Good point Sucky, at 257 it is very possible that Dorian was wider at the clavicles. However, I was taking into consideration the shoulder to waist differential and that may be where the illusion is. Regardless, and at least you acknowledge this, it would be close. Pumpster seems to think that Dorian would not stand a chance. I call utter BS on that statement. Now, regarding 2003 Ronnie, he really did take size to another level that year. Must have been tough, as he never duplicated that condition again. I have the DVD and he really is sick. The split on the floor MM is the sickest shot of any bodybuilder I have ever seen. However, Dorian of 1993 would have battled to no end. I believe Coleman would triumph, but hey, I am not a judge. Obviously, Pumpster is the official IFBB judge as he has basically stated that the last two prior Mr. Olympia's before Ronnie were garbage. 
Moreover Pumpster, I may be relatively neutral, but I do it out of respect for both bodybuilders. Dorian is ridiculed by you guys, but he was really quite awesome in the early 1990's. Later, he became a morphed shadow of his former self, but didn't that happen to Ronnie also???
Regardless, you argued that Ronnie had wider lats than the 1993/5 Dorian, and I demonstrated that, mathematically as well as visually, this is highly unlikely. Considering that they weighted the same, and that Ronnie's quads were clearly bigger overrall, it's obvious that what made they weight the same had to come from one of the larger bodyparts. Now Ronnie's waist from the back is smaller, which makes him look as if his lats are wider than they really are. Not only that, Ronnie's lats have a rounder shape, so they add to give an impression of being bigger they they really are - just like in Wheeler's case. I agree that Ronnie has wider clavicles, and this adds to the effect.
However, in the case of the rear lat spread, just like in the front version, taper is a function of the lats, not the shoulders. The issue here is not taper per se, but actually sheer lat width. There's no question that Dorian's lats were wider, because, although his waist is thicker, they're equivalent in taper. Added to Ronnie's bigger quads, Dorian obviously had the wider and thicker lats.
As for Ronnie 2003, he looked like shit from a symmetry perspective. Sorry, but a distended midsection is the ultimate symmetrical liability and Ronnie was immense. Why is the ultimate symmetrical liability? Because it can be seen from the front and sides, and the midsection is the focus of the body. I don't think it's fair to compare a 257 lbs Dorian to a 287 lbs Ronnie and say:"Ronnie would crush him because his overrall muscularity was greater". You all just ignore the gut and go on to praise trhe muscularity. Guess what? Let's compare 2003 Ronnie to 1997 Dorian. I mean, if we're going to ignore gut distensions as if they didn't exist, then let's stack Dorian at his biggest, gut distension and torn muscles and all - and consider that Dorian won with straight-first scores from
all judges in
all rounds!
Both McGough and Kennedy are on record for stating that Dorian was 266 lbs for pre-judging and ballooned to 274 lbs by the night show. That would cut down the size difference to only 13 lbs
and Dorian was still harder than Coleman
and his midsection, although distended, was still infinitely better than Ronnie's.
If brutal size is all that counts, then the 1997 Dorian would not only give the 2003 Ronnie a srun for his money, but, considering his trademarked desity and better(less worse) gut, he might win.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
