I've always maintained that 03 Ronnie's combination of mass, conditioning, and symmetry would overwhelm Dorian. The only comment I made that remotely resembles what you said is when I claimed the difference in size >>> the difference in conditioning.
I always laugh at your continued ignorance , symmetry
in 2003 his ' symmetry ' was at its all-time worse his waist was at its thickest his abdomen was swollen , his balance & proportion ( lack thereof ) is maxed out his symmetry sucks period , especially this year and 18 extra pounds on Ronnie was NOT quality pounds so the size advantage compromises his balance & proportion as well so its redundant , please notice where where Mcgough states the obvious , 2001 he was HARDER ( i.e. 2003 is soft ) and more detailed ( i.e. not as dry )
Peter McGough
He was 269 pounds of rock-hard shapely (yes, shapely) head-to-toe muscle. I had never seen anything like it. notice the key-words
ROCK-HARD ( i.e. NOT soft like Coleman 2003 ) and shapely , Dorian showing that highly prized combo of muscular bulk and muscular density that would make Ronnie 2003 look off-season , especially if he was tanned , had on posing oil and was under contest lighting , couple that with being more complete , having clearly better balance & proportion and being a better poser Ronnie 2003 would get trampled just like the Little Ronnie of 2001 , any year you pick Dorian had advantages in the judging criteria Ronnie doesn't
2001 Ronnie may have matched Yates in density & conditioning but he's still down balance & proportion , completeness , posing and Oh he's also down 22 pounds of quality dense muscle
2003 Ronnie doesn't match Dorian in density & conditioning , doesn't match Yates in balance & proportion , completeness , or posing although he is heavier but its not that dense muscle combined with the muscular bulk that is highly prized in bodybuilding contests
so you're right back to square one , you've gained NO ground.
