umm..if you stick to the real visual evidence instead of a printed quote ND, you would see Ronnie was 257 pounds in 99 and 10x more ripped and dry than dorian was in 93:

do you even LOOK at physiques in this sport, or do you just read about them?

this new quote that the nuthuggers are orgasming about makes no sense.
we have 1500 pages of visual evidence showing 99 ronnie being better, more ripped and dry than a 93 contest yates.
then Peter makes the statement that the 93 precontest yates, with no cuts in the quads, arms and a smooth upper back, is now more ripped than superstriated 99 ronnie (note: with NO VISUAL COMPARSIONS or EVDIENCE OF ANY KIND WHATSO EVER TO BACK IT UP

)
and now this quote must be true in the face of all evidence to the contrary..

tell me, if McGough had said that 2+2=7, would you have automatically believed it?
apparently so.

so sad.