first of all.
ronnie can't hold a candle to yates when it comes to training intensity or influence on others.
ronnies training style is more a result his better genetics and the copious amount of chad nichols drugs
2nd of all,
the growth that you talk about from 1998 - 2003 was mostly in colemans gut. Sure his upper body and legs grew,
but they were already big to start with. In 1998 coleman has pencils for calves, then in 2003 he has
20" calves?? what did he forget to train his calves before meeting chad?? or did he not inject oil into them?
hmm, i guess if you're already blind to colemans flaws, then he started training calves only after becoming mr 0.
3rd of all,
bodybuilder A who does more with his physique than bodybuilder B who has better genetics, clearly make bodybuilder A better. Showing up on the olympia stage (from 1999 - 2005) with a grotesque beer belly does NOT really move the sport forward.
4th -speaking of guts, its funny that in one of your posts you claimed to not be bothered by guts. I guess that must be a prerequisite for any coleman fan.
LOL what bullshit.
first of all, Dorian's unique high intensity training tore the shit out of every muscle in his body.
How in the world can anyone criticize the current Mr. O (8 times running and at 42 years of age) and then praise a guy who trained so poorly that he tore most of the major muscles in his body and had to RETIRE because of the consequences of his "unique training style" 
Secondly, what proof do you have about Ronnie's calves?
That they grew over the years?
guess what: compare 1996 Ronnie to 2003 ronnie and you will quickly see that the rest of him grew quite a bit too. Did he put oil in to every muscle in his body?
LOL - you are saying that because ronnie had to "rely" on his genetics that it is somehow worse than Dorian who "didn't" - totally retarded.
Finally, to put an end to the ridiculous bullshit you just spewed out:
if you consider this "traces" of a gut then you seriously need help.
