if you are talking about a 270 pound dorian, maybe. He has a weight advantage at the same height.
if you are talking about 1993 dorian who weighed the exact same as Ronnie 99, well, that is up for debate.
No, it's not open for debate, and the fact that they weight the same is irrelvant. Why? Because Dorian is slightly shorter and comes in dryer, hence, more of that weight is lean muscle mass than in Ronnie's case. Also, even if they had the exact same height, weighted the same and were equally dry, it would still not mean, in any way, that they had equally wide lats. Why? Because the muscle mass is not distributed proportionally in all bodybuilders. Ronnie's quads were bigger than Dorian's in 1999, so it's obvious that Dorian had the widest and thickes lats - because, since they weighted the same and Ronnie's quads were bigger and Dorian was drier, the difference in size came mostly from the back. Make no mistake about it: Dorian had the thickes and widest lats in bodybuilding until the 2003 Olympia.
Look at the width and thickness of Ronnie in 99:
"Looking" can be deceiving. Can you acurately measure distances by looking? The height of mountains? No. That's why the Human species created instruments for that effect. Likewise, the only
precise way of measuring back width is with a tape measurer.
notice how thick the muscles are down where Ronnie's lats insert.
The width of the lats is measured in the upper portion. Why? Because that's where the muscle develops further.(take note of this, NeoSeminole)
was dorian's lat spread wider than this? probably not. Equally wide? probably.
"Probably" is synonimous with inaccuracy. Again, strong empirical evidence does suggest that Dorian's lats were wider than that of the 1999 Ronnie, but only a proper measurement could determine that.
But the taper comes into play at this point since their lats are probably equal width and thickness at the same weight.
Actually, it is
exactly because Ronnie has a slightly better taper that his lats appear to be wider than they are. Is this relevant for making the case that his lats are as wide or wider than Dorian's? No.
one thing is for sure out of all of this: no one in history has has a thicker or wider back than Ronnie displayed in 2003. The trade off, was, however, the fine details.
Yes, but Dorian could still hold his own in the back double biceps and rear lat spread, because his latissimus, teres major, teres major an such were denser and also, Dorian had more proportion and completeness in these two mandatories - except for biceps. Ronnie's back in 2003, for all it's width, had barely a cut in it when he stood relaxed.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
