I have never ignored Ronnie's weaknesses. In fact, between you and me I'm the only person who takes liabilities into account. I've said numerous times Dorian's poor arms cancel out Ronnie's weak calves.
But the thing is that you're wrong. The arm is alarge bodypart, which show-cases different muscles from different angles. You're making an a priori assessment which is simply not true. Comparing Ronnie's calves to Dorian's arms and trying to derive and analogy between them as far as liability goes is ridiculous. It's obvious that Ronnie's biceps were bigger than Dorian's even in 1999. When you consider that the difference in arm size was not that great to begin with, you realize that the difference in triceps muscularity was, at best, small. I'm not even including forearms here - where Dorian trounces Ronnie at -, because the real issue here is arm girth, which includes only biceps and triceps.
But regardless, lets assume that Ronnie does have a small advantage in overrall triceps muscularity. Who cares? The inner and medial triceps heads are only visible when felxing the arms from the front. Since Ronnie wins this mandatory anyway, the point is mute. Now the arms as a whole are only judged in thge relaxed round. I will give the edge to Ronnie, by a very small margin. The bottom line is that there's an entire mandatory designed to show-case the triceps, and Dorian wins it do to better muscular
quality, more striations, superiorly etched serratus, more proportional deltoid heads and I'm not even mentioning the calves. Ops, I already did.
Is Ronnie's small advantager in triceps size visible in the back double biceps? No, because only the lateral triceps head is visible, and Dorian talkes it. It is barely visible in the rear lat spread. But let' give that to Ronnie. Regardless, how does this stop Dorian from taking this mandatory since he has the widest lats? It doesen't. Even if Ronnie wins points over Dorian in the rear lat spread due to his - barely visible and only slightly bigger - inner and medial triceps heads, Dorian still wins the pose because he takes Ronnie flat out at everything else. Is it visible in the front lat spread? No. So Ronnie's small advantage in overrall triceps muscularity wouldn't mean much, because it is only visible in one mandatory and during the relaxed round. And when you consider how small the difference is, and that Dorian would defeat Ronnie on lat width, midsection and at least tie in pectoralis thickness, you realized that the few points Ronnie would win there wouldn't mean much.
As for 99 Ronnie's midsection, it was pretty flat. So I don't know what you are talking about. I admit that 03 Ronnie had a huge gut when he was relaxed, but his stomach in 99 was definately not below average. His abs were sharp and his obliques were striated.
But Dorian's was flatter! That's all that matters in a
comparison!
And I'm sorry, but Ronnie couldn't hold a candle to Dorian in abs/serratus separations even in his 1998 form, let alone in 1999. The abs-and-thighs shot of Ronnie was already posted and, while it is not horrible, it is not great either. Give Ronnie the advantage in quadriceps size. Besed that, and regardless of the fact that Ronnie's taper,
when standing relaxed, was slightly better than Dorian's, Ronnie can't holed his own against The Yates because his taper is actually better than Ronnie's in 1999, he has more separations in his abs/serratus and his lats are slightly wider - which makes the difference in taper even more apparent. Game over.
sub-par anterior and medial deltoid heads? Wtf are you talking about? 
The pointhere is not an issue of muscularity, but of symmetry. Regardless, Ronnie's frontal deltoid heads were thicker than the other two, and this is obvious in the fact the side tris where the three heads are visible and Dorian's are clearly more equally developed.
I never said Ronnie looks the same width as Dorian due to his smaller waist. I said both appear just as wide, but Ronnie's waist is narrower giving him the illusion of better taper. I don't look at midsections to determine who is wider. I compare the width of their lats.
No, your're wrong: it is
exactly because his waist is slightly smaller that his latisimus appear to flair wider. In symmetry here Ronnie has the edge because his waist is smaller and his waist appears to be equally wide. This is pertinent to to taper, but not when evaluating lats muscularity. The same can be said about their lats from the back - and even though taper is far less relevant here -, where Ronnie would match or defeat Dorian in taper, but would be soundly defeated in muscularity. You're not looking at their lats width to determine who has the wider ones; you're assuming that because the contrast between lat width and waist makes Ronnie appear wider than he really is. Again, the only way to verify this is with a tape measurer. However, mathematically, since they weighted the same, Ronnie had obviously bigger quads and Dorian was dryer, it is reasonable to assume that most of what maid Dorian a match for Ronnie in bodyweight was overrall back width and thickness.
Previously, you made a very stupid analogy between muscular density and weight, proposing rhe hypotheises that Ronnie had lats as wide as Dorian's because, since Dorian was denser, he could have more weight with equal mass. This is extrmely inane because, as far as muscles go, density is a
visual measure, and not a physical one. It's not like the difference in
physical desity between Plutonium and Aluminum, where one pound of Plutonium occupies less physical space than the Aluminum because their atomic numbers vary. Unless you can demonstrate that the
visual appearance of muscle density results from an increase in
physical density, there's no way that this argument is logical. The weight of muscle tissue doesen't vary, so weight and physical size correlate
always. Muscle tissue can't be "squeezed" to carry more mass in less physical space. That's impossible. You have no game.
yeah, Dorian's triceps are "coarsing with striations" all right. 
Lower insertion point in the tendom results in more triceps to be seen from this angle. Even if Ronnie's overrall triceps size is somewhat larger, Dorian's lateral triceps head obvioulsy has more mass because it has more space to stretch from. Add to it all the other superiorites, and Dorian makes his triceps work fro him,
when it counts.
Bullshit, Ronnie has a huge advantage over Dorian in pecs. Ronnie's were more balanced from top to bottom and had more striations.
Like I said, the side chest could go euther way. I think Ronnie's pecs were wider from the front than Dorian's. But thickess? No. Dorian's pectoralis were incredibly thick and striated. Again, Dorian's pecs were as good as Ronnie's in this
angle. And consider that Dorian's c=vastus lateralis and claves are also visible from the sides, and would tip the balance in Dorian's favor. Dorian had a
classical side chest shot, amazing for a 5'10 man at 260 lbs.
His delts were also better than Dorian's.
His delts might have a slight advantage in muscularity. Or not. I don't see much difference. Check out the black&whites from 1993 and Dorian's delts were so huge they they looked like watermellons. Besides, Dorian had more proportional development between his three delt heads, which is visible from the sides.
Even his midsection looks pretty good from what little you can see of it. Ronnie wins this pose easily.
He has a gut distension and no serratus. As good as Dorian's?
Check out rh lower pic. It;s from 1997, when Dorian was 270 lbs. Even at that bodyweight, his abs/serratus separations shitted all over Ronnie's,
and his taper is just as good.The only thing Ronnie wins easily is and anal raping from The Yates.
Again: owned.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
