again, where did I contradict myself? I don't see how saying that Ronnie and Dorian were the same width, and saying they look equally as wide is a contradiction.
It is a contradiction, "dipshit"
. because looking the same width and being the same width are two very different things. If you took a picture of a building from 500 ft away and then one of Mount Everest taken from 30 miles away, it would look just as big as a the building. Visual comparisons are far from accurate, sport, and the bottom line is that you didn't prove your assertion. Game over.
the issue here is entirely visual you dumbass.
No, it is not, dumbshit. I don't how wide their lats look like, since what matters is the mathematical meaure of their lats. You claimed that Ronnie's lats were just as wide; prove it, you son of a bitch!
For you to claim it's not is a pathetic attempt to make your lame guessing argument look stronger despite a lack of evidence on your behalf. Since nobody measured both their lat widths, all we have is pics and videos to compare.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Thanks for agreeing with me! You have just proved my point! Since their respective lats were never measured, then we have no way of knowing who was wider. The difference between me and you, c.u.n.t, is that I never said that I'm sure Dorian was wider; I said that all things indicated that. You, conversely, have asseted that Ronnie was just as wide. Oh, and by the way, there's far more evidence in my side than yours, dumbshit, since at least my argument is logically reasonable, while all you do is post some comparisons when they're facing the camera from a different angle, have different waists, etc. You suck dick and so those your bullshit comparisons.
I find it amusing you try to dismiss photo comparisons made by Pubes and me. What a coincidence that 2 people working independently both arrived at the same results, not once, but multiple times. Furthermore, there is direct video evidence that shows Ronnie and Dorian were the same width.
Million sof people working independetly have come to millions of wrong conclusions. What's your point, dumbshit? "Direct video evidence". Wtf? Unless the video showed, in bold letters, that they had the exact same lat width measurement by saying the number of the measurement, I just don't care foer the video.
of course you would call a video of Ronnie and Dorian onstage together under the same circumstances irrelevant when it doesn't agree with you. 
Ok, what if I said that, based on the video, Dorian is wider. You wouldn't agree with it, but would you be able to prove me wrong based on the visual evidence? No, you wouldn't. Of course, I wouldn't be able to prove that Dorian was wider either. The bottom line is that your methods were proved to be ineffective to prove your hypothesis. You have failed, "dipshit".
face it, you are wrong kid.
Face it: you're as lost on this argument as Ronnie was when he competed with Dorian.
I still don't think you know what the brachialis muscle is, otherwise you wouldn't say Ronnie's were poor. If anything, they might have been too big for his biceps. I dare you to circle his brachialis on the pic I posted of Ronnie hitting a most muscular. Prove to me you know which muscle it is.
Oh, I'm gonna circle the muscle..,
when all I had to do, in case I didn't know where the muscle is located, would be to do a simple google search for an anatomy chart and find it. NeoSperminole: you're a retard.
You are out of your f*cking mind if you think Dorian's arms held their own against 03 Ronnie's. It's not even close.
They held their own pretty fucking well, tou dumb c.u.n.t. Do you think he would defeat Dorian in the side triceps shot with an inferior triceps, a distended gut and no calves? The arm's msucle mass is only visible entirely in the front double biceps, so Ronnie's size advantage wouldn't work that great for him. I'll match these arms against that of the 2003 Ronnie any day.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
