Suckmyasshole, your post may sound plausible but quickly falls apart upon closer inspection. Ronnie had larger biceps, triceps, pecs, delts, glutes and quads, yet he supposedly had less muscular bulk than Dorian? I've already demonstrated why their backs were equivalent in width and thickness. This means Dorian made up the difference in weight someone else, most likely his midsection.
Semen, your post is based on two false premisses:
- With the exception of biceps, glutes and quads, Ronnie in his 1999 form does not have larger muscles than Dorian, anf the latter compensates by having bigger muscles elsewhere - like in his chest and back.
- Dorian's gut is not bigger than Ronnie's, being, in fact, smaller.
You simply can't get over these facts; you know it, and it eats you inside. Since they weight exactly the same, and yet Dorian has less water outside the muscles but less inside, then odds are strongly on his side that he carries more lean mass. Again, just because Ronnie's muscle look bigger doesen't mean that they are. Like Wheeler, Ronnie has relatively small joints and round muscles, which gives the impression that his muscles are bigger than they really are. Now, from a bodybuilding standpoint this is relevant, but it is not in this matter because the issue here is sheer amount of muscularf tissue, and not how big the muscles look.
Owned...again.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
