sucky missed my point about the fat guy on lasik. i said he wouldnt be in condition because of bf. would he have any cuts, seperations, or striations-NO. because he is high in bf. what does this tell us
You gave the example of a fat man on diuretics, and I pointed out that you also need to lose bodyfat to show separations. Ergo, your suggestion that Ronnie was drier than Dorian because he showed more separations is illogical - and it would still be illogical even i the said man had a low bodyfat average.
1)bf and water equal better conditioning which equals more definition
But the correlation is non-linear. Every guys show improved separations as they lose boyfat and water, yes, but some do more than others for reasons other than bodyat and water levels. Furthtermore, you make the mistake of assuming that separations are a yardstck to measure dryness, which couldn't be further from the truth: garing is as good and indication of that, and some bodybuilders, like Dorian, display their superior dryness through skin texture, and not separations.
2)both are needed
Yes, but the man with the most separations is not necessarily the one with the lowest bodyfat and water levels, despite the fact that every man with good muscular separations has a low bodyat and water level.
3)sep,striations,and cuts positively correlate with both, see above example
Yes. And so does grain, which Dorian had ar in excess of Ronnie. So the argumentation is redundant.
4)if dorian lacks striations,cuts, and seperations then he is either higher in bf, or not dry.
Utterly false. Wanna bet? Your hypothesis would be correct if the correlation between striations, cuts and separations were non-variant and linear for all Human Beings. Unfortunately for you, your conjecture is non-sensical.
5)a further testament to this fact is that some areas of dorian(and others) have more sep,cuts,and striations. eg. his lower back is shredded, with super seperation,cuts and striations. this is optimal conditioning. however, his legs lack seperation,cuts,and striations thus showing that this area is either higher in water or bf, i would venture it is a combination of both to a degree.
Bodyfat and water levels are absolutes. This means that, when you measure bodyat, you're not measuring it at some specific location, but in the whole body. If both Dorian and Ronnie are at 3% bodyfat, as an example, and yet Ronnie shows more overral separations than Dorian - as he does -, then it follows that the correlation between bodyfat and separations is non-linear and variant as far as human goes.
The point here is that some areas might hacve more separations in a given bodybuilder but, if the correlation between bodyfat and separatiuons is as linear and non-variant across specimens as you predict, then the number of separations of two bodybuilders at the same given bodyfat should be similar. This is obviously not true, which means you hypothesis is incorrect.
6)water and bf levels are not global but local. no one would argue that dorians lower back was not more conditioned then his quads, proving this point. lee priest upper body is much more conditioned or defined then his lower body, another point.
This is true, but it is also irrelvant. Why? Because we're arguing absolutes here. If Ronnie and Dorian measure the same bodyfat, then they should have the same amount of separations overral. Sure, Dorian could have a little more here and Ronnie there, but overral, they should average
exactly the same - if your hypothesis is coorect. Your inferences are incorrect, and you can't prove otherwise. Thanks for playing!
hope this helps.
Oh, you'll need all the help that you can get!
SUCKMYMUSCLE
