I delete all the pics in my responses , old news ! and if you mean Dorian was never as full onstage like Coleman , which means soft I agree Dorian was always as dry and as hard as it gets its in the criteria
and the picture you posted that was supposed to be so awe-inspiring is Ronnie at among his all-time worse in terms of balanced development , density and conditioning , while very impressive none the less it doesn't change the fact that he's lacking compared to earlier versions and to Dorian .
Haha, amusing twisting of my point. You're right, Yates was dry as the day is long. This does not detract from the fact that he never looked as full onstage as he did in those b/w photos, which he didn't.
You don't always delete the pics in quotes because you included the Dorian one.
It's very hard to argue with someone who pooh-poohs a pic like that one of Ronne 03 by stating that he has bad balance even though in that pic and many others he doesn't - I'd take that delt/arm balance over Yates's any day. I understand that the main argument is for the 98/99 Ronnie but I feel that 03 Ronnie would beat Dorian too, and not even because I think he is better just because the judges would see him dwarfing Dorian like he did Jay (who was what 260+), observe that every body part is superior sans lower back, abs and calves, and see the insane lines he has in his ass and hams and say GAME OVER.
I was also under the impression it was 03 Ronnie that Yates himself conceded would probably beat him. Like Yates does himself, you could maintain that Ronnie isn't as good whilst admitting he would most likely win in competition. Personally I think he is better too, but regardless, the way the O is judged he would have to win. Even if you don't think it's right it's still true.
What's Yates' best year, '93?
