everything I say is a contradiction?
lol

here is a hint Icecold: posting shots of Ronnie 1995 olympia or 2001 olympia or ronnie from 1996 etc is NOT posting shots of ronnie in his prime.
I don't post shots of dorian 96 and claim it to be his prime, now do I?
I know this is a shock to you because your intelligence is not exactly up there, but its the way it is.
please, enlighten me about all these other 'contradictions' that you fools claim I make.. 
a brief list:
-you mention the polls on the internet, but dont recognize the polls in the mags, thinking people who actually pay for a subscription don't know who ronnie is or his best form.
-you post quotes of peter when the reflect your point of view, but dont recognize him when he says the total opposite of what you say - ex. yates being the best conditioned onstage in 94
-you post shots of dorian that arent good (96 grand prix, bad quality pics of 96 and 94), but when bad pics of ronnie are shown you bitch about them being a poor quality or him not at his prime.
-you say dorian only won bc he was the biggest, when he really wasnt, but wont say the same for ronnie, when he actually was
-you ridicule the judges for the decisions they made after 93, but those same judges picked ronnie in 01, despite loosing the prejudging. yates never lost the prejuding.
-when judges chose dorian, it was bc of poltics, but not ronnie, when he lost the prejudging or challenge rounds.
-when a former competitor speaks highly of dorian, you claim its bc of politics, but when the same guy talks positive about ronnie, its not political.
-when ronnie says something, you claim to tell us what he really means. when he talks badly about other bbers, but when he talks highly of dorian, its bc he's being humble.
would you like me to continue?