it was ken waller who said "they wont notice the legs". only he didnt mean that arnold didnt have legs. he just meant that he was so huge everywhere they would only see the chest etc. remember back then alot of judges still only looked at chest and arms ( especially overseas) also remember arnold had a bad leg injury he had to come back from in 74 i believe. a posing dias collapsed. also these clowns are heavier nowdays. SO WHAT? that doesnt mean they are better. again thats people thinking weight and size is what bodybuilding is about. and of course your still comparing a 1970s arnold with todays guys. if arnold was 26 years old TODAY he would beat everyone cuz he would have whatever kind of build the judges were looking for. lets do a role reversal. put a modern bloated big gutted no symmetry guy from today who weighs 300lbs on stage with the guys from the 70s and see what would happen. people would laugh judges wouldnt know wtf they are and they would get last place IF they could even make thru the contest without passing out. smh. think about this. womens bodybuilding when new had that freak roided out bev francis in the 80s. way to muscular. down right fugly. now look. thats what they all look like even worse!! so an arnold today at 26 would still be superior to anyone else because he has the genetics the drive and determination. ( he wouldnt look like arnold of the 70s)
I'm seriously flabbergasted at the extent to which people will take actual evidence of something contrary to their view and try to twist it so that it is somehow consistent with their beliefs.
So let me see if I understand this correctly:
You think that Ken Waller commenting to Arnold "No one will notice the legs", and everyone LAUGHING on the mountaintop of where ever they were posing, was somehow Ken's way of complimenting Arnold on his chest and other muscle development, as opposed to mocking him for his legs, HENCE EVERYONE LAUGHING AFTER THE COMMENT WAS MADE.
Seriously?
So Ken Waller making a comment about Arnold's legs followed by a bunch of guys laughing at the comment was Waller's way of complimenting Arnold's chest? And when Arnold made the comment about the side chest pose to Franco "If you don't have it, don't hit it", was that Arnold's way of complimenting Franco's legs?
bigbychoices - you seriously believe that Ken Waller wasn't making fun of Arnold's legs while he made a comment about Arnold's legs followed by everyone laughing, but rather, he was bringing attention to Arnold's other strong areas?
...
No - I don't even think you believe that. I am absolutely bewildered at the extent to which people will take facts and twist them to be in line with what they believe. But I want you to know something, bigbychoices - no one believes you. Not only do the people you are debating not believe you, but you don't believe yourself when you make that comment.
Think about what you are saying - you are saying that Ken Waller making a comment followed by a bunch of Arnold's friends and fellow bodybuilders laughing like hyenas is actually Waller's way of complimenting Arnold.
Do you realize what comments like that do to your credibility? Often, people don't have the debating tools nor the confidence to call someone out - even online - for making a comment like yours, but that doesn't mean they aren't thinking it. I'm lucky, being a "right wing racist" or whatever, that everyone is confident enough to call me out, as we live in a society that empowers people to attack any thinking White man out there, so I am actually sort of lucky to live in a society where people will call out the slightest error in anything that I say - it helps me to raise my debating game.
Unfortunately, there are so many Arnold nut-huggers, that I think people who defend Arnold in ways that border on the absurd don't get to develop the refinement in debate ability that one would when their views are being called out nonstop.
Anyway, Arnold wouldn't even win Nationals the way he looked in the 1970's. If he were to take the drugs of today, he would probably just look like a more aesthetic version of Gunter, if that. That assumes a lot - including that Arnold had the genetic constitution to eat the calories and take the drugs necessary to put on the size necessary to be competitive today.
Furthermore, the natural evolution of bodybuilding was to get bigger and bigger and bigger...that included the legs, which simply were not looked at in the 1970's as they were in the eras that followed.
Arnold, no matter what he would have done to adapt to modern-day bodybuilding, would not somehow become short enough to be Mr. Olympia in today's bodybuilding era.
Do you know what the average height of Mr. Olympia winners is among the 36 champions from 1984 through to 2019? 5'9.9".
Do you know how many bodybuilders 6'0" or taller have won the Mr. Olympia during that time period? Zero.
So no, Arnold wouldn't somehow be able to develop the proportions of a man with a 5'10" frame at his height of just under 6'2". I have no doubt Arnold would do everything he could have done to become champion today, but to suggest that a man of his height would win the Olympia in an era where hardly any men his height even make the Olympia to begin with is simply a stretch in logic that you're making, using absolutely no evidence to make a stretch. You're just a fan of Arnold's.
