Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: 240 is Back on August 18, 2008, 05:50:25 PM
-
Currently, bodybuilders who compete in the under-202 class are able to compete in the Open (over 202) class as well.
Bob Chic said on PBBW tonight that he plans to petition to have them turned into separate entities. The Under 202's wouldn't be allowed to compete in the Open as well. If you competed in, (or won?) the 202, your night was over. No getting onstage with the big boys. If you're that good, skip doing the 202s and just do the open.
Is this a good idea or a bad idea? Does it mean no more David Henry/Freeman showdowns? Does it mean we won't get to see another Franco/Arnold rivalry again?
-
Doesn't make any sense to have crossovers...it isnt the NPC. If you're good enough ala Lee P, David Henry, etc.....great....compete against those you're competitive against...the big boys. For the other 99% of the guys, this class was made for this very reason. It's a nightmare for the judges, makes already "too long" shows, even longer...
-
agree 110% ;)
-
Doesn't make any sense to have crossovers...it isnt the NPC. If you're good enough ala Lee P, David Henry, etc.....great....compete against those you're competitive against...the big boys. For the other 99% of the guys, this class was made for this very reason. It's a nightmare for the judges, makes already "too long" shows, even longer...
yea i agree with Bob here 100%
-
Doesn't make any sense to have crossovers...it isnt the NPC. If you're good enough ala Lee P, David Henry, etc.....great....compete against those you're competitive against...the big boys. For the other 99% of the guys, this class was made for this very reason. It's a nightmare for the judges, makes already "too long" shows, even longer...
Yes... but... not even the 202 winner can get into the Open?
I mean, DHenry could have won Tampa just as easy as he got 3rd. Crowd seemed pretty surprised with him at 3rd.
Maybe just let the top 3 from the Under-202s enter the Open?
The biggest thing is that you won't get to see fan favorites - like Flex Lewis for example - stand next to the top guys. Like Flex said on Larry Pepe tonight... He wants to train to WIN something, so he and DH and other guys will do the 202s.
But it's a shame you can't get the top 3 into the Open class. Might be a healthy compromise. Let the top 3 from under 202 enter the Open. We're gonna get awfully tired of seeing Flex and DH standing next to scrubs each week (no offense tricky).
-
Yes... but... not even the 202 winner can get into the Open?
I mean, DHenry could have won Tampa just as easy as he got 3rd. Crowd seemed pretty surprised with him at 3rd.
Maybe just let the top 3 from the Under-202s enter the Open?
The biggest thing is that you won't get to see fan favorites - like Flex Lewis for example - stand next to the top guys. Like Flex said on Larry Pepe tonight... He wants to train to WIN something, so he and DH and other guys will do the 202s.
But it's a shame you can't get the top 3 into the Open class. Might be a healthy compromise. Let the top 3 from under 202 enter the Open. We're gonna get awfully tired of seeing Flex and DH standing next to scrubs each week (no offense tricky).
Again...if you are one of the few good enough at under 202 to stand with the big boys....then I would suggest for them to do just that. Bigger money....
As for the competition level...I think you'll be surprised how much it increases over the next year or two....there are some damn good BBers out there who are under 202, and just as many who compete slightly above that, that can drop down to be better BBers.
-
AGREED!!
BOB RULES!
-
Again...if you are one of the few good enough at under 202 to stand with the big boys....then I would suggest for them to do just that. Bigger money....
As for the competition level...I think you'll be surprised how much it increases over the next year or two....there are some damn good BBers out there who are under 202, and just as many who compete slightly above that, that can drop down to be better BBers.
Absolutely!
I really don't care how awesome these guys look, when they're altogether the size of Freeman's thigh :-\
Lets not forget the basic premise of bodyBUILDING ;D
-
I think they should remain as seperate entities....even if the 202 was a Olympia event...I would suggest keeping them as two different titles....just as the Heavyweight boxing champ doesn't fight the middleweight champ....more champions is never a bad thing for a sport.
-
I agree that only the top three, perhaps top five (if the scores are dramatically close) should be allowed to crossover into the open.
In the Europa 202 top five:
1. Lewis won the 202 and tied for seventh in the open
2. Shabazz did not crossover, but obviously would have behind Lewis
3. Horvath, placed tenth in open
4. Bryant did not crossover
5. Farah placed twelfth in open
So of the top five in 202, two men broke into the top ten in the open.
About a half dozen other crossovers tied for last in the open.
-
and the paycheck was the same for 7th-last
-
I agree.. and as I wrote months ago.. THE WINNER OF THE 202 AND THE WINNER OF THE OPEN SHOULD HAVE A SHOWDOWN AT THE END - AKA FOR THE OVERALL TITLE - THIS WOULD BE A VERY EXCITING AND WORTHWHILE ADDITION TO EACH AND EVERY SHOW.
;)
-
I agree.. and as I wrote months ago.. THE WINNER OF THE 202 AND THE WINNER OF THE OPEN SHOULD HAVE A SHOWDOWN AT THE END - AKA FOR THE OVERALL TITLE - THIS WOULD BE A VERY EXCITING AND WORTHWHILE ADDITION TO EACH AND EVERY SHOW.
;)
Exactly what I DONT want....
-
To expend the Sport and make it more acceptable to different demographics it is fundamental to separate classes. Pound for pound who is better Anderson Silva or Fedor. Bodybuilding is about increasing your muscle mass ...not doubt, but most importantly symmetry, balance, proportions...
I believe the public will really appreciate this class. If you want to see a Freak...great but if you really understand the concept of bodybuilding you would enjoy both classes as much as you enjoy watching fighters in different divisions.
-
I agree.. and as I wrote months ago.. THE WINNER OF THE 202 AND THE WINNER OF THE OPEN SHOULD HAVE A SHOWDOWN AT THE END - AKA FOR THE OVERALL TITLE - THIS WOULD BE A VERY EXCITING AND WORTHWHILE ADDITION TO EACH AND EVERY SHOW.
;)
More champions the better...I don't see the Light-Heavy UFC champion Fitghting the Heavy Weight....A champ is a Champ....
-
But then we can't have someone winning both classes like Silvio Samuel Saviour did for the Europa in 2007
-
I agree.. and as I wrote months ago.. THE WINNER OF THE 202 AND THE WINNER OF THE OPEN SHOULD HAVE A SHOWDOWN AT THE END - AKA FOR THE OVERALL TITLE - THIS WOULD BE A VERY EXCITING AND WORTHWHILE ADDITION TO EACH AND EVERY SHOW.
that would be a lightweight class and a heavyweight class, which IFBB pro contests had until 1980
-
But then we can't have someone winning both classes like Silvio Samuel Saviour did for the Europa in 2007
And...?
-
Good idea Bob, would keep it more competitive for those with lighter body weights.
-
Not sure what is exactly accomplished by limiting a competitors options... shorter show? easier on the judges?
-
Not sure what is exactly accomplished by limiting a competitors options... shorter show? easier on the judges?
DEpends on how you're looking at it..I look at it as ADDING to a competitors options by coming up with the 202 in the first place....
The open guys don't have twice the opportunity to cash in...why should the 202 guys?
I believe it will ad to a competitors image, money making ability, potential contracts, etc....by being a champion in his own category, rather than watering it down with a "17th place chaser"...
-
i totally agree with this. i also think this would be another step towards legitimizing the weight class.
-
i totally agree with this. i also think this would be another step towards legitimizing the weight class.
Correct...
-
Not having 202 crossovers is a good idea. Having the 202 winner go against the open winner for the overall is a waste of time. The reason the 202 class was created was to give the smaller guys a chance to compete against smaller guys. Why put them back right back in with the big boys for an "overall" title? Anything to speed up a show is a good thing. The worst part of watching an NPC show is seeing every competitor come right back out for every class. IFBB shows do not need this.
-
I'd be open to debate on this with Bob.
It could be best for all concerned and possibly even "fairer" if the 202 winner (and only the 202 winner) was allowed to compete against the bigger guys for the overall "bigger boys" trophy.
The 202 overall winner would merely have to step in the "bigger boys" lineup during the evening finals to allow the judges to do some further comparisons and then "adjust" their scores accordingly.
This would require an additional bit of time during the evening finals but it would not shut-out a better but smaller contender from collecting his due rewards when and if he deserved it.
Don't shut-out a great bodybuilder just because he doesn't tip the scale far enough! Allow him the opportunity to beat the big boys if he elects to do so. Allow him to make that decision.
Submitted on behalf of the smaller greats for Bob's and the IFBB's consideration.
Bob, will you be discussing this with those "lighter" and current contenders before making a formal submission to the IFBB?
Thanks, Bob.
-
I'd be open to debate on this with Bob,
It could be best for all concerned and possibly even "fairer" if the 202 winner (and only the 2092 winner) was allowed to compete against the bigger guys for the overall "bigger boys" trophy.
The 202 overall winner would merely have to step in the "bigger boys" lineup during the evening finals to allow the judges to do some further comparisons and then "adjust" their scores accordingly.
This would require an additional bit of time during the evening finals but it would not shut-out a better but smaller contender from collecting his due rewards when and if he deserved it.
Don't shut-out a great bodybuilder just because he doesn't tip the scale far enough!
Submitted on behalf of the smaller greats for Bob's and the IFBB's consideration.
Thanks.
The smaller BB is NOT shut out of any opportunities...he can simply compete in the open if he believes he can hang. Why someone of that calliber would WANT to compete in the 202 is the question at hand....?
-
I would like to see the overall posedown as the littler guys just dont get the callouts in the "open" class but I do agree the shows could now be even longer and that is not good.
-
Actually, they should dump the weight class idea dn do height. I think that makes much more sense as a 210 lb guy at 5'4" is never judged fairly against a 230 lb guy at 5'8". The height is what makes the comparisons more accurate instead of weight.
-
The easiest solution, as I see it, is have all the competitors compete together (as if there is no weight class) and the highest placing 202 competitor is named the winner of the 202 class. The next highest 202 competitor is declared second in the 202, etc.
The winner of the 202 and the open have then, already competed against each other, and the score sheet is the source of separation for the two classes.
-
Top three maby tyop 5 should be able to compete in the open.
-
Bob is mad because the short guys can possible cash in twice which he couldn't.
Is Bob even a pro? :/
-
chicherillo is right, you have 2 categories, or don't, they have to be separate
one more problem is for the European bodybuilders, the best compete out of IFBB
-
I think guys with bodies like women, example: Arvilla, should be able to compete with women if the body structure in comparable.
-
The concept of the under-202 class is great in itself. Lee Priest, Dave Henry, Flex Lewis, Jaroslav Horvath, etc. We'll see some great, aesthetical physiques.
-
the 202 class is a fucking joke.
its an crutch for people who dont have the genetics to win a contest.
theres no under 6ft basketball legaue lol :D
-
The concept of the under-202 class is great in itself. Lee Priest, Dave Henry, Flex Lewis, Jaroslav Horvath, etc. We'll see some great, aesthetical physiques.
no, you just see blocky mass on somone who is 5ft.4 instead of 5ft.10
-
the 202 class is a fucking joke.
its an crutch for people who dont have the genetics to win a contest.
theres no under 6ft basketball legaue lol :D
ur ridiculous.
-
no, you just see blocky mass on somone who is 5ft.4 instead of 5ft.10
Jaroslav and Flex Lewis definately aren't blocky.
-
FRANCO COLUMBU WAS A GREAT UNDER 200LB CHAMPION
-
Good idea
It gives the "under 202" more noteriety.
Keep the classes apart and the "under 202 will grow", if not seperated then it will be severly compromised and won't recieve the recoqnition it deserves.
A middle weight champion in boxing would get less respect if he had to fight and lose to the weakest heavyweights.
-
Quote from http://www.muscletime.com/news/latest/state-of-the-sport-of-bodybuilding/ (http://www.muscletime.com/news/latest/state-of-the-sport-of-bodybuilding/)
Action to Save the Sport of Bodybuilding
Here are our humble suggestions to the top people in our industry.
(1) Please act now. Do not wait any longer! Make changes no matter how hard they might appear in the beginning. Many athletes and people within the industry will be furious at the changes. However, the fans must be considered the number one priority going forward.
(2) Do not allow distended midsections on stage any longer. Make no exceptions based on degree of celebrity. If athletes are unable to control their abdominal distention, they should never place within the top ten of any IFBB pro show regardless of their size and conditioning.
(3) Emphasize symmetry and the classical bodybuilding physique. The athlete "look" includes the ability to adequately move and present their physique.
(4) Publish clear rules for what the physiques in the sport are supposed to look like and then have the courage to actually enforce your own rules without exception.
(5) Emphasize the fans and the fans only. Do not listen to the industry "insiders" who have guided the growth of the sport in the past. Ideas like the 202 and under class only benefit the athletes and the promoters. Fan numbers will continue to dwindle in the long run due to the increasingly excessive length of the show. Additional classes like the 202 and under class simply diminishes the quality and prestige of pro championships; handing out more first place trophies is not going to increase the popularity of the sport.
(6) Keep the shows short. Fan numbers will continue to dwindle in the long run due to the increasingly excessive length of the show. The media and industry insiders should be required to sit through the entire events of one current contest weekend without taking a break and without working - just like we expect spectators of the shows to endure. Do you think anyone will acknowledge having a good time? They most likely will admit being bored especially if the competitors are out of shape.
(7) Hire a professional sports marketing agency. It would be worth the investment on real sports marketing professionals. Find legitimate market experts to examine how to make bodybuilding competition more entertaining. That is the ultimate goal. People want to be entertained. The major flaw of bodybuilding shows is the lack of entertainment. The entertainment should probably involve real sports action rather than WWE style entertainment. The current succession of bodybuilders trying to dance during posing routines is extremely tiresome to watch. For the most part, bodybuilders are not dancers but dedicated athletes. As such, athlete against athlete competition should prevail where the audience can identify with the drama of competition.......
-
I agree with Bob 100%
-
Quote from http://www.muscletime.com/news/latest/state-of-the-sport-of-bodybuilding/ (http://www.muscletime.com/news/latest/state-of-the-sport-of-bodybuilding/)
Action to Save the Sport of Bodybuilding
Here are our humble suggestions to the top people in our industry.
(1) Please act now. Do not wait any longer! Make changes no matter how hard they might appear in the beginning. Many athletes and people within the industry will be furious at the changes. However, the fans must be considered the number one priority going forward.
(2) Do not allow distended midsections on stage any longer. Make no exceptions based on degree of celebrity. If athletes are unable to control their abdominal distention, they should never place within the top ten of any IFBB pro show regardless of their size and conditioning.
(3) Emphasize symmetry and the classical bodybuilding physique. The athlete "look" includes the ability to adequately move and present their physique.
(4) Publish clear rules for what the physiques in the sport are supposed to look like and then have the courage to actually enforce your own rules without exception.
(5) Emphasize the fans and the fans only. Do not listen to the industry "insiders" who have guided the growth of the sport in the past. Ideas like the 202 and under class only benefit the athletes and the promoters. Fan numbers will continue to dwindle in the long run due to the increasingly excessive length of the show. Additional classes like the 202 and under class simply diminishes the quality and prestige of pro championships; handing out more first place trophies is not going to increase the popularity of the sport.
(6) Keep the shows short. Fan numbers will continue to dwindle in the long run due to the increasingly excessive length of the show. The media and industry insiders should be required to sit through the entire events of one current contest weekend without taking a break and without working - just like we expect spectators of the shows to endure. Do you think anyone will acknowledge having a good time? They most likely will admit being bored especially if the competitors are out of shape.
(7) Hire a professional sports marketing agency. It would be worth the investment on real sports marketing professionals. Find legitimate market experts to examine how to make bodybuilding competition more entertaining. That is the ultimate goal. People want to be entertained. The major flaw of bodybuilding shows is the lack of entertainment. The entertainment should probably involve real sports action rather than WWE style entertainment. The current succession of bodybuilders trying to dance during posing routines is extremely tiresome to watch. For the most part, bodybuilders are not dancers but dedicated athletes. As such, athlete against athlete competition should prevail where the audience can identify with the drama of competition.......
I disagree with number 5 entirely....what the 202 class does, it make it fairer for the 3 out of 4 athletes that turn pro, and are eligable for this class. It makes it fair for an athlete to compete against someone of relative weight/ size....It makes for more opportunities for a 202 champ to gain exposure, contracts, etc...while placing 15-25 doesn't.
As to the length being too long...I not only agree, but have taken many steps to try and shorten the shows, while increasing the production value.. I've said it a million times...we need more entertainment, SHOWS, not competitions....competit ions should be relegated to the prejudging, thats why we have it in the first place.
-
I disagree with number 5 entirely....what the 202 class does, it make it fairer for the 3 out of 4 athletes that turn pro, and are eligable for this class. It makes it fair for an athlete to compete against someone of relative weight/ size....It makes for more opportunities for a 202 champ to gain exposure, contracts, etc...while placing 15-25 doesn't.
As to the length being too long...I not only agree, but have taken many steps to try and shorten the shows, while increasing the production value.. I've said it a million times...we need more entertainment, SHOWS, not competitions....competit ions should be relegated to the prejudging, thats why we have it in the first place.
Agree
-
Joe Rourk's submission (see above) appears that it would solve any and all forthcoming problems and objections. Smart submission, Joe.
Has there been any discussion on this subject matter with the pros who are affected? Any complaints? Any improvement suggestions?
Probably not!
-
I agee with Chick. The U202 guys who are good will compete in the open (like Henry and Flex Lewis) and this will leave the U202 class with a bunch of small guys who look like shit. After a few shows of this, the U202 will be phased and out and put on the shelf beside the Master O as a good idea that didn't work. Who wants to watch a bunch of short tiny guys compete anyway???
I look forward to the Ken Jones Vs Cliffton Torres posedown!!!!
-
I agee with Chick. The U202 guys who are good will compete in the open (like Henry and Flex Lewis) and this will leave the U202 class with a bunch of small guys who look like shit. After a few shows of this, the U202 will be phased and out and put on the shelf beside the Master O as a good idea that didn't work. Who wants to watch a bunch of short tiny guys compete anyway???
I look forward to the Ken Jones Vs Cliffton Torres posedown!!!!
I don't necessarily think that this will lose interest like the Masters O. This is because all good bodybuilders will eventually get older and lose physique quality, but for the most part a good small BB will always look good as a small BB. And you won't have to wait until he hits 40 to see it. And there's just too big of a talent pool. Besides, David Henry and Flex Lewis are freaks among freaks, and even Flex Lewis placed out of the money in the open class. He'd be better off kickin ass in the 202.
-
Exactly what I DONT want....
That's a shame because it's what the fans want... it would just be the best 202 guy vs the best open guy.. besides that it would be kept seperate.
-
They best 202er and the best open WOULD compete against each other...in the open class.
Why wait for an overall posedown? If the 2022er can win in a lineup, what makes you think he would win in an oerall posedown?
-
only Lewis and Henry were really of high-level in the 202 class
there is need of time to make new champions in this class
-
The open guys don't have twice the opportunity to cash in...why should the 202 guys?
Best point so far in the thread.
-
Perhaps itīs time to watch several things.
Itīs necesary to know what was the cause for 202 class.
- For shorts, small bodybuilders who donīt have any oportunity in a lienup where only over 250 lbs can be saw by judging line
- To try get back to classics physiques where mass isnīt the most important part of bodybuilding, between other things the reason cause this sport losses fans. This way judges get back to consider this physiques judging it.
- Only a freelicense of events organizers, who put the money put the rules... In that cause we canīt do naything abuout it, cause in a soon future if i would be a organizer i can do any match i want to pay. The most muscular, better legs, tallest one... or a special class, under 250, americans, europeans,etc... All in a different time, of course apart from the main event.
In the first point we see right Bobīs petition.
In the second point is totally negative this petition, because this goal will be lost. Judges donīt watch this kind of physiques between big boys.
In the third point if my money rules, my money will be the scale
-
I think the 202 will be more competitive than the open in the future. Like Bob mentioned, 75% of the weight classes that turn pro are under 202. They don't have to wait until their mid 30's, they can jump in at a young age like Flex Lewis and do very well. Not only should it be separate from the open, but it should be on the Olympia stage this year, rather than at the expo.
-
How many upset atheltes were tehre after little 202 Silvio took the crown last year from the big guys?
-
ACTUALLY GUYS I THINK IT'S TIME FOR BODYBUILDING TO GO TO WEIGHT CLASSES..LIKE CHICK SAYS, MOR CHAMPIONS WOULD BE A GOOD THING..FOR EXAMPLE, WE COULD HAVE THE FOLLOWING WEIGHT CLASSES
1) 180 AND UNDER AS ONE CLASS (this will encourage really small guys who are 5'5 and under to get into the sport as professionals)
2) 181 - 202 ( for guys like david henry and silvio)
3) 203 - 240
4) 241 - 280
5) 281 - 300 and beyond ( for the true mass monsters so they don't overwhelm the smaller competitors)
this will increase competition and rivalries because certain bodybuilders can take aim at other guys who they think they can beat or who they dislike...the magazines and fans can have a field day with all the BBer's taking aim at one another to knock each other off...the only problem with this scenario is that there may not be enough money to pay off all the potential winners in each weight class...what do you think Chick? Is something like this viable?
-
ACTUALLY GUYS I THINK IT'S TIME FOR BODYBUILDING TO GO TO WEIGHT CLASSES..LIKE CHICK SAYS, MOR CHAMPIONS WOULD BE A GOOD THING..FOR EXAMPLE, WE COULD HAVE THE FOLLOWING WEIGHT CLASSES
1) 180 AND UNDER AS ONE CLASS (this will encourage really small guys who are 5'5 and under to get into the sport as professionals)
2) 181 - 202 ( for guys like david henry and silvio)
3) 203 - 240
4) 241 - 280
5) 281 - 300 and beyond ( for the true mass monsters so they don't overwhelm the smaller competitors)
this will increase competition and rivalries because certain bodybuilders can take aim at other guys who they think they can beat or who they dislike...the magazines and fans can have a field day with all the BBer's taking aim at one another to knock each other off...the only problem with this scenario is that there may not be enough money to pay off all the potential winners in each weight class...what do you think Chick? Is something like this viable?
Too many classes...you basically answered your own question...not enough money to go around, and too many unanswered questions with too many champs.
2 classes is more than enough, and manageable from a judging standpoint, and sponsor dollars...
-
Too many classes...you basically answered your own question...not enough money to go around, and too many unanswered questions with too many champs.
2 classes is more than enough, and manageable from a judging standpoint, and sponsor dollars...
i agree with bob here,thats why they have npc weight classes ,u can turn the pro card down and continue as amateur .some have done it,better to stay competive as a lightweight then compete as pro and be out of the money.if u wanted to see different shapes and sizes then the aau would have better for some bbers or fans,they had short,med short,med tal,tall,divisions .so for example u had vic terra in med short or short class and he was 5'4 over 200 and if u were 5'4 175 then u would be in trouble.but aau had great competitiors.
-
Interesting reading here. SOmeone must have put the kids to bed! This is what this Board should be all about. Intelligent questions, remarks, and responses. I hope it's contagious and spreads to the rest of this GetBig Board.
I also hope that the competitive pros are showing just as much interest and making it known to Bob.
-
Interesting reading here. SOmeone must have put the kids to bed! This is what this Board should be all about. Intelligent questions, remarks, and responses. I hope it's contagious and spreads to the rest of this GetBig Board.
I also hope that the competitive pros are showing just as much interest and making it known to Bob.
THis will surprise you, Bill....out of all the 202 guys I've asked so far....ALL of them are in favor of making the 202 it's own distinct class, and not allow crossovers.
Makes sense for a lot of reasons, the main one being that I believe it takes away from the legitimacy of the class.
-
The O is special the best of the best should not have more than one class
-
The O is special the best of the best should not have more than one class
Thats bullshit. There's been a ton of short people who should have won but never did ONLY because of their stature. What croc of crap.
-
The O is special the best of the best should not have more than one class
If it were able to be judged that way, I'd be with you 100%...
History shows, it isn't...we've seen the best physique in the world relegated to 2nd place on many occasions over the years, all to the bigger man.
-
tell him, chick
-
Thats what I don't get, whats the point of the 202 class if they crossover. Under 200 lbs competitors have been fighting for the 202 class forever and when they have it they go cross over ad compete in the open too.
Why not have 202 class and open, no crossovers, and have the winners of both division comepete against each other for an overall title?
-
Chick, why 202 and nor 200 lbs???
-
How I enjoy watching 240 trying to act smart and get tramped on ;D
-
Dont worry BIG ACH, you wont ever be 150lbs...
-
Dont worry BIG ACH, you wont ever be 150lbs...
??? Ok ?
-
Chick, why 202 and nor 200 lbs???
Why indeed..
I personally thought 205 made more sense for a variety of reasons...
-
How I enjoy watching 240 trying to act smart and get tramped on ;D
actually I thought this was a softball topic delivery, wouldn't ya agree?
-
The O is special the best of the best should not have more than one class
best of the best? The following contestants in the 2007 Olympia have never won a pro contest:
Eddie Abbew
Mark Dugdale
Marcus Haley
Will Harris
Sergey Shelestov
Quincy Taylor
Bill Wilmore
Hidetada Yamagishi
-
best of the best? The following contestants in the 2007 Olympia have never won a pro contest:
Eddie Abbew
Mark Dugdale
Marcus Haley
Will Harris
Sergey Shelestov
Quincy Taylor
Bill Wilmore
Hidetada Yamagishi
And your point is what?
They have playoffs in many sports...I'm watching the Olympics, they have the top 3 qualify on to the next round, not just the winner, etc, etc...How about rookies that have made quite a debut at the Olympia like Levrone and Wheeler? Guess they had no business being there either, right?
-
And your point is what?
Bob Bonham claimed that the Olympia is the best of the best. if they let people in who've never won a pro contest, it's hard to call it that.
the olympia use to be the best of the best. only winners of other major contests were invited. not sure when that changed.
I'm watching the Olympics, they have the top 3 qualify on to the next round, not just the winner
kind of hard to have a track or a pool that is 40 lanes wide
How about rookies that have made quite a debut at the Olympia like Levrone and Wheeler? Guess they had no business being there either, right?
Levrone won the NOC prior to his Olympia debut. Wheeler won the Arnold and the Ironman prior to his Olympia debut.
-
I have not checked this, but probably [most] every IFBB pro contest has allowed competitors who had not at that point won an IFBB pro contest. But the overall quality of contestants at the Olympia is better than the overall quality at other IFBB pro shows, so in that sense it is the best of the best.
Coleman and Cutler did not have parade leading introductions with their initial Olympia competitions, but they later did okay.
Wheeler began 1993 by setting a record of four consecutive wins before competing in that year's Olympia.
-
And your point is what?
They have playoffs in many sports...I'm watching the Olympics, they have the top 3 qualify on to the next round, not just the winner, etc, etc...How about rookies that have made quite a debut at the Olympia like Levrone and Wheeler? Guess they had no business being there either, right?
Correct Bob. All very fine bb's, and deserving to grace the O stage
-
Not a good idea at all. This is the danger of having an also-ran like chik in charge. He brings with him the emotional baggage of having had a metsa-metsa career. Those of us that are sensitive to the nuances of the human psyche know that chik is seething with anger on the inside. As such, he should be prohibited from calling any shots.
-
Bob Bonham claimed that the Olympia is the best of the best. if they let people in who've never won a pro contest, it's hard to call it that.
the olympia use to be the best of the best. only winners of other major contests were invited. not sure when that changed.
kind of hard to have a track or a pool that is 40 lanes wide
Levrone won the NOC prior to his Olympia debut. Wheeler won the Arnold and the Ironman prior to his Olympia debut.
Many of these guys have won multiple shows in a given year, what a great lineup and show it would be if there were 5-6 guys competing for the Olympia, huh?
Don't need a pool 40 lanes wide, just athletes that have won a meet along the way, right?...not a chance every Olympian has won prior to geting to the Olympics...
-
I have not checked this, but probably [most] every IFBB pro contest has allowed competitors who had not at that point won an IFBB pro contest.
in the early days, it was not limited to winners of IFBB pro contests. Winners of NABBA Pro Universe were invited. Winners of top amateur contests were invited, especially class winners of the IFBB Universe (World Amateur Championships)
For example, Boyer Coe and Tony Emmott were invited to the Olympia the year after they won the NABBA Pro Universe (1975 and 1977). Neither had entered any IFBB Pro contest in between. Danny Padilla's first Olympia was the year after winning his class at the World Amatuers. Same with Roy Callendar, Roger Walker, Samir Bannout.
Winning an IFBB pro event wasn't a requirement to get into the Olympia, but pretty much every contestant had won a major international pro or amateur event.
-
Don't need a pool 40 lanes wide, just athletes that have won a meet along the way, right?...not a chance every Olympian has won prior to geting to the Olympics...
First you try compare my argument that only winners of contests should go to the Olympia to only winners of heats of races should go on to the next round. but they only have heats when they can't have everyone on the track at the same time. plus it's not just the top three that make it to the next round. the rest of the field is filled out by time. that way if you're randomly put into a heat with the three best in the world, you still might make it into the next round if you have the fourth best time of the day.
now you're arguing about just getting into the Olympics. Teams are set by country, so you have to be the best in your country to be sent. But there are still minimum qualifying times that you must meet. you might be the best in your third world country, but you still have to be able to be competitive at the international level to be allowed into the Olympics.
-
in the early days, it was not limited to winners of IFBB pro contests. Winners of NABBA Pro Universe were invited. Winners of top amateur contests were invited, especially class winners of the IFBB Universe (World Amateur Championships)
For example, Boyer Coe and Tony Emmott were invited to the Olympia the year after they won the NABBA Pro Universe (1975 and 1977). Neither had entered any IFBB Pro contest in between. Danny Padilla's first Olympia was the year after winning his class at the World Amatuers. Same with Roy Callendar, Roger Walker, Samir Bannout.
Winning an IFBB pro event wasn't a requirement to get into the Olympia, but pretty much every contestant had won a major international pro or amateur event.
Good points. Weider, like Lurie often did, invited bodybuilders from other associations to compete in their respective shows. Sometimes, one suspects both Weider and Lurie were more hopeful than certain that those other competitors would jump aboard, and it seemed to me in those days that to say so-and-so 'has been invited' was mis-read by some as 'has agreed to compete'.
Certainly in the early years it was necessary to draw from all available sources for competitors.
-
Certainly in the early years it was necessary to draw from all available sources for competitors.
Bodybuilding today ain't as popular as it use to be. Maybe it's time to do that again.
-
Bodybuilding today ain't as popular as it use to be. Maybe it's time to do that again.
As you know, Tim, selecting the judges (from which federation) would be the main hindrance to a modern motley contest. With the friction between (perhaps even among) various magazines, and the resultant positive publicity for the winner and his sponsor, it is unlikely we will see this idea materialize.
Actually, depending on what exactly you are referring to, an argument can be made that bodybuilding is now more popular than ever.
-
First you try compare my argument that only winners of contests should go to the Olympia to only winners of heats of races should go on to the next round. but they only have heats when they can't have everyone on the track at the same time. plus it's not just the top three that make it to the next round. the rest of the field is filled out by time. that way if you're randomly put into a heat with the three best in the world, you still might make it into the next round if you have the fourth best time of the day.
now you're arguing about just getting into the Olympics. Teams are set by country, so you have to be the best in your country to be sent. But there are still minimum qualifying times that you must meet. you might be the best in your third world country, but you still have to be able to be competitive at the international level to be allowed into the Olympics.
Your analogy is falling apart fast, because it makes no sense.
"They have heats because they cant have everyone on the track at the same time"....fine...we have contests because we cant have 200 athletes on the stage at the same time....
"the rest of the field is filled out by the best times"....fine....and the rest of our field is filled out by th next highest placings
YOU'RE ACTUALLY MAKING MY CASE FOR ME...
Lets see...under your suggestion, so far we would have Phil, Dexter, Kai, Silvio, Toney...I guess Jay gets in even though he hasn't competed in 08. Kai is out....WOW, what an OLympia...5 guys to pick rom...guess we can all go home after an hour.
-
Lets see...under your suggestion, so far we would have Phil, Dexter, Kai, Silvio, Toney...I guess Jay gets in even though he hasn't competed in 08. Kai is out....WOW, what an OLympia...5 guys to pick rom...guess we can all go home after an hour.
fine. have the winners from the previous 12 months, then a point system for the remaining spots. Last year they could only bother ranking the top 15. Why clutter the stage with people who won't even place?
-
Actually, depending on what exactly you are referring to, an argument can be made that bodybuilding is now more popular than ever.
tickets sold at shows like the Ironman, Colorado Pro, Keystone Pro, Tamp Bay, Houston, New York Pro.
compare the single seating for the NY Pro in a 1200 seat college auditorium to multiple seating (pre, women, finals) for the NOC at the 4000 seat Beacon Theatre.
-
Why not refer back to Larry Pepe's well thought out proposal back in 2006?
All of these points were addressed and he broke down the weight classes, prize money, etc.
-
tickets sold at shows like the Ironman, Colorado Pro, Keystone Pro, Tamp Bay, Houston, New York Pro.
compare the single seating for the NY Pro in a 1200 seat college auditorium to multiple seating (pre, women, finals) for the NOC at the 4000 seat Beacon Theatre.
Yeah....dont forget to compare the comps as well. Full house doesn't mean more tickets were sold.
-
Why clutter the stage with people who won't even place?
Excellent!
-
Excellent!
1992 Mr. Olympia Standings
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Place Name
1 Dorian Yates
2 Kevin Levrone
3 Lee Labrada
4 Shawn Ray
5 Mohammed Benaziza
6 Vince Taylor
7 Sonny Schmidt
8 Porter Cottrell
9 Ron Love
10 Thierry Pastel
11 Steve Brisbois
12 Lou Ferrigno
13 Alq' Gurley
14 Henderson Thorne
15 Francis Benfatto
16 Samir Bannout
16 Ronnie Coleman
16 Miroslav Diskiewicz
16 Jose Guzman
16 Johani Herranen
16 Patrick Nicholls
16 Milos Sarcev
Yeah...like THIS guy!
-
1992 Mr. Olympia Standings
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Place Name
1 Dorian Yates
2 Kevin Levrone
3 Lee Labrada
4 Shawn Ray
5 Mohammed Benaziza
6 Vince Taylor
7 Sonny Schmidt
8 Porter Cottrell
9 Ron Love
10 Thierry Pastel
11 Steve Brisbois
12 Lou Ferrigno
13 Alq' Gurley
14 Henderson Thorne
15 Francis Benfatto
16 Samir Bannout
16 Ronnie Coleman
16 Miroslav Diskiewicz
16 Jose Guzman
16 Johani Herranen
16 Patrick Nicholls
16 Milos Sarcev
Yeah...like THIS guy!
Polemic! I think Tim means guys who will never, ever place, Chick.
/you know who they are!
-
Polemic! I think Tim means guys who will never, ever place, Chick.
/you know who they are!
LOL...trust me, no one had Coleman as a top champ, let alone going on to be the greatest of all time.
Just goes to show what can be achieved
-
LOL...trust me, no one had Coleman as a top champ, let alone going on to be the greatest of all time.
Just goes to show what can be achieved
Fair enough, but do you think he wouldn't have done what he did if he didn't compete in the 1996 Olympia? I'm pretty sure he would have been fine.
-
LOL...trust me, no one had Coleman as a top champ, let alone going on to be the greatest of all time.
Just goes to show what can be achieved
Ok. Fair cop. But, while lacking in initial size, Ronnie did have some good - real good shape - unlike, say (extreme example!) Ken Jones, who just looks lost up on stage.
-
Ok. Fair cop. But, while lacking in initial size, Ronnie did have some good - real good shape - unlike, say (extreme example!) Ken Jones, who just looks lost up on stage.
POint being...Ken Jones has never qualified for the OLympia. Guys earning the opportunity to compete in the O, by placing in the top 3 of qualifying shows, belong there just as much as the guy that won...who can be the other guy on a different day.
Tim's point/ idea...is lame.
-
1992 Mr. Olympia Standings
16 Samir Bannout
16 Ronnie Coleman
16 Miroslav Diskiewicz
16 Jose Guzman
16 Johani Herranen
16 Patrick Nicholls
16 Milos Sarcev
Yeah...like THIS guy!
It seems to me that you're supporting my position. If the Olympia is suppose to be the best of the best of that year, it really doesn't matter what you might do six years later. obviously Ronnie wasn't ready to compete with the big boys yet. in his only two pro contests up to that point he placed 11th at the Chicago Pro, and 14th at the NOC. the only reason he was in the Olympia was because he won his class in the World Amateurs the year before.
-
Guys earning the opportunity to compete in the O, by placing in the top 3 of qualifying shows, belong there just as much as the guy that won.
OK, what about the top 5 as with the Ironman and the Arnold? and if 5, why not the top 10? Why not just make it an Open?
-
It seems to me that you're supporting my position. If the Olympia is suppose to be the best of the best of that year, it really doesn't matter what you might do six years later. obviously Ronnie wasn't ready to compete with the big boys yet. in his only two pro contests up to that point he placed 11th at the Chicago Pro, and 14th at the NOC. the only reason he was in the Olympia was because he won his class in the World Amateurs the year before.
POint is (which you wouldn't know, as you've never been on a stage , let alone the Olympia stage)....is that competing against the best in the OLympia is invaluable when it comes to experience...
That said...A athlete can lose to a guyat a given show, not because the other guy was better, but because the athlete was off, or ill, or mistimed his prep...
There is nothing wrong with the current system of qualifying.
-
OK, what about the top 5 as with the Ironman and the Arnold? and if 5, why not the top 10? Why not just make it an Open?
Why have playoffs in Football and baseball? You either win your division with the best regular season record, or you don't...right?
-
That said...A athlete can lose to a guyat a given show, not because the other guy was better, but because the athlete was off, or ill, or mistimed his prep...
or is on some judge's shit list
There is nothing wrong with the current system of qualifying.
having too many people who have yet to prove that they are among the best of the best dilutes the brand, slows down the contest.
giving out too many invites at the early contests such as the Ironman and the Arnold takes away from the excitement of the later contests.
wouldn't the Europa be more dramatic if more top tier athletes were fighting to qualify for the olympia?
wouldn't it be exciting to have a point system for wildcard spots for those who don't win a contest that year?
And shouldn't everyone who steps on stage at the Olympia be ranked in the final results instead of having an 8 way tie for last?
-
or is on some judge's shit list
having too many people who have yet to prove that they are among the best of the best dilutes the brand, slows down the contest.
giving out too many invites at the early contests such as the Ironman and the Arnold takes away from the excitement of the later contests.
wouldn't the Europa be more dramatic if more top tier athletes were fighting to qualify for the olympia?
wouldn't it be exciting to have a point system for wildcard spots for those who don't win a contest that year?
And shouldn't everyone who steps on stage at the Olympia be ranked in the final results instead of having an 8 way tie for last?
This is pro bodybuilding...it isn't as easy as just competing 6-7 times in a year...nor would it be healthy. In a perfect world, yes...the top guys would be competing over and over for big money every month....unfortunately, we have to deal in reality.
BTW....in your senario...how many guys do you think would prepare for competitions if the top 3 guys were competing in every one, and only the winner qualified?
Ridiculous
-
how is it fair that the guys under 202 can win prize money.. then turn around and enter the open and win more prize money, when that courtesy is not extended to the open class guys? pick a class.. compete and let the chips fall where they may.. personally, i am not the least bit excited about the 202 class.. it limits the pros in making improvements and we will see the same physique over and over..
-
how is it fair that the guys under 202 can win prize money.. then turn around and enter the open and win more prize money, when that courtesy is not extended to the open class guys? pick a class.. compete and let the chips fall where they may.. personally, i am not the least bit excited about the 202 class.. it limits the pros in making improvements and we will see the same physique over and over..
It's not fair....
As for making improvements....not everyone competes right at the 202 cutoff. Most of the athletes have plenty of muscle they can put on without ruining their physique...and, there are athletes who compete above the cutoff who can streamline their physique for the better...
-
chick i agree.. but, what i mean about making improvements is the guys who are right at the 202 limit.. they dont want to cross over to the open and they still wish to compete in the 202.. there is only so much "refining" one can do.. dave henry, for example will outgrow the 202 very quickly unless he just trains to "maintain".. there are others in a similar situation..
but, like i said, the "double dipping" of prize money is compete b.s. how can the ifbb think that is fair..? should we have a over 265 class, a over 235 class and the like so that the open guys can also get more prize money?.. completely unfair.. i thought this was the pros.. the best of the best.. no limitations.. life is not fair.. deal with it.. not all pros in other sports are on a level playing field.. so should the nba have a 6' and under class so that everyone can play?.. ::) sorry for the rant.. back to the subject, the class should be separate like you have stated.. no one should have much of a financial advantage...
-
It might make the Olympia title more prestigious if less guys were on stage. Say, 10 - 14; being the winners of the shows throughout the year. If the number is less than ten, then the top 2 in each show.) Less guys on stage means more chance for everyone to stand out.
As far as an early 90's Ronnie Coleman not qualifying for the Olympia under this new rule, it wouldn't necessarily mean he wouldn't improve and become the man who dominated the sport. It'd be upto the guy themselves to make those improvements and then qualify, by only accepting him if he makes the top 1 or 2 in each show.
Some of the people who compete in the Olympia have no chance of winning and it's a wonder how they qualify.
-
It might make the Olympia title more prestigious if less guys were on stage. Say, 10 - 14; being the winners of the shows throughout the year. If the number is less than ten, then the top 2 in each show.) Less guys on stage means more chance for everyone to stand out.
As far as an early 90's Ronnie Coleman not qualifying for the Olympia under this new rule, it wouldn't necessarily mean he wouldn't improve and become the man who dominated the sport. It'd be upto the guy themselves to make those improvements and then qualify, by only accepting him if he makes the top 1 or 2 in each show.
Some of the people who compete in the Olympia have no chance of winning and it's a wonder how they qualify.
Less guys on stage means less interest overall. People are paying for a show, to see thei farvorite BBers compete, as well as the collective best of the IFBB...bringing more athletes to the big dance is a win-win for everyone.
-
This is pro bodybuilding...it isn't as easy as just competing 6-7 times in a year...nor would it be healthy.
they would have to adjust or temper their drug regiment, that's for sure. but that's not necessarily a bad thing.
in the 80s and into the 90s, most of the top athletes competed in 9 or more contests a year. sure the Gran Prix events were packed pretty close together. but athletes knew how to pace themselves.
BTW....in your senario...how many guys do you think would prepare for competitions if the top 3 guys were competing in every one, and only the winner qualified?
1) why in the world did 41 people enter the open class at the Europa? surely most knew they wouldn't even be ranked, let alone be in the prize money.
2) this is a money making venture. it doesn't matter how many athletes enter. what matters is how many paying fans there are in the seats. I think the current system dilutes all the contests, including the Olympia. My proposals will make both the Olympia and the contests throughout the year more exciting, which means more paying customers.
-
they would have to adjust or temper their drug regiment, that's for sure. but that's not necessarily a bad thing.
in the 80s and into the 90s, most of the top athletes competed in 9 or more contests a year. sure the Gran Prix events were packed pretty close together. but athletes knew how to pace themselves.
1) why in the world did 41 people enter the open class at the Europa? surely most knew they wouldn't even be ranked, let alone be in the prize money.
2) this is a money making venture. it doesn't matter how many athletes enter. what matters is how many paying fans there are in the seats. I think the current system dilutes all the contests, including the Olympia. My proposals will make both the Olympia and the contests throughout the year more exciting, which means more paying customers.
I notice you don't like to answer direct questions...
41 entered in the open for the simple fact that the 202 guys are there anyway...
BTW...I've talked to many 202 guys, have yet to find ONE who doesn't agree with me.
The athletes didn't "pace" themselves anymore then, than they do now...you don't know what you're talking about
-
Less guys on stage means less interest overall. People are paying for a show, to see thei farvorite BBers compete, as well as the collective best of the IFBB...bringing more athletes to the big dance is a win-win for everyone.
you know, I really don't think second or third tier bodybuilders have many fans who will fly into Vegas just to see them. if someone decides to spend a couple of grand for a weekend in Vegas, they're doing it to see the top bodybuilders.
besides, the Olympia is really a trade show. most of the people attending the expo and the show are industry people.
-
Less guys on stage means less interest overall. People are paying for a show, to see thei farvorite BBers compete, as well as the collective best of the IFBB...bringing more athletes to the big dance is a win-win for everyone.
There are good reasons to have more guys onstage, but also it would be interesting to see the best 10 guys each year on stage together. It would make the competition better quality as a whole, as the last place guy would still be an amazing BBer.
The lesser guys (places 10 - 18) are mostly fillers who likely knew they wouldn't place better than top 5, let alone top 10. I'm all for spreading out the competition; just trying to offer a new idea. We all want the best for BBing. But in the end, the winner has to be someone we respect as champion. IFBB can learn alot from last year.
-
I notice you don't like to answer direct questions...
ok. the answer is just as many as now, as 2nd and 3rd tier competitors don't really have any expectations to place in the money, let alone win the overall.
-
There are good reasons to have more guys onstage, but also it would be interesting to see the best 10 guys each year on stage together. It would make the competition better quality as a whole, as the last place guy would still be an amazing BBer.
the purpose of my proposal is to get more top tier guys into the other contests throughout the year. No one is going to skip the Olympia because the 5th place guy from the Ironman didn't make the cut. many more people will attend the regional shows if the top tier bodybuilders have to requalify every year.
-
LOL...trust me, no one had Coleman as a top champ,
Jesus did.
-
Jesus did.
chill out and take a breather 240.
-
the purpose of my proposal is to get more top tier guys into the other contests throughout the year. No one is going to skip the Olympia because the 5th place guy from the Ironman didn't make the cut. many more people will attend the regional shows if the top tier bodybuilders have to requalify every year.
Good point. It would be a great way to create more interest in the Olympia if one of the top 5 guys got beaten in the earlier shows. All sports need competition to thrive. BBers need to have competitors that are a legit threat to beating them. Having Jay compete at one or two shows throughout the year would give him a good chance to lose, which wouldn't be a bad thing at all, competitionwise.
-
after winning smaller shows and moving to olympia caliber,haney,yates, coleman,cutler dieted for olympia and then the euro tour,gave them long offseason to train ,put size on,they just trained for the richest title.
-
This system would do nothing to have top tier athletes compete more often. They would get an early show, qualify, and still take off till the Olympia....
Only a significant increase in purse at the smaller shows would entice a Jay Cutler, Dex, or Vic to compete in them...
As for having the best guys on stage at the Olympia....what do you think we have now?
-
As for having the best guys on stage at the Olympia....what do you think we have now?
yes, we have the best guys on stage, and a lot of others who've never won a pro contest.
if all those guys are an important part of the contest, why don't the judges rank them in the final results?
-
yes, we have the best guys on stage, and a lot of others who've never won a pro contest.
if all those guys are an important part of the contest, why don't the judges rank them in the final results?
Because the paycheck is the same whether your 13th or 23rd...
They were placing the guys all the way down....not sure if exsists on the official score sheets.
-
Only a significant increase in purse at the smaller shows would entice a Jay Cutler, Dex, or Vic to compete in them...
You might have more entrants if you didn't use the term "purse".
Maybe something more manly. Like "Fanny pack"!
-
They were placing the guys all the way down....not sure if exsists on the official score sheets.
http://www.ifbbpro.com/results/2007-olympia/ shows no judge ranked anyone below 16.