Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: The RedMeatKid on January 27, 2010, 02:40:40 PM
-
I have performed an exhaustive review of the photos and videos, interviews and critiques, and my professional opinion is that Arnold indeed won the 1980 Olympia and quite handily I might add. He was bigger, better defined and a better poser than anyone else in that arena. End of story.
-
Thanks Mr Mentzer~
-
Your hands hold a lot of time.
-
Arnold had lacking rhomboids. Mentzer won easily.
-
Arnold had lacking rhomboids. Mentzer won easily.
Mentzer got trounced by Arnold.
-
Thanks Mr Mentzer~
Mentzer aka Flanders
-
I have performed an exhaustive review of the photos and videos, interviews and critiques, and my professional opinion is that Arnold indeed won the 1980 Olympia and quite handily I might add. He was bigger, better defined and a better poser than anyone else in that arena. End of story.
I hope you didnt leave an jism on the toilet seat
-
Gayer than your handle being 'The Red Meat Kid'
-
finally after 30 years of speculation we now know.
-
In my view it doesn't matter if he wasn't good enough to beat those guys, because at his very best Arnold crushed them.
Thats what counts
-
I've just done extensive analysis on the Craig Titus case, and I've come to the conclusion that he didn't kill that girl, dump her into the back of a Jaguar, drive out into the middle of the desert and torch the car ::)
-
I have performed an exhaustive review of the photos and videos, interviews and critiques, and my professional opinion is that Arnold indeed won the 1980 Olympia and quite handily I might add. He was bigger, better defined and a better poser than anyone else in that arena. End of story.
well done.
fwiw i agree, but it wasnt a handy win at all.
but he won it.
-
I have performed an exhaustive review of all the stupid threads I've started lately and my professional opinion is that I'm by far the dumbest poster on GetBig. I'm a compulsive Arnold guy, a broken record and an absolute retard. End of story.
Fixed
-
I have performed an exhaustive review of the photos and videos, interviews and critiques, and my professional opinion is that Arnold indeed won the 1980 Olympia and quite handily I might add. He was bigger, better defined and a better poser than anyone else in that arena. End of story.
Post pics, or never happened.
WOOOOSSSHHSHSHSHSHSHSHSHSHSHS
-
I have performed an exhaustive review of the photos and videos, interviews and critiques, and my professional opinion is that Arnold indeed won the 1980 Olympia and quite handily I might add. He was bigger, better defined and a better poser than anyone else in that arena. End of story.
I think Arnold was indeed bigger than anyone else that night, but better defined? I don't think so. Better poser? Maybe.
You are leaving out a lot of other factors that should have determined the winner, such as conditioning, proportion, symmetry, density, hardness, etc. I don't think Arnold had the complete physique and wasn't well balanced.
Again, I only saw photos and videos from the contest, just like you. So we really don't have the complete picture, only people who were there that night could have the complete picture. I have read somewhere that about half or more than half the people present that night were upset by the results and actually booed Arnold.
-
Now, would have Arnold smoked every competitor that night at his best? Absolutely.
-
Flanders came 5th, maybe it wasa dodgey fix, but he sure lacked for overall thickness. Great shape and more proportionate upper legs, but this is bodybuilding, the bigger guy is allowed to win sometimes.
-
Do we have to wait another 30 years for your evaluation on the 81 Mr. O as well ????
-
Do we have to wait another 30 years for your evaluation on the 81 Mr. O as well ????
1-Platz
2-Padilla
3-Coulmbu
note : (I wont say woooossshhhh for the remaining of day).
-
corrected:
1. Platz
2. Padilla
3. Callender
-
Yes Arnold deserved the 80 "O," but hardly by a wide margin.
-
Fixed
You've been a member for a couple of months and have 600 posts? Does your mother know you're blowing off your homework for this? Or is she too busy getting passed around at the biker bar? You've got two names: Douche and Bag.
-
I've just done extensive analysis on the Craig Titus case, and I've come to the conclusion that he didn't kill that girl, dump her into the back of a Jaguar, drive out into the middle of the desert and torch the car ::)
Wasn't kfc involved?
-
Buddy, Arnold wasn't close to bigger than everyone else that night. He was as light as he had been since what....'69? Mentzer was shorter, about a mile thicker, with cross striations on his triceps and legs 2x the size of Arnold's. Arnold wasn't as proportional as Zane, Dickerson, or Mentzer. He wasn't as big as half the lineup, and he was probably only on par with their conditioning. All this combined with the fact that he was Arnold and the judging panel was made up not only of his friends, but former roommates, and role models=biased judging.
-
Buddy, Arnold wasn't close to bigger than everyone else that night. He was as light as he had been since what....'69? Mentzer was shorter, about a mile thicker, with cross striations on his triceps and legs 2x the size of Arnold's. Arnold wasn't as proportional as Zane, Dickerson, or Mentzer. He wasn't as big as half the lineup, and he was probably only on par with their conditioning. All this combined with the fact that he was Arnold and the judging panel was made up not only of his friends, but former roommates, and role models=biased judging.
His chest and arms dwarfed everyone else. I could see an argument for Dickerson, based on symmetry, but that would be a stretch. Mentzer, had great triceps, and decent legs, but the weakest chest in the entire lineup.
-
His chest and arms dwarfed everyone else. I could see an argument for Dickerson, based on symmetry, but that would be a stretch. Mentzer, had great triceps, and decent legs, but the weakest chest in the entire lineup.
..so he had the two smallest major body parts were biggest in the lineup. Legs and back>arms and chest.
-
Not even close...
-
:'(
-
It looks like Arnold is winning every pose except the front standing relaxed. Which I give to Mentzer by a slight margin.
-
His chest and arms dwarfed everyone else. I could see an argument for Dickerson, based on symmetry...
Chris didn't have good symmetry,notice how uneven his pecs and arms were...
-
Chris didn't have good symmetry,notice how uneven his pecs and arms were...
I could see an argument, but I pointed out that it would be a silly one. Dickerson is probably tied with Jackson as worst "O" in history.
-
It looks like Arnold is winning every pose except the front standing relaxed. Which I give to Mentzer by a slight margin.
I hope it was a joke...
-
I could see an argument, but I pointed out that it would be a silly one. Dickerson is probably tied with Jackson as worst "O" in history.
They were winners by luck.
-
Arnold wasn't as proportional as Zane, Dickerson, or Mentzer.
Of those 3,only Zane had better proportions than Arnold.Arnold lacked thighs,but Dickerson lacked arms and Mentzer pecs and width.So,they didn't have better proportions than him.
-
Of those 3,only Zane had better proportions than Arnold.Arnold lacked thighs,but Dickerson lacked arms and Mentzer pecs and width.So,they didn't have better proportions than him.
I agree. Arnold deserved the win. I don't think it was quite a blowout victory, but a deserved one, nonetheless.
-
;D
-
I agree. Arnold deserved the win. I don't think it was quite a blowout victory, but a deserved one, nonetheless.
IMO the only reason this contest was named "The most controversial Olympia"is because of the circumstances surrounding the event(Arnold's last minute entry,the conflict at the athlete's meeting etc.)I don't see the result as controversial at all.There were another more controversial results,I don't know why people still talk about this contest as being controversial.
-
IMO the only reason this contest was named "The most controversial Olympia"is because of the circumstances surrounding the event(Arnold's last minute entry,the conflict at the athlete's meeting etc.)I don't see the result as controversial at all.There were another more controversial results,I don't know why people still talk about this contest as being controversial.
The reason why it's so controversial is because Arnold didn't look like he did in 1975 and people can argue all they want that he shouldn't have won that's okay but Mentzer sure as fuck didn't win ! I think many consider 1981 the most controversial :-X
I think Arnold was good enough to win and better than Mike
-
The reason why it's so controversial is because Arnold didn't look like he did in 1975 and people can argue all they want that he shouldn't have won that's okay but Mentzer sure as fuck didn't win ! I think many consider 1981 the most controversial :-X
I think Arnold was good enough to win and better than Mike
I agree,and it's not important how Arnold looked compared to his former self,but to the competitors standing next to him.Haney,Dorian and Ronnie also won titles being not at their best.
-
I agree,and it's not important how Arnold looked compared to his former self,but to the competitors standing next to him.Haney,Dorian and Ronnie also won titles being not at their best.
And the thing is Arnold didn't look bad , he just did look as great as the early to mid seventies. His conditioning wasn't off he was just a scaled down version of himself and still one of the biggest guys on-stage and the best
-
Yes... 81 was the biggest joke of all, probably followed by Jay's supposed win in 07. Dorian's win in 97 is also suspect, but not nearly as bad as the two aforementioned examples.
-
And the thing is Arnold didn't look bad , he just did look as great as the early to mid seventies. His conditioning wasn't off he was just a scaled down version of himself and still one of the biggest guys on-stage and the best
Absolutely!
-
Yes... 81 was the biggest joke of all, probably followed by Jay's supposed win in 07. Dorian's win in 97 is also suspect, but not nearly as bad as the two aforementioned examples.
I think Danny Padilla should have won in 81 and it's not a secret that Martinez deserved it in 07.IMO Shawn Ray looked the best in 97.
-
I think Danny Padilla should have won in 81 and it's not a secret that Martinez deserved it in 07.IMO Shawn Ray looked the best in 97.
Hmm.. Padilla is a fair pick, though I would have went with Platz. I disagree about 07 martinez though... his calves had some of the most outright absurd site injections ever...I mean they were REALLY bad...he should have been flat disqualified for that crap.
I had Wolf winning 07.
-
Hmm.. Padilla is a fair pick, though I would have went with Platz. I disagree about 07 martinez though... his calves had some of the most outright absurd site injections ever...I mean they were REALLY bad...he should have been flat disqualified for that crap.
I had Wolf winning 07.
Wolf in 07 is a good choice...
Platz's legs always overpowered his upperbody and by the standards back then it was even more out of proportion.Danny had better symmetry and balance IMO.
-
Wolf in 07 is a good choice...
Platz's legs always overpowered his upperbody and by the standards back then it was even more out of proportion.Danny had better symmetry and balance IMO.
I agree with this... though I think that 81 was the year that Platz really brought his upper body up, and his overall package was very impressive, (no homo). His back is often not talked about and it should be...he had a very impressive dear double bi.
-
Yes... 81 was the biggest joke of all, probably followed by Jay's supposed win in 07. Dorian's win in 97 is also suspect, but not nearly as bad as the two aforementioned examples.
Though I don't agree with Arnold's win in '80, I do agree that '81 was an even bigger catastrophe. That was like a downright lie. Two men of equal height and conditioning. One with legs, one without. Padilla was big time robbed.
-
Buddy, Arnold wasn't close to bigger than everyone else that night. He was as light as he had been since what....'69? Mentzer was shorter, about a mile thicker, with cross striations on his triceps and legs 2x the size of Arnold's. Arnold wasn't as proportional as Zane, Dickerson, or Mentzer. He wasn't as big as half the lineup, and he was probably only on par with their conditioning. All this combined with the fact that he was Arnold and the judging panel was made up not only of his friends, but former roommates, and role models=biased judging.
You sound like that loser Al Gore. Some people just can't take a beating. ::)
-
Regardless of whether Arnold was good enough to win or not, what is truly remarkable is that there were people who had seen him 4 months or so before the show and he looked like nothing and hadn't trained or juiced seriously in 5 years. And to blow up in a few weeks like he did after 5 years is pretty good. Levrone is one of the few other guys that could pull that off.
-
As boring as the Anti Leonard klan who claim Hagler won. ::)
-
Buddy, Arnold wasn't close to bigger than everyone else that night. He was as light as he had been since what....'69? Mentzer was shorter, about a mile thicker, with cross striations on his triceps and legs 2x the size of Arnold's. Arnold wasn't as proportional as Zane, Dickerson, or Mentzer. He wasn't as big as half the lineup, and he was probably only on par with their conditioning. All this combined with the fact that he was Arnold and the judging panel was made up not only of his friends, but former roommates, and role models=biased judging.
HAHAHAHA. You know NOTHING of Arnold's competition weight. Arnold came in at 250 pounds for the 1969 Mr. Olympia, with NO cuts and he lost as a result of that. The following year he trimmed down to 230 pounds onstage. The following year he ballooned back up to 250 pounds and then down to 235-240 pounds until the 1975 Mr. Olympia where he weighed 225 pounds. Fast forward to 1980, he was 210 pounds the night of the competition. SO YEAH, he was actually 40 pounds lighter than his 1969 competition weight. ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)
-
HAHAHAHA. You know NOTHING of Arnold's competition weight. Arnold came in at 250 pounds for the 1969 Mr. Olympia, with NO cuts and he lost as a result of that. The following year he trimmed down to 230 pounds onstage. The following year he ballooned back up to 250 pounds and then down to 235-240 pounds until the 1975 Mr. Olympia where he weighed 225 pounds. Fast forward to 1980, he was 210 pounds the night of the competition. SO YEAH, he was actually 40 pounds lighter than his 1969 competition weight. ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)
He was more like 220 pounds in 80.And as far as I know he was 240 in 70 and 228 in 75.