Bodybuilding Pro.com articles on the 2006 Mr. Olympia Contest.

[NarcissisticDeity]

If we look at the past 21 years of bodybuilding history, we see that the reigning Mr. Olympia will always win as long as he is top three at the night of the show.  I don't think the Mr. Olympia title has ever really been guaranteed to go to the best man of the night.  As long as a reigning Mr. Olympia comes in a show in respectable conditioning and could be argued to be the winner - he will win.

Do I think Ronnie should have won all of his titles?  Well, unlike some (ND), I don't consider a gut to be an auto-failure, so most of his wins I think were deserved.  In 2002, I think the best argument could have been made for Kevin or Gunter beating Ronnie.  Regardless of my personal view, based on judging standards in politics, Ronnie was a sure winner from the moment he won his first title.  That's just simple history.

Jay was by all rights being irrational, ignorant, and even dare I say stupid in thinking he could have won the show.  To get to his level takes the obvious time, money, and health risks, coupled with the fact that he skipped the Arnold two years in a row to get where he did, so he lost out on those earnings too - which were also guaranteed for political reasons.  He won the show, and the IFBB couldn't have awarded the title to a better man and more dedicated bodybuilder.

But my question is - why?  Had Ronnie won on the weekend, it would have been business as usual.  You would have just as many people saying he deserved it as any other year, and just as many people saying Jay deserved it.  So what was with the change?  Since I will be the first to say that the top bodybuilding shows are not given to the best of the man day (2004 ASC, 2002 O, etc) and are ALWAYS political, what is the benefit to have Jay crowned champ?

Like I said, whether I agree with the judging decisions or not, I will be the first to say that Ronnie's victories were also politically oriented at times.  Politics always plays a role, whether I like the outcome or not, and I will admit it.  So were what the politics behind Jay?  Forget about debating physique quality here - I'm talking strictly about politics.

Jay was by all rights being irrational, ignorant, and even dare I say stupid in thinking he could have won the show.  To get to his level takes the obvious time, money, and health risks, coupled with the fact that he skipped the Arnold two years in a row to get where he did, so he lost out on those earnings too - which were also guaranteed for political reasons.  He won the show, and the IFBB couldn't have awarded the title to a better man and more dedicated bodybuilder.

Obviously he wasn't lol he won

[Hulkster]

Hey, ND, has dorian cum yet?

[NarcissisticDeity]

Hey, ND, has dorian cum yet?

LMFAO M-E-L-T-D-O-W-N 

[NarcissisticDeity]

ND, hindsight is 20/20.

At the time, Jay was still being irrational to think he had a chance.  The intelligent and likely predicted outcome would have been another victory for Ronnie.  Whether or not Ronnie would even deserve it was besides the point.

Matt why train to be a professional bodybuilder? he placed a very close 2nd to Ronnie in 2001 and 2004 , he may have been a long-shot but he did have a shot , he needed to be spot-on and Ronnie needed to be off and low-and-behold 2006 Mr Olympia

Did Jay Cutler train to be 2nd place? of course not he trained to beat Ronnie Coleman and he did so it doesn't matter if any of us believed in him he believed in himself and proved everyone wrong. I don't think he's Mr Olympia material , he has a gut right along with Coleman which I find unacceptable , do I thibk he'll be better for the sport? no I think his type of physique is whats wrong with the sport , will he market the sport more than Ronnie or Dorian? probably but I don't think he's the best we have to offer in the sport , but the judges made choice and Jay made history.

[Hulkster]

when you sit back and look at all of ND's pro dorian arguments, they are ALWAYS based ON NUMBERS.

ie because the judges said he scored this and that therefore he was great and dominant.

the problem is, this argument ignores the fact that in terms of QUALITY, dorian was severely lacking



even here in 1995, supposedly one of his dominant years.

ND has never really given any sort of credibilty to any pics, scans or videos.

If he did - he would be saying what all of us are saying:

that dorian had major flaws and was dominant only because of a different (and flawed) judging philosophy of

size



over quality



period.

thankfully, times changed during the Ronnie reign:


quality was rewarded.

[NarcissisticDeity]

when you sit back and look at all of ND's pro dorian arguments, they are ALWAYS based ON NUMBERS.

ie because the judges said he scored this and that therefore he was great and dominant.

the problem is, this argument ignores the fact that in terms of QUALITY, dorian was severely lacking



even here in 1995, supposedly one of his dominant years.

ND has never really given any sort of credibilty to any pics, scans or videos.

If he did - he would be saying what all of us are saying:

that dorian had major flaws and was dominant only because of a different (and flawed) judging philosophy of

size



over quality


period.

thankfully, times changed during the Ronnie reign:

quality was rewarded.

Wow you're really lost on this one , I based my arguments on all the criteria , NOT sellective criteria that fits your agenda , most of the pics posted on this and many other boards are my scans , I take into accound the judges , the writers , the pictures , the videos , the contemporary accounts , biased and unbiased opinions I weigh it all , and I'm a hell of a lot more honest and objective and knowlegeable than you are this is plainly obvious , you didn't even know how the judges score contest until I showed you and then you cherry-picked what you liked and through-out the rest

For you to claim that Dorian in 1995 lacked ' quality ' once again showcases your ignorance to history , I've seen footage from that contest , a ton of pics and read every article I could , for you to say he lacks ' quality ' undermines the judges abilities the same judges who gave Ronnie the nod when he wasn't 100% don't be hypocritical it makes you look pathetic , the picture you posted Yates doesn't look as good as say Coleman in that particular shot ( in his prime of course ) but he smokes everyone else in almost every single other pose , whats funny is no one ever claimed Dorian wasn't good enough to win in 95 , Nasser prasied Yates , as did the rest of his contemporaries in 1995 , but Hulkster in 2006 sees some scans and says " he didn't deserve to win " lol kid go away and come back when you have some sense.

[slayer]

This industry is ruled by money and politics.  That should be obvious.

Attemping to ban speech about the PDI in magazines? 

Get real!  Talk about a monopoly.  How can you even try to justify that BS?

Do I think politics are involved?  Sure - for the reasons you specified.  But this has definitely not been the first time politics have been used in bodybuilding.  Think about Jay winning the 2004 ASC being as flat as a pancake for example.  Also, why did Ronnie win the challenge round when it counted, but when it didn't - he lost?

Yeah, explain that one. 

Corruption in the IFBB??  Never!

Also - hook me up with as much PDI stuff as you can.  I'm going to do my best to spread the word about it as much as possible.

biggest meltdown in getbig history has just unfolded do to ronnie colemens loss!

ohhh baby it gets better every dayyyyyy!

[NarcissisticDeity]

ND - what I am trying to say is that even if Jay believed in himself and even if he deserved to win, probability would have it so he didn't win.  That is why it was irrational for him to think he could win.  I didn't doubt he could beat Ronnie if Ronnie came in off, but I didn't think beating him wouldn't get him the title.  I felt that even IF Jay was the better man of the day, he would come second.  So it's not so much that I didn't believe in Jay, it's that I had a better understanding of IFBB politics than he did.  That is, until Jay won.  Obviously the politics changed too.

I thought the same as you , especially after seeing the pics I thought wow Ronnie is really off and Jay is on but Jay's going to be relegated to second and I was surprised they did the right thing , do I think there was politics involved ? no I think the gap between Ronnie & Jay this year was just that much and Ronnie paid , if people say it was a conspiracy then I say well its ironic Ronnie showed up looking like garbage.

[suckmymuscle]

ND, hindsight is 20/20.

At the time, Jay was still being irrational to think he had a chance.  The intelligent and likely predicted outcome would have been another victory for Ronnie.  Whether or not Ronnie would even deserve it was besides the point.

  Matt C, as I've said before, you're an utter idiot. Cutler being irrational about winning? He almost beat Coleman in 2001, and last year it's obvious he had matched Ronnie for muscularity except quads. Considering that Coleman is 42 going on 43 and Cutler is 33 and starting to peak, why is it "irrational" for him to hope winning? Cutler almost had Ronnie from the back last year and he was aware that his back had improved dramatically during 2006. So, there is nothing irrational about him hoping to win. Cutler had already won the ASC and Ironmen before, two of the most important pro shows; if it weren't for Coleman, he'd have several Sandows by now. For fuck sake, the guy has been a really, really top pro for several years now, and FLEX pronounced him a future Mr.Olympia way back in 1997, when he turned pro.

  After you've won the ASC, the most imporant pro bodybuilding show besides the Olympia several times, becoming a standard-bearer is all that's left to achieve. Considering his outstanding track record as a pro, Coleman's age and his own history of competition against Ronnie, there's nothing irrational about Cutler hoping to defeat Coleman. You and "sculpture" are at the Pantheon of Coleman nut-huggers. Seriously. You once said that a match-up between Dorian and Ronnie would be almost like a match-up between you and Ronnie. As if Dorian were so insignificant that even a nobody, such as yourself, could take him out at a bodybuilding show. Again: you're an utter idiot.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[nicorulez]

Well reguardless of anyones personal opinions the judges gave Dorian straight firsts in 1993/1995/1996/1997 and thats as good as it gets , you can't get a better score , in 93 he set a new standard in bodybuilding and he matched that in 1995 thats as wide of a margian as you can get , I don't know if he got straight firsts in 1992 but if it was a close contest they would have made note of that , which they didn't .

ND, that is the problem.  I can deal with Dorian getting straight firsts in 1993/1995 and 1996; in 1997 he looked like shit.  He looked worse than Ronnie ever looked until this year.  Ronnie was most definitely off at the pre-judging on Friday.  I feel if he could have brought his condition on Saturday to the Friday pre-judging, this conversation would be moot.  He would have won.  He looked better on Saturday.  However, he looked like a bloated mess on Friday.  Dorian was gifted the 1997 Mr. Olympia, because there was no competing PDI.  Thus, there was no reason to change.  Nasser absolutely crushed him in four of the mandatories.  Thus, he should have won.  However, the back always wins out, and Dorian still had that card.  In 1993, Dorian was amazing.  I laugh when people state that Jay could take him.  No chance.  Dorian should have gotten out in 1996; the last year he truly deserved to win.  He was gifted 1997.  Ronnie should have bowed out of this show, when it was obvious he was not going to be on and his left lat was missing.

[adipo8]

Ronnie has never been "very" beatable throughout his career!  Possibly beatable is one thing, but never has it been the case where he was clearly and easily beatable - not this year either.  And Ronnie wasn't off this year.  He was defintely on, just not to the degree he had been in the past.

I think some people on here are judging this contest based on personal bests.  Saying Victor should beat Ronnie is laughable.  Just because Victor was closer to his personal best than Ronnie was doesn't mean Victor should have beat him (some have suggested this).

I don't think he was lucky to win in 1998 - I think he was lucky to win in 2002.

ND, you still haven't addressed by point: in the history of the Mr. Olympia, the reigning champ will win as long as he is top three caliber.

Do I agree with this unwritten rule?  No.  But why was this year an exception?

IT will no longer be a rule. Also I have ALWAYS said - Ronnie was beatable. ALWAYS. He is a great bodybuilder - however most of the athlete seem to always beat themselves before they even go out on stage, because they do not beleive they can win.

Ali , Arnold and jordan loss - what made them great was coming back and winning again-

There is more than 3 that are worth now and the caliper has increase and thank you to ronnie for holding it down why the kids finally grew up!

TRUE STORY

[NarcissisticDeity]

My second article is up:

http://www.bodybuildingpro.com/jaycutlerversusronniecoleman2006.html

More to come.  I'm trying to be as fair and neutral as possible when I write these.    My guess would be Jay won the Mr. Olympia due to his back.  Everything else can pretty well be debated.

Matt I've read some of your reveiws and fair & neutral never came to mind .

[NarcissisticDeity]

Because of this statement?

I've taken back this statement in part when I acknowledged that 1995 may have been the year he did in fact dominate, torn biceps and all.  1993 you could still make a strong argument for Flex Wheeler.

Also, you are one of the few who would say I am not neutral.  Even the Jay sperm drinkers on here can see that I will be the first to point out Jay's strengths and Ronnie's weaknesses.

Look I'm a huge Flex Wheeler fan and he is what I would consider Mr Olympia material but he was off in 1993 and he was lucky to beat Shawn Ray , he admitted this to Shawn , 1993 was NOT a contest for anyone except Dorian Yates , to best quoet Samir Bannout " Dorian was first , second , and third. "

[NarcissisticDeity]

1993 may have been another year.  It comes down to whether you like shape or size I guess - with Dorian taking the lead in conditioning.

However, aside from 1993 and 1995, wouldn't you agree the other years were all debatable?  Ronnie had wins like this too.

Well we can decide from a personal opinion if they were debatebale or from a factual point of veiw , I hate to break it to all the Yates-haters , Dorian was NEVER in danger of losing his title to anyone from a judging point of view , this is a fact plain & simple

From a personal point of veiw I think he should have lost in 1997 he was that off , but I'm only basing this on video and pictures which DO NOT tell the whole story , he got straight firsts in almost every single win so to say most of his wins are debateable is simply not true