Sergio Oliva Article - Musclemag July 1981

[slaveboy1980]

Onlyme's the only other one here who gets it, doesn't confuse perception with reality. Part of the problem now is the fact that the many great BBs back then who were never allowed to win have been diminished over time. Robinson, Fox, Padilla to name a few were absolutely phenomenal, second to no one. They were not inferior to the Olympia winners of the era, were in fact better. Most of the divergence from this reality is pure revisionism after the fact. Szkalak & Mentzer as well were almost as great.

In many of the poses they were comparable. In some, one or the other had the edge, so to say Oliva had the edge in a particular pose is only part of the equation. Sergio did *not* look better than Bertil in a shot like this, for example.

who said anything about padilla etc..i was talking about fox..you make up stuff when you reply in almost every thread

in my opnion sergio was better than bertil fox.. sergio in his prime would have crushed fox

as for padilla etc..i think padilla should have won in 1981..that guy was amazing. so was robinson..

[pumpster]

who said anything about padilla etc..i was talking about fox..you make up stuff when you reply in almost every thread

in my opnion sergio was better than bertil fox.. sergio in his prime would have crushed fox

as for padilla etc..i think padilla should have won in 1981..that guy was amazing. so was robinson..

I've made up nothing; Onlyme who was there sees the same reality as i do, dreamer. You only highlight your own desperation with the personal stuff, genius.

[slaveboy1980]

you bring padilla and alot of other stuff (about which no one has disagreed )in to the debate  about fox and sergio.  this shows your way of debating...

sergio crushes fox

[pumpster]

you bring padilla and alot of other stuff (about which no one has disagreed )in to the debate  about fox and sergio.  this shows your way of debating...

sergio crushes fox

So bringing up a larger picture at the same time is too complicated for you? I was providing context, something you apparently can't comprehend. I smell GED..

[slaveboy1980]

all you smell is your own bad breath  ...

a larger picture doesnt have anything to do with that sergio is better than fox.
fox was narrow ...sure he was massive but...he wasnt as good as some think he was. im not saying fox sucked as he was obviously top 10 in the early 80s.


and yes padilla deserved better...he should have beaten franco no legs in 81

[pumpster]

all you smell is your own bad breath  ...

a larger picture doesnt have anything to do with that sergio is better than fox.
fox was narrow ...sure he was massive but...he wasnt as good as some think he was. im not saying fox sucked as he was obviously top 10 in the early 80s.


and yes padilla deserved better...he should have beaten franco no legs in 81

Your obsession with "narrowness" proves the lack of dimensionality of your assessment. I have news for you: no one's perfect other than maybe Padilla. With a more balanced perspective you'd already give Fox more credit as one of top 4-5 guys who should've been winning Olympias in the late 70s - early-mid 80s in fair shows. Just as one example, in shape he'd have beaten Columbu in '81 or '76.

[slaveboy1980]

lol you always think other people lack view of the  "big picture" or your so called multidimensional views....i suspect it has more to do with them not agreeing with your categorical statements.

the only thing my view of fox "narrowness" proves is that fox was narrow compared to alot of other bodybuilders..and that his structure ..while being massive wasnt enough to win. 

only way fox could win mr o if he was given a gift such as franco was..

also mr o is a totally uninteresting competition...several guys where better than fox.

[pumpster]

lol you always think other people lack view of the  "big picture" or your so called multidimensional views....i suspect it has more to do with them not agreeing with your categorical statements.

Wrong yet again. You've done nothing but harp about Fox's "narrowness" (in comparison with Oliva, which is fairly meaningless vis-a-vis anyone else) without mentioning any other aspects such as the fact that he was in better condition than Oliva in the show, or mentioning that on some poses he was comparable or better.

These are not objective assessments! You have an obvious bias against him that i don't have, nor does onlyme. Look at your own posts and get a clue.

[slaveboy1980]

Wrong yet again. You've done nothing but harp about Fox's "narrowness" (in comparison with Oliva, which is fairly meaningless vis-a-vis anyone else) without mentioning any other aspects such as the fact that he was in better condition than Oliva in the show, or mentioning that on some poses he was comparable or better.

These are not objective assessments! You have an obvious bias against him that i don't have, nor does onlyme. Look at your own posts and get a clue.

its the other way around...you are biased toward fox. its not just fox narrowness..its his whole structure..sergio is better than fox.

stating that that fox is narrow is as objective as all your subjective statements 

when it comes to muscle mass fox is not far behind sergio..altho sergio wasnt at his all time best in early 80s while fox was. still sergios structure wins over fox slightly better conditioning.

[pumpster]

its the other way around...you are biased toward fox. its not just fox narrowness..its his whole structure..sergio is better than fox.

stating that that fox is narrow is as objective as all your subjective statements 

when it comes to muscle mass fox is not far behind sergio..altho sergio wasnt at his all time best in early 80s while fox was. still sergios structure wins over fox slightly better conditioning.

Again your myopia's striking: I never said nor should you assume that he had to beat Oliva to be either a great BB or to win the Olympia. This is your limited thinking.

Even in that contest though, it's closer than you say because of the strengths and weaknesses of both. Sergio had him on width, Fox beat him on conditioning, detail, biceps peak, arm detail, thigh cuts, etc.-quite a bit.

[slaveboy1980]

i wasnt talking about mr olympia i was talking about fox vs sergio and that sergio beat fox and was and is a better bb than fox.

i never said that fox has to beat sergio to be a great bodybuilder...again its the voices in your head mr.

shawn ray never beat dorian still shawn is a great bodybuilder so no..my mind isnt limited.

[pumpster]

i wasnt talking about mr olympia i was talking about fox vs sergio and that sergio beat fox and was and is a better bb than fox.

i never said that fox has to beat sergio to be a great bodybuilder...again its the voices in your head mr.

shawn ray never beat dorian still shawn is a great bodybuilder so no..my mind isnt limited.

Wrong again-you said he deserved top 10. I have news for you, he already was..duh? The reality was that he, along with several others i've mentioned, deserved top 3 placings for years, nothing less.

[slaveboy1980]

no my debate was fox vs sergio...but you brought in other stuff.

i know what im debating i dont need your help to say what im saying.

and i havent talked about what others deserved more than saying that i agree padilla should have been treated better. top 3 bla bla..may be true..but i wasnt discussing that. so dont shift focus when you are losing a debate and start debating other issues which I may even agree with you on. also competitons are a joke..alot of weird decisions where made in the early 80s. its not like i dont like fox ...its just compared to sergio...sergio is better....but your narrow mind generalizes from this thought...and you think...this guy thinks sergio is better than fox...therefore he must think fox sucks...so its you who is narrow minded and lack multidimensional thinking.

but fox vs sergio : sergio wins.

 but if you wanna discuss other things:
 i know fox placed 5th in 1983 and i believe he placed 8th in 1982 so yes thats top 10. just as i said he should be..in the top ten but not winning

[pumpster]

You're obsessed with Sergio/Fox, which BTW was closer than you're claiming because you still refuse to acknowledge his numerous advantages in that show. Thankfully i'm here to balance your misguided interpretations, as if it's only about width!

As far as your silly claim that "he deserved top 10" that's stating the obvious genius-he already was top 10! You didn't know that? My valid point is that he, like others, deserved higher placings. Don't obsess on Padilla either, as if others weren't also deserving. Widen your views.

[slaveboy1980]

You're obsessed with Sergio/Fox, which BTW was closer than you're claiming because you still refuse to acknowledge his numerous advantages in that show. Thankfully i'm here to balance your misguided interpretations, as if it's only about width!

As far as your silly claim that "he deserved top 10" that's stating the obvious genius-he already was top 10! You didn't know that? My valid point is that he, like others, deserved higher placings. Don't obsess on Padilla either, as if others weren't also deserving. Widen your views.

im not obsessed at all..im just stating what the discussion was about in the beginning...fox vs sergio and i think sergio is better.

and if you read all of my earlier post  you would know that im aware that fox was in top ten twice in early 80s..and one or twice in the later parts of the 80s..

and im not obssed with padilla..you brought him up.


the thing is you dont know what your debating anymore as you dont read the other persons posts.

widen your horizons. understand that alot of guys never got the placings they deserved. because bb is such a subjective sport and influenced by who sucked whos cock and politics. thats why competitions are jokes.

but that doesnt change the fact that oliva is better than BETIL BEEF IT FOX 

[pumpster]

You've confirmed low levels of cognition, consistently mixing up and confusing one issue with another.

I've made my point for others who aren't cognitively challenged & extremely biased towards Oliva and Padilla, only two of the names that i used that have been obsessed on by someone.

[slaveboy1980]

You've confirmed low levels of cognition, consistently mixing up and confusing one issue with another.

I've made my point for others who aren't cognitively challenged & extremely biased towards Oliva and Padilla, only two of the names that i used that have been obsessed on by someone.

only reason you think im mixing stuff up is because you keep bringing in other stuff into the discussion...and saying im mixing stuff up doesnt mean fox is better than sergio.

instead i would say it is you who is mentally challanged because you always change the subject when your loosing a discussion.