Vince says, "I say bring back the days when bodybuilders could enter any and all shows. You would show up, fill in a form, join whatever was necessary, pay the fee and you were in."
That still applies today, Vince. As you well know, Amateurs can still enter any show they want to providing that they are aware of the present definition of the word "amateur" and that one cannot retain his/her amateur status if one compete in a contest that offers a cash award or an award of value.
The actual definition of "amateur" was even stricter in your days as you may or may not recall.
But even then, it was impossible to keep track of any athlete who crossed the line.
And if someone did compete in "pro" contest, no one usually ever complained about or even questioned his amateur standing unless that individual was one of the top contenders.
ANd let me reaffirm that NPC athletes have in fact been banned from entering NPC events for up to a one year period as a result of competing in a contest for a cash award or an award that could be easily converted into cash.
The REAL QUESTION here is - What is the definition of an "Amateur Athlete" within competitive bodybuilding.
The NPC states that an athlete is no longer an amateur bodybuilder if he enters a bodybuilding contest in which a "cash award" is offered. That athlete does not have to win. He simply has to enter and compete. Once he does so, he is no longer considered to be an amateur within the NPC.
So if he is no longer considered to be an "amateur", one would ASSUME that he is a professional. But such a "professional" is not recognized as such within the IFBB and possibly not even recognized as a pro in any other bodybuilding sanctioning body.
So he's kind of in a place called Limbo.
The Big Question behind this real question is - Would a court of law agree or disagree with the NPC's definition/viewpoint of an amateur bodybuilding athlete?
My personal feeling is that there has to be a distinction between amateurs and athletes, and the definition we are presently adhering to has worked since the early days of the AAU (and possibly even before the AAU) - Compete for cash and you are no longer an amateur. It's a simple way to maintain this distinction, but the problem of "control" always arises.
"Control" means witch-hunt tactics tracking down the "culprits" who bend the rules. And that's damn near impossible within a small organization unless complaints are signed, sealed and delivered to the proper authority who reacts and takes the appropriate action.
And for your information appropriate action WAS taken with one-year suspensions in two separate cases that I have been party to. And even though we are not aware of who these "culprits" may be, I am sure that there have been many other "appropriate actions" taken in the past.
Sure there have been many similar cases that have been overlooked and never brought to anyones attention for a good number of reasons. I can't think of any organization that doesn't have a similar in-house problem.
