Best IFBB historian - Tim Fogarty or Joe Roark?

[Matt C]

March 2008 "Runners up Roundup"

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0KFY/is_1_26/ai_n24356591

Too bad about the error, but I must say, that is a pretty good article and exactly what I like about Joe's wealth of knowledge.

[Joe Roark]

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0KFY/is_1_26/ai_n24356591

Too bad about the error, but I must say, that is a pretty good article and exactly what I like about Joe's wealth of knowledge.

No error in this case, Bob. As the lead paragrah outlines, the article examines those who have not won a non-masters event after placing second in the same. In other words, those who have won a masters event, even if they had placed second in non-masters events, were not included in the data.
Someone contacted me indicating you were 'miffed' about this, so I replied-thinking he would pass along the info to you- with this explanation.

[Matt C]

No error in this case, Bob. As the lead paragrah outlines, the article examines those who have not won a non-masters event after placing second in the same. In other words, those who have won a masters event, even if they had placed second in non-masters events, were not included in the data.
Someone contacted me indicating you were 'miffed' about this, so I replied-thinking he would pass along the info to you- with this explanation.

In other words, a masters win is still a pro win.

[Joe Roark]

In other words, a masters win is still a pro win.

Yes, indeed, Matt, but the arbitrary distinction in this article was to separate the two categories.
Perhaps a later article may cover runner-up in the masters who have never won in the masters.
Factoids is two pages and some borders on data compilation help.