Bob Chic will petition to SEPARATE the 202s from the Open Class

[LATS]

 how is it fair that the guys under 202 can win prize money.. then turn around and enter the open and win more prize money, when that courtesy is not extended to the open class guys? pick a class.. compete and let the chips fall where they may.. personally, i am not the least bit excited about the 202 class.. it limits the pros in making improvements and we will see the same physique over and over..

[Chick]

how is it fair that the guys under 202 can win prize money.. then turn around and enter the open and win more prize money, when that courtesy is not extended to the open class guys? pick a class.. compete and let the chips fall where they may.. personally, i am not the least bit excited about the 202 class.. it limits the pros in making improvements and we will see the same physique over and over..

It's not fair....


As for making improvements....not everyone competes right at the 202 cutoff. Most of the athletes have plenty of muscle they can put on without ruining their physique...and, there are athletes who compete above the cutoff who can streamline their physique for the better...

[LATS]

 chick i agree.. but, what i mean about making improvements is the guys who are right at the 202 limit.. they dont want to cross over to the open and they still wish to compete in the 202.. there is only so much "refining" one can do.. dave henry, for example will outgrow the 202 very quickly unless he just trains to "maintain".. there are others in a similar situation..
   
     but, like i said, the "double dipping" of prize money is compete b.s. how can the ifbb think that is fair..? should we have a over 265 class, a over 235 class and the like so that the open guys can also get more prize money?.. completely unfair.. i thought this was the pros.. the best of the best.. no limitations.. life is not fair.. deal with it.. not all pros in other sports are on a level playing field.. so should the nba have a 6' and under class so that everyone can play?..  sorry for the rant.. back to the subject, the class should be separate like you have stated..  no one should have much of a financial advantage...

[GoneAway]

It might make the Olympia title more prestigious if less guys were on stage. Say, 10 - 14; being the winners of the shows throughout the year. If the number is less than ten, then the top 2 in each show.) Less guys on stage means more chance for everyone to stand out.

As far as an early 90's Ronnie Coleman not qualifying for the Olympia under this new rule, it wouldn't necessarily mean he wouldn't improve and become the man who dominated the sport. It'd be upto the guy themselves to make those improvements and then qualify, by only accepting him if he makes the top 1 or 2 in each show.

Some of the people who compete in the Olympia have no chance of winning and it's a wonder how they qualify.

[Chick]

It might make the Olympia title more prestigious if less guys were on stage. Say, 10 - 14; being the winners of the shows throughout the year. If the number is less than ten, then the top 2 in each show.) Less guys on stage means more chance for everyone to stand out.

As far as an early 90's Ronnie Coleman not qualifying for the Olympia under this new rule, it wouldn't necessarily mean he wouldn't improve and become the man who dominated the sport. It'd be upto the guy themselves to make those improvements and then qualify, by only accepting him if he makes the top 1 or 2 in each show.

Some of the people who compete in the Olympia have no chance of winning and it's a wonder how they qualify.

Less guys on stage means less interest overall. People are paying for a show, to see thei farvorite BBers compete, as well as the collective best of the IFBB...bringing more athletes to the big dance is a win-win for everyone.

[timfogarty]

This is pro bodybuilding...it isn't as easy as just competing 6-7 times in a year...nor would it be healthy.

they would have to adjust or temper their drug regiment, that's for sure.  but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

in the 80s and into the 90s, most of the top athletes competed in 9 or more contests a year.   sure the Gran Prix events were packed pretty close together.   but athletes knew how to pace themselves.

BTW....in your senario...how many guys do you think would prepare for competitions if the top 3 guys were competing in every one, and only the winner qualified?

1) why in the world did 41 people enter the open class at the Europa?   surely most knew they wouldn't even be ranked, let alone be in the prize money.

2) this is a money making venture.  it doesn't matter how many athletes enter.  what matters is how many paying fans there are in the seats.   I think the current system dilutes all the contests, including the Olympia.  My proposals will make both the Olympia and the contests throughout the year more exciting, which means more paying customers.

[Chick]

they would have to adjust or temper their drug regiment, that's for sure.  but that's not necessarily a bad thing.

in the 80s and into the 90s, most of the top athletes competed in 9 or more contests a year.   sure the Gran Prix events were packed pretty close together.   but athletes knew how to pace themselves.

1) why in the world did 41 people enter the open class at the Europa?   surely most knew they wouldn't even be ranked, let alone be in the prize money.

2) this is a money making venture.  it doesn't matter how many athletes enter.  what matters is how many paying fans there are in the seats.   I think the current system dilutes all the contests, including the Olympia.  My proposals will make both the Olympia and the contests throughout the year more exciting, which means more paying customers.

I notice you don't like to answer direct questions...

41 entered in the open for the simple fact that the 202 guys are there anyway...

BTW...I've talked to many 202 guys, have yet to find ONE who doesn't agree with me.

The athletes didn't "pace" themselves anymore then, than they do now...you don't know what you're talking about

[timfogarty]

Less guys on stage means less interest overall. People are paying for a show, to see thei farvorite BBers compete, as well as the collective best of the IFBB...bringing more athletes to the big dance is a win-win for everyone.

you know, I really don't think second or third tier bodybuilders have many fans who will fly into Vegas just to see them.  if someone decides to spend a couple of grand for a weekend in Vegas, they're doing it to see the top bodybuilders.

besides, the Olympia is really a trade show.  most of the people attending the expo and the show are industry people.

[GoneAway]

Less guys on stage means less interest overall. People are paying for a show, to see thei farvorite BBers compete, as well as the collective best of the IFBB...bringing more athletes to the big dance is a win-win for everyone.

There are good reasons to have more guys onstage, but also it would be interesting to see the best 10 guys each year on stage together. It would make the competition better quality as a whole, as the last place guy would still be an amazing BBer.

The lesser guys (places 10 - 18) are mostly fillers who likely knew they wouldn't place better than top 5, let alone top 10. I'm all for spreading out the competition; just trying to offer a new idea. We all want the best for BBing. But in the end, the winner has to be someone we respect as champion. IFBB can learn alot from last year.

[timfogarty]

I notice you don't like to answer direct questions...

ok.  the answer is just as many as now, as 2nd and 3rd tier competitors don't really have any expectations to place in the money, let alone win the overall.

[timfogarty]

There are good reasons to have more guys onstage, but also it would be interesting to see the best 10 guys each year on stage together. It would make the competition better quality as a whole, as the last place guy would still be an amazing BBer.

the purpose of my proposal is to get more top tier guys into the other contests throughout the year.   No one is going to skip the Olympia because the 5th place guy from the Ironman didn't make the cut.   many more people will attend the regional shows if the top tier bodybuilders have to requalify every year.

[240 is Back]

LOL...trust me, no one had Coleman as a top champ,

Jesus did.

[Luinitari]

Jesus did.

chill out and take a breather 240.

[GoneAway]

the purpose of my proposal is to get more top tier guys into the other contests throughout the year.   No one is going to skip the Olympia because the 5th place guy from the Ironman didn't make the cut.   many more people will attend the regional shows if the top tier bodybuilders have to requalify every year.

Good point. It would be a great way to create more interest in the Olympia if one of the top 5 guys got beaten in the earlier shows. All sports need competition to thrive. BBers need to have competitors that are a legit threat to beating them. Having Jay compete at one or two shows throughout the year would give him a good chance to lose, which wouldn't be a bad thing at all, competitionwise.

[njflex]

after winning smaller shows and moving to olympia caliber,haney,yates, coleman,cutler dieted for olympia and then the euro tour,gave them long offseason to train ,put size on,they just trained for the richest title.

[Chick]

This system would do nothing to have top tier athletes compete more often. They would get an early show, qualify, and still take off till the Olympia....

Only a significant increase in purse at the smaller shows would entice a Jay Cutler, Dex, or Vic to compete in them...

As for having the best guys on stage at the Olympia....what do you think we have now?

[timfogarty]

As for having the best guys on stage at the Olympia....what do you think we have now?

yes, we have the best guys on stage, and a lot of others who've never won a pro contest.

if all those guys are an important part of the contest, why don't the judges rank them in the final results?

[Chick]

yes, we have the best guys on stage, and a lot of others who've never won a pro contest.

if all those guys are an important part of the contest, why don't the judges rank them in the final results?

Because the paycheck is the same whether your 13th or 23rd...


They were placing the guys all the way down....not sure if exsists on the official score sheets.

[240 is Back]

Only a significant increase in purse at the smaller shows would entice a Jay Cutler, Dex, or Vic to compete in them...

You might have more entrants if you didn't use the term "purse".

Maybe something more manly.  Like "Fanny pack"!

[timfogarty]

They were placing the guys all the way down....not sure if exsists on the official score sheets.

http://www.ifbbpro.com/results/2007-olympia/  shows no judge ranked anyone below 16.