Multi-Mr. Olympia runners-up get more props than men who won Mr. O just once

[MCWAY]

Dexter Jackson won it; Shawn Ray, Kevin Levrone, Flex Wheeler did not. Yet, they get more props than Dex does.

Chris Dickerson won it; yet Mentzer get more fanfare.

Bannout won it; yet, Gaspari and Labrada have more legendary status.

Why is that?

[The Showstoppa]

Dexter Jackson won it; Shawn Ray, Kevin Levrone, Flex Wheeler did not. Yet, they get more props than Dex does.

Chris Dickerson won it; yet Mentzer get more fanfare.

Bannout won it; yet, Gaspari and Labrada have more legendary status.

Why is that?

It's relative to the time they were competing.  I would also say that Gaspari and Labrada has more to do with what they did afterwards, supp companies.......Mentzer it was the heavy duty training stuff....

[MB]

Shawn, Kevin, Flex, Nasser, etc. ran into Yates.  Gaspari and Labrada ran into Haney.  Dickerson, Bannout, & Dex had weak competition.

[Team Diver]

it's like in pro boxing: legendary guys like shane mosley, de la hoya etc. attract millions of viewers even if they are past their prime and have no title at the moment, while there are "reigning" world champions who no one cares about.

[Smanjh]

Yeah, it is the memorable events-not just the overall title or no title. Wheeler coming in like that and facing freaking Yates is better than the 2008 hit job to get someone new real quick to make up for 2007. Mentzer is remembered for the feud and having a lot of basis for his claims.

It is like the Arnold's, Haney's, Yates',  and Coleman's are remembered for their dominance, and thus the top 5 somewhat come along since it was such a big deal.

Look at it now, we got Cutler, Heath, Branch, Wolff, and even Greene getting this huge push when in reality none of them really bring anything that has not been done better than Coleman before or Yates even. No new direction or excitement these days, it is like we are used to seeing this stuff so much now, it is not like Yates in 92 with shock value, or Coleman in '03, or Cutler in '01.

In short it is like shock TV when it runs out of new ways to push the envelope honestly.

[MCWAY]

Shawn, Kevin, Flex, Nasser, etc. ran into Yates.  Gaspari and Labrada ran into Haney.  Dickerson, Bannout, & Dex had weak competition.

Bannout defeated Haney and Makkaway.

Dickerson beat 3-time Mr. O, Frank Zane, as well as Platz, Bannout, and a host of other well-known bodybuilders.

And, Jackson? I wouldn't exactly call Cutler and Heath "weak".

[MCWAY]

Yeah, it is the memorable events-not just the overall title or no title. Wheeler coming in like that and facing freaking Yates is better than the 2008 hit job to get someone new real quick to make up for 2007. Mentzer is remembered for the feud and having a lot of basis for his claims.

It is like the Arnold's, Haney's, Yates',  and Coleman's are remembered for their dominance, and thus the top 5 somewhat come along since it was such a big deal.

Look at it now, we got Cutler, Heath, Branch, Wolff, and even Greene getting this huge push when in reality none of them really bring anything that has not been done better than Coleman before or Yates even. No new direction or excitement these days, it is like we are used to seeing this stuff so much now, it is not like Yates in 92 with shock value, or Coleman in '03, or Cutler in '01.

In short it is like shock TV when it runs out of new ways to push the envelope honestly.

Cutler's got 4. That sounds like the beginning of dominance to me.

Plus it seems some people can't make up their minds. When Haney, Yates, and Coleman were always winning, the complaint was that there was no excitement, because of the same guy keeping the title. Then, Culter finally upended Coleman. Now, people want dominance again?

Prior to 2006, the defending champion hadn't been beaten on stage in 22 years. Now, that's happened three times with Cutler beating Coleman and Jackson and Cutler beating each other for the title.

Plus, I'd hardly call 2008 a "Hit job". Jay was off and barely escaped with his title in 2007. He was WAY off in 2008 and Jackson nipped him for the Sandow.

[MB]

Bannout defeated Haney and Makkaway.

Dickerson beat 3-time Mr. O, Frank Zane, as well as Platz, Bannout, and a host of other well-known bodybuilders.

And, Jackson? I wouldn't exactly call Cutler and Heath "weak".

If you ranked the greatest of all time, would you have all the Olympia winners at the top of your list? 

[MCWAY]

If you ranked the greatest of all time, would you have all the Olympia winners at the top of your list?  

No!

And the reason for that is the Olympia wasn't always the top, be-all-to-end-all, title that it is today.

Case in point: In the 60s and early 70s,the NABBA Universe was the top title. The fact that Bill Pearl defeated 3-time Mr. Olympia, Sergio Oliva, for the 1971 NABBA Universe is an example of that.

Plus, Sergio won an Olympia uncontested. So, you have to factor things like that into the equation.

But, since the Olympia became the top title, we still have it where people who've placed 2nd at the O multiple times are considered more legendary, than the three men who've won the title just once (Jackson, Bannout, Dickerson).

[Parker]

Cutler's got 4. That sounds like the beginning of dominance to me.

Plus it seems some people can't make up their minds. When Haney, Yates, and Coleman were always winning, the complaint was that there was no excitement, because of the same guy keeping the title. Then, Culter finally upended Coleman. Now, people want dominance again?

Prior to 2006, the defending champion hadn't been beaten on stage in 22 years. Now, that's happened three times with Cutler beating Coleman and Jackson and Cutler beating each other for the title.

Plus, I'd hardly call 2008 a "Hit job". Jay was off and barely escaped with his title in 2007. He was WAY off in 2008 and Jackson nipped him for the Sandow.

Even though he has 4, never earned all, but 1. Therein lies the Cutler lie, he is a pretender, set up until the next freak arrives. He is the only modern day Mr. O with a weak back. You can't have NPC competitors have better backs than the Mr. O, that's just pathetic. Mr. O should possess ungodliness, if not a combo of shape, size, conditioning, and cuts, like none other...on all bodyparts. And he lacks that.

[MCWAY]

It's relative to the time they were competing.  I would also say that Gaspari and Labrada has more to do with what they did afterwards, supp companies.......Mentzer it was the heavy duty training stuff....

I realize that it's relative. That's why I cited the men that competed with those one-time winners.

Dex has faced Kevin, Shawn, and Flex. Kevin placed 2nd four times; Flex did so three times; and Shawn did it twice.

But, Dex won the title. Are multiple Olympia runner-up spots now better than an Olympia win?

[MCWAY]

Even though he has 4, never earned all, but 1. Therein lies the Cutler lie, he is a pretender, set up until the next freak arrives. He is the only modern day Mr. O with a weak back. You can't have NPC competitors have better backs than the Mr. O, that's just pathetic. Mr. O should possess ungodliness, if not a combo of shape, size, conditioning, and cuts, like none other...on all bodyparts. And he lacks that.

I wouldn't say that. It's the 2007 Olympia that most people say is most suspect. Of course, the only Olympia that the nearly everyone says Cutler shouldn't have won, he actually didn't (2008).

I'd say 2006 and 2009 were solid wins, with 2010 a bit-less solid.

[Tre]

Marketability and hustle, brah.  

I'm not saying Dex isn't marketable - and make no mistake, he could still win it again - but guys like Shawn, Kevin, and Flex have been more marketable within the bodybuilding world.  Additionally, they have hustled and kept themselves relevant long after their competitive days have ended.  Being charming and having great smiles (no homo) certainly hasn't hurt either.  

Other than the fact that he promotes an NPC show, I don't know anything about Dexter.  It's entirely possible that he prefers to keep most of his life - including his business interests - private and away from this industry.  He certainly cannot be faulted for that.  I mean, are you honestly going to care about 'props' from the fans when you're focused on building a successful company and/or investment portfolio that will provide for you and your family for years to come?  

If Dexter is grounded in reality and doesn't pay any attention to internet forum bullshit, then he gets all the 'props' in the world.

[crownshep]

Don`t forget Bannout beat Zane and Fox to win the 83 Olympia,in my opinion he was one of the best Olympia winners.

[heavyNbasic]

Don`t forget Bannout beat Zane and Fox to win the 83 Olympia,in my opinion he was one of the best Olympia winners.

Agree.  Unreal back.

[crownshep]

Agree.  Unreal back.

True.

[Smanjh]

Cutler's got 4. That sounds like the beginning of dominance to me.

Plus it seems some people can't make up their minds. When Haney, Yates, and Coleman were always winning, the complaint was that there was no excitement, because of the same guy keeping the title. Then, Culter finally upended Coleman. Now, people want dominance again?

Prior to 2006, the defending champion hadn't been beaten on stage in 22 years. Now, that's happened three times with Cutler beating Coleman and Jackson and Cutler beating each other for the title.

Plus, I'd hardly call 2008 a "Hit job". Jay was off and barely escaped with his title in 2007. He was WAY off in 2008 and Jackson nipped him for the Sandow.

I am not talking about dominance per say, more like innovation and destroying what came before. Like, Haney was a level up from anything previously, Yates was, and Coleman came from another planet. That was just size though for the last two.

No, Cutler's performance in 07 was terrible, but Dexter is the exact same every year. Instead of anyone really winning that year, Dexter just sort got it for reasons unknown. If it was aesthetics and balance, then Dex should be on number 3 right now, but since it is sheer size again, Cutler got the nod.

The placings the last 2 years make no sense. It is like mass guy, proportion guy, mass guy, mass guy, proportion guy and so on with the top 5 for no rhyme or reason.

If Heath is number 2, then how is Cutler number 1 this year? 2 totally different packages. It would make sense if it was Cutler. Branch, Wolff, then heath, then dexter, but it is like building cars and letting the electric model take second to the non epa car.

It makes no sense. At least in the 90's everyone looked massive, now it is a mix of guys trying to be like Yates or Haney, and then judged oddly against each other.

[NarcissisticDeity]

No!

And the reason for that is the Olympia wasn't always the top, be-all-to-end-all, title that it is today.

Case in point: In the 60s and early 70s,the NABBA Universe was the top title. The fact that Bill Pearl defeated 3-time Mr. Olympia, Sergio Oliva, for the 1971 NABBA Universe is an example of that.

Plus, Sergio won an Olympia uncontested. So, you have to factor things like that into the equation.

But, since the Olympia became the top title, we still have it where people who've placed 2nd at the O multiple times are considered more legendary, than the three men who've won the title just once (Jackson, Bannout, Dickerson).

If you're ranking the best ever ALL of the Olympia winners would rank on that list for the simple fact they won the most coveted title in the ' sport ' 

The Olympia was always the end-all-be-all title since it's conception , it used to be the Mr Universe contest after you won that title that was it , which is part of the reason Steve Reeves retired at 24 , he won the Universe and that was it no where else to go after that

The Olympia was created to see who was the best of the best of the Universe winners , if I recall the story Larry Scott won the Universe and then he was going to retire and Joe Weider coaxed not to and enter the Mr Olympia and the rest is history

The Olympia stands alone even to this day because of the fact that very few have won the title , you win it you're in a lofty group of a select few

[Chick]

Dexter Jackson won it; Shawn Ray, Kevin Levrone, Flex Wheeler did not. Yet, they get more props than Dex does.

Chris Dickerson won it; yet Mentzer get more fanfare.

Bannout won it; yet, Gaspari and Labrada have more legendary status.

Why is that?

Popularity...plain and simple...same reasoning the Yankees will get more interest/ talk/ etc than most other teams whether they win the series or not.....same with the Cowboys, etc, etc...

Jay BUILT his fanbase on LOSING the Olympia over and over to Coleman...not winning it.  People like the underdog in any sport, it's human nature

[jaejonna]

 Bannout 'nailed' it that year....

[NarcissisticDeity]

Dexter Jackson won it; Shawn Ray, Kevin Levrone, Flex Wheeler did not. Yet, they get more props than Dex does.

Chris Dickerson won it; yet Mentzer get more fanfare.

Bannout won it; yet, Gaspari and Labrada have more legendary status.

Why is that?

I don't think Gaspari or Labrada have more legendary status 

Dickerson was good enough to win it but he was like Cutler the right guy at the right time at the right place and I think Samir looked better than him in 82 as well

Flex is Flex , he's on a level above Shawn & Kevin and his physique is better than Dexter's but I could understand why he gets more props his physique is one of the best of the last 25 years and certainly the best that never won a Sandow but Dexter has something they can only dream of so I doubt their props can some close to that

[NarcissisticDeity]

Don`t forget Bannout beat Zane and Fox to win the 83 Olympia,in my opinion he was one of the best Olympia winners.

Absolutely 83 his physique was outstanding one of the best ever in my opinion

[Parker]

If you're ranking the best ever ALL of the Olympia winners would rank on that list for the simple fact they won the most coveted title in the ' sport ' 

The Olympia was always the end-all-be-all title since it's conception , it used to be the Mr Universe contest after you won that title that was it , which is part of the reason Steve Reeves retired at 24 , he won the Universe and that was it no where else to go after that

The Olympia was created to see who was the best of the best of the Universe winners , if I recall the story Larry Scott won the Universe and then he was going to retire and Joe Weider coaxed not to and enter the Mr Olympia and the rest is history




The Olympia stands alone even to this day because of the fact that very few have won the title , you win it you're in a lofty group of a select few

Its odd to me how the Arnold seems to have more polish, better judges, and more cache to the general public than Mr. Olympia...if they got rid of the rule that the Arnold can't have a higher 1st cash prize than the Mr. Olympia, you'd probably see first place being 1.5-2.5 million by now, based upon the yr Arnold had said that, if not more.
The Arnold seems to reward aesthetics, symmetry, conditioning and freakiness, whereas the rewards size, size, freakiness and conditioning...there should be a consistency in what is being looked for, not some "on the whim" or some political bullshucks.

[MB]

If you're ranking the best ever ALL of the Olympia winners would rank on that list for the simple fact they won the most coveted title in the ' sport '

Would the 12 Olympia winners be the top 12 on your list?  (assuming the list only goes back to 1965)

[NarcissisticDeity]

Its odd to me how the Arnold seems to have more polish, better judges, and more cache to the general public than Mr. Olympia...if they got rid of the rule that the Arnold can't have a higher 1st cash prize than the Mr. Olympia, you'd probably see first place being 1.5-2.5 million by now, based upon the yr Arnold had said that, if not more.
The Arnold seems to reward aesthetics, symmetry, conditioning and freakiness, whereas the rewards size, size, freakiness and conditioning...there should be a consistency in what is being looked for, not some "on the whim" or some political bullshucks.

I think the same judges are used for both contests , Chick would probably know for sure.