You’re assuming - in your interviews you’ve never asked ?
Zane to small this time round to challenge Arnold though he easily beats
Butt Slut Dickerson He most certainly was given a Gifted Placing -
No biceps / Droppy Pecs / Pointy elbows / Monkey Face.
Zane & Mentzer Both were better than him.
Mentzer Flat Chest / Back Lacking / Great Arms / half Decent Legs
Boyer / Great Arms / Good calves / Legs ok Though shapeless
Zero Abs / Hunch Back
And they Better Than Arnold 🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣
1, Arnold
2, Zane / Mentzer
4, Coe / Callander
6, Tinnerino / Walker / Dickerson
Where did T Platz Place ?
Where’s your Breakdown of who should of Placed 1st. ?
Didn't you listen to my interviews?
I did ask.
I don't know how I would have placed them because I wasn't there.
I agree that in many of the photos and videos, Arnold looks like the best because of his big structure and height and his massive arms, chest and back.
However, he obviously was not a "clear cut winner" because so many of the competitors complained that Arnold should not have won, the audience booed loudly at the result (and this was for Arnold, Bodybuilding's Golden Boy, the guy who everyone loved). CBS television must have thought he didn't deserve to win because after paying the huge fee to be the only television outlet that could film the contest plus the big expense for sending a camera crew half way around the world to Australia, they decided not to run the footage because it was too controversial with Arnold winning. In addition, they decided not to even cover the 1981 Mr. Olympia even though they paid the money they were contractually bound to pay. There was obviously more to the contest than the photos and video show. I heard from several people who were there that Arnold was holding water at the prejudging (reportedly from a cortisone shot he took for shoulder pain from trying to get in shape so quickly with a hard 8 weeks of training). The water retention, in addition to the weak legs, is probably the reason most of the bodybuilders said Arnold should have been 5th at best.
Dickerson was in great shape in 1980, probably the best he ever looked. He looked much better in 1980 than he did when he won it in 1982. If you never saw Dickerson in person, you really can't judge him. He was awesome when I saw him in 1979 at the Olympia and he was much better one year later. Zane was ripped but too light due to his injury. He lost a lot of muscle mass compared to '79. The bottom line is that the top competitors, despite having weak points, were in peak condition. They had trained hard all year for this one contest while Arnold only trained for 2-3 months. Like Frank Zane said after the 1980 Olympia, when you try to come back that quickly without properly training for a longer period of time, your strong points (Arnold's biceps, chest and back) come back but his weaker bodyparts (triceps, thighs, shoulders) did not look that good. In some pictures, he looks soft with some bodyparts looking weak.
As I said when talking about the 1981 Olympia, if you see pictures of Danny Padilla from that contest, you could easily come to the conclusion that Danny was the clear cut winner. However, if you were at the show (as I was), you might conclude that Danny looked fantastic because he was so incredibly ripped. However, when I watched him being compared in the prejudging to Platz, Callender, Dickerson and Franco, he sometimes kind of faded in the comparisons. He wasn't as aggressive or animated as Callender (who was extremely aggressive) or Platz. I had Danny in third despite his near physical perfection. I'm guessing the 1980 Mr. Olympia might have been similar. If you see pictures of Arnold from that contest, in comparison to the others or by himself, he looks like the winner. However, if you were at the show and you watched the prejudging from the audience, you might feel that Arnold's legs were too weak or he didn't look quite right in the mandatory poses, etc. I don't know, I wasn't there. But there was obviously lots of different opinions because we are still debating the results of the contest almost 40 years later. Are people debating Arnold's win in 1974 over Ferrigno, Franco and Zane or Ronnie's win in 1998 or 1999 or Dorian's victory in 1993 or Phil Heath's win in 2011? No, because these were all dominating wins. The 1980 Mr. Olympia wasn't a dominating win by Arnold. Many of the competitors don't feel he should have even been in the top five, at least half the audience booed loudly at the result and other top experts think Arnold should not have won.
