Yes. He used speed. Many of them in the 70’s through to the 2000’s used recreational drugs. Arnold is clearly smoking a joint at the end of Pumping Iron. With regards to the 80 Mr. O, Walker fell out with the promoter (Paul Graham) before the event, wasn’t happy with his placing and always felt very hard done by. Graham and Arnold were especially good friends. Did Arnold get a fair result? It was 44 years ago. It’s history.
1 Like
Yep…it’s a dead horse, just like any other fixed competitions in history
2 Likes
So you know a lot about the contest, having spoken (at length?) to Mentzer and Walker. And yet, this 20+ year old audio clip by Mentzer appears to be something you never heard before? Mentzer never mentioned it to you?
Is it just me, or does no one feel that it was Dickerson that was cheated out of a victory? Why even mention Mentzer? He wasn’t close to winning. I suppose you could say that the entire judging panel was as much against Mentzer as the first 5 judges were favoring Arnold.
From the score sheet it is very clear that judge #6 placed Arnold lower than any other judge. I would suppose that those who believe that the contest was rigged, would look at judge #6 as the main judge certainly not in on the fix.
If we look at the totals of the points system, and listed the results of judge #6 we would order them as:
- Dickerson: 60 or 1st Place
- Zane: 59 or tied for 2nd Place
- Callendar: 59 or tied for 2nd Place
- Coe: 58 or tied for 4th Place
- Mentzer: or tied for 4th Place
- Walker: 57 or 6th Place
- Platz: 56 or 7th Place
- Schwartzenegger: 55 or tied for 8th Place
- Tinerino: 55 or tied for 8th Place
- Emmott: 55 or tied for 8th Place
2 Likes
Dickerson believed the contest was rigged to keep him from winning.
The Stark Center has a 19 page article on the 1980 Olympia contest, written by John Fair, which covers most of the points being rehashed here. With regard to Dickerson, you find this paragraph:
According to Dickerson, “the promoter was a real low life, a bigot, who had a real dislike for me-partly on racial grounds and partly for my sexual orientation.” Graham even told another official that “Chris couldn’t win because he was a fag.” Indeed, Dickerson, who was short, black, and gay, was a diametric opposite to the kind of image Amold represented. Also contrary to Amold’s approach, Chris, with his polite and gentlemanly demeanor, always kept a respectable distance from contest judges and always believed that “you should let your body do your talking.” It is hardly surprising that Dickerson believes that “the whole thing” in Sydney “was orchestrated,” and “if there was a culprit, it was Graham.”
2 Likes
If you simply remove Arnold as a contestant, it looks like Dickerson would have won and Mentzer fans would still have been disappointed.
The Stark center paper has several comments by well known bodybuilders suggesting that while Mentzer was big and muscular, his posing routine was dated and he looked “unfinished”. So that raises the question of what was being judged: are you trying to identify the best physique in raw terms, or are you making a judgement on who created the best impression on the stage that night, which would be influenced by posing skill, stage presence, judge bias and expectation? I have no idea about what kind of instructions and guidance judges are supposed to folllow when doing this.
While these conspiracy theories are somewhat interesting to read, there seem to be multiple versions. What was the objective of the fix?
- Ensure that Arnold won.
- Ensure that Dickerson didn’t win.
- Ensure that Mentzer didn’t win.
I think I understand the potential motives behind the first 2 theories. Less clear about the latter. And I supposed you could have multiple players with different objectives all working at the same time…
1 Like
Seems obvious that #1 was the desired outcome. And individual biases or prejudices were applied – deliberate or subconcious I cannot say – such that #s 2 and 3 happened incidentally. #1 Primary, with the other two secondary.
I have said this numerous times. The Point System used to judge competitors uses three separate grades: Symmetry, Muscularity, and Presentation. Each get a standalone score. These scores are added and used to determine who is included in the final posedown. Here they received a first place vote or not by each judge. Those points are added to the score. It is a totally ridiculous way to judge physiques. It too was used by the AAU.
- Round 1 is all on stage doing quarter turns: max of 20 points. (Supposedly Symmetry is being judged)
- Round 2 is the compulsory comparative poses: max of 20 points. (Supposedly Muscularity is being judged.
- Round 3 is the individual posing routines: max of 20 points (Supposedly Presentation is being judged)
But these all become blended, but getting scored as best the judge can. Most everyone can see that Round 2 is the most important round. This is where the contest is actually judged.
What you ended up having was the judges trying to manipulate their scoring so that they gave points such that it represented how you ranked the competitors.
Symmetry had the same value as Muscularity. Symmetry had the same value as Presentation. Muscularity had the same value as Presentation.
It is simply a recipe for criticism.
IMO, if there was a fix, it was to assure Arnold victory (for monetary reasons.)
OSB,
I remember reading, a few years ago, an article about the 1980 O. There was a short interview with the director who was there, and he stated they ran out of film, among other things.
It was in my old book marks, but I stupidly deleted them, and I now cannot find the article anywhere after serious looking.
Do you have a link to, or pdf of, that article?
Thanks,
Arnold won. There’s no debate to be had.
Keep giving arnold rimjobs
1 Like