|
Navigation
|
 |
Article Navigation:
Stay Updated!
If you'd like to stay updated and recieve a notice when the next issue of is released, just sign up at our forums by [Clicking here]. We will send out a mass e-mail to all our members when the next issue is released. |
|
Your Comments
Let us know how you feel about this issue. We will read e-mail sent and would appreciate any comments and/or suggestions that you may have. [Click here]. |
|
|
|
 |
Undercover Pro Interview
by James Simon
 Did you vote for Shawn?
Yes
Why?
Shawn is the only voice in the sport that resonates with the IFBB heads and there is no other clear choice. Plus, he is not competing so can speak freely. He will be a liaison between the athletes and the IFBB. Since he has personal relationships with many people on both sides of the table, this position is tailor made for him.
Some people feel Shawn has a reputation for being selfish, what do you think of him as an individual?
With Shawn, one always know exactly where he stands because he is outspoken, but in a positive way. He is diplomatic and obviously experienced. He made a very successful career for himself, which is not about his being selfish, but about being a very driven individual, and that is exactly the kind of person you want fighting for you.
Some of the pros who refused to sign are doing so for personal reasons, and to me THAT is selfish.
What changes would you like to see in terms of the financial side of things?
First and foremost, start paying all the athletes who compete in the Mr. O, even if it's just enough to cover expenses for the bottom guys. This is the biggest show in bodybuilding; you can't have people leaving with a net loss while competing in it can you? That is ridiculous to me.
Realistically speaking, where should this money come from?
Well, I have more sympathy for the promoter than a lot of my fellow athletes do. After all, it is a huge capital expense to put on the show - there's tons of overhead. You have to rent out many places for things like the bicep contest and muscle beach, not to mention the size of the expo area, plus the promoter's time needs to be compensated for. In order to keep people promoting this show, they need to make enough money to cover their expenses, time and capital resource costs.
But in the same breath, you'd think with all the money that is changing hands they could spare a few grand for the ATHLETES. They could get this money from the sponsors, some of whom pay $12-15,000 for a booth at the expo, by charging them a couple grand more. Additionally, they could redistribute the existing purse by taking away from the top and putting it in the bottom. The promoter could probably afford to contribute a portion as well. My point is there are many places where this money could be drawn from.
Do you have any idea what the actual dollar amounts involved with putting on the O are?
I have tried to find that information, but I can't. This is another thing that has to change. And, I believe that is something, which has been addressed by athletes seeking to have role in the sport. As the athletes, we should have knowledge of what it costs. Frankly, if we did, one of two things would happen: 1) we'd find out there isn't much money and accept the state of our chosen sport or 2) that there IS plenty of money and it's not going to the athletes. Seeing a P&L sheet would do wonders for all the accusations and clear things up once and for all one way or the other. This happens in other pro sports. That's why guys like Derek Jeter can ask for huge salaries through their agents - they know what the financial status is of the team. They know what their worth in terms of the market value. If we the athletes knew the bottom line, we'd either stop griping that we're not making enough, or be able to make reasonable requests. It's pretty simple. Unveil things a bit.
Is there anything else you would like to see addressed?
How about a code of conduct for the judges to help make everything more concrete. I have seen so many conflicts of interest: judges waiving and cheering for competitors, fraternizing before and after the show, obvious favoritism in the placings, etc. If the judges step out of line, fine them just like you do the athletes, or even replace them. It sets a bad precedent to ignore their transgressions; if we want our sport to gain more credibility, we need to make it more professional from the top down.
In terms of the show itself, they should really release the score after every round and get the judges sitting closer to the stage. They need accountability: if someone wins the first two rounds, how can he lose the show?
Also, the same standards need to be used for all competitors and this "name" placing has to stop. When a guy looks bad, place him there.
What about the code of conduct for the athletes?
I think they waited too long to introduce that. Things are out of control on the Internet. You have pros and people claiming to be pros starting rumors and hurting reputations on a daily basis. We need more self-control from the pros, and more follow through on the part of the IFBB with enforcing the rules. Just like the judges, we need to step up our professionalism for the greater good of the sport. The problem is, this is a low-rung sport in terms of the money. In other pro sports, you wouldn't see athletes going on line and saying things they shouldn't. Rather, an athlete would have a PR person who filters their public commentary. But, this sport doesn't have enough money, at least at this time, such that an athlete would have PR person on retainer to craft their public persona and ensure they don't do, say or go places the shouldn't.
You have outlined the issues you want to see addressed, but what do you think will actually happen?
Shawn will end up being a bearer of bad news at first. He is the only voice in the meetings so he does not have a lot of leverage. But, possibly in time his being in these meetings will cause there to be some changes. At least there will be someone at the meetings who can come from an athlete's perspective. I don't think we're going to see sweeping reform, but having a voice, one that can articulate things in a reasonable businesslike fashion is positive. Again, Shawn is the only one capable of doing this in a rational way.
Ok, on to this year's Olympia, how do you feel about the qualification restrictions?
I think they are necessary TO A DEGREE. Having 26 competitors can be overkill. With that many guys on stage, the level of competition becomes diluted and the show is too long. However, the biggest mistake is making only the top 6 and no longer the long-standing tradition of the top 10, qualify for the following year for this reason: it's no secret that it is hard on one's body to do more than one season in a year. If only the top 6 have the luxury of doing one show per year, instead of getting bigger names at the smaller shows, you are going to see more screwed up bodies, illnesses and injuries with guys having to knock themselves out to re-qualify. And, the Olympia won't have as much excitement with the opportunity for a rookie or two to be a decent contender because he won't have been able to qualify because competitors 7, 8, 9, 10 had to go to the other shows to re-qualify.
How do you feel about those that qualify and refuse to compete?
Unless they have an injury, illness, or very serious circumstances, they should compete if qualified. It's seems silly to say you don't want to do it for financial reasons. When you do the O, you increase your market value and therefore, even if you don't come home with a big check, you reap the rewards through other means having generated more interest in your name, doing more shoots, etc. However, for all we know, those that are saying they don't want to compete because it's not worth their while financially, may well have illnesses or injuries but don't want to be public about it.
Ok, I'm going to throw some names at you, tell me how you think they will do:
Ronnie
The man to beat. After losing to Gunter, he is very determined to keep his title.
Jay
The silent stalker. I think he beat Ronnie in 2001, and when he is 100% and Ronnie isn't, he deserves to win.
Gunter
He made massive improvements, but he doesn't have the structure to beat Ronnie, if they are both 100%. He deserved his placing at last year's O.
Kevin
The dark horse. He could be in shape, out of shape, nobody knows. He is always an enigma and a threat to the top placings. However, he's a classic example of someone who's been given some placings based upon his name such as the Arnold Classic in recent years.
Dexter
He is a very quality competitor, but he is not big enough to hang with Ronnie, Jay and Gunter.
Dennis
This is his year. He is huge and harder than I have ever seen him.
Chris
Structurally speaking, easily the most gifted athlete, but he lacks focus and I think we have seen the best of him. He's got too many personal problems and he's been getting over and skating through on his lucky genetics for too long.
Lee
8-9th place. He never gets hard in the glutes and hams and I think the judges are too kind with his placings sometimes. Still, he has the freakiest arms out there.
Melvin
He's a great bodybuilder. Top ten for sure if his condition is good.
What about the after parties?
It's nice for the fans, but I think it perpetuates a negative stereotype of bodybuilders. It's a bit incongruous to have athletes be representatives of a healthy lifestyle of training, eating clean, getting rest, etc. who are then seen "partying" until all hours of the night.
Finally, do you feel the IFBB is racist?
I have never observed any racism on their part; bodybuilding has a good track record in that regards. Just look at how many of the top guys are Black. Individual companies might have a certain look they are seeking for marketing purposes and in that case, a good-looking white bodybuilder might get a bigger contract over a Black guy. But, as far as the placings, again, the Black guys dominate.
Thanks!
* Article by James Simon.
* Back to Issue #4 Frontpage
|
|
|
