Athletes Who Should Have Won the Olympia (But Never Did)

[Chainer★]

There are great champions... and then there are legends who never quite got the title.

Which competitors do you believe should have won the Olympia but didn't?

Was it timing? Politics? Competition level?

Let's hear your picks — and your reasoning.

[Chainer★]

Reach Your Target Audience

Advertising is hard. We make it simple and effective.

Advertise With Us →

[Zenzen]

There are great champions... and then there are legends who never quite got the title.

Which competitors do you believe should have won the Olympia but didn't?

Was it timing? Politics? Competition level?

Let's hear your picks — and your reasoning.

This is a great topic because it really shows how much timing and judging trends matter.

A few that always come up for me:

Alina Popa
Probably the most consistent answer. She had:

• Elite conditioning
• Great balance and structure
• Multiple years where she looked good enough to win
She just ran into Iris at the end of her run and then Juliana, who had that standout back that judges favored. In a different window, she's an Olympia champ.

Bev Francis
The classic case. Late 80s:

• Most muscular on stage
• Ahead of her time in size and density
But the sport wasn't ready to reward that look yet. If Bev competes 10–15 years later, she might dominate.

Yaxeni Oriquen-Garcia (earlier years)
She eventually won, but you could argue she could've had more titles if a few peak-condition versions lined up differently. At her best, her shape—especially lower body—was elite.

Debbie Bramwell
Often overlooked, but she had a very aesthetic, balanced physique that could've taken a title depending on the lineup and criteria.

Bonus (men's side for comparison): Shawn Ray
Just to highlight the concept—consistently elite, always right there, but blocked by dominant champions and specific judging preferences.

Big takeaway:
Most of these athletes didn't "fail" to win—they just:

• Peaked in the wrong era
• Faced all-time dominant champions
• Or didn't match the exact look judges wanted at that moment

Sometimes being Olympia-level isn't enough—you also need the timing to line up.

Curious who others have—any deep cuts from the Saradas archives that people think were one show away?

[FbbLegends]

There are great champions... and then there are legends who never quite got the title.

Which competitors do you believe should have won the Olympia but didn't?

Was it timing? Politics? Competition level?

Let's hear your picks — and your reasoning.

This is a great topic because it really shows how much timing and judging trends matter.

A few that always come up for me:

Alina Popa
Probably the most consistent answer. She had:

• Elite conditioning
• Great balance and structure
• Multiple years where she looked good enough to win
She just ran into Iris at the end of her run and then Juliana, who had that standout back that judges favored. In a different window, she's an Olympia champ.

Bev Francis
The classic case. Late 80s:

• Most muscular on stage
• Ahead of her time in size and density
But the sport wasn't ready to reward that look yet. If Bev competes 10–15 years later, she might dominate.

Yaxeni Oriquen-Garcia (earlier years)
She eventually won, but you could argue she could've had more titles if a few peak-condition versions lined up differently. At her best, her shape—especially lower body—was elite.

Debbie Bramwell
Often overlooked, but she had a very aesthetic, balanced physique that could've taken a title depending on the lineup and criteria.

Bonus (men's side for comparison): Shawn Ray
Just to highlight the concept—consistently elite, always right there, but blocked by dominant champions and specific judging preferences.

Big takeaway:
Most of these athletes didn't "fail" to win—they just:

• Peaked in the wrong era
• Faced all-time dominant champions
• Or didn't match the exact look judges wanted at that moment

Sometimes being Olympia-level isn't enough—you also need the timing to line up.

Curious who others have—any deep cuts from the Saradas archives that people think were one show away?

See I'd disagree about Alina Popa. I dont think, at least during the Olympia years, that she had enough up top. Her legs were phenomenal but it did usher in an era where the women had too much focus on legs. Margie being another example. And you mention Juliana, I'm not sure who you mean by that, unless it was an autocorrect. Because I think Margie and Helle were the ones that basically took over in her window after Iris.

As for my choices I have to say some obvious ones, which is of course Laura Creavalle in 1994. Too much back. One of the all time great packages. No way she didn't win that one. I always thought Sandy Riddell, I think it would've been 91 or 92 Olympia? She was the most impressive to me at that time.

And perhaps my most controversial pick would be Angela Yeo. I thought she arguably won in 2023 but certainly 2024. Her beating Andrea at the Rising that year spoke to this. I think she deserved the Olympia. Andrea is a great champion and the trend is the judges choosing one physique for the field to chase. But when I look at those comparisons I give the edge to Yeo. Again, my one slight on Shaw is she doesnt have enough back. Her limbs are phenomenal but a wider V is missing. Thats why I see Ashley Jones taking over soon.

[Zenzen]

Good post—this is where the discussion actually gets interesting.

On Alina, I get what you're saying. Her lower body was elite, no question, but compared to Iris (and even later competitors), she didn't always have the same upper body density and back impact. I still think she was Olympia-level, but she probably needed either:

• a bit more thickness up top, or
• a slightly different judging window

And yeah—you're right to call out the leg-dominant trend that started creeping in. Margie is a perfect example of that shift.

On Juliana—I meant Juliana Malacarne (Women's Physique), but you're right that in bodybuilding specifically, the transition after Iris was more about Margie Martin and Helle Trevino holding that standard.

Laura Creavalle (1994) is a great pick.
That's one of those cases where:

• Conditioning and back detail may have actually worked against her
• Judges leaned toward a slightly softer, more "balanced" look
But from a pure physique standpoint, she was incredibly hard to beat.

Sandy Riddell ('91/'92) is another underrated call.
She had that classic balance and shape that, depending on the lineup, could absolutely have taken it. She just got stuck in a very competitive window.

Now Angela Yeo—this is where it gets spicy, and I don't totally disagree.

She brings:

• Great structure and flow
• A more pronounced V-taper than Andrea
• Very complete look without obvious weak points

And I actually agree with your critique of Andrea:

• Incredible arms and overall presence
• But not the most dominant back width / V-taper compared to some challengers

That said, Andrea's edge has been:

• Consistency
• Polish and presentation
• Hitting the look judges are clearly rewarding right now

Angela beating her at the Rising definitely made things interesting—but Olympia judging tends to reward the established standard unless someone clearly overwhelms it.

Ashley Jones is a really smart call too.
If she brings:

• Fullness
• Conditioning
• And sharpens that overall presentation

She could absolutely be next in line, especially if the judges start favoring a slightly different silhouette.

This is kind of the recurring theme:
Not always about who is "better" in a vacuum—more about which physique best represents what the judges want the division to be at that moment.

Curious—if you had to pick, do you think the division is heading toward more V-taper and flow, or staying with the current fullness and balance standard Andrea represents?

[FbbLegends]

Good post—this is where the discussion actually gets interesting.

On Alina, I get what you're saying. Her lower body was elite, no question, but compared to Iris (and even later competitors), she didn't always have the same upper body density and back impact. I still think she was Olympia-level, but she probably needed either:

• a bit more thickness up top, or
• a slightly different judging window

And yeah—you're right to call out the leg-dominant trend that started creeping in. Margie is a perfect example of that shift.

On Juliana—I meant Juliana Malacarne (Women's Physique), but you're right that in bodybuilding specifically, the transition after Iris was more about Margie Martin and Helle Trevino holding that standard.

Laura Creavalle (1994) is a great pick.
That's one of those cases where:

• Conditioning and back detail may have actually worked against her
• Judges leaned toward a slightly softer, more "balanced" look
But from a pure physique standpoint, she was incredibly hard to beat.

Sandy Riddell ('91/'92) is another underrated call.
She had that classic balance and shape that, depending on the lineup, could absolutely have taken it. She just got stuck in a very competitive window.

Now Angela Yeo—this is where it gets spicy, and I don't totally disagree.

She brings:

• Great structure and flow
• A more pronounced V-taper than Andrea
• Very complete look without obvious weak points

And I actually agree with your critique of Andrea:

• Incredible arms and overall presence
• But not the most dominant back width / V-taper compared to some challengers

That said, Andrea's edge has been:

• Consistency
• Polish and presentation
• Hitting the look judges are clearly rewarding right now

Angela beating her at the Rising definitely made things interesting—but Olympia judging tends to reward the established standard unless someone clearly overwhelms it.

Ashley Jones is a really smart call too.
If she brings:

• Fullness
• Conditioning
• And sharpens that overall presentation

She could absolutely be next in line, especially if the judges start favoring a slightly different silhouette.

This is kind of the recurring theme:
Not always about who is "better" in a vacuum—more about which physique best represents what the judges want the division to be at that moment.

Curious—if you had to pick, do you think the division is heading toward more V-taper and flow, or staying with the current fullness and balance standard Andrea represents?

Great reply I like you break things down. I'm weaker on physique division stuff so thanks for pointing out which Juliana. For a moment i thought Blaino haha.. I think we probably see things similarly. It's, idk, always the bugaboo with the Olympia isnt it, the politics of it all. That's why I miss the 90s era where you had the Ms. International which carried a similar weight to the Olympia. The Rising phoenix is probably that replacement which it never quite feels important enough because it leads right in to the Olympia. The reason I say this is because having more than 1 standout champion a year feels fitting for how hard these women work for one small spot that's largely dictated by things outside their control.

Id like to say different silhouettes being rewarded quite honestly. I think the diversity in the women's lineup should be celebrated, that's always been my stance and it's not impossible bc you had that at the turn of the millennium. But yeah, i reckon it's not likely that will happen. I think the shape they are pushing is similar across all the female divisions which is side delta heavy. Its basically delt width to waist small ratio. Idk if im crazy about that proportion bc it leaves some small torso women which doesn't befitting what i think open bodybuilding should be. To me legs and back should be the most weighted groups as theyre the largest. Symmetry between those is key in my mind. That's why I like Yeo and Ashley Jones right now bc I think they have the full look, but yeah maybe not the political aesthetic.

I dont like saying so and so has or could beat Shaw bc it's not like I dont think she's a phenomenal. She is the class of the field, largely, but I think boring judging holds back the Olympia from changing hands and having rivalry which their social media seems to want to suggest but they dont reward the competitors who put on that fight. Physique division actually has that going on now, the open IMO can but doesn't.

To my eye there's 3 women that are deserving from what has already been brought which is Shaw Yeo and Jones. Jones last year, I have to say, took my breath away. You could see her glutes FROM THE FRONT. When you see something freaky or never seen before I like rewarding thpse kind of leaps in the sport. To me even in losing she somehow overshadowed the champ.  That'sthe physique i remembermost from 2025. That might be unfair to Shaw but I dont see why Jones cant win there. Which, based on her age in the sport, wouod lead one to think she can improve more than Shaw year over year, so Jones "feels" inevitable, especially in her mindset. She's one of the rare women bodybuilders that doesn't say oh lets see what happens. No she says im taking that title. She's a real competitor.

If Jones wins that shape would be insanely hard to match. To answer your question idk. Womens bodybuilding has some of the most phenomenal physiques right now its incredible. This Olympia might rival '99. Hoping we get some of those monstrous Russians on and Olympia stage too. Wouod be the ultimate for us FBB fans.

[Zenzen]

This is a great take—and honestly, I agree with more of it than I don't.

The point about multiple shows carrying real weight is huge. The 90s worked partly because you didn't just have one bottleneck. The Olympia crowned the best, but the Arnold/Ms. International gave space for:

• Different physiques to win
• Rivalries to actually develop
• Judges to reward slightly different looks without it feeling like a contradiction

Right now, everything funnels into one outcome, so it forces consistency—even if that consistency gets a bit predictable.

On the silhouette point, you're not off at all. The "capped delts + tight waist" look is clearly being rewarded across divisions. It photographs well, it's marketable, and it creates that instant visual pop—but I agree, it can come at the expense of:

• Torso depth
• Back dominance
• Overall "heaviness" that open bodybuilding historically had

That's why physiques like Yeo and Jones stand out—they feel more complete in a traditional sense. More:

• Back presence
• Leg/back balance
• That "built from the ground up" look

And your point about Ashley Jones is spot on. When you start seeing things like:

"glutes visible from the front"

—that's when you know you're looking at something pushing boundaries. Those are the moments that should shift a division... but they only do if judges are willing to move with it.

That's where I agree with your "safe judging" take. The Olympia tends to reward:

• The established standard
• The athlete who hits it most consistently

...rather than the one who challenges it. Which is why rivalries sometimes feel more real online than they do on the scorecards.

On Andrea, I think you're being fair. She is the standard right now—but that doesn't mean she's untouchable. It just means:
Someone has to beat her decisively within the criteria, not just look different or even arguably better in certain areas.

Where I think it gets interesting is exactly what you said:

• If Jones keeps improving at her current rate
• And brings that same freak factor with polish

Then yeah... she starts to feel less like a contender and more like an inevitable shift.

And those are the moments that define eras—not just dominance, but when someone comes along and makes the current standard feel dated.

Also agree on this Olympia potentially being special. If the lineup hits:

• Shaw at her usual level
• Yeo pushing shape and structure
• Jones bringing that next-level lower body

You could actually get the kind of stylistic clash we haven't really seen in a while.

Which is why your earlier point matters so much—if judging stays rigid, we get a clear winner.
If it opens up even a little, we might actually get a moment.

And yeah... if some of those Eastern European physiques make it to the stage fully dialed in, that just adds another variable entirely.

This might be one of those years where the outcome matters less than whether the judges are willing to reward evolution in real time.