Which is worse in the WWF

[Guest cynicalprofit]

I just saw the Booker T beatdown by the Samoans, and after seeing Booker get dropped really badly, atleast it looked that way to me, I have to ask, which is worse in the WWF, being sloppy or being stiff.

 

Im really not sure really, I mean Benoit and Angle are stiff, but they are main eventers. Yet Low-Ki's stiffness isnt WWF style and Tajiri, who has some of the stiffest kicks around is low card material in the WWF. Awesome, Public Enemy, RVD, and Rosie and Jamal are sloppy and it

cost the first 3 their jobs, but the WWF still has Rosie and Jamal along with RVD, Mark Henery, and Big Show who arent known for their crispness in the ring.

 

So in the WWF which is worse:

Sloppy or Stiff.

[Guest Quik]

Hmm.

 

I'd say sloppy. Stiff leads to busted noses and bruises. Sloppy means landing awkwardly and breaking something.

 

But in regards to the Island Boys, they kinda combine both sloppiness and stiffness. How rough are their kiks **Cough**Lesbians**COugh** or their splashes? These guys suck

[Guest razazteca]

sloppy matches are not entertaining while a stiff match could be.

[Guest BorneAgain]

sloppy, at least stiff helps the illusion in the ring

[Guest Red Hot Thumbtack In The Eye]

Sloppy is far worse IMO. If a worker is doing moves that LOOK like they hurt like a bastard (ie: Tajiri's kicks looking like they can knock out a horse), it adds to the value of the move cuz it's easy to get drawn into the drama when the 'fakeness' line seems to blur.

 

when a guy like Bubba ray drops someone on the back of their head with a German suplex it just looks bad, and for me, blows the reality of the match.

 

Guys like Benoit are stiff workers but they know how to protect their opponent, thus making them both look better when they are in the ring.

 

Wrestlers expect to be sore and whatnot when this is the line of work they choose, but they will last a lot longer if someone is stiff with them, but protects them at the same time.

[Guest MarvinisaLunatic]

Sloppy because then you can tell its fake and theres more of a chance of someone getting hurt. If its stiff, at least it will probably look good, even though it could result in some injuries as well.

[Guest NoCalMike]

Guess it depends on who is wrestling who. If RVD stiffs UT, you can be sure UT will go straight to Vince, however if RVD and Benoit stiff each other in a match, I bet neither cares and know it is for the good of the match, and they just go home and lick their wounds. Also, sloppiness can lead to stiffness if slopiness includes "poor timing" and not being in the right place at the right moment....

[Guest Zero_Cool]

Sloppiness is much worse, because, as many people have already said, it kills the believability of the match.

[Guest New World Order of Wrestling]

This is funny because Ahmed Johnson was sloppy AND stiff. He also got a huge push.

[Guest godthedog]

tajiri smacking his thigh while pretending to make contact does not a stiff worker make.

 

sloppy is definitely worse. not only does it look bad, but it's dangerous. better to "hit very hard in very safe places" than to not know what you're doing.

[Guest FeArHaVoC]

Both are bad if used wrong.

 

Guys like Jericho and even Shawn michaels at times have been sloppy in the ring. However, they were able to play off those "Sloppy"spots and make them looks like acts of genius. While other idiots like Jeff Hardy is just a mess and he's dangerous.

 

Stiff is bad also if used wrong. Someone like Benoit may be a little "Stiff," I'd rather call it being "Snug," but he takes it also. Someone like Bradshaw who gets over by being "Stiff" but then No-Sell is just crap. It's like he's all for giving it out but then isn't willing to take it.

 

Then again, there's that "Sloppy Stiffness" like you see in the indy's at times. XPW for one.

[Guest Spaceman Spiff]

Well, Bob Holly & Bradshaw still have jobs, so I guess sloppy is worse in the WWE's eyes.

 

For me, it would be sloppy. It just makes a match look *bad*

[Guest MaxPower27]

I thought XPW was Sloppy Suckiness.

 

Sloppiness is far worse because it can detract heavily from a match. Stiffness can add to a match be making things look more realistic.

[Guest Midnight Express83]

worst case I can think of stiff is a broken jaw.

 

worst case I can think of sloppy is Droz.

 

So I guess sloppy is worse.

[Guest Raven_Effect01]

Sloppy. Being like that could possibly end another wrestler's career if say they're dropped on their head awkwardly.

[Guest Olympic Slam]

Sloppy is of course worse from the fan's point of view. Although, I bet the same can't be said for the wrestlers who have to be in a Steve Williams match or on the receiving end of a Buzz Kick.

[Guest Trivia247]

I believe there is more Injury towards a Sloopy match than a stiff match.

 

Lately people been tearing their Quads by tripping. So being clumbsy is already a consideration. People Hitting Tiger Drivers, Sheer Drop Brainbusters, Emerald Fusions and the Line still seem to have viable Wrestling careers. HHH Trips Tears His quad and he spends 9 months rehabing with a U2 Desire video sooo TOUCHING.

 

I think Stiff matches is better because at least before hand Wrestlers can prepare for each other to go Stiff. Clumbsy and Sloopy is not something you can prepare for. Someone could hit a Vertical Suplex and Not cushion the person and they take a neck injury.

[Guest redbaron51]

worst case I can think of stiff is a broken jaw.

 

worst case I can think of sloppy is Droz.

 

So I guess sloppy is worse.

but it wasn't D'lo's fault though, he slipped while doing one of his trade mark moves (running powerbomb)

[Guest GreenMist]

worst case I can think of stiff is a broken jaw.

 

worst case I can think of sloppy is Droz.

 

So I guess sloppy is worse.

but it wasn't D'lo's fault though, he slipped while doing one of his trade mark moves (running powerbomb)

Well, I don't think anyone's saying he did it on purpose.