Something is amiss

[Guest SupaTaft]

I was watching Smackdown last week I beleive it was, and saw something odd. For the whole Brock/Big Show feud, the big thing was that Heyman doubted that Brock could F5 the Big Show. Of course at the PPV he did F5 him and there was much rejoicing *Yay*.

 

Then on Smackdown in the tag match, Kurt Angle nails Big Show with the Fireman's Carry Slam without any hype or hoopla. Does this strike anyone else odd that the man with the huge physique, the massive strength, and the even bigger push was hyped as being unable to lift a giant and an obnoxious underrated superstar goes and hauls him off without any to-do.

 

Just a thought.

 

-Taft

[Guest Vern Gagne]

What are you talking about Kurt Angle is too small to lift the Mighty Big Show.

[Guest The Hamburglar]

The F-5 requires more power to do it to the Slow than the Angle Slam. The Angle Slam is a very fast smooth-looking takedown whereas the F-5 is a lifting power move. And anyways, there was no hoopla because Angle has Angle-Slammed the Big Show before, the first time being all the way back in April 2000.

[Guest razazteca]

Lets just give The Big Show some respect for doing Spike Dudley quality bumps

[Guest evilhomer]

It was all just selling the show. Brock was the irresistable force, Show was the immovable object. Brock was running roughshod over everyone by overpowering them, now we were supposed to be interested because he's facing someone who he can't overpower.

 

Since Angle/Show has already been done, they couldn't do any of this to try to fool us.

[Guest Ace309]

From the "pure amaresu physics" department:

 

Hamburglar's right, at least by my estimation. The Angle Slam is basically a variant on a backdrop suplex and requires (relatively) very little strength, relying more on leverage than the F5. The F5 is basically just brute strength.

[Guest AndrewTS]

It was all just selling the show. Brock was the irresistable force, Show was the immovable object. Brock was running roughshod over everyone by overpowering them, now we were supposed to be interested because he's facing someone who he can't overpower.

 

Since Angle/Show has already been done, they couldn't do any of this to try to fool us.

Sucking like a black hole is quite the irresistable force. </AS>

 

Kidding, just making sure AS can't make that joke.

 

Although, I think it's mainly because the Angle Slam is a leverage thing, F5 requires total power. Angle doesn't have to hold Big Show over his head, twist his body, and slam him to the mat.

[Guest BobbyWhioux]

Of course, lifting "The 500lb. Big Show, Bah Gawd!" over one's shoulders and throwing him to the mat should be a rather impressive physical feat no matter which move/method one uses.

 

But it's just a testament to the fact that Brock Lesnar is and was supposed to be the selling point. He's the priority. Angle is not.

 

Therefore, Lesnar's "struggle" is more important and impressive than Angle slamming him with relative ease, For Yea, That Is How He Who Is Vince Has Ordained It Shall Be.

 

And you're supposed to be a good little consumer and be too lasy to care about these little logic gaps. After all, the writers and bookers are too lazy/inattentive to patch them up...

[Guest Redhawk]

Since Angle/Show has already been done, they couldn't do any of this to try to fool us.

Are you serious? How about when they wiped Kane's entire life off the chalkboard just to sell a feud? Or when they did the same with Undertaker ("He's taken this character too far.")? WWE has no problem trying to "fool" us. History means nothing. That's why JR can call Taker a great human being two months after Taker made JR toss Vince's salad.

[Guest evilhomer]

Sorry, I had a momentary lapse of stupidity and believed in logical booking in the WWE.

 

Good point, if they're willing to ignore years of booking and character development at the drop of a hat, they could at least hype a very impressive display of power. The Angle slam is mostly leverage, but it still takes a lot of strength to throw that big sack of shit over.