World's Worst Man

Clearly the crowd reacting the way it does means guys like Danielson and Joe are just play wrestling and aren't any good.

No, trolling idiots who write shitty reviews, are (justifiably) hated by a large majority of the community and desperately want to appear smart are worse. But let me guess.. "I KNOW YOU ARE BUT WHAT AM I?!?!?!"

It's basically true what Meltzer said, some people are pathetically obsessed with the ROH/"smarky" crowd. On the other hand, some of those chants are quite annoying, and I can't imagine how annoying a 5 minute duelling chant would be. But in the end, no matter how annoying a crowd might be, the people who constantly bitch about it are worse. If one doesn't like indy wrestling, they should just come out and say it, rather than trying to "intelligently" criticise a promotion based on how their fans act.

You don't have matches as good as the 1995 match vs. Bret unless you're somewhat of a good worker yourself. Carry jobs only go so far. His matches vs. Bret also smoked Bret's matches vs. HBK, for whatever it's worth.

Yep, it's all subjective. Lots of people even here call Hogan/Warrior and Hogan/Andre two of the best matches ever. I don't understand it a bit. I like Rudo's article on what wrestling is all about. http://forums.thesmartmarks.com/index.php?...p;showentry=537 I know you read it because you responded to it, but everyone should read it. That's just a personal opinion on what good wrestling is, erroneously dressed up as a fact. Presenting something the audience enjoys certainly makes for successful wrestling, and that's something that's fairly objective. But to many, quality and success are not one in the same (and in fact, using the argument that a proposition is true because many people believe it, is a fallacious argument). So what it really comes down to is how much a person knows about what they're talking about and how strong their argument is. One uses facts to support their opinion, but how those facts are understood or prioritized can vary wildly from one person to the next.

Anyone who claims Shawn Michaels is the greatest wrestler in wrestling history deserves to be banned on principle.

Toshiaki Kawada > Shawn Michaels.

Go Shiosaki would be another young worker who's already incredibly good. I guess that's what hanging around and teaming with Kenta Kobashi will do for you. Shinsuke Nakamura was pretty good considering his experience level. He had a really good 60 minute draw after only wrestling for 2 years and change. A match where he was the better peformer that night. He also headlined the Tokyo Dome after 1 year and a few months of experience in a decent spectacle against Takayama.

Rogers is 3.72/1.17/2.44 with a 10-3 record. Even though he probably got in due to the grossly overrated W/L stats, his other stats aren't too shabby. Liriano definitely should have gotten in before him though. Man, what a shitty year for all-star picks. Liriano and Hafner are both dynamite picks and they both get snubbed.

In the AL, Hafner is tied for 3rd in RBI, tied for 3rd in HR, 1st in OPS, 1st in SLG (for regular players), 1st in OPS and he's hitting a respectable .313. And thats even missing some games due to interleague play/injury. That's how people can get upset. It's completely friggin daffy.

I don't really care if they do or not, nor does it seem even relevant. If someone actually knows what they're talking about, they can name-drop all they want.

Fallacious argument. You might think success equals quality, but that's just your opinion. Success can be measured, quality is subjective. So if you think the most successful means the "best", good for you. Don't speak of it like fact, because you'll get nowhere trying to prove your criteria is more valid than anyone elses. That's your opinion and many would disagree with that definition of workrate and worker. Plus, when people talk of a "worker", they're generally referring to their wrestling ability. There's no point in making a big deal out of semantics by going on about how the best "worker" is the one who makes the most money as opposed to the one who has the most wrestling ability. People are generally not talking about that when talking about a worker or workrate. If they wanted to discuss success and money making ability, they'd probably say so. PWI was a casuals magazine, so I don't know what relevance that holds. They threw out international names to look credible, but it was fairly easy to tell what agenda was driving the magazine. Thinking about it logically, Sabu wasn't as skilled as about 100 other wrestlers nor did he draw much money, so I don't see any argument for being the best in the world. Unless one's criteria is breaking tables and botching spots.

You're thinking of success, which doesn't seem to be the point of this thread. It's about who would be called the best wrestler, not the most successful. And who really knows what the answer is. Some wrestlers have some pretty nutty ideas about who's good or not. A few years ago I believe one of the Funk's (Terry probably) said Sabu was the best in the world, or something to that effect. I'd wager to say Flair would get the most mention, even though there's a bunch of guys who were a lot better than him in the ring. But he's the "traditional" pick.

I've only seen the first two seasons. The show became too formulaic and boring for me to continue watching it. It would have been fine as a one season show, because the premise was good and the show was entertaining for a while.

At his peak, he had the best moveset in wrestling history, was a great dramatic seller and could get a story over with his intensity and emotion. The downside to the latter point is that he occasionally let that intensity and emotion throw the logic of the match out the window. Along those lines, he's also a fair bit responsible for the no-selling that's become a staple in big match Japanese pro-wrestling. Even so, for the few "silly" performances of his, he's had ten times as many that showed he was quite a smart wrestler. Kenta Kobashi is probably one of the ten or fifteen best workers of all time and is certainly the greatest wrestler of the past 10 years. Completely believable, stiff offense. The best selling ever. A clear understanding of how to tell a story in the ring. Toshiaki Kawada is the best worker of all time. His longevity was certainly not at the level of a Jumbo Tsuruta, but from about 1993 to 1998, I don't believe there was a better talent in the history of pro-wrestling. Every wrestler should watch and learn from Toshiaki Kawada. Mitsuharu Misawa was undoubtedly the star of All Japan during the 90's. Oddly enough, among American wrestling fans, he's probably the least popular of the "big 3" of All Japan (Taue is less popular, but he's not really at the level of ability as the other 3). Still, I believe he was a better worker than Kobashi. Misawa just wasn't as flashy or fancy, but the guy was just completely solid as a wrestler. He's probably been involved in more great matches than anyone else, mostly because all of the other AJPW workers' great matches typically involved him as well. His feud with Kawada is probably the best of all time, spanning 6 years and 10-12 matches over that timespan, almost every single match over ****. Misawa was also a large draw, and along with Keiji Muto and Shinya Hashimoto, was the face of Japanese pro-wrestling througout the 90's and into the 2000's. Shinya Hashimoto was larger than life. Combining crisp looking offense, fantastic selling and an overwhelming amount of in-ring charisma, Hashimoto matches were often spectacles and he was well loved by the fans. Probably the biggest Japanese draw of the 90's, he built his reputation as the "true" successor to Antonio Inoki. The amount of fire and emotion he brought to his matches is unmatched by all but a few. His feud with Naoya Ogawa was probably the last great feud that NJPW ever did. Hashimoto is a true legend and may well be among the greatest of all time.

Great worker back in the day. Crisp, believable offense, good, smart selling and a master at the slow build NJPW Junior style. These days his offensive strengths are totally gone, so I'd never call him great, but he's still very good, and has shown a complete understanding of US pro-wrestling story-telling. Unfortunately, he's now incredibly overrated, especially by a certain repugnant group of fans (the contrarian anti-smark idiots). Because of that, it's hard for me to really get into him. The last thing I said about Benoit also applies to Mysterio. Actually, the offense problem applies too. The difference is, I think Rey has always been overrated. He was athletically gifted and could certainly have good matches. But I haven't seen much truly great stuff from him. Today, he's one of the better WWE-style workers, probably only behind Benoit at this point. Hey look, it's another guy that's overrated. I think with Finlay, it comes because some vocal people seem to like stiffness and tough guy personas. There's no doubt he was a good brawler, as his selling and execution (in the context of a brawl) was topnotch. I haven't seen much to talk about during his comeback though. The PPV match with Benoit was so dime-a-dozen and so laughably overrated, and that pretty much sums up all of his comeback work. It's hard to consider him anything more than decent at this point. I haven't seen any of him lately, but before..All he brought to the table was spots. And he usually blew 1 or 2 per match. That's a bad combination. He's overrated by the casual smarks, which probably isn't a big deal. He probably has no hope of becoming a decent worker going down the path he's on. Danielson has always been technically fabulous. It's only in the past year or so that he's consistently able to apply that technical ability in matches that have some sort of meaning. Meaning that in his earlier days, his matches were just straight up wrestling with little or no dramatics and passion (some exceptions obviously). But today, he's given a character and gimmick to run with, so his matches are quite a bit more well-rounded. Since his ROH title reign started, he's probably the best wrestler in North America. He pretty much has it all in the ring. All he's lacking is outside the ring charisma, which isn't a big deal to me, and wouldn't big a big deal in NJPW or NOAH, where I hope he ends up sometime in the future. Aries showed a lot of promise when he broke out in 2004, being involved in some really good multi-man tags, along with the 2 excellent Danielson matches. Since losing the world title, he's been somewhat stagnant I think. He's pretty much plateaued as a wrestler without reaching the heights one would have expected for him. I still think he's a decent-good worker, but he needs to pick up his game. Shelley is a tremendously funny worker. His mannerisms and body language are top notch and he has a good idea of how to work a crowd. His wrestling sometimes tends to get on the "play wrestling" side of things, that is to say the technical portions of his match look somewhat forced and unnatural. I think that's more of a mental issue as opposed to him just not knowing how to work naturally. With his charisma, he has no need to wrestle that way. Even if he's not Bryan Danielson, he doesn't have to be, so there's no need to force anything. The more I watch and think about Daniels, the more I dislike him. He seems to wrestle in a homogenized and sterile way. Everything seems unnatural and forced, even the passion and dramatics. He's a smart, capable worker, but I think he tries too hard to be great. That means he ends up not even being good.

Complete indifference. Best introduction in wrestling. Corino is a tremendously entertaining pro-wrestler. His in-ring ability is nothing special, but the guy has tons of charisma, cuts a good promo and plays an awesome heel. He'd be a perfect fit for a WWE-style company, yet the promotion is so retarded that he's the type of guy that would never even get a fair shot. Low-Ki is probably the definition of explosive. The guy is an athletic marvel in the ring. Great execution and very believable. Tends to be a bit spot happy at times though. Once he started having a bit of personality he really came full circle. I'm somewhat perplexed as to why he isn't being used better in NOAH, although I have a sneaking suspicion that it might be due to his well documented attitude problems. Criminally underutilized. Good worker, decent charisma. It's shameful how poorly he's been utlized. He'd be perfect for All Japan and I've long held out hope that he just cut all ties with the WWE and go somewhere where his talents would actually be appreciated.

The core fans don't drive the business to insane levels. The casuals do, and they're drawn by the characters and gimmickry, so that's where the real money is. I certainly consider wrestling ability to be the most important aspect of quality pro-wrestling, but quality doesn't equal success and vice-versa.

Me Me Me.

The word "smark" seems to mean different things to different people. Some people smarmily use it to define all "smartened up" wrestling fans. Often times they do it just to annoy "smarts", because "smark" used to have a somewhat negative connotation. Some use the term to define fans who look at wrestling in a different way than the average fan. I personally define it to be a fan that's "smart" to the business, but is unable or unwilling to look at wrestling for anything other than the face value. Then a "mark" would be the casual/average fan who really doesn't know the inner workings all that well and also aren't able to see wrestling on any kind of deeper level. And then the "smarts" are those who understand the inner workings and also view/enjoy wrestling on a somewhat deeper level. Of course, these days you have the "anti-smart/smark" smarts, who are annoying, contrarian assholes, who despite me labelling them as "smarts", are really quite stupuid. But that's another rant for another day.

Cena and the WWE have unintentionally suckered the so called smarks into hating Cena. And why should they care? Even if Cena has "real" heat, those people are still coming to the shows and participating. Cena has "go-away" heat, so they'll keep running him out to play that up while simultaneously keeping Cena's own fanbase happy. And so far, it's kept both groups interested. They're working the smarks who aren't "smart" enough to realize they're being worked.

Akira Hokuto Manami Toyota Ayako Hamada The Destroyer Koji Kanemoto Jushin Liger

Dibiase benefitted by being given a great gimmick, but I can't imagine anyone playing the character better than he did. It's like he was born to play the Million Dollar Man. And it went past just the character, as he was an awesome heel in the ring as well. That's the benefit of knowing how to wrestle on a fundamental level, and being able to do it well. Dibiase pretty much had it all, and it's almost criminal that he never got a run with the WWF title in the late 80's. Most of what I said about Ted Dibiase also applies to Curt Henning. Although I'd say Henning was better in the ring. Another guy who had all the tools. Great bumping, great selling, tons of charisma, a completely convincing heel. They don't make them like Curt Henning anymore and it's a shame he died so young. Haven't seen his best work. If the ability to execute a tope atomico meant anything, he might be good. Since it doesn't, Hardy didn't bring anything to the table outside of being over with the girls.

Sting was always capable in the ring and had quite a unique moveset for early 90's US wrestling. I like guys who are still good workers despite being incredibly over for other reasons. And Sting was really, really over in WCW, even before the crow gimmick. He played a good psycho heel, but was not good as a face. In the ring, he may have been barely passable at best, but that wasn't often. He was a good guy to have around to stick in feuds with faces, but he wasn't going to be a top draw or carry the company. Norton was ok during the 90's when he was younger and in better shape. He had some fun power vs. power matches against guys like Vader, and was over enough in New Japan to have hot matches with the Muto's and Hashimoto's of the world. Right now he's awful, as his weight is up a bit and he doesn't move around well anymore. Nothing new to say about him. Just like Goldberg, he was intense and got a great push, so he got over. Couldn't do much of anything in the ring. Fizzled out a bit when he was given the ball. Complete basketcase in modern times. I'd wager to say there's many guys who could have done what he did.

Crummy worker who got over because he showed intensity and was properly pushed as a monster. Kind of in the Ultimate Warrior mold, but not as bad in the ring. Good worker once upon a time. Since coming back, he's been awful. And I mean awful. That's what laziness and not being interested in wrestling will do to a guy I guess, even one who had so much promise earlier in his career.