World's Worst Man

Care to support this opinion? I'd like to hear how the WWE style lends itself to more dramatic matches than the technical King's Road style. Or the technical NJPW Juniors style. Then perhaps you could compare the best matches from each style to show why the WWE matches are more dramatic.

Ever seen Daniels vs. Williams? As far as I can tell, that match was better than anything Angle's ever done. You know what, screw it. Daniels is better than Angle, even comparing career on career. It's easy to forget that Daniels was doing some good stuff as Curry Man stuff from 99-2001, and after that he started doing better stuff stateside as well. I don't think there's a huge difference between the 2, certainly not as much as say, Joe vs. Angle. But it really just comes down to Angle being that bad in some aspects of the game. His selling and match pacing are just completely comical, and he's as masturbatory as your stereotypical indy wrestler. Ironically, Daniels has some of the same problems, it's just not as bad with him. For example, I don't think I've ever seen Daniels completely drag down a match, like Angle did versus Benoit at Royal Rumble '03. So yea, Daniels is better than Angle, not enough to make it a mockery of a comparison, but enough to that I'm fairly comfortable saying it. P.S. Joe > WWE's entire roster (for "Hail" bps21)

This guy is probably a gimmick, done by someone who was banned here before. If it's not, he's the stupidest god damn person on the internet. But I really don't think anyone could be such a douchebag, and a lot of that nonsense is just so far-fetched, so I vote for a troll who's working a gimmick, which makes him a douchebag anyway.

Kurt Angle would win. Afterall, he's da best worker in da world!

Rick Rude vs. Roddy Piper (12/28/89) This was the only good Piper match on the DVDVR WWF 1980's set. Unless there were any "hidden Piper gems" missing from the set, that's about it for his good WWF stuff from the 80's.

The names are generally right, but the order is absolutely terrible.

Close enough. I would have accepted AD&D as well.

*Begins casting Melf's Acid Arrow" Points for people who get the reference. Any bets on which banned poster this is?

I can think of a few guys who absolutely destroy Angle in all of those categories, save for mic skills, which aren't really a big deal anyway.

I kind of agree with that. If he was working the arm throughout the match, the armbar finish makes sense, and there's no reason to turn it into a worked shoot. It's just business exposing to act like the guy stopped "cooperating" and started shooting. I'm sure 100% of ROH fans know wrestling is a work, but I don't think people want to be told "The wrestlers cooperate with each other to produce a match, but Danielson stopped cooperating and forced an unplanned finish". It ruins the illusion of the show.

There's no point to Joe vs. Angle, because it's not even arguable. Daniels vs. Angle is closer, because neither guy is particularly very good, and it could go either way. But as others have said, right now it's Daniels due to what he's done lately. Past 3-4 years? Complete toss up.

Kill it with fire. Or acid. Just don't let it regen.

It all seems like a gimmick to me. I don't think anyone could possibly be that dense.

I must second the Val Venis love. He's a better worker than Shelton, and has more charisma. Yet the guy seems to be Heatlocity for life now. I'd love to see him ply his trade on the indies or in TNA, or even Japan. I think people would be surprised at what he'd be able to do.

Good post Corey. You captured a lot of what I would have said if I wanted to spend the time replying to this clueless guy. I'll just add that another one of Angle's big flaws is that he absolutely blows at building/setting up his spots. I call it Scott Steiner circa 1994 syndrome. So many times in an Angle match he'll walk up to his fully aware, undamaged opponent, grab him, and suplex him. What compounds the problem is that it usually happens early in the match, which makes even less sense. It all makes me cringe because it's so business exposing to see a totally aware guy let his opponent walk right up to him and suplex him.

The fact that you criticise Daniels for his bad selling, yet ignore Angle's obviously poor selling says more than I ever could. Not to mention using "ring gear" as a reason why someone is a good wrestler.

How someone who is such a poor writer and who doesn't really know a whole lot about wrestling is even considered to write a pro-wrestler's biography is a mystery that man will spend centuries trying to unravel.

Good, because I was referring to the second CM Punk match. What all this boils down to is people thinking spots and stiffness is what makes Joe a good worker, and if he isn't allowed to work that way, he wouldn't be a good worker. This is nonsense, because rolling out spots doesn't make one a good worker, and stiffness isn't really a big deal. The things that make Joe truly great are his selling, pacing and how he builds a match. And really, all this talk about Joe hurting people is ridiculous. If one has seen enough of Joe's work, they'd see that Joe doesn't work an insane level of stiffness all the time, as he did in the Styles match. It was obviously an agreement on both men's part to work really stiff, to show how important the match was. As I said before, wrestlers have been known to throw caution to the wind when involved in high-profile matches.

This is such a silly argument. Anyone who's seen any of Joe's work outside of TNA would never suggest he might not be able to work a bigger opponent, nor would they complain abou him hurting AJ Styles. Joe's best match came against a guy who was taller than him. Joe routinely doesn't fuck people up in the ring. The AJ Styles match was clearly a case of 2 guys agreeing to go out there and kill each other due to the importance of the match. It's really no different than Akiyama and Kobashi deciding to kill each other with brutal head drops in the main event of a Tokyo Dome show. It's not like that kind of match is wrestled all of the time. So yea, if you want to discuss a worker, at least see a relevant sample of his work.

Considering this thread has nothing to do with mic skills, and is all about in-ring ability, I would argue that it's a rather irrelevant point to bring up at this time. And regardless, even if Angle destroys Joe on the mic, Joe destroys Angle in the ring. And how much time is spent talking, and how much time is spent in the ring?

Leg-work is its own reward, meaning that it's always useful. If you take a guy's leg out, he's obviously at a huge disadvantage. Your statement might apply to something like arm work, which is less useful than leg work, unless there's a specific reason for it. This could get fun, since Kurt Angle is the best way to weed out the hypocrites. Certain people like to bitch about indy workers being spotty, then turn around and call Angle a great worker. Hell, nevermind Daniels, since it's quite arguable whether he's really good or not. But I bet if you asked "Who's better at pro-wrestling, Samoa Joe or Kurt Angle?" you'd still have people picking Angle.

That figures.

Here's your problem. You're making factually incorrect, broad, sweeping statements about something that isn't absolute. You're also unbelievably pretentious and repugnant, but that's neither here nor there. Anyway, the fact is, some (not many, but a few) X-Division matches do have storytelling, characters, selling and psychology. The latest Samoa Joe vs. AJ Styles match is a good example of this, as those criteria were fairly obvious. So really, lose the attitude and the desire to make generalizations and maybe you won't have people calling you a troll and an idiot. Or at least, it won't be warranted.

There's always MMA.

I agree with this sentiment. Most of the X-Division stuff is indeed spotty-spot-spotty-spot. The problem is, it seems to me that some of the people who complain about this don't really know the difference between a spotfest, and a match with a lot of spots. It's like they think a lot of spots automatically makes the match bad. But that's not really true. If spots are built to and and have some meaning, it doesn't matter if there's a lot of them. And that's the problem with a lot of these matches, meaningless, poorly built spots, just for the sake of rolling out spots. Also, here's a question. To the people who think the X-Division is business exposing and spotty, what is your opinion of Kurt Angle?