It's official

[Guest yomama]

>If a wrestler had his best matches at the age of 35, then wouldn't that be his prime?

 

No. For instance, Ric Flair, he wrestled in mostly tag matches in his prime (late 70s and early 80s). In tag matches only half the time you get to see Flair in action, so the match quality wouldn't be as good as if you got to see Flair in 1 on 1 action (which was the majority of his matches when he was slightly past his prime).

[Guest Big McLargeHuge]

So, if someone is having the best matches of his life and in the business at 46 years old, that would be past his prime? Even if during their specified prime (according to Yomama) 28 - 33, they sucked?

 

No. Your Prime is when you are at your best. End of discussion.

[Guest AlwaysPissedOff]

Don't waste your time arguing with this idiot, Smarky. He's nothing more than a troll who does the same exact shit in AOHell chatrooms.

[Guest Big McLargeHuge]

Understood. *sigh*

[Guest yomama]

>Flair was past his prime when he had the greatest match of all time with Steamboat.

 

Flair never faced anybody in a series as good as Steamboat before

 

>Austin I believe was past his prime last year (correct me if I'm wrong... I'm too lazy to look up his age) when he had the best run of **** matches since Flair in 89

 

It had a lot to do with his opponents, like Rock, 2001 HHH, Angle, Benoit, compared to his 1998/1999 opponents such as Kane, Undertaker, and a younger and unseasoned Rock.

[Guest yomama]

>Don't waste your time arguing with this idiot

 

Just because I talk about prime doesn't make me an idiot

[Guest AlwaysPissedOff]

>Flair was past his prime when he had the greatest match of all time with Steamboat.

 

Flair never faced anybody in a series as good as Steamboat before

Ummm... Barry Windham and Lex Luger anybody? Don't act like Flair faced nothing but bums until the classic Steamboat feud, dipshit.

[Guest AlwaysPissedOff]

>Don't waste your time arguing with this idiot

 

Just because I talk about prime doesn't make me an idiot

You're right, it makes you an idiot AND a troll. My bad.

[Guest RavishingRickRudo]

But you talk about prime using the wrong definition. A persons prime is not defined by their age, but by the period when their performance had peaked.

[Guest bps "The Truth" 21]

I don't have a problem with the discussion of "primes"

 

But to say that it is defined by age is stupid.

 

I have always beleived that Austin was in his prime from 1992-1994.

 

Most of his good matches came after that...but that is when I feel he was the best he ever was.

[Guest yomama]

>>Flair never faced anybody in a series as good as Steamboat before

>Ummm... Barry Windham and Lex Luger anybody

 

Steamboat was better than them

[Guest Big McLargeHuge]

Exactly. If you're saying that the period most common to be 'prime' in wrestlers' careers are the years 28-33, then sure, that's plausible.

[Guest yomama]

>>Just because I talk about prime doesn't make me an idiot

>it makes you an idiot AND a troll.

 

I'm neither of those. A troll is a person whose purpose is to annoy people, I come here to post the occassional topic of prime to inform people about it when it is the right occassion (like HHH turning an old man today).

[Guest yomama]

>A persons prime is not defined by their age, but by the period when their performance had peaked.

 

A person peaks from 28-32

[Guest yomama]

>If you're saying that the period most common to be 'prime' in wrestlers' careers are the years 28-33, then sure, that's plausible.

 

It's plausible that prime is always 28-32 unless you have major injuries, a major disease, or do drugs

[Guest Brian]

Because I've killed this discussion using Flair as primary example in the past, I'll do it again.

 

Ric Flair is fifty-two years old or so. He's too old to be in a ring isn't he. But he still is. And he still has a strong enough grasp of psychology to cover up some of his physical shortcomings.

 

But the Flair story starts in 1982. That's when Flair first started to peak, a peak that lasted about 13 years to 1994 when he had what was truly his last great match. By you prime rule, in 1982 Flair should have been at the end of his peak. Yet, it wasn't until 1984 that Flair truly became what we know him for. He had what would set up ground-breaking matches with a young Steamboat at a house show that was really his coming out, even in poor quality an easy ****1/4 match. He had arguably the best match of his career in 1986 against Barry Windham. In 1989 he had a series of matches against Steamboat that would set the world on fire. Carrying a young Luger. Also in that year he had a revolutionary match with Terry Funk importing the Puerto Rican style of brawling. In fact, during these five years he was arguably having the best five years of any wrestler ever.

 

Take Juventud Guerrera. Juventud, at the tender age of about twenty-one, was ne of the best rudos in all of Mexico. Yet at twenty-seven (I think) he's entered a watered down period of his career.

 

 

"It had a lot to do with his opponents, like Rock, 2001 HHH, Angle, Benoit, compared to his 1998/1999 opponents such as Kane, Undertaker, and a younger and unseasoned Rock."

 

Austin also wrestled hurt for a long time which really hurt his standing, despite in 1997-99 showing he still could lay the groundwork for a good match and in 2001 when he was healthy, he bumped like hell and his psychology was even stronger. Rock and Angle hadn't done stuff that good.

[Guest yomama]

>By you prime rule, in 1982 Flair should have been at the end of his peak. Yet, it wasn't until 1984 that Flair truly became what we know him for. He had what would set up ground-breaking matches with a young Steamboat at a house show that was really his coming out, even in poor quality an easy ****1/4 match. He had arguably the best match of his career in 1986 against Barry Windham. In 1989 he had a series of matches against Steamboat that would set the world on fire. Carrying a young Luger. Also in that year he had a revolutionary match with Terry Funk importing the Puerto Rican style of brawling. In fact, during these five years he was arguably having the best five years of any wrestler ever.

 

As I said before, Flair wrestled in mostly tag matches in his prime and he didn't wrestle the quality of opponents in his prime in singles matches that he did when he was past his prime. Also Steamboat and Luger weren't young in those years, they were in their primes (28-32 is prime, 27 under is young).

 

>Juventud, at the tender age of about twenty-one, was ne of the best rudos in all of Mexico. Yet at twenty-seven (I think) he's entered a watered down period of his career.

 

It's because of all the drugs he takes and that his work ethic has slipped

[Guest The Mighty Damaramu]

Dude show me the medical proof of what you are saying. Because as of now it's just you saying "This is the way it is because I said so."

[Guest gthureson]

>A persons prime is not defined by their age, but by the period when their performance had peaked.

 

A person peaks from 28-32

Why are you even still arguing this?

 

I am in my prime, you are not. I said you are wrong, by your own theory, you cannot hope to stand against my prime-driven mental faculties.

 

Come back and argue this in 9 years.

[Guest jimmy no nose]

How about this, make a list of WWE wrestlers who haven't passed their prime. I'm not talking about age, I'm talking guys who haven't already had their best days behind them. Really other than very young guys who just came in, most of the roster has already peaked. There's no reason to say that Triple H passed his prime because he turned 33 today, as soon as he tore his quad his days as a great wrestler were over.

[Guest SuperTonyJaymz]

Age and prime don't go together. Flair is the most pressing example, but what about Steambaot? His series with Austin was pretty good...was he in his prime then? Some guys never even have a prime, Mark Henry, for example? And 35 isn't old. By that standard, Rock is about to pass his prime, as is Kurt Angle, even though Angle has been in the buisness what? 3 years. And don't forget Dean Malenko. His series with Jericho happened after he was 33, and that was his best angle/series of matches ever

 

Prime is all about matches, not age. If Ric Flair starts having the greatest series of matches ever, better tahn any others he has ahd, then his "prime" would be now.

 

Wait until you become 33 and see if you still beleive in the prime shit.

[Guest FeArHaVoC]

Bret Hart was about 33 when he first won the IC Title from Hennig. Think of all the great matches he had after that.

[Guest cabbageboy]

Yeah Bret was not remotely in his prime when he was 28-32. He didn't really hit his peak until 1991 or so, and some of the best wrestling of his career came in 1996-97 when he was nearly 40.

 

Anyway, I know the one guy who will once and for all shatter this retarded debate: DDP. The guy didn't even start wrestling till he was about 35 and I can assure you that early DDP stuff sucks really bad. He was not in real good shape either. DDP never really got any good at all till about 1996 or 97 when he was 40 or so. And he was in the best physical condition I've seen him in too (assuming the rib injury is a work), since he was leaner and more muscled.

[Guest Kahran Ramsus]

What about DDP? I don't think his prime was when he was with Badd Company.

 

He was great in 1997-1998, when he was over 40, yet he was horrible before 1996. And don't say that Randy Savage in 1997 was better than Marc Mero in his prime.

 

EDIT: Someone just beat me to it.

[Guest cabbageboy]

Whoa, we both made the DDP argument at the same time.

[Guest yomama]

>show me the medical proof of what you are saying

 

I don't need medical proof. 28-32 prime, 33+ decline is common sense

[Guest Trivia247]

Too keep from looking too much in decline they change from their usual moves and gimmicks to keep up.

[Guest cabbageboy]

I note you didn't bother to try and refute Kahran and me about DDP.

 

I don't even get what this prime crap is all about anyway. Maybe Bret Hart was technically in better shape in 1988 than he was in 1994....but he was also primarily a tag wrestler who was nowhere near as experienced as he would be a few years later.

 

To me, a wrestler's prime is a combination of:

 

1. His physical ability.

2. His knowledge of wrestling.

 

Someone like Flair hit an awesome peak at the age of 40.....it was his peak of the combo of having wrestling knowledge and the ability to carry out that knowledge in the ring.

 

RVD on the other hand in ECW had awesome physical skills, but his knowledge of what to do and why wasn't that great. If he stays injury free in WWE his peak will likely be the next few years....his physical ability will likely still be good and his understanding of wrestling will increase.

[Guest Brian]

"Bret Hart was about 33 when he first won the IC Title from Hennig. Think of all the great matches he had after that."

 

Weird, I'd consider Bret's prime almost ten years earlier in Stampede.

 

Angle won't neter his prime for another year or two, when he really becomes a great wrestler.

 

"As I said before, Flair wrestled in mostly tag matches in his prime and he didn't wrestle the quality of opponents in his prime in singles matches that he did when he was past his prime. Also Steamboat and Luger weren't young in those years, they were in their primes (28-32 is prime, 27 under is young)."

 

Have you even watched Flair's work in the late 70's-early eighties? For the most part he was a great worker who was exposed a little for not being the all-around worker he later became after a stint in Japan, and the only reason he wrestled so many tag matches during that period in Japan because they were covering for his weaknesses.

[Guest mach7]

28-32 is prime, 33+ you decline (exceptions to this rule are major injuries, a major disease, or drugs).

Oh god, not *this* thread again....