Greatest Wrestlers Of All Time

[Guest XdojimeX]

"I disagree with that. The Hell in a Cell match between Taker and Foley is listed at ***** in my books. The reason it is ***** is because there hasn't been a match when two guys (mostly Foley) layed everything, including their lives on the life just to please the fans."

 

Not to be crude...(ok I'll be crude).

 

Since when is being a whore great art?

[Guest godthedog]

augh, ricky...you had me, you had me, you had me, then you lost me. good, logical post, aside from this:

 

If you like rating matches based on how close both guys come to dying, that's fine and good, but don't critisizing other's who, you know, actually rate the match objectively.

i beg of you, please don't pull a wolverine and make the 2 deadly assumptions:

1) that it's possible to objectively rate a match

2) that your standards perfectly exemplify this objective rating, & everyone who disagrees is wrong

 

1 is fallacious, 2 is pretty pompous & egotistical.

[EL DANDY~! 0]

Good call. If that was the case...I'm not gonna say it. I'd get booted so fast...

[Guest RickyChosyu]

Sorry, but I'm of the opinion that it's possible to objectively rate a match. Call me crazy, but I don't find it that dificult to watch a match, notice what's going on, and decide what worked and what didn't. It's not that hard to understand what you're watching.

 

For example, watching Taker/Foley, it's not that hard to detatch yourself from all sympathy for Mick (after all, he got rich off of those bumps at the expense of the wrestling industry), and simply watch the match as a match. Doing so, it doesn't take a genius to notice that it has no real point to it, other than brutality, which, as I said before, is a plot device, just like like power, just like speed, and just like technique, and if it's mis-used, well, you get things like this.

 

I'm also of the opinion that there is a place for personal bias, as long as it's done openly and admitedly. If someone has a favorite match, it doesn't neccesarilly have to be what they consider to be the absolute best, it's just their favorite. I dig Hart/Austin from WM 13 a lot and it's one of my favorite matches, but I still don't consider it perfect, by any means, or even the best match to happen stateside that year. It's possible to watch a match objectively, and it's just as much possible to admit one's own bias and seperate the two. Simply stuff, really.

 

Meanwhile, I'm wondering why Dandy hasn't decided to humor me and back up his opinions yet. Why do get that feeling that I'm waiting for something that isn't going to happen?

[Guest Midnight Express83]

Next, do people even know what five stars is anymore? No offense, but I would be hard-pressed to find a tabloid more fabricated than these "lists" of all the five-star matches Flair has had. Is discussing wrestling so dificult, because it seems like most people would rather attempt to drown me in snow flakes.

Well, Star ratings are subjective. Because NO TWO PEOPLE ARE THE SAME. People might SHARE OPINIONS but that is it. I haven't seen much puro, and of what I saw, its mostly boring. I saw the Misawa/Kabachi(sp?) vs Kawada/Taue and I was bored to tears the first half of the match. One man's ***** is another person's DUD. Most openly is the whole HIAC II debate.

 

There are NO perfect matches, you can watch any match and say they could of done this better, or they could have done that. I rate matches like this: Was it great? Was it smooth(ie: No aimless bullshit)? Did it tell a story? Did it either change wrestling for the better or did it make people feel like they were watching one of the greatest things ever? And finally, did it entertian me? Why would a boring match be rated so high by me? I saw a Misawa vs Kawada. I turned the match off about 10 mins in because it was just that damn boring. But everyone says that Misawa had the most ***** matches ever. So I will believe them, but I not really in the mood to look all over to prove yes or no for myself.

[Guest Tim Cooke]

"I saw the Misawa/Kabachi(sp?) vs Kawada/Taue and I was bored to tears the first half of the match. I saw a Misawa vs Kawada. I turned the match off about 10 mins in because it was just that damn boring."

 

It's because you went in ill-prepared. It is kind of like going into a math test. If you go in knowing the material and its basics (match history, prior matches, etc) then you will do good (understand the match). If you don't know the material, then you will fail (and not like the match).

 

Common sense.

 

***** is *****.

 

It's just the competance of the viewer that makes the rating have any meaning.

 

Tim

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

"Cure for insomnia"

 

AGREED. That match blows. HIAC sucked as well....watching it live was emotional but it doesn't hold up. In fact. the only match that I think was actually a MOTYC or even really good was the RR v Foley. And I think we know who made that match.

 

Tim, who doesn't even want to discuss the travestry that was Benoit v HHH from No Mercy.

You've got to be kidding me, the 2/3 falls was a really good bloody brawl, and the blow off to a hot feud. The crowd was into it the whole match, the work was quite good, especially the brawling portions, and an ending that, while fairly contrived, got the point across that they'd just beat each other to a pulp, with neither man having the upper hand, and HHH fell on top for the pin as a fluke.

 

HIAC, well, let's agree to disagree on that one, that match fucking rules. Emotional, great work from both men, fit the gimmick of the match perfectly, the right person went over, and Foley's tears as he was walking out with the crowd standing in unison out of total respect was the icing on the cake.

 

I can see why you wouldn't like HHH/Benoit, as the Steph interference was totally useless, and the leg work didn't really go anyplace. Match is still really good aside from those two points, IMO.

 

 

As far as the Misawa/Taue match. It's good and all, but I still don't like it.

Kawada/Taue I've either never seen or else just don't care enough to remember. Considering I hate all of his other singles matches, (ESPECIALLY the one with Doc in 96, god that match EATS IT. * for effort in my book) I don't think that one would change my opinion too much.

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

"I saw the Misawa/Kabachi(sp?) vs Kawada/Taue and I was bored to tears the first half of the match. I saw a Misawa vs Kawada. I turned the match off about 10 mins in because it was just that damn boring."

I was almost the same way. Now it's IMO the best match ever. Well, that or Kobashi/Misawa from 1/97, it changes depending on which one I watched most recently.

 

If it's the 6/3/94 match (which it probably was), well, you missed out big time, that match owns.

[Guest Tim Cooke]

"You've got to be kidding me, the 2/3 falls was a really good bloody brawl, and the blow off to a hot feud. The crowd was into it the whole match, the work was quite good, especially the brawling portions, and an ending that, while fairly contrived, got the point across that they'd just beat each other to a pulp, with neither man having the upper hand, and HHH fell on top for the pin as a fluke."

 

The match was a clusterfuck. If they wanted to show real hate, they should have studied MX v Fantastics from Clash I. The first fall was decent but the second and third falls were horrendous, with Trips being totally blown up. The barbed wire in the face with a sleeper hold wasn't good psych, it was just a simple resthold.

 

"HIAC, well, let's agree to disagree on that one, that match fucking rules. Emotional, great work from both men, fit the gimmick of the match perfectly, the right person went over, and Foley's tears as he was walking out with the crowd standing in unison out of total respect was the icing on the cake."

 

It was emotional the first time, I will agree with that. But where is the great work from the match? A few contrived though neat looking spots and a lot of brawling. Give me a well laid out Wargames any day over ANY HIAC's.

 

"I can see why you wouldn't like HHH/Benoit, as the Steph interference was totally useless, and the leg work didn't really go anyplace. Match is still really good aside from those two points, IMO."

 

Match was pathetic. I have wrote much more in depth on this in the past and can't do it justice right now.

 

 

Tim

[Guest Strike Force!]

"I saw the Misawa/Kabachi(sp?) vs Kawada/Taue and I was bored to tears the first half of the match. I saw a Misawa vs Kawada. I turned the match off about 10 mins in because it was just that damn boring."

 

It's because you went in ill-prepared. It is kind of like going into a math test. If you go in knowing the material and its basics (match history, prior matches, etc) then you will do good (understand the match). If you don't know the material, then you will fail (and not like the match).

 

Common sense.

 

***** is *****.

 

It's just the competance of the viewer that makes the rating have any meaning.

 

Tim

[EL DANDY~! 0]

OK.

 

1st off, if you want me to back up my actions...this is what I know.

 

I've seen some great matches. What I call a great match is like this.

 

Good story? Fluidity? Excitement? Psychology? Workrate? Crowd Heat? Does the match get me out of my seat cheering at the end?

 

If all those questions are answered with a yes, then I give the match at least ****. Now, if the people in the ring go above the call of duty, and put on a match I must watch over and over again, then ***** is what I give it.

 

I've seen WrestleWar '89, 2/3 falls Flair/Steamboat, the lost Steamer/Rhodes vs. The Enforcers tag match, Austin/Hart (both times), Hart/Hart (both times), Misawa/Kawada (about the whole series), and some MPro 10-mans that just made me giddy. Now, personally, more than one match deserves the five-star moniker, since I personally think a CLASSIC is a ***** match. I do not disagree with some people going the whole "one perfect match means one ***** rating." The way I see it is the way I see it. Ricky, what I'M wondering about you is what do YOU do to give out a ***** rating to a match, because if you can't give Austin/Hart, one of the greatest brawls ever, a ***** rating, what DID you give a ***** rating?

[Guest dreamer420]

Dreamer, there have been some stupid things said in this forrum, but I see no way you can even think of saying what you did, save flame bate.

 

Performance? He took to ridiculous bumps and then spent the rest of the match trying to stay concious. That's not wrestling, that's masochism. There is no entertainment there, unless you, yourself, enjoy seeing other's pain. If you like rating matches based on how close both guys come to dying, that's fine and good, but don't critisizing other's who, you know, actually rate the match objectively. As Tim said, there are millions of death matches in the history of wrestling where guys have come much closer to dying, and those aren't good, either. Brutality is a plot device. It doesn't make a break a match. Just like anything, brutality used well results in good matches, but used poorly, and it's just wonton violence. By itself, it's not worth anything, and neither is HIAC II. I don't see a point in arguing it further.

 

Next, do people even know what five stars is anymore? No offense, but I would be hard-pressed to find a tabloid more fabricated than these "lists" of all the five-star matches Flair has had. Is discussing wrestling so dificult, because it seems like most people would rather attempt to drown me in snow flakes.

 

Explanations? Anyone?

 

Wargames I was good, but a ten-man brawl with four bad workers, two non-wrestlers, and little structure, is still not a five-star match, because I can name plenty that were better, and the whole point of five stars is that it's the HIGHEST rating, or has everyone forgotton that? If Flair/Vader is five stars, what is Flair/Steamboat? Six stars? What about the other eleventy-billion matches that were better? Are those, too, *****+ matches, because they're definitely better than that match was.

 

I could go on and on about Flair/Windham, Flair/Funk, and Flair/Vader (yuck) but I think I can just sum it up with "I've seen better" and get the same point across.

let me put this another way so hopefully you understand this time.

 

my definition of a ***** match:

 

-a wrestling match that has both workers giving their best efforts to please the fans.

-a wrestling match that gives me exactly what I want and was expecting from it.

-a wrestling match that I can watch time and time again without getting tired of it.

 

You don't have to follow my guidelines when reviews matches or anything but christ, let me have my own opinion too. You aren't going to change it so you might as well save your words. You can follow the Scott Keith style of reviewing all you want but personally I don't like it.

[Guest RickyChosyu]

First and formost, I don't care about any of your rating systems, and that's not what I was asking. I wanted you to back up your opinions on a match-by-match basis. Why was the particular match you listed five stars? What made it great? Explanations, not bullshit, please.

 

Midnight: Did you take the time to consider what was going on in Misawa/Kobashi vs. Kawada/Taue? Years of Misawa/Kawada history, and the lineage of past leagues they were trying to live up to all formed that match, and it helps to know that. Tim's description of "knowing the material before taking the test" is dead on here, because if you don't understand that stuff, an entire layer of the match is totally wasted on you. No need to pass judgement on AJPW and the style it embodies just because you didn't particularly enjoy one match, either. I have no clue where this notion came from that you can just leap into an entirely new style and be capable of fully comprehending all of the cultural nuances and stylistic trademarks that define it.

 

AoO: HHH/Austin was an over-blown, stupid, crappy match, and you need to have a better defense than "good crowd heat" to save it. The crowd heat was because it was blowing off a hot feud, but that doesn't make it a good match just like the crowd heat for Hogan's matches never them good either. Now, lets start with selling: Horrible selling of body parts by both men, that either only existed to set up dumb spots (Austin works the arm forever, Trips no-sells the injury for fifteen minutes, then re-injurres trying to "hook the arm"? yeah, ok) or simply didn't go anwhere at all (Austin's leg that he just totally forgot about and served no purpose). Bad bumping with blown spots and awkwardness everywhere in the beggining, with both men blowing, repeating, and calling spots. Then, there's the structure, where they go from really bad wrestling to worse brawling, followed by the stupid "lets use barbed wire for no reason" part, leading a finish that's as insulting as it is illogical. Really shitty match.

 

Dandy: I never said there's only one five star match, I just said that if Vader/Flair is five stars, there's no point to having ratings to begin with. There are plenty of matches that are way, WAY better than Flair/Vader, and thus, it's not five stars. It's an easy concept. Misterio/Guererro, Flair/Steamboat (Wrestle War '89), Hart/Hart (WM X) and Hart/Austin (from SS '96, need to re-watch, though) are the only North American matches I would consider for five stars. I don't think that's too radical of an opinion, either. I like Hart/Austin from WM 13 a whole lot, and it's probably my favorite NA brawl ever, but I don't think it's *****.

 

Dreamer: What does Keith have to do with this topic, like, at all? Are you just making this stuff up? Sorry, but Taker/Foley was a black eye on the wrestling business, hurt it more than Shawn Michaels ever could, and generally sucks all kinds of ass. Get over it, already.

[EL DANDY~! 0]

For the benefit of Ricky...5 ***** matches I've seen that are somewhat debatable, with the reasons I picked them.

 

1) Flair/Steamboat Wrestlewar '89-This is utter brilliance in the fact that Steamer attacks what he thinks Ric's one weakness is, his arm, and the fact that the ONLY moves he uses are the armdrag and the armbar to weaken it to get to the Flying Double Chicken Wing makes the psychology fucking great. He just mixes it up with Flair so great. Also, Flair makes himself to look like a fucking badass by going RIGHT for the leg after Ricky gets knocked off the top rope. The ending is sheer brilliance, as they complete the circle with the OTHER match of the decade for NA, Savage/Steamboat-WM 3. Also, Flair just STIFFS Steamer so much with those forearms that I quiver. I thought I was watching the next match I'm selecting...

 

2) Misawa/Kawada-6/3/94-OK. As a match itself, I know why people are going to say it isn't *****. So that is why, in my opinion, you need to back to 1990 to see how this came about. It tells the greatest story ever told in the ring. Kawada has tried so hard to defeat Misawa, and he goes so far as to try to break his face...which he does. But Misawa shows why he IS the Triple Crown champion, and wears Kawada down with the elbow shots that only he knows how to throw. The fact that the icing on the cake is one Tiger Driver '91 is fucking brilliant, because it sets the stage for Kawada finally beating Misawa in singles competition down the line, as Misawa had to pull out THE trump card in order to get the win.

 

3)Steamer/Dustin Rhodes vs. The Enforcers-Clash XVI-Now, I think that if Windham was still in it, it COULD have been *****...but the fact that when Steamer is the mystery man, and that The Enforcers go into fucking FEAR at the sight of him...shows how great this match will be. Steamboat gets on FIRE, but then after The Enforcers do all they can to CHEAT TO WIN~!, the chain wrestling and the counter wrestling and the heel tag tactics used by The Enforcers make this match GREAT. And the CROWD GETS IT. When Dustin comes in with the hot tag...it's goes BONZO GONZO (copyright Scott Keith, all rights reserved), and then when Steamer skins the cat and hits the bodypress for the titles...I absolutely go crazy...as I have just seen about the greatest tag match I've ever seen.

 

4) MPro 10-Man Tag from 10/10/96-Yes, it's a spotfest. But the workrate, the selling, the crowd heat, everything about this match just makes it *****. Watch it. See how all the little mannerisms just play out for both teams. See how KDX allows themselves to just REEK of RUDOISM, and how all the faces just laugh in the face of EEEEEVIL...oh yeah, and DICK MOTHERFUCKIN TOGO is in the match.

 

5) Austin/Hart-OK. Do do you one up. Why is this match *****? It's fucking simple. The two HATE each other to no end. Hart had been talking about a heel turn. But simply look at this. After the bell shot, and the PRIMO bladejob from Austin, he gets to play the sympathetic face, as Hart makes Austin fucking SUFFER like he's never suffered before in that ring, but you also have to remember that Austin held on like a MAN, and didn't tap like a bitch, to The Sharpshooter. Hart is a heel for holding on as much as he does, and Austin gets the chants of Austin for fighting Hart to his last gasp of air, and is an instant face. *****, and don't let anybody tell me otherwise.

 

There. Those are SPECIFIC reasons as to why THOSE matches are *****.

[Guest Tim Cooke]

Two quick things for Dandy.

 

Not to nit pick, but the 10/10/96 Mpro 10 man didn't have a lot of heat. They were in a huge building for a small indy. When they got back to the smaller gyms, that is where they got the great heat. The 12/16/96 series finale did. It is a great match and the best laid out spotfest that I have ever seen.

 

Secondly, you say "Austin/Hart-OK. Do do you one up. Why is this match *****? It's fucking simple. The two HATE each other to no end." Well if "bringing the hate" is so important, then why isn't the MX v Fantastics Clash I match *****?

 

Also, if you don't care to agree, that is fine, but remember something key will always be missing from the Bret/Austin match..............the Cobra Clutch. It backfied on Austin in Nov of 96, but now with no pinfalls, Bret is screwed. That spot would have guaranteed that match as a billion stars. Without it, I am hardpressed to say it is ***** because a truley smart match would have incorporated that spot.

 

Tim

[Guest Tim Cooke]

One more thing, the 11/18/91 tag is probably the last great Southern Tag Match in the US. Superbrawl 1992 had a killer Windham/Rhodes v Austin/Zybisko, but that was a different type of match.

 

Tim

[LaParkaYourCar 0]

Comparing 5 star matches is hard since ***** is the highest you can go and that means there are a lot of 5 star matches out there that are better than other 5 star matches. It's hard when all you have seen is American wrestling or if you have seen only limited puro. Some American stars that we see as best ever are pretty low on the list once compared to some puro stars and vice versa. I don't know if you can list based on how many 5 star matches they have had, but it is a good sign if they have had many.

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

Also, if you don't care to agree, that is fine, but remember something key will always be missing from the Bret/Austin match..............the Cobra Clutch. It backfied on Austin in Nov of 96, but now with no pinfalls, Bret is screwed. That spot would have guaranteed that match as a billion stars. Without it, I am hardpressed to say it is ***** because a truley smart match would have incorporated that spot.

 

Tim

But why would Austin use a move that Bret obviously knows how to counter and would be expecting? Not to mention the fact that it cost him the first match.

[EL DANDY~! 0]

Tim, cool name. My name is Tim, too.

 

Oh, and I DID actually give that match *****. I thought everybody would give that match *****. Hmmm...

[Guest godthedog]

 

Also, if you don't care to agree, that is fine, but remember something key will always be missing from the Bret/Austin match..............the Cobra Clutch.  It backfied on Austin in Nov of 96, but now with no pinfalls, Bret is screwed.  That spot would have guaranteed that match as a billion stars.  Without it, I am hardpressed to say it is ***** because a truley smart match would have incorporated that spot.

 

Tim

But why would Austin use a move that Bret obviously knows how to counter and would be expecting? Not to mention the fact that it cost him the first match.

bret knew how to counter the hold INTO A PINFALL, he didn't know how to get out of the hold (at least, he never made it clear that he actually knew how to get out of it). since pinfalls don't count, bret's counter wouldn't have worked; austin's shoulders would be on the mat, but he'd still have the hold applied, so bret would've had to find a way out of the hold. that's the argument tim was making.

 

i personally don't understand the 'no million dollar dream' thing as a flaw. as i understand it, the million dollar dream isn't supposed to hurt; it's supposed to just knock you out. i've never seen anyone actually submit to the million dollar dream. it would be like trying to win a submission match with a sleeper hold.

 

also, about flair/steamboat: i've never met anyone who actually agrees with me, but i have a small problem with the ending & i thought i'd throw it out there to get opinions on it. first, the way steamboat happens to hurt his leg falling to the floor seems a bit contrived to me & it took away the natural flow of the match a bit. so flair works his leg, figure 4 etc., steamboat comes back with an enzuigiri, bodyslams flair but the knee weakens, so flair cradles him for 3...that's the logic of it, right? now, steamboat had been wrestling a very smart match up to that point (aside from the requisite blind charges that every great babyface is prone to), using his experience from the 2/3 falls match to try to win. but if he's using his experience from that match, shouldn't he have learned NOT to pick flair up when his knee is shot to hell? when he tried to pick him up for the chicken wing at the clash, his knee gave way. since at wrestlewar the knee is hurting worse than it was at the clash, steamboat has every reason to believe he can't support flair's weight. i'm cool with a guy making a mistake that costs him the match, but someone like ricky steamboat shouldn't be making the same mistake 2 matches in a row against the same opponent. to me, that's like if bret & davey had a rematch right after summerslam 92, bret went for a sunset flip again, & davey pinned him the same way.

[Guest Coffin Surfer]

I haven't seen much puro, and of what I saw, its mostly boring. I saw the Misawa/Kabachi(sp?) vs Kawada/Taue and I was bored to tears the first half of the match. One man's ***** is another person's DUD. Most openly is the whole HIAC II debate.

 

I saw a Misawa vs Kawada. I turned the match off about 10 mins in because it was just that damn boring. But everyone says that Misawa had the most ***** matches ever. So I will believe them, but I not really in the mood to look all over to prove yes or no for myself.

All you have to do is read the RollingGermans review of 6/3/94 and 6/9/95 to get all the backstory and markout moments of the matches you lazy ass sombitch. Even those reviews leave alot of the story out, but it's still enough to get a general understanding of the matches.

 

And to be honest, If our a fan of heavyweight wrestling, I don't see how you could find the matches boring.

[Guest Coffin Surfer]

[

 

 

also, about flair/steamboat: i've never met anyone who actually agrees with me, but i have a small problem with the ending & i thought i'd throw it out there to get opinions on it. first, the way steamboat happens to hurt his leg falling to the floor seems a bit contrived to me & it took away the natural flow of the match a bit. so flair works his leg, figure 4 etc., steamboat comes back with an enzuigiri, bodyslams flair but the knee weakens, so flair cradles him for 3...that's the logic of it, right? now, steamboat had been wrestling a very smart match up to that point (aside from the requisite blind charges that every great babyface is prone to), using his experience from the 2/3 falls match to try to win. but if he's using his experience from that match, shouldn't he have learned NOT to pick flair up when his knee is shot to hell? when he tried to pick him up for the chicken wing at the clash, his knee gave way. since at wrestlewar the knee is hurting worse than it was at the clash, steamboat has every reason to believe he can't support flair's weight. i'm cool with a guy making a mistake that costs him the match, but someone like ricky steamboat shouldn't be making the same mistake 2 matches in a row against the same opponent. to me, that's like if bret & davey had a rematch right after summerslam 92, bret went for a sunset flip again, & davey pinned him the same way.

Though JR didn't do a good job of setting it up. Steamboat's leg was worked to hanging by a thread after the 2/3 match. His fall at Wrestlewar 89 simply reinjured the leg. Flair's leg work in the 2/3 match eventually won him the match at Wrestlewar. Like Kawada's leg giving out from work from previous matches in 12/3/93 tag match.

 

However Steamboat making the same mistake twice does seem a bit odd. But it's still Flair's best match ****3/4 IMO. Not really for flaws, but because there has been so much better matches since than or during the same year like Jumbo/Tenryu.

[Guest RickyChosyu]

I have to go with Tim and godthedog on Hart/Austin from WM 13. The spot should have been done, plain and simple. Hart knew it was coming, but what could he have done about it? No pinfalls = Bret is fucked = Austin should have done the move. It wouldn't even neccesarily be a way to win, but merely another way to stick it Bret, since that's what Austin was trying to do the entire match. Because of it's absense, and because some of the brawling is a tad on the weak side by today's standards, it's not *****.

 

And yes, after just seeing 12/16/96, I think it's pretty clear that it's the better match. Not neccesarilly because Sasuke is in it, or that Tiger Mask isn't, just that they have a better idea of what to do and how to lay the match out. 10/10 feels seemed like a case where they threw a lot of stuff together to see what would stick, and it works really damn well, but 12/16 has structure, build, and embodies everything I love about wrestling, for the most part. I have to re-watch it to see what I would actually rate it, but I know that I liked it more than 10/10, so that would make it pretty fucking good, I think.

 

As for the Flair/Steamboat thing, I think godthedog makes a great point. The feud was centered around then knowing each other's counters to each other's counters to each other's counters, so Steamer making a mistake like that does test the limits of wrestling logic and if there's anything keeping it from being the best, that's it. However, I'm not quite sure if that's enough to declare it unworthy, since there's just so much stuff that's done right in that match. Toughie, that one.

[Guest godthedog]

I have to go with Tim and godthedog on Hart/Austin from WM 13. The spot should have been done, plain and simple. Hart knew it was coming, but what could he have done about it? No pinfalls = Bret is fucked = Austin should have done the move. It wouldn't even neccesarily be a way to win, but merely another way to stick it Bret, since that's what Austin was trying to do the entire match. Because of it's absense, and because some of the brawling is a tad on the weak side by today's standards, it's not *****.

actually, i was just clarifying tim's argument. in the next paragraph, i explained why i don't think the spot should have been in the match. i don't think there was anything wrong with the match as it was.

[Guest RickyChosyu]

I'm aware of that, as I went on to explain why it should have been done, even if it wasn't meant to make Bret tap. Little Austin did was ment for that, actually, and since it was the finish to SS, he should have pulled it out as way to stick it Bret.

 

It should have been in the match, and even if it had been, some of the brawling doesn't hold up as well as the rest of the match does. Then again, back then crowd brawling was still a fairly big deal, so it's all relative. Anyway, I still don't think it deserves *****.

[Guest Midnight Express83]

I haven't seen much puro, and of what I saw, its mostly boring. I saw the Misawa/Kabachi(sp?) vs Kawada/Taue and I was bored to tears the first half of the match. One man's ***** is another person's DUD. Most openly is the whole HIAC II debate.

 

I saw a Misawa vs Kawada. I turned the match off about 10 mins in because it was just that damn boring. But everyone says that Misawa had the most ***** matches ever. So I will believe them, but I not really in the mood to look all over to prove yes or no for myself.

All you have to do is read the RollingGermans review of 6/3/94 and 6/9/95 to get all the backstory and markout moments of the matches you lazy ass sombitch. Even those reviews leave alot of the story out, but it's still enough to get a general understanding of the matches.

 

And to be honest, If our a fan of heavyweight wrestling, I don't see how you could find the matches boring.

I am used to and a fan of the US mixed light and heavyweight style. the style blend where matches are shorted, high impact, and like the last 7 mins of an AJPW match. But I find the first ten mins of AJPW style boring because well, it IS. Its stalling, and basic wrestling. The Kurt Angles, Eddy Guerreros, and Chris Benoit's have made me like the faster style more. So I am not going want to sit on my hands for 10 mins+ until a match gets good.

 

If I find a match boring, why in the hell would I want to read up on it and learn more about it when I already showed my willingness to care about it being next to nill? Thats like teaching a pig to sing. Not only are you wasting your time, you are annoying the fuck out of the pig.

[Guest Coffin Surfer]

used to and a fan of the US mixed light and heavyweight style. the style blend where matches are shorted, high impact, and like the last 7 mins of an AJPW match. But I find the first ten mins of AJPW style boring because well, it IS. Its stalling, and basic wrestling. The Kurt Angles, Eddy Guerreros, and Chris Benoit's have made me like the faster style more. So I am not going want to sit on my hands for 10 mins+ until a match gets good.

 

If I find a match boring, why in the hell would I want to read up on it and learn more about it when I already showed my willingness to care about it being next to nill? Thats like teaching a pig to sing. Not only are you wasting your time, you are annoying the fuck out of the pig.

O.K. whatever, It's obvious you dont' know what your talking about and you don't want to know what your talking about. But I would like to correct the error in your statement. Most of the early 90s All Japan matches start off with early high spots to the pop the crowd like Kawada hitting Misawa with a Backdrop Driver in the first second of their 92 match, or Kobashi giving a DDT to Hansen on the concrete floor to start their 93 match. Not to mention that guys like Kawada/Misawa/Kobashi invented the 20+minutes of high spots style to close their matches. And if you not only find shit like that boring but state it is a fact, than I'm wasting my time.

 

I also find it humerous that a Eddy, Dynamite Kid, Benoit fan dislikes slow starts.

 

I'm not tyring to push All Japan heavies on you, most people do prefer the junior style. But I just don't think you can make a fair assumption of something you didn't entirely see.

[Guest RickyChosyu]

Borring because you don't understand it? Why bother even watching the matches if you're going to a) go into them completely blind of everything that defines the style and motivation of the characters and b) going to base your entire opinion of All Japan on one match alone? If you don't WANT to check out the style, that's fine, but quit trying to hide under the guise of "it just didn't click with me" when you're obviously being ignorant by choice.

[Guest El Psycho Diablo]

..ever consider that maybe he just dosen't like it? Some people don't want to have to learn a whole boatload of stuff just to watch and "entirely appreciate" a match. Some people never like a particular style of stuff, from the first viewing. It happens.

 

While it could be said "Wait until you've seen enough of it"..these arguments tend to come out really elitest.

[Guest Respect The 'Taker]

Top 5 in North America:

 

1. Stone Cold Steve Austin

2. "Nature Boy" Ric Flair

3. Hulk Hogan

4. Bret "Hitman" Hart

5. "The Heartbreak Kid" Shawn Michaels

Yeah the above post was posted ages ago...

 

Yeah im currently in Taker Re-Hab recovering from my obsession for a man who gets paid to BORE people...

 

But all i gotta say is i whole heartedly agree, Austin *IS* the best ever...the best overall package your ever gonna find...

 

Hitman in a close second though, just personal opinion

 

AFKA Taker-Mark