Guest RazorxEDGE Report post Posted September 7, 2002 Before I open up this huge can of worms, allow me to state the following: 1. I respect Ric Flair and all of his contributions to this business. 2. I do not care if Ric Flair abused his power as booker back in the 1980s. He was the best worker in North America at the time, so more power to him. Whoo! 3. I like Ric Flair. I mark out for his "Whoo!", his Nature Boy strut, his knife-edge chops, and even his infamous man boobs. There, now that we have that out of the way... I believe that Ric Flair is the most overrated wrestler in the history of the business. On either continent. While the Flair Formula may have popped the Mid-South's "finest" back in 1986, I don't believe that Flair's style holds up today. I was watching this year's SummerSlam when somebody complained that all Flair does is chop, chop, chop and take his signature bumps (the Flair Flop, the Flair Flip, the press slam off the top, etc.). I pointed out that Flair has been doing that for the past 25 years, it's just that nobody seems to notice. Seriously...I read the other day that Scott Keith called Ric Flair the greatest worker of all time. Please. Yes, he was the best worker of his era. Yes, he was a crowd-pleaser. Yes, he inspired a lot of people to lace up the boots. Yes, his philosophy of "make your opponent look good and you'll look good" still holds up today. BUT...the greatest worker of all time? Come on, folks...this isn't 1989, and we're not a bunch of drunk, redneck marks cheering for Steamboat. Time has passed Flair by. His redundant style no longer holds up in 2002. The wrestlers themselves have already realized this...in his RF shoot, Bret Hart said that he and Randy Savage used to joke about a Ric Flair match being "30 minutes of no psychology". Raven, William Regal, Dean Malenko, and a bunch of other wrestlers have gone on the record and said that they thought Ric Flair was the best of all time until they saw HHH work. Not a day goes by that I don't see people bitching about how so-and-so "only has three moves". Well, what did Flair have? A knife-edge chop, a vertical suplex, and a figure-four leglock. I know that people are going to reply, "Well, it's what he did in between those three moves that made him great". I disagree. I don't think it's fun to watch a match where I can call the spots. I think that Flair's act was stale as hell even by the late 1980s and that he should have changed it up a bit to make it interesting again. That's just my opinion, though. Now...here is the part that might ruffle some feathers. You know his series with Ricky Steamboat? WrestleWar '89, Chi-Town Rumble '89, Clash of the Champions...the matches that everybody praises as ***** classics and the greatest wrestling matches of all time. I don't consider them *****. There, I said it. I'm gonna single WrestleWar '89 out of the "trilogy" (since Flair/Steamboat is to smart marks what "Star Wars" is to movie buffs). I give it...**** 1/4. Yes, I saw the f'n psychology. But the fact that Steamboat relentlessly worked on the arm because he beat Flair with a double chicken-wing submission in their last encounter just isn't making me cream my pants. Everybody's going, "Oh, the psychology! The psychology!" So WHAT? Psychology is only one part of a wrestling match. In my opinion, BAD psychology can ruin a great match, but all of the psychology in the world can't make a so-so or good match great. I think that the crowd's reaction, the spots, the story being told, and the finish are much more important. Yes, it was cool how the psychology connected all of their matches, but it wasn't THAT cool. Take away the psychology, and you had 30-45 minutes of these guys chopping each other or working a body part on the mat. **** 1/4, and Flair is overrated. That's my opinion and I'm sticking to it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RazorxEDGE Report post Posted September 7, 2002 I would rather discuss this intelligently then get flamed right off the bat, by the way. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest godthedog Report post Posted September 7, 2002 hm...i think i'll come back to reply to this later, i'd like to hear what others have to say about this. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest BionicRedneck Report post Posted September 7, 2002 Quite simply, no. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RazorxEDGE Report post Posted September 7, 2002 I would like to say that one Ric Flair match that I DO consider to be ***** is his match with Randy Savage at WrestleMania VIII. I thought that he and Savage were brilliant in how they wove the emotion of the match's back-story (Flair and Liz) into the match itself. I feel that this match is much, much better than anything he ever did with Steamer. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest snowfan Report post Posted September 7, 2002 I would rather discuss this intelligently then get flamed right off the bat, by the way. I agree. Flair was a great performer, but hardly the be all and end all he is made out to be by some. I honestly think Bret Hart was as good in most aspects of the "art" and superior in some. just my $.02... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RazorxEDGE Report post Posted September 7, 2002 I consider Bret Hart to be one of the top 3 workers of all time, and heads above Ric Flair as a performer. That being said, Bret did get a little redundant late in his career. Not as bad as Flair, but I'm sure that we're all familiar with the FIVE MOVES OF DOOM. I liked how Bret would zero in on the lower back and the legs and stick with it for the entire match. He always had one goal: Sharpshooter. Ric Flair would be all over the place. Arm, shoulder, knee...just everywhere. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest BionicRedneck Report post Posted September 7, 2002 So Bret was as good as Flair? I don't think so, even if he was how is Flair overrated? He had one of the few 5* matches in US wrestling He could carry anyone to a good match He was consistently very good for a long time What more do you want? Flair may not be the best, but he was pretty close. Shawn Michaels on the other hand... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest snowfan Report post Posted September 7, 2002 I consider Bret Hart to be one of the top 3 workers of all time, and heads above Ric Flair as a performer. That being said, Bret did get a little redundant late in his career. Not as bad as Flair, but I'm sure that we're all familiar with the FIVE MOVES OF DOOM. Sure. EVERY performer establishes his "killer set". The key is that Bret was extremely innovative on PPV. I honestly do not think Flair was EVER capable of putting on a show like Bret/Owen. snowfan Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RazorxEDGE Report post Posted September 7, 2002 I also consider Shawn Michaels to be in the top 3, for North America. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest AlwaysPissedOff Report post Posted September 7, 2002 Well hey, if that's your opinion, then no one is really going to change it, so why worry about what other people say about the man? Different strokes for different folks, I always say. And, to be honest, the phrase "Greatest Wrestler of All-Time" is thrown around quite a lot and usually with a subjective POV. And for the record, I am one of those who call Flair one of, if not, the greatest wrestler ever, but I'm biased anyway, so take my opinion with a grain of salt. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RazorxEDGE Report post Posted September 7, 2002 Bret also made the Sharpshooter a *feared* finisher. Remember the disbelief when Austin would not submit at WrestleMania 13? Flair's figure-four was pretty much a joke. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest snowfan Report post Posted September 7, 2002 Flair may not be the best, but he was pretty close. Shawn Michaels on the other hand... Bingo! THE most overhyped performer in our beloved "sport" is the master to young HGH the Padawan. HBK is overblown and declined a lot as time wore on. Flair is overrated, but I guess he is hardly the MOST overrated. That'd be Shane Douglas. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest BionicRedneck Report post Posted September 7, 2002 Flair had everything HBK had and more. I think you need to watch some Flair matches closer. HBK bumped his ass off to make his matches interesting, but name one "great" Shawn Michaels match that didn't include a gimmick of some sort or a load of short cuts. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RazorxEDGE Report post Posted September 7, 2002 Well, my opinion of Ric Flair the worker is not going to change. But I always have an open mind as far as match ratings go. So if somebody can convince me that his matches with Steamboat were *****, more power to them. I'm listening. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest AlwaysPissedOff Report post Posted September 7, 2002 It was? Maybe now it is, but back then, whenever the Figure 4 was slapped on, I've seen crowds go apeshit, so I wouldn't say that at all. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RazorxEDGE Report post Posted September 7, 2002 HBK bumped his ass off to make his matches interesting, but name one "great" Shawn Michaels match that didn't include a gimmick of some sort or a load of short cuts. What constitutes a "short cut"? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RazorxEDGE Report post Posted September 7, 2002 Maybe I haven't watched enough mid-1980s Flair, but it seems to me like he always uses the figure-four to punish his opponent, but he winds up getting the win via feet on the ropes or a handful of tights. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest BionicRedneck Report post Posted September 7, 2002 Of course the figure 4 wasn't a joke. The people were on their feet everytime. By a shortcut I mean like Ladders, tables, chairs that kind of stuff. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest snowfan Report post Posted September 7, 2002 Maybe I haven't watched enough mid-1980s Flair, but it seems to me like he always uses the figure-four to punish his opponent, but he winds up getting the win via feet on the ropes or a handful of tights. That was the idiot weak Flair that was "saving the loser heat". Some of his stuff in 1981-84 was awesome, but as time wore on he became Hogan in a funhouse mirror. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest AlwaysPissedOff Report post Posted September 7, 2002 Well, that's why I always loved Flair the heel. If the Figure 4 didn't work, he'd resort to cheating like a bastard which all good heels should. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RazorxEDGE Report post Posted September 7, 2002 Hmm...none of his matches with the Bulldog involved any gimmicks, and I consider them to be in the ****+ range. Very underrated matches, if you ask me. He carried Sid to a **** (Scott Keith rating, not mine) match without any gimmicks. His match with Mankind at Mind Games wasn't really a gimmick match, aside from one table spot. The iron man match with Bret had no gimmicks, and that **** 1/2 in my opinion. He had a **** match with Austin at the '97 KOR with no gimmicks. I'll try and think of more. Actually, this thread is about Flair -- not HBK -- so let's get back to Flair. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest snowfan Report post Posted September 7, 2002 Well, that's why I always loved Flair the heel. If the Figure 4 didn't work, he'd resort to cheating like a bastard which all good heels should. That was my biggest problem with "Southern booking". If Flair was SO weak he'd never have been champ at all. The endless Dusty finishes killed a lot of Flair credibility that took years to repair. Dusty hurt Flair a lot. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RazorxEDGE Report post Posted September 8, 2002 Man, I miss being a mark. 12-13 years ago, when I was 8 or 9 years old, I would watch the NWA/WCW on TBS and I thought that Ric Flair was a God. I had only been exposed to the WWF up until that point, and Ric Flair was very different from the WWF's champ, Hulk Hogan. Now I watch those old Flair matches and I'm calling the spots. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LaParkaYourCar 0 Report post Posted September 8, 2002 I hate how it's got down to where Heels have to cheat to be heels. Wrestling needs another good "asshole heel" that can be heel without cheating because he's such a jerk. Rock played a good "asshole heel" back in 98-99, but even he resorted to cheating some. Flair/Steamboat from Spring Stampede '94 is the match that got me hooked on wrestling, and that wasn't even their best match. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest AlwaysPissedOff Report post Posted September 8, 2002 Actually, I wasn't talking about the Dusty Finishes. Feet on the ropes and holding the tights are perfectly acceptable methods of cheating to me. Hell, even though it was Dusty-ish in nature, I loved the finish to the Austin/Angle classic from SummerSLam last year because it was believeable and made Angle out to be a monster. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RazorxEDGE Report post Posted September 8, 2002 Well, promoters are under the impression if the babyface loses cleanly to the heel, then the fans won't believe that the babyface has a chance in a re-match. It's fucking stupid. One of the reasons that the fans got behind Steve Austin was that he kept losing to Bret Hart, but he also kept dusting himself off and coming back for more. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest snowfan Report post Posted September 8, 2002 Actually, I wasn't talking about the Dusty Finishes. Feet on the ropes and holding the tights are perfectly acceptable methods of cheating to me. Hell, even though it was Dusty-ish in nature, I loved the finish to the Austin/Angle classic from SummerSLam last year because it was believeable and made Angle out to be a monster. Oh I know what you mean, but I felt the Dusty junk needed mentioned. "Cheating" is groovy in small doses, but not to the point it insults everyone's intelligence. Flair 83 was top5 imho, but his fand act as though all Flair was EASILY #1. It is debatable. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest AlwaysPissedOff Report post Posted September 8, 2002 Well, promoters are under the impression if the babyface loses cleanly to the heel, then the fans won't believe that the babyface has a chance in a re-match. It's fucking stupid. One of the reasons that the fans got behind Steve Austin was that he kept losing to Bret Hart, but he also kept dusting himself off and coming back for more. True, but Austin was the heel in both of those matches, though. Well, until the double turn at Mania. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RazorxEDGE Report post Posted September 8, 2002 Which was the greatest finish of all time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
