It has arrived

[Guest RickyChosyu]

Then we get Doyo, who basically says that because Thurston and Meltzer rated it highly, our opinions don't matter. Who's ignorant in that situation? Then he does himself one better and says that because the WON READERS liked it, our opinions are worthless.

 

Please don't put words in my mouth. Nowhere in this thread have I

attacked anyone's opinions.

"Wolverine, you are kindly recommended to remove thy head from within

thy ass. Dave Meltzer and my grandma probably watched thousands

of matches before you were even born." -- Doyo, page two of this thread

 

That "Meltzer has watched more than you," spot is really getting redundant, you know.

 

A couple guys on here were saying that they had not read any good reviews of two particular matches, so I pointed out some examples of

sources that did like those two matches.

 

And you cited two people who put more thought into the type of after-shave they use than their reviews.

 

No, all that has been explained is that Meltzer and Thurston's opinions

on certain matches may be different than yours, therefore it is a crime

around here to even mention them. Yes, it is a good point that Meltzer

doesn't always back up his reviews. If you wish to not even consider

his opinions because of this, then good for you.  I and others, though,

have valid reasons to pay attention to him.

 

Such as? If you're going to make a point, go ahead and make it, but we like to back up our arguements around here.

 

Just to add on to what has already said about Keith and Meltzer's "play-by-play" I'd like to give an example I feel sums up Keith's nonsense quite well. In his review of NWA Great American Bash '87, when he got to the two Wargames matches, he basically took up nearly three pages altogether giving the play-by-play of the matches.

 

At the end of the review for the first Wargames match, his "analysis" was something to the effect of "A bloody, brutal classic. *****"

 

Then came the review for the second War Games match. He thoughts were: "Not quite as intense as the original. ****"

 

Maybe he thought going beyond adjectives like "intense" would confuse his fanbase?

[Guest wolverine]

I can't believe no one has brought up the fact that Meltzer actually claimed the Momoe/Maekawa 2001 series of matches were the second coming of Flair/Steamboat. Now, I'm no huge fan of the Flair/Steamboat series (particulary after being exposed to work that's far more complex and deep), but to say something like that is quite ludicrous on several levels. This is one of the reasons why people need to think for themselves, and question what he says sometimes.

 

"And that's no exaggeration."--Dave Meltzer, comparing both series of matches.

[Guest Jubuki]

Dave should be slapped silly. I'm no big fan of Flair/Steamboat as Greatest Thing Ever, but I'd never insult their work by comparing it to the sucktastic Momoe/Maekawa stuff.

[Guest DragonflyKid]

Speaking of Maekawa/Nakanishi does anyone know how was their 2/24/02 match was?, I believe PuroresuPower had that match as one of the best of 2002.

 

I thought the 8/17/01 Momoe/Maekawa match was lots of fun. The TLDs had fun moments but also had periods of suck. I wouldn't call them good but also wouldn't say they sucked as a whole.

[Guest Coffin Surfer]

Which one was it that proclaimed the Kawada/Kobashi 96 draw to be the greatest match of all time? Meltzer or Kieth, probably Kieth, because I don't think Meltzer was ever that dillusional, was he?

[Guest wolverine]

The 2/24/02 Momoe/Maekawa isn't worth going out of your way to see. Maekawa is clueless when it comes to pacing a match, and Momoe needs an anchor in there (i.e. Kaoru Ito). Those two, on the other hand, have what I'd call pretty close to magic chemistry.

[Guest Jubuki]

Yeah, Keith gives major head to the 10/18/96 Kawada/Kobashi. Still haven't watched that, even though it would round out a tape to do so. And I watched the end of the 2/24 Momo match - just as bad as the 60-min. match, but with an ending to it. Momoe oversells, Maekawa undersells.

[Guest ConspiracyVictim]

Hmm...This is a very good argument but I cant really choose a side. I think that everyone has their good points but I will just try to interject here and put in a few good words if I can. I am only 16 years old and have only been following guys like Meltzer since 1999. I personally love just about any wrestling I can get my hands on. Most importantly I love Lucha Libre and Shoot Style wrestling. Now the shoot style stuff I have just got into like a year and a half ago after I got the History of RINGS 8 hour video but Lucha Libre I have been following an watching almost weekly since 98-99 when I first realized it came on. Now just as an example, there are alot of people who dont like Lucha Libre, some with a passion. They say there is a lack of storytelling within many of the matches and a lack of selling. Some of that may be true for some guys, but mostly that is a generalization. You cant truly appreciate something until you dig and you find the real good stuff and you see enough of it so that you can make a solid judgement. I think that is how Wolverine feels with Puro. Alot of guys may comment on how a certain match is good or bad but truly they have not seen enough to make that judgement. I am still trying to get into more Puro, like All Japan, New Japan, and NOAH but I am starting with all the good stuff first, and I am only trying to get the stuff that I have heard is undeniably good. I think that is the best way to start out for anyone...start at the top and work your way down. I am also trying to start getting into Joshi by picking up whatever GAEA, AJW, and ARISON I can get from Lynch updates. I think you guys should just listen to the guys like Wolverine...may seem like an ass but he knows what he is talking about...

[Guest The Mighty Damaramu]

Keith has seen AJ? I thought he said that they were slow and plodding and boring or something to that effect. I of course totally disagree but you know I was just wondering because I thought he hated it.

[Guest Tim Cooke]

First, if you actually have a grasp on what good wrestling is, good lucha is just as good as anything else in the wrestling world.

 

And about SKeith, he reviewed 2001 AJPW and loved it. That should tell you everything you need to know.

 

Tim

[Guest Doyo]

That "Meltzer has watched more than you," spot is really getting redundant, you know.

 

That was in response to where Wolverine told El Dandy that he needed

to watch more wrestling before he could comment on here

anymore or something to that effect.

 

Such as? If you're going to make a point, go ahead and make it, but we like to back up our arguements around here.

 

Me saying that I pay attention to Meltzer's reviews does not constitute

me having an argument with anyone.

I've already pointed out that Meltzer has been analyzing this stuff day

after day for years. He writes a miniature book about wrestling every

week. Probably nobody on the planet has ever wrote more about the

sport in their lifetime. If that is not reason enough for me to pay him

some attention, then I don't know what is. Does that mean that I or

anyone else will agree with all his ratings? Does that make him God

or the best reviewer around. Of course not...I'm just saying I'll pay

attention to him. I'd be interested to hear what the person who

has wrote about music the most in the last 20 years thought were

the best albums of the year. Doesn't mean I would like any of those

albums, but I still would find it interesting.

 

And you say you like to back up your arguments around here...

The only thing I can remember being pointed out in this thread

about Brandon Thurston is that he is an "idiot" and that he gave

a particular match a certain rating. Brandon's site is one of the

most detailed I have found for puro reviews. It was great how

in his Kojima vs. Tenryu review he pointed out background info

about Kojima saying he was going to use Hansen's lariat.

 

You have yet in this thread to point out any examples, besides you

and the Clique's, of people's reviews that you like. I'm guessing

it is only people that agree with you.

 

El Dandy came here looking for information. I came here providing

information. You and some others come here to participate in

"arguments" as you've said above.

[Guest The Mighty Damaramu]

Has anybody seen the Kawada/Kobashi draw? I haven't....is it any good? I mean is Keith's pimping justified? I mean I'm sure it's not as great as he pimps but it should still be a "good" match with those two...shouldn't it?

[Guest wolverine]

I've seen it....once. Take that for what it's worth.

[EL DANDY~! 0]

OK. So what I've garnered from this is "Fuck 2002." On top of that, 93 AJPW rules, and I should look up a bunch of other stuff...I gotcha. Thanks. Continue to argue...

[Guest Coffin Surfer]

Yeah, Keith gives major head to the 10/18/96 Kawada/Kobashi.  Still haven't watched that, even though it would round out a tape to do so.  And I watched the end of the 2/24 Momo match - just as bad as the 60-min. match, but with an ending to it.  Momoe oversells, Maekawa undersells.

10/18/96 is one of those matches that is actually painful to watch all the way through. It's not a horrible match, but when compared to some other matches, even the 95 draw, it's pretty bad. The first half is good but of course very, very, slow, making the 95 match look like a luchadore spot fest. Even though they throw quite a few bombs early, you just know this is going the distance. They pretty much work the whole match by the 30 minute mark, leading to a complete meltdown of stalling, over selling, and sluggish head dropping.

 

At one point an exhausted Kobashi, nearly kills Kawada by dropping him hard on the top of his head with a fucked up Dangerous Backdrop. There isn't even that many near falls, as the clock winds down at the end. In short, it's pretty fucking far from the greatest match of all time. And to the Mighty D, go after their two 93 matches or the 98 Triple Crown. If you have to seem them go the distance, check out the 95 match. It's very slow when compared to the 93 match, but it's also very smart and well paced.

[Guest The Mighty Damaramu]

Were they just in bad shape during that match? From the sounds of it, it sounds like Kobashi was blown up. I'll steer clear.

[Guest Coffin Surfer]

Were they just in bad shape during that match? From the sounds of it, it sounds like Kobashi was blown up. I'll steer clear.

Yeah, Kobashi looked like shit. But than again in a few months he would be in arguably the best 40+ minute men's single match ever. I think the pacing is what hurt it, they shouldn't have burnt themselves out by the 30 minute mark. They literally go through a whole match at the half way point, and seemed to run out of ideas on what to do, very rare back then to see Kawada look lost. The crowd of course, was also starting to turn head drop crazy around this period, possibly forcing the guys to blow all their spots in hopes of keeping them involved.

[Guest The Mighty Damaramu]

*sniff* It's always sad to see good workers pulled down by a shitty crowd.

[Guest Dangerous A]

If 10/18/96 is worse than the 95 draw (which I unfortunately have a co-op version of) than you should really steer clear unless someone gives you the damn match. The 95 match is damn hard to watch. I've tried. Twice. It's still not a good match.

[Guest The Mighty Damaramu]

I dunno about you guys but a match I found hard to watch was that 6-Man draw on CC95 Tape 1. Is it just me for being so new to AJ or was the match not that great?

[Guest Dangerous A]

It's not just you. The match wasn't all that great. I know Baisden rated it ****'s, but I wouldn't put it any where near that rating. While it wasn't that great, it's better than the 95 Kobashi/Kawada draw.

[Guest Jubuki]

It is at times a rough match. Then again, you've got a 50 year old Hansen and a 57 year old Baba in there with the main guys, and Taue wasn't quite up to the M-K-K level yet. I think if you examine how they pace the match, you'll find that it's pretty good. They don't wear it out too early, and they build to the old guys having the biggest near-falls, which is kind of neat in a kitschy sort of way. Helps to know that the neckbreaker drop was Baba's finisher, too.

 

And Thurstion had better damn well have pointed out the Western lariat connection, not that it was hard. They had mentioned it in the news over there a couple of months before, and they spent 10 freaking minutes of the PPV going over his learning process. That's not detailed - it's just covering your arse.

[Guest Coffin Surfer]

If 10/18/96 is worse than the 95 draw (which I unfortunately have a co-op version of) than you should really steer clear unless someone gives you the damn match. The 95 match is damn hard to watch. I've tried. Twice. It's still not a good match.

I have a soft spot for the 95 match, it's really incredible how well they paced and structured that match. And it's about as good and dramatic as a nonending as your gonna get. However, it is a tough watch.

 

The 96 match has alot more action and crazy stiffness, but the speed, intelligence, and pacing of the match is sacrificed. If you don't mind the late 90s head dropping/super stiff era, the match is decent, but if your into the smarter worked matches, stay clear.

[Guest PlatypusFool]

I've seen niether of the 60-min draws in discussion, they'll all be picked up eventually with all the rest of the good 90's AJPW when I get round to start ordering compilations from Lynch or someone. The CC 95 6-man draw entertains me a lot, it's by no means a great match, but the (as Jubuki rightly puts it) kitsch offence from Baba mixed with all the usual greatness from the big four entertains me greatly. There's also a load of subtle stuff going on connected with the ongoing progression of Taue, I especially remember a moment on the outside where they are all brawling chaotically, and Baba just turns up, a vision of honour in amongst the youngsters brawling, and Taue goes to hit him, but just sort of stops himself, unwilling to lower himself to striking Baba unecessarily, and the brawl breaks up.

 

Oh man, I REALLY need to start my journey through 90's AJPW... but where's the cash?!

[Guest RickyChosyu]

Me saying that I pay attention to Meltzer's reviews does not constitute me having an argument with anyone.

 

Then you're willing to concede my point that he's a doofus when it comes to analyzing ring work? That sure would make things easier.

 

 

I've already pointed out that Meltzer has been analyzing this stuff day after day for years.  He writes a miniature book about wrestling every week.

 

How much of that is spent talking about match quality? Everyone knows Meltzer has been covering wrestling forever, but his ability to gauge quality is the issue, not his credentials.

 

If that is not reason enough for me to pay him

some attention, then I don't know what is.

 

How about "a sign that he knows what he's talking about"?

 

Does that mean anyone else will agree with all his ratings?  Does that make him God or the best reviewer around.  Of course not...I'm just saying I'll pay

attention to him.

 

The dilema isn't whether or not you pay attention to him. It's that you used what he wrote in an arguement. I still read what he has to say sometimes, but I know better than to bring him as a source for arguing a match's quality.

 

The only thing I can remember being pointed out in this thread about Brandon Thurston is that he is an "idiot" and that he gave a particular match a certain rating.

 

No, I think it was the idea that he never backs up what he says.

 

Brandon's site is one of the most detailed I have found for puro reviews.  It was great how in his Kojima vs. Tenryu review he pointed out background info about Kojima saying he was going to use Hansen's lariat.

 

I would hope he pointed that out. I suppose next we should congradulate him for remembering what both guys' finishers were.

 

You have yet in this thread to point out any examples, besides you and the Clique's, of people's reviews that you like.

 

Why would I need to refference someone else's opinion when I've seen the match? You're the one who brought outside reviews into the arguement, if I remember correctly.

 

El Dandy came here looking for information.  I came here providing information.

 

No, he came here asking for an opinion from those who had seen the matches, and you gave him reviews he could have found on his own. I suppose you want a pat on the back for posting a link to Ichiban Puroresu?

 

You and some others come here to participate in "arguments" as you've said above.

 

Actually, I just gave him my opinion, which was asked of me. You decided it was your place to discredit my opinion without having seen the match in question. I think it's clear which one of us was looking for an arguement.

 

If you see the match and want to discus it with me, feel free, but I'd rather not squable with someone who won't bother listening to what I have to say. I suggest you go try to stir up debate on matches you haven't seen elsewhere.

[Guest wolverine]

WWWA Tag Team Champions Nanae & Momoe vs. Rumi Kazama & Takako Inoue in a best two out of three falls match (7/6/02) ***3/4

 

Who rates this shit?!?! I just saw this match and it's like * at best - easily the worst WWWA Tag Title match I can remember. Just a horrible clusterfuck with tons of bad brawling and gimmicks. The Toyota-Ito match from the same show was real good though, but I did hate the spot where Toyota blew off a Double Footstomp towards the finish. Not a must-see, but definitely a fun match.

[Guest TheGame2705]

I personally think too many people jump on Jubuki because he comes off like a dick sometimes in his posts. I however, don't think he does. He simply states that he didn't like the match and if someone keeps saying that it's good, he'll get frustrated. It'd be no different than the people in the WWE folder calling another poster an idiot because he liked Funaki/Bill DeMott. I go off what I hear and what I think looks good. What I think looks good may in fact may NOT be good. On paper, if you saw Misawa, Kobashi, Kawada, Akiyama, Mutoh, Chono, Tenzan, and Nagata in a huge clusterfuck match you'd think "Shit that must be a good match" but who's to say they didn't all get drunk before the match or they just don't feel like putting on something good? More than likely if someone has seen the match in question and you haven't, I think it's safe to assume they know more about how good it is than you. I personally don't care what Meltzer says. A star is supposed to tell me how good the match is? I'd rather have an explanation of all that happened in the match. It's like going to buy something at the store and asking for a quick review. If they say "That guy over there said it's good" you won't say "OMG OK!". You'll wanna do your research if you really have an interest in it. I know Wolverine and Jubuki have helped me ALOT. If they say anything is long and boring, I stay away from it very far. I have a very short attention span so anything that is pretty boring gets no second thought from me. In the end though it all boils down to what you want to see. Do you want an epic classic or just something entertaining?

[Guest TheGame2705]

I was planning on getting that Highspots 13 tape series but I'm not too keen on wasting $100 in one shot for 13- 8 match tapes, and a a magazine that they call a deal but it's regular $15, not the advertised regular $24.95. I probably will get it if I get my new job where I'll have money to throw away but not now.

[Guest Doyo]

Actually, I just gave him my opinion, which was asked of me. You decided it was your place to discredit my opinion without having seen the match in question. I think it's clear which one of us was looking for an arguement.

 

If you see the match and want to discus it with me, feel free, but I'd rather not squable with someone who won't bother listening to what I have to say. I suggest you go try to stir up debate on matches you haven't seen elsewhere.

 

Listen man, I don't know how to explain myself anymore. You and some

others said you hadn't heard of anyone who liked those matches so I

took some time to point out some sources that did. That is that and nothing

more. You seriously have problems if you think that means I was

trying to "discredit your opinion" or "look for an arguement". I kindly

took some time to make a rare post here and provide you with info you

hadn't heard. Many people would have been like "Oh thanks Doyo for

pointing that out to me, even though I strongly disagree with them,

I didn't realize those people liked those matches." Instead you get

all offended for even mentioning opinions that are different than yours.

Just a suggestion, but try and lighten up a bit. I really appreciate you and everyone else's

opinions and analysis on here and look forward to reading the posts

and sometimes posting in the future.

[Guest RickyChosyu]

Actually, I just gave him my opinion, which was asked of me. You decided it was your place to discredit my opinion without having seen the match in question. I think it's clear which one of us was looking for an arguement.

 

If you see the match and want to discus it with me, feel free, but I'd rather not squable with someone who won't bother listening to what I have to say. I suggest you go try to stir up debate on matches you haven't seen elsewhere.

 

Listen man, I don't know how to explain myself anymore. You and some others said you hadn't heard of anyone who liked those matches so I took some time to point out some sources that did. That is that and nothing more. You seriously have problems if you think that means I was trying to "discredit your opinion" or "look for an arguement". I kindly took some time to make a rare post here and provide you with info you

hadn't heard. Many people would have been like "Oh thanks Doyo for pointing that out to me, even though I strongly disagree with them, I didn't realize those people liked those matches." Instead you get all offended for even mentioning opinions that are different than yours. Just a suggestion, but try and lighten up a bit. I really appreciate you and everyone else's

opinions and analysis on here and look forward to reading the posts and sometimes posting in the future.

"If I can't listen to Meltzer, who can I listen to? He's followed wrestling longer than you have, so who are you to say he's wrong? Also, his readers, the most knowledgable wrestling fans on the planet, voted for the match, so that also proves that it's good. You guys are just mad that they don't agree with you."

 

That's what I read. You were frequently more obnoxious about it than the above, too. It has nothing to do with you posting sources. You tried to discredit my and others' opinions by claiming that Meltzer and his readers should be listened to above us.

 

Maybe in all your defensiveness you forgot what this thread was about. He asked for a second opinion from the people of this board. When you come here and basically tell us that our opinions aren't to be listened to, it goes against the purpose of the thread. I have trouble "lightening up" when someone drags the discusion off topic with vague arguements from sources they don't know how to defend.