HHH v. Steve Austin - No Way Out 2001?

[Austin3164life]

It was very good for what it was meant to be, a brawl. I give it ***3/4.

[Guest sarcastro]

I give it 9 thumbs up, my lowest rating ever.

[Guest nikowwf]

I'm going to start a thread to explain how the Ric Flair / Ricky Steamboat matches are really overrated, how Chris Benoit really is not talented, and how Kurt Angle never really won the gold medal. I think the board needs more of these threads - you know EVERYONE REALLY LOVES SOMETHING SO I NEED TO BITCH ABOUT IT threads.

 

thats like the purpose of the board.

 

niko

[Nevermortal]

I don't think WWE has EVER had a ***** match...but that's just me.

 

 

This wasn't ****+, but it was still pretty good. Being a "brawl" does NOT make it bad.

Brawls don't equal bad, as evidenced by the legit ***** street fight between Trips & Foley at RR2000.

[Guest BionicRedneck]

You would honestly give that match *****?

[Nevermortal]

You would honestly give that match *****?

Yes, yes I would.

 

I love it as much now as I did when I first saw it, much like the other ***** matches that I cited earlier.

[Guest Dmann2000]

Good...but not close to the masterpiece Austin gave us a month later.

I agree, Austin/Rock from WM XVII is phenominal, (and I do happen to give it *****)

[godthedog]

Is any of the sudden "this match is overrated" thing coming from HHH hate?  Even if it is, I have to agree that the match doesn't have the same impact it did the first time you watch it.  The first time, your stunned cause after you Austin wins the first fall you figure he's going to win the match, than boom, HHH wins twice....this was back in the day, you know, when the Internet loved HHH and Austin.  How the mountains have fell.

it's far from sudden. the "trips/austin is overrated" debate has been going on in some form or another here for over a year. and i don't remember being particularly stunned by any of the falls, because they never seemed to build up from anything.

[haVoc]

I don't understand how a match doesn't age well or hold up over time. If it was a classic at one point but has been topped since, why isn't it still a great classic match?

 

That's like saying Ali sucks because there have been arguably better boxers since. Or a Beatles, early Stones or Doors album suck because they were recorded on 4 track compared to the production of bands today.

[The Tino Standard]

I LOVED this match and it was the primary reason I bought the Stone Cold "What?" DVD last year. In the context of the storyline, the type of match they put on was perfect, they added in some psychology and my favorite part was that they absolutely got after it for about 40 minutes.

 

As I recall, there was very little in the way of resting/holding back (or as WWE officials like to call it: "pacing"). Those guys went all-out.

 

That match and the X-Seven match were two of my top 5 all time.

 

In fact, I'm going to watch the NWO match on DVD right now.

[SamoaRowe]

First off, after all this time the Austin/HHH 3 stages of hell match is still **** to me.

 

Foley/HHH at Royal Rumble 2000 was ***

 

I thought the match was overrated, I didn't actually get to see it in it's entirity until earlier this year and I was seriously let down.

[CanadianChick]

I never, to tell the truth, got into the match to call it an all time classic. I can see why others would, but I just didn't. Maybe it's because I'm not the biggest fan of Austin and I never thought of HHH as a god of the ring. Funny that I like Triple H more than people do now but less than everybody when they liked him.