4/12/03 - Danielson vs. London

[Tim Cooke 0]

Rudo = " "

Tim = no " "

 

“Watched Dragon/London 2/3 falls again - on mute - and there is no way this is MOTY. There's a lot of smart work in it, but there's also a lot of very stupid stuff as well.”

 

Hmmm. There is stupid stuff in Misawa/Kawada 6/3/94 (wrong man winning) but that doesn’t mean it isn’t the best men’s singles match ever.

 

”HeY! Dragon is tired! No wait! Dragon is fresh! No! Tired! No!!! FRESH!”

 

From memory, London controls early with the side headlock, Dragon takes over with some offense control, and London wins the fall by reversing the top rope move.

 

Care to list where there is a bad transition?

 

”London's leg is hurt! Look at him SELL~! POWERBOMB! SSP!”

 

Desperation finisher. Once again, for every time Kawada’s leg was hurt from 12/93 to 6/94, he was still able to hit the powerbomb. He hit it twice on 6/3/94 even though Misawa spent an extended segment working over the leg.

 

”Hey! A headlock! Going nowhere! And another headlock! Also going nowhere! HEY~! A HEADLOCK! GOING NOWHERE!”

 

Called the babyface doing what he needs to control the pace of the match. This match was no Kawada/Tsuruta (10/24/91) but it was trying to establish the same principles. Of course they didn’t get near the level of Tsuruta/Kawada but then again, no one is saying they are at the level of two of the finest.

 

 

*snip multiple pin falls paragraph due to no specifics*

 

*snip again – see above*

 

”They over-played the top-rope-battle spot, they must have done that over half-a-dozen times, each ending with "stupid" Dragon falling to the mat.”

 

I *might* agree with you if they hadn’t built that spot up on 12/7/02. That was an important spot on 12/7 because after 3 exchanges, London hit the finisher and was able to get the win. Here, he needs 2 falls instead of one and they play off the previous spots. It may have been a little overdone but I see it more as smartly working a key spot from a previous match and showing its importance.

 

“There was a spot where London and Dragon were copying eachothers moves... for whatever reason... I think they probably thought it would be "fun" to do.”

 

Examples? London hit 7-8 moves the whole match. The “dreaded” headlock, leg lariat from second rope, shooting star press….christ, my mind can’t even think of more than that right now though I know he did more. So where is the copying each others moves?

 

”Now, correct me if I am wrong, but was American Dragon playing the "cagey veteran"?? Cause I kinda got that feeling. American "4 years in the business" Dragon playing the well-travelled vet doesn't quite work for me.”

 

I didn’t get that impression at all. I got that Danielson was a guy who the company was built around, always has good matches, and is technically sound. London is the up start babyface who everyone loves and has progressed rapidly but his 12/7 win over Danielson only proved that *any one* can get a fluke win.

 

As far as the pacing goes, I think with 2/3 falls they did a fine job. It may have run a tad long but it isn’t like 10/22/94 Kawada vs. Williams where they desperately needed 10 minutes shaven off to even keep it at a “great level.”

 

All in all, the work is just as smart as Benoit’s work was in the Rumble match. Benoit taking the first five minutes and building to the sharpshooter, which then got a HUGE pop when he finally locked it on, is called killing time wisely. The sharpshooter never appeared again nor did the leg selling of Angle, but it was still smart work. After that, I felt the match took a tumble down hill, especially the silly reversals at the end.

[bob_barron 0]

Question for Tim-

 

Do you still think that London v. AJ from Night of Grudges is better then London v. Dragon at Epic Encounter?

 

And just being curious- What do you think of Homicide v. Corino from 8.16? Do you think it ranks up there with other ROH MOTYC from this year?

[Tim Cooke 0]

"Do you still think that London v. AJ from Night of Grudges is better then London v. Dragon at Epic Encounter?"

 

No. At one point I did, but after numerous viewings, it just isn't what Danielson/London is. Styles/London is still fantastics and one of 4 ROH matches from 2003 that I would give ****+ but it isn't better in my eyes.

 

"And just being curious- What do you think of Homicide v. Corino from 8.16? Do you think it ranks up there with other ROH MOTYC from this year?"

 

****, but seems to slip downwards sometimes into the ***3/4 range. Homicide KILLS me with his bad selling, especially since he brings a lot of charisma and moves to his matches. But for a babyface, he needs to sell better.

 

Tim

[Michrome 0]

Another thing about the powerbomb: He didn't actually lift Dragon up for the powerbomb, Dragon had mounted him for punches in the corner and London powerbombed him off, which is definitely possible for someone with a bad knee to do. Earlier in the match, he couldn't even pick up Dragon for a bodyslam, so if he had actually picked Dragon up for the powerbomb the complaint would be legit.

 

The top rope spot is key to the match, since it builds off the first match and adds another level to it.

[Guest Duncan Eternia]

London vs. Dragon was great. I was there, best match I think I have seen live - loved every second. It's ok if some people don't think the selling was right. Some people on this damn board think that if a guy gets put in a side headlock he should sell the rest of the match like he has a fucking brain tumor. Ok well maybe that is a bit exaggerated, but the match was incredible. If a guy can comeback from taking some nice moves and holds I personally think it can add to the match's drama (if done right). But that is just my two cents.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

I just saw it a couple days ago for the first time...and I was pretty underwhelmed by it (London/Dragon).

[Guest OSIcon]

I think some people take selling too far.

 

Let me use a contemporary example. Kerri Strugg managed to land that move in the Olympics in '96 with a very messed up ankle. She was fueled by adrenaline and the desire to win and was able to block out the very real pain she was in.

 

So I fail to see why London hitting the shooting star press is bad selling. He fully knew that the shooting star was his best chance at a win (since it won the match for him on 12/7). You are telling me that he an athlete can't get enough adreanline to push slightly off of a bad leg to hit that move?

 

The rest of the match, London sold the leg like it was in the pain it should be in. He limped around, failed to hit a body slam, didn't use his bad leg when climbing the turnbuckle, ect. But when the time was needed, he blocked out the pain and hit the move he needed to in order to pick up the victory. Afterwards, he sold it like it was killing him again. That's not bad selling...that is a form of realistic selling.

 

The powerbomb spot has already been touched on. He simply had to bring Danielson down from the turnbuckle and drop him. Unless his leg was broken, he had enough adrenaline to apply that minimum strain needed to perform the move. He also didn't get up right after the move, showing that indeed did take something out of him.

 

The complaint about the headlock seems ridiculous to me. London's strategy during that part of the match was to control the pace and wear Dragon down with a headlock. He did that as long as he could then switched plans. Similiar to Benoit switching plans after trying for a submisison victory via the sharpshooter early on in his match against Angle. All matches have work at the beginning that has a purpose but doesn't directly lead to a conclusion. That work is there to chew up time and to be seen as a strategy by one wrestler that ultimately doesn't go anywhere. Not every strategy a wrestler applies should lead to a finish.

 

The climbing the turnbuckle was a playoff of the 12/7 match where Dragon keeps heading to the top to stop London, but London knocks him down three times before hitting the shooting star for the win. It makes sense for Dragon to keep trying to stop London when he is on the top rope. For one thing, Dragon knows that being unable to stop London in the first match cost him the win. Secondly, if he was able to do it in the first match, it makes sense for him to apply the same strategy in the second match. As was said above, it was a longer match (and London went for the shooting star more) so it made sense that there was more fighting up top. Not to mention that Dragon hit the back drop suplex on London in the first match after stopping him up top. That was a big move for Dragon in that match (almost got the pin) so why not try that in a longer match when London is more worn down?

 

The match told an excellent story and was the "old school-style" (simple) match that some people claim ROH doesn't produce. Are there flaws? Sure. I have yet to see a match where I couldn't think of at least one thing I would do differently. This is no different yet is still a fine match and had less flaws and more positives than any other match this year (Benoit/Angle, Hero/Homicide, ect.)

[Guest Max Peter David]

****1/2

 

Close, but not my MOTY.

 

Angle/Benoit has that honor at this point, followed closely by AJ Styles vs. Paul London from Night of Grudges.

 

I loved this match though.

[Guest TDinDC1112]

I thought the London-Dragon match was very overrated. Anyway, here's a question:

 

Can a ROH be a 5 star match? Can you have a 5 star match in front of 500 people? Or do you need lots of people and the match to mean a lot? I've been thinking about that lately. If 2 guys go out there and have a perfect technical, hard hitting, whatever match, and there's 200 people to see it and they're not fighting for any particular reason, can it be 5 stars? I feel a match has to be very important to have the ability to be a 5 star match. I don't know, I just think it's an interesting topic.

[Tim Cooke 0]

"I just saw it a couple days ago for the first time...and I was pretty underwhelmed by it (London/Dragon)."

 

Care to give any details?

 

------

 

Benoit vs. Angle was excellent live but upon further viewings, it is no different than their previous encounters, minus the first five minutes of Benoit building to the Sharpshooter.

 

The ending sequence of reversals could be compared to Misawa vs. Kobashi from 6/99. It was technically sound yet it was the same old thing. Oh, and Misawa/Kobashi had better moves and selling, but that is for another time.

 

Maybe a better comparison would be a UWFI "spot fest" where the only high spots are the cross armbreaker spots. Takada/Yamazaki from 4/94 does a reversal section that is cool the first time but once you see other Takada/Yamazaki matches and other matches in the style, you see that their is so much more to work.

 

Tim

[Michrome 0]

Crowd size doesn't matter at all. If so, should we rate wrestlemanias based on crowd size? What about WWE matches? Was one Benoit-Angle match better than the other because of crowd size?

 

Match Of The Year simply means the best wrestling performance of the year.

[bob_barron 0]

Can a ROH be a 5 star match? Can you have a 5 star match in front of 500 people? Or do you need lots of people and the match to mean a lot? I've been thinking about that lately. If 2 guys go out there and have a perfect technical, hard hitting, whatever match, and there's 200 people to see it and they're not fighting for any particular reason, can it be 5 stars? I feel a match has to be very important to have the ability to be a 5 star match. I don't know, I just think it's an interesting topic.

 

 

I had the same argument with HartFan in another thread. A ***** match is a ***** match- no matter how many people are there to see it. Because using your line of thinking- then only WWE can have MOTYC. Or do matches at Death Before Dishonor count since the crowd was 1,000+. What about TNA? Their crowds aren't very big yet they're on PPV.

 

A good match is a good match- whether it's in front of 3, 303 or 3,303.

[Guest wildpegasus]

------

 

Benoit vs. Angle was excellent live but upon further viewings, it is no different than their previous encounters, minus the first five minutes of Benoit building to the Sharpshooter.

 

The ending sequence of reversals could be compared to Misawa vs. Kobashi from 6/99. It was technically sound yet it was the same old thing. Oh, and Misawa/Kobashi had better moves and selling, but that is for another time.

 

 

The reversal sequences weren't the same old thing. They built continually from the Unforgiven match and the triple threat match beteen Angle, Rey and Benoit. The spot where Angle countered with the Angle slam after being caught in the crossface was beautiful. Angle also learned how to counter mid match when Benoit went for his old trick of flipping around and driving Angle into the crossface by using both of his legs. Even the holding on the leg after Benoit continually kicked him was fresh as it was only ever done once before and that was in a match most people forget. If it works, use it.

[Guest Max Peter David]

Of course an ROH match can be *****. It just hasn't happened yet. The closest to it has been Ki/Dragon from 3/30/02.

[Tim Cooke 0]

Regarding crowds-

 

A bad match gets no heat.

 

A good match will get good heat, regardless if there are 50, 1000, or 13,000 in the building.

 

Tim

[Guest wildpegasus]

Can a ROH be a 5 star match? Can you have a 5 star match in front of 500 people? Or do you need lots of people and the match to mean a lot? I've been thinking about that lately. If 2 guys go out there and have a perfect technical, hard hitting, whatever match, and there's 200 people to see it and they're not fighting for any particular reason, can it be 5 stars? I feel a match has to be very important to have the ability to be a 5 star match. I don't know, I just think it's an interesting topic.

 

 

I had the same argument with HartFan in another thread. A ***** match is a ***** match- no matter how many people are there to see it. Because using your line of thinking- then only WWE can have MOTYC. Or do matches at Death Before Dishonor count since the crowd was 1,000+. What about TNA? Their crowds aren't very big yet they're on PPV.

 

A good match is a good match- whether it's in front of 3, 303 or 3,303.

I agree that a 5 star match can happen in front of very few fans but this of course brings out the question of rewarding a match extra points if the match itself keeps on generating more and more heat during the match. (and because of the match, not the participants) Should you or shouldn't you reward points for that?

[bob_barron 0]

You mean like how Angle v. Benoit go from dead crowd to standing ovation?

 

I try not to let the crowd affect my enjoyment of a match but it's hard not to let them influence your star ratings.

 

The only good match I've ever seen get shat on was Benoit v. Malenko from Hog Wild

[Guest wildpegasus]

You mean like how Angle v. Benoit go from dead crowd to standing ovation?

 

I try not to let the crowd affect my enjoyment of a match but it's hard not to let them influence your star ratings.

 

The only good match I've ever seen get shat on was Benoit v. Malenko from Hog Wild

Worst crowd in the history of wrestling. The whole night they were awful with the possable exception of the Dragon/Mysterio match. I'll give credit to the few fans that cheered during the announcement of an extra few minutes (Yes, there were a few but they were overwhelmed by the boos) but the rest were awful.

 

Not particulary the Angle/Benoit match. I just mean any match that gets more and more heat during it purely for the wrestling. Should they be awarde extra points for that since essentially it's the wrestler's job to do that?

[Guest Ray]

About crowd reactions...

 

It takes talent to tell a compelling story, and draw fans into it only by wrestling. So in that sense, crowd reaction is important.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

I'll watch the match again tomorrow and point out all the specifics.

 

But Tim, "just because Misawa did it", doesn't make it right. Let the match stand on it's own. The headlock went nowhere. It meant nothing. It was just a means of delaying time.

 

And I've had a knee injury (Hockey, knee on knee). It hurts like a motherfucker. I tried to stay in the game, but I couldn't. Adrenaline or not. I couldn't put weight on it for a week. It still hurts today depending on how I sit. So forgive me for being skeptical that a guy who had his knee worked on probably a lot harder than my knee-on-knee can be fucking superman when he chooses.

[Nevermortal 0]

Hey guys, when you two were kids, did you ever expect to grow up, and one day be arguing over headlocks?

 

Christ.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

I grew up as a wrestling fan... so... yeah.

[JustJoe2k5 0]

I would have to say the Bryan Danielson vs. Paul London is my personal MOTY. It was one of the few matches that I watched the first time and didn't lose interest. A.J. Styles vs. Paul London just didn't feel right to me, I felt it was more of an extended collection of spots with no real psychology.

[Michrome 0]

Ki-Dragon isnt even in the top 5 RoH matches.

[Guest TDinDC1112]

So the fact that Misawa vs. Kobashi on 3/1/03 was built up so well and meant so much to the crowd there and the crowd because of that was SO IN TO everything they were doing didnt' help the match become a ***** match?

[Guest Real F'n Show]

Ki-Dragon isnt even in the top 5 RoH matches.

Thats just your opinion. I happen to love the match and would rate it as the best or second best (behind Dragon/London) match in ROH's history.

[Nevermortal 0]

Ki-Dragon isnt even in the top 5 RoH matches.

Its better than Danielson-Dragon in my opinion.

[Guest OSIcon]

I pointed out one example of an athlete with an injured leg who had "heart" and was able to win an athletic competition based soley on determination and adrenaline. So it is possible and happens quite a bit. There are many other times I have read about an athlete doing something similiar (including watching someone do something similiar when I ran cross country in high school) and I am sure you have heard of these instances too. Just because YOU had a knee injury that left you unable to continue in the game doesn't mean all leg injuries have that effect. We saw a pretty famous example of that in the '96 Olympics as I pointed out earlier.

 

I pointed out the meaning of the headlock. Say a fighter in a MMA match has the strategy of trying to win by standing up and knocking out his opponent. He looks for a knock out the whole first round and doesn't attempt a takedown. That doesn't work and he gets rocked quite a bit in stand up. So, the next round he tries to take his opponent down. He is successful and eventually gets a submission victory after scoring the takedown. The first round with the stand up didn't lead to the finish. Yet that does not mean that it wasn't entertaining or important to the overall match. Scoring a knockout was the fighter's objective at first, but that didn't succeed. London working a headlock to control the pace and try to gain an advantage didn't lead to the end of the match. However, it was a strategy he applied that just didn't lead to a win. So he went to his next plan. It is realistic and makes sense.

 

If you are going to complain that the headlock seciton in London/Dragon hurt the match, then you must have a lot of problems with many other hyped matches throughout the years. You'll be hard pressed to find a match in the US or Japan that is of a decent length that does not begin with some sort of section similiar to the headlocks in London/Dragon. Even Benoit/Angle, your match of the year if I recall, had a an eight minute section at the start where Benoit built towards a sharpshooter. The leg work and the sharpshooter didn't lead to a finish and was not incorporated into the rest of the match. So do you see that as a problem in that match? Or do you pick and choose when opening sections are considered "bad"?

 

By your logic, if a wrestler were to hit a belly to belly suplex and a vertical suplex in a row, but then end up winning via a submission on the arm, that those moves would be "killing time" because they didn't "lead anywhere". Of course, they actually did lead some where because they were meant to where down his opponent. Sameway the London headlock was meant to where down Dragon. You will be hardpressed to find a match over 30 minutes where every single move in the match leads to the finish. That seems to be what you are looking for. That won't be found often (if at all) and it would not be realistic for it to happen all the time.

 

It seems to me you are pulling here. You are holding things against this match that are found in nearly every long match and are just common.smart parts of pro wrestling.

[Guest RickyChosyu]

The headlock went nowhere.  It meant nothing.  It was just a means of delaying time.

 

The headlock was London's way of controlling Dragon. London, despite getting a win over Danielson in their previous match, needs to rely on a basic headlock to keep control of the match. It contrasts their characters and gives the audience an instant impression of where they are in the ROH pecking order. Add that to all the reversals that forced Danielson to come up with new ways to escape the hold, and I'm not sure I've seen a headlock used that smartly in years.

 

Where are headlocks "supposed" to go? Usually, they're resting moves. London/Dragon were active and creative enough to avoid falling into that.

 

And I've had a knee injury (Hockey, knee on knee).  It hurts like a motherfucker.  I tried to stay in the game, but I couldn't.  Adrenaline or not.  I couldn't put weight on it for a week.  It still hurts today depending on how I sit.  So forgive me for being skeptical that a guy who had his knee worked on probably a lot harder than my knee-on-knee can be fucking superman when he chooses.

 

You're being melodramatic. Realism has its place in pro-wrestling, and can often add to a match. However, the same can be said for theatrics. London being able to hit his finisher, even with an injured knee is part of the suspension of disbelief that wrestling is based on.

 

The work should be judged on the worker's ability to create a suspension of disbelief. London sold his knee like death from the second it was worked over to the ending. As he climbed the ropes, he sold his knee to remind everyone of his struggle and that he was still hurting. Realistically, he would never have been able to do that, but that argument is redundant since, realistically, trying to hurt someone with a Shooting Star Press would be impossible.

 

London's selling in that match was more consistent than anything I've seen in an Angle match. If you can point out a match, this year, with selling better than London's, I'll concede this point.

 

I doubt you can make a case for Angle/Benoit.

[Michrome 0]

Its better than Danielson-Dragon in my opinion

 

Which match are you talking about? I mean, I know it would be awesome if he wrestled himself, but...