Guest Ray Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 How does Michaels not sell? He's practically a ragdoll in all of his matches. He bumps like a ma'fucker and sells accordingly. Then he does his no-sell nip-up superman comeback... burst of adrenaline bullshit excuse
ChrisMWaters Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 ^ Very true above, though Shawn DID work in AWA with the Rockers. THat might make some difference, but not too much.
ChrisMWaters Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 How does Michaels not sell? He's practically a ragdoll in all of his matches. He bumps like a ma'fucker and sells accordingly. Then he does his no-sell nip-up superman comeback... burst of adrenaline bullshit excuse Actually, truthful. I know, because I had a similar experience happen to me. One night during a High School Wrestling meet, I had a REALLY sore back PLUS a high fever. It almost felt like I couldn't move. During the match I had that night, after a while, I felt no pain or no illness, and I won. That was adrenaline in action. It works, trust me. Was hurting like hell the next day, but still, the point stands.
Guest Ray Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 Wow, next people will be defending Hogan's Hulk-Up.
chaosrage Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 bullshit excuse why? It happens dude. And usually when he does the kip-up, he just gets knocked back down anyway. Unless he's facing a jobber.
ChrisMWaters Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 Wow, next people will be defending Hogan's Hulk-Up. Actually, Hogan's Hulk-up and Michaels' nip-ups are using the same principle, just different execution of it.
Guest Askewniverse Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 Kevin Nash is a great high flyer, IMO. See ^^^, opinions can be wrong. If you really felt that way, the opinion wouldn't be wrong, since that's how you truly feel. However, the views stated in the opinion can be wrong. This whole "argument" could just be a case of misinterpreting what we consider to be opinion or fact.
The Czech Republic Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 Personally I'd bet that Shawn's drug abuse may have affected his body's ability to produce adrenaline.
chaosrage Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 The hulk up wouldn't be bad if he wasn't getting PUNCHED IN THE FACE while he's doing it
DangerousDamon Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 why does everyone always look at selling as how good the match is. to the average wrestling fan, pretty much a non smark, selling means absolutely shit. i dont think that my cousin who got me into wrestling thought that it was cool that steamboat grabbed his ankle after savage kicked him in it `123 times but i think that he found the match fucking exciting and entertaining and didnt go well holy shit this match sucked he didnt grab his leg enough -3stars
ChrisMWaters Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 The hulk up wouldn't be bad if he wasn't getting PUNCHED IN THE FACE while he's doing it Sorta like Flair tried to do in their first 1994 WCW Title match?
Guest Askewniverse Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 How does Michaels not sell? He's practically a ragdoll in all of his matches. He bumps like a ma'fucker and sells accordingly. Then he does his no-sell nip-up superman comeback... burst of adrenaline bullshit excuse Not necessarily, since Michaels' burst of adrenaline could be attributed as him experiencing "runner's high."
Guest wildpegasus Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 (edited) why does everyone always look at selling as how good the match is. to the average wrestling fan, pretty much a non smark, selling means absolutely shit. i dont think that my cousin who got me into wrestling thought that it was cool that steamboat grabbed his ankle after savage kicked him in it `123 times but i think that he found the match fucking exciting and entertaining and didnt go well holy shit this match sucked he didnt grab his leg enough -3stars Just my $.02 I think selling's important to anyone no matter who they are. All of the little things like overall fatigue, facial expression, body movements and limb damage all add up and even if a newcomer doesn't realise it it adds to his experience watching a match. Take the same match in an alternate dimension and use the exact same movements but have poor selling and I bet you the newcomer watching wouldn't feel that the "same" match wasn't as good. In fact, I think it's a good thing when good selling goes "without being noticed". It shows that the wrestlers are doing their job "right". There's nothing odd looking about the match. Oh, and BTW I'd give Angle vs Benoit at the Rumble a real good 4 1/4 stars leaning upwards. Edited November 27, 2003 by wildpegasus
Guest wildpegasus Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 (edited) How does Michaels not sell? He's practically a ragdoll in all of his matches. He bumps like a ma'fucker and sells accordingly. Then he does his no-sell nip-up superman comeback... burst of adrenaline bullshit excuse Not necessarily, since Michaels' burst of adrenaline could be attributed as him experiencing "runner's high." I remember the announcers would always play it off as (or at least Vince) "Shawn Michaels is the most resiliant man in the WWE today." I thought Vince was smart saying that as it made the nip up more believable. Hulk Hogan's comeback power was always from the Hulkamaniacs. Just thought I'd point that out. I'd wonder who'd win: Hogan's Hulking up vs Michaels nip up vs Warrior's shaking the ropes vs Tatanka's war dance?(talk about steryotypical) Edited November 27, 2003 by wildpegasus
ChrisMWaters Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 Hogan's Hulking up vs Michaels nip up vs Warrior's shaking the ropes vs Tatanka's war dance(talk about steryotypical)? None of the above. Taker's POWER OF THE URN would win.
Guest Askewniverse Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 I'd wonder who'd win: Hogan's Hulking up vs Michaels nip up vs Warrior's shaking the ropes vs Tatanka's war dance(talk about steryotypical)? Tatanka would lose for sure. I remember when Bam Bam Bigelow actually stopped Tatanka in mid-war dance by kicking him in the back of the head.
Invictus Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 I'd wonder who'd win: Hogan's Hulking up vs Michaels nip up vs Warrior's shaking the ropes vs Tatanka's war dance(talk about steryotypical)? Tatanka would lose for sure. I remember when Bam Bam Bigelow actually stopped Tatanka in mid-war dance by kicking him in the back of the head. "He's...He's-- Yes! Tatanka is making a comeback! This is amazing, he... oh wait. No he's not."
Guest The Winter Of My Discontent Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 Man, Stan Hansen no sold a lot of shit too. So did Misawa. All Michaels did was a nip-up, bah God. And as a heel, whats your excuse for hating Michaels? He never nipped up. Hell in the Cell with the Undertaker? How did he not sell? He sold that match and made that the most popular gimmick match in the WWE. Moreover, his selling in the ladder match with Razor made that one extremely popular too. I just can't buy saying Michaels doesn't sell.
Guest Ray Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 I don't buy this "adrenaline" thing at all. If a man is injured in a fight, he isn't going to nip-up and dance around as if nothing happened. Shawn nips-up to get a cheap pop from the crowd. It's crappy inconsistant selling. BTW, this is what Webster's has to say about opinion: opinion (e pinyen, o-) n. 1 a belief not based on absolute certainty or positive knowledge but on what seems true, valid, or probable to one's own mind; judgment 2 an evaluation, impression, or estimation of the quality or worth of a person or thing SYN.opinion applies to a conclusion or judgment which, while it remains open to dispute, seems true or probable to one's own mind Seems like opinions can be wrong to me. why does everyone always look at selling as how good the match is. to the average wrestling fan, pretty much a non smark, selling means absolutely shit. i dont think that my cousin who got me into wrestling thought that it was cool that steamboat grabbed his ankle after savage kicked him in it `123 times but i think that he found the match fucking exciting and entertaining and didnt go well holy shit this match sucked he didnt grab his leg enough -3stars Selling is one of the most important things in wrestling. I don't care if "average fans" don't care about it. Selling is a major part of the story of a match. Man, Stan Hansen no sold a lot of shit too. So did Misawa. If one of the AJPW guys no-sells I bitch about it too. I bitch about Kobashi's no-selling in his allegedly great 8/93 match with Steve Williams. All Michaels did was a nip-up, bah God. Nip-up after getting the shit beat out of you = bad selling. And as a heel, whats your excuse for hating Michaels? He never nipped up. Hell in the Cell with the Undertaker? How did he not sell? No, he just bumped around like an idiot. And he OVERsold. Overselling = bad. He sold that match and made that the most popular gimmick match in the WWE Popularity doesn't make it good. Moreover, his selling in the ladder match with Razor made that one extremely popular too. Which match? There were two. I just can't buy saying Michaels doesn't sell. Watch Summerslam 2002. Shawn's back is DESTROYED, then nip-up, dance around no-sell for the rest of the match. Utter crap it was.
Guest The Winter Of My Discontent Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 Overselling is bad? No selling is bad? Who is to say what the perfect amount is? Your opinion? You're blowing smoke out your ass son, Michaels' selling has always been great. So he nips up, big F'N deal, its one fault in an otherwise great aspect of his career. If you'd ask anyone who sold the best in the WWE, they'd say Shawn Michaels. The guy was an elastic playdoll, he allowed himself to be tossed around like a ma'fucker, and I said before, sold it accordingly.
Guest Ray Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 Answer my question about Shawn. His heel work had him selling like he was hit my a freight train. I did. Read it again. No, he just bumped around like an idiot. And he OVERsold. Overselling = bad. And selling as a heel doesn't make up for his no-selling as a face.
RavishingRickRudo Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 This is ridiculous. No-Selling is a crowd device. It is meant to pop the crowd. But that doesn't make it good. Am I to assume that we can catagorize all no-selling as "adrenaline"? So really, there is no such thing as a "bad seller"? Unless it is part of the story of the match (which it rarely is), no-selling doesn't have it's place in wrestling. It's just lazy storytelling. "So how can we X make his comeback" "Well, just have him get up" "Wouldn't that ignore the beating that he just took" "Yeah, but the crowd will like it." HBK no selling the back-work and his history of back-problems (this supposed "career ending back injury", this injury that can put him -and has- in a wheelchair) is just careless and gratuitous. It made Jericho look like a chump and took all of his heat away. And he didn't even get a "strong" finish - it was a roll up; something that he could have done "tired and beaten". No, No, No... gotta get that crowd pop.
Guest croweater Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 Are you all missing the point of Michaels "nip up"? If anything it's a positive for him. Sure, if it was Wrestler A vs. Wrestler B and after 15 minutes of being beaten up Wrestler A nips up it would make little logic. But it's not A nor B, It's HBK, THE SHOWSTOPER, THE MAIN EVENT. It's his character to do things like that. He's a cocky showoff who would do anything to pop the crowd. The "nip up" is a show off move, it's not necessary and HBK does it regardless of the beating he's taken because it's his character to show off and pop the crowd. It's his characters priority. Hence the big wind up before the sweet chin music, he could just instead run over and kick them in the face, but it's not his character. and an Angle/ Michaels match would rule.
RavishingRickRudo Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 I thought it was also in his character to be the-guy-with-the-crippled-back? "Character" does not trump "Reality" (The reality of that universe - in this case, the universe of the WWE closely mirrors the "real world"). The Nip-Up is the equivalent of Neo getting shot a dozen times and getting up like nothing happened... of course, that wasn't "real". Even in the universe of the film, it wasn't real. It was a computer program. It was established early on that when Neo becomes the one, he can defy normal convention. We've accepted this. So I guess it's actually not the equivalent of Neo getting shot a dozen times - cause that actually made sense in regards to the story they were telling. It made sense to the universe they created. Shawn Michaels is not a superhero. The world of the WWE is not that of gods and demons. They are human. They get hurt. They bleed. That is why we invest our emotions into their matches. We relate to their pain. We see them struggle and fight. We invest our time in watching the story develop - nipping up completely negates that story. "Yeah, I was just fakin it all - I'm not really hurt. It's ADRENALINE! Oh, that that adrenaline comes and goes when I choose... ain't biology fancy"
Guest croweater Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 Have you ever "niped up". I can't see how it would hurt his back, it's lower body power....... only he back would be stretched a bit and that's it. It's not like he's twisting it abnormally or putting pressure on it, he's just pushing with his legs and then arching his back. It's not bad selling if it doesn't hurt him.
RavishingRickRudo Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 The majority of the pressure in on the back when doing a nip up.
Guest croweater Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 No it isn't. It's on the quads and gluts. You push with your legs (the easy part) and then have to stand up from a very low and unbalanced position. The back merely stabalises the move. I just did 1 then, that's how it works. Also, it gets him up quickly and gives him the advantage in the match (as both opponents are usually down)......... he then proceedes to dance around, which could be called bad selling, but still wouldn't really hurt, nor put pressure on his back.
RavishingRickRudo Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 Let's go through the movements of a nip up. Flatback. Bring legs up. This bends the back. This puts pressure on the back. Then you push with both your legs and arms (some can do it on leg strength alone). This sends a "shock" throughout your spine (spine contracts, spine extends). The back acts as a stabilizer; it takes a lot of the inertial pressure and balances things out. It acts as a base from which the "jump" is first performed, and then as a "leveller" when "landing". Not to mention the main pressure is on the "lower" back, which is what Shawn injured IIRC (it was also the place HHH 'struck' with the sledgehammer). I can't imagine anyone with a "bad" back doing it (if that is what we are to believe), let alone someone with as "bad" a back as Shawn Michaels. In terms of "getting up quickly" - yeah, I always see that happening in MMA. Guys are on their back and they nip up... 1)It takes more energy to do a nip up than a regular stand-up as you have to also use energy to balance yourself after the momentum of the "up", 2)It's clearly not quicker and effective as you have to set it up, do it, and then balance. Carlos Newton, for example, has the quickest standup I've seen and he doesn't nip up to do it... besides, why are you trying to use logic for "the showstopper"??
The Czech Republic Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 "Yeah, I was just fakin it all - I'm not really hurt. It's ADRENALINE! Oh, that that adrenaline comes and goes when I choose... ain't biology fancy" Like I said before, I wouldn't put it past Michaels to figure out some "fancy biology" that allows him to easily manipulate his own endocrine system in said fashion.
The Amazing Rando Posted November 27, 2003 Report Posted November 27, 2003 Micheal's character has been built up as having an "ungodly amount of stamina"... Sure him nipping up is a bad sell point... and it's to pop a crowd... but it's an original way to make a face comeback ... he hits the old flying elbow to the face...then NIP! Up he goes...and the crowd goes ape shit... It's kinda like Angle and the Pop-Up Superplexes...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now