HBK/HHH at SS '02

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

How was it a "good" match when the main story of the match -HBK's back- was conveniently forgotten about.

 

I think some people need to separate "I enjoyed it" from "It was good"

OlympicHeroRVD already defended that in the best way I've ever read. Go back and read his long post on it.

[Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes]

How was it a "good" match when the main story of the match -HBK's back- was conveniently forgotten about.

 

I think some people need to separate "I enjoyed it" from "It was good"

I enjoyed it as a Mark, but like I said, almost the first half was boring and HBK Refused to sell the back.

 

 

Reasons why HBK is a better heel: He sells better and doesn't do the cheap pop kip-ups.

[Lord of The Curry 0]

I thought it was TheDames homemade chocolate chunk cookies...

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

 

Don't give away his secret recipie. Those fuckers at Kiebler are threatening us with death again but we'll kick their asses like we always do. I mean, it's not like it's hard or anything.

 

Any word on whether or not Dames is going to pursue our black and white "Racial Unity" cookie or not?

[NYU 0]

How was it a "good" match when the main story of the match -HBK's back- was conveniently forgotten about.

 

I think some people need to separate "I enjoyed it" from "It was good"

Have you read the other posts in this thread?

 

The story of the match can be taken different ways, depending on hurt Michaels back was supposed to be. If he was really supposed to be a walking cripple - how come he's wrestling every Raw now? Is it SO impossible to think that the WWE writers used a little psychology in Michaels' initial matches, showing his back was not as bad as he led people to believe, and the 4 years of rest and rehabbing did him good?

 

But then again, the IWC didn't think up this kind of psychology, so surely it cannot be right. Michaels didn't sell the back as if he was dead, and lay in the ring like a beached whale for the entire match. Screw the enjoyment of the fans. MINUS 10 MILLION STARS!!!

[Guest BionicRedneck]

If you try to find flaws in the match, obviously you'll find them

 

Yep. I tried so hard. It was so difficult for me, but I tried hard enough, and managed to see one of the wrestlers ignore the entire story of the match.

 

You had to really, really look hard, but it happened.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

OHRVD also thinks that Puro and the WWE are "two entirely different things" despite Puro having heavy american influence.

 

His explanation was bullshit. "Nothing can hurt his back! HBK IS BACK!... except for... and HBK isn't"

[Fökai 0]

Just like I said...

 

I don't give a shit if Shawn marks in the crowd liked it. If they're too dumb to see the giant flaws in it, it's their loss.

The definition of a wrestling fan is to suspend your beliefs.

 

If you think that the WWE puts stock into pleasing the home audience over the live crowd when a match is going on, you're lacking brain matter.

 

What if my opinion is that the match sucks? Why are we not allowed to be negative? Please explain why several people happening to have the same opinion is bad.

 

If you think the match sucks, fine. That's your opinion, and we respect it.

 

But as an earlier poster has said, you shouldn't be going out of your way to nitpick on faults and flaws in the match - that just kills any enjoyment you may have.

 

If there's a glaring problem with the match (selling, BASIC psychology, match structure, etc.) you're entitled to love/hate the match because of it. The same goes for the entertainment factor of the bout.

Edited December 3, 2003 by bravesfan

[NYU 0]

OHRVD also thinks that Puro and the WWE are "two entirely different things" despite Puro having heavy american influence.

 

His explanation was bullshit. "Nothing can hurt his back! HBK IS BACK!... except for... and HBK isn't"

I'm saying it's ridiculous and nearly impossible to compare the two in this day and age. If we look at the crowds....American fans want non-stop action. Selling and slow, methodical submission-based style matches mean shit to them for the most part. They want offensive moves and flashy spots, and they want it now. If they don't, the "Boring" chants come, like they did with Hardy/Christian last night. Meanwhile, the Japanese fans are entirely different. They appreciate the classic submission-style match and seem to actually kind of appreciate it a little more than the flashy, signature-style kind of matches that happen in America. The crowds dictate what kind of matches happen. How can you compare an American match to a Japanese match when they wrestle two DIFFERENT types of matches in front of two DIFFERENT types of crowds?!

 

Puro may have had heavy american influence. But bring some of that to the common-WWE arena and watch it get shit all over on. What might be good for you would not be good for the majority, and not good for business. Selling constantly and realistically, without going on offense, might be good for you, other Puro fans, and the Japanese fans - but try that in America and you won't be able to block out the "Boring" chants.

 

As for the HBK explanation, I'm done with that. If you didn't understand the complexity of it, go back and reread it.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

Have you read the other posts in this thread?

 

Yeah, and a lot of it is "well, I enjoyed it so it doesn't matter"

 

The story of the match can be taken different ways, depending on hurt Michaels back was supposed to be. If he was really supposed to be a walking cripple - how come he's wrestling every Raw now?

 

Well _at_the_time_ *HBK* said he'd be there for "one or two" matches (even on WWE.com). How come he's wrestling on every Raw now? Money? Glory? I dunno. What does it have to do with *that* match? For *that* match we were supposed to believe that the "retired-from-a-back-injury" Shawn Michaels. Which is why people were gasping at the moves done to Shawns back. See, people were believing it. Then all-of-a-sudden it's not true, everything you saw was a lie, and HBK is really OKEYDOKIE! All that stuff you watched - worthless. All the emotion you put in - doesn't mean a thing. HBK is BACK baby! Oh wait, no he's not... he gets crippled after the match... so he really wasn't OKIEDOKIE... that's picking and choosing when to be fine - that doesn't take actual skill to do. It's spot work. Amateurish.

 

Is it SO impossible to think that the WWE writers used a little psychology in Michaels' initial matches, showing his back was not as bad as he led people to believe, and the 4 years of rest and rehabbing did him good?

 

Yeah. It is impossible. I'm thinkin it was more like "Ok, let's see how Shawn does here. If he's ok, lets use him some more cause he's over..." which they did - they gave him the title - after that they had no idea what to do with him. So lets not give the WWE too much credit here.

 

But then again, the IWC didn't think up this kind of psychology, so surely it cannot be right. Michaels didn't sell the back as if he was dead, and lay in the ring like a beached whale for the entire match. Screw the enjoyment of the fans. MINUS 10 MILLION STARS!!!

 

Never said entertaining the fans wasn't important. Just said that the match wasn't good. Again, being entertaining and being good aren't necessarily the same thing. There are still ways to have made that match good without no selling the back - they just didn't know how. Shawn didn't know how. Which is why people say Shawn is a bad seller. He takes the easy way out.

[Guest BionicRedneck]

Bah. Wrestling is wrestling. Wether it be Puro, WWE or lucha, the basic components are the same.

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

Bah. Wrestling is wrestling. Wether it be Puro, WWE or lucha, the basic components are the same.

That's like saying "Music is Music. etc."

[NYU 0]

Bah. Wrestling is wrestling. Wether it be Puro, WWE or lucha, the basic components are the same.

But how can you compare the two? If we have Chris Benoit and Kurt Angle facing each other in a submission match, can it REALLY be comparable to a constant high-spot match between two luchadores?

 

Shawn Michaels and Triple H in a hardcore match. Can it REALLY be comparable to a match in Japan that was based on submissions?

 

The puro fans here (Not just this thread, but many other) are the ones doing some of the comparing when it comes to offensive moves, defensive, counters, selling, etc.

 

People would just be happier if they could accept a match for what it was, without comparing it to the Awesome, Life-Changing, Thrilling, Climactic Misawa-Kobashi match from whatever year.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Shawn Michaels and Triple H in a hardcore match. Can it REALLY be comparable to a match in Japan that was based on submissions?

 

No, but it can be compared to the Foley/HHH brawls which smoke the hell out of it.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

I'm saying it's ridiculous and nearly impossible to compare the two in this day and age.

 

Hmm. 1 on 1. 2 on 2. etc. 3 count. 1 fall. Count out. DQ. Submissions. Pins. Suplexes. Drivers. Slams. Hmm, looks and sounds the same to me. Maybe if you're talking about UWF-i, or RINGS, or something where the rules are modified and the objectives are different. But me thinks you're just generalizing.

 

If we look at the crowds....American fans want non-stop action. Selling and slow, methodical submission-based style matches mean shit to them for the most part.

 

So are you saying matches should be judged on their pace? I dunno bout that. It seems kinda silly. The elements of a match are the same. There's a universal standard. "What is good". You can use the same standard to judge them. I break it up into 2 big parts - Technical and Artistic. The are sub-sections to these two parts. Technical has performance and execution of moves, it's difficulty, the transitions between, workrate, pace, "smart" work, etc. Artistic is telling a story - how one tells that story is through SELLING, psychology, expression, etc. You can find these things in all types of wrestling.

 

They want offensive moves and flashy spots, and they want it now. If they don't, the "Boring" chants come, like they did with Hardy/Christian last night.

 

Disagreed. Fans wouldn't even be chanting boring had they not been encouraged to do so by the WWE. That practice was on it's way out the door before "that" happened. Fans can still 'appreciate' a slow(er) build - as long as it is a constant build. That's the same with Japan. If there is an issue, if the two wrestlers in the ring are ones the fans care about, they can take as long as they want (within reason) and it won't matter - Hogan vs. Rock is an extreme example of that. Conversely, if you throw out two no namers who fly around at 100mph the fans won't be too pleased. Besides, there is a way of incorporating quick pace and flashy spots and still being "good". It just takes EFFORT. I know, it's a crazy concept and has to do with the "finer points" of wrestling. Forgot, have to have low standards to appreciate bad wrestling...

 

Meanwhile, the Japanese fans are entirely different. They appreciate the classic submission-style match and seem to actually kind of appreciate it a little more than the flashy, signature-style kind of matches that happen in America.

 

REALLY? That's.. weird. Cause I could have sworn I've seen Japanese crowds go crazy during spotfests and not seem too enthused with two guys trading submissions before. You should watch your generalizations. If all the Japanese fans want technical masterpieces, explain Masahiro Chono's popularity? Explain Bob Sapp? They aren't exactly the pinnacle of the form. And if American fans don't want submissions - explain the success of Benoit vs. Angle?

 

The crowds dictate what kind of matches happen. How can you compare an American match to a Japanese match when they wrestle two DIFFERENT types of matches in front of two DIFFERENT types of crowds?!

 

As I said before - there are common threads that bind wrestling matches. And it's not THAT "different" when you look at it. Besides, how does that justify putting out bad matches? "The fans want it" NO THE FANS ACCEPT IT because they can't do a thing about it. Like people here accept that the WWE is shit and lower their standards accordingly.

 

Puro may have had heavy american influence. But bring some of that to the common-WWE arena and watch it get shit all over on.

 

I can think of a dozen matches that would make the WWE fan go NUTS over.

 

What might be good for you would not be good for the majority, and not good for business.

 

"Good" wrestling matches and "Good" for business are two different things. What *I* want is a higher quality product, I don't see how that is "bad" for "the majority".

 

Selling constantly and realistically, without going on offense, might be good for you, other Puro fans, and the Japanese fans - but try that in America and you won't be able to block out the "Boring" chants.

 

Who said there would be no offense? I don't know what's wrong with "realism" since "realism" helps with "suspension of disbelief" which inturn is better for the fan and the believabilty of the match.

 

As for the HBK explanation, I'm done with that. If you didn't understand the complexity of it, go back and reread it.

 

Nothing "complex" about it. It's simple really. Shawn didn't know how to transition over from "being hurt" to "being ok" so he just totally forgot about "being hurt".

[Guest Coffey]

Cakes.

[Kardo 0]

Okay, this is my take on the match. HBK had his back worked on by the Romans/Pontius Pilate (HHH) til he is "Crucified" by him. Then when the time came he rose from the tomb where he no-sold all his wounds using the holy power of Jesus.

 

Quite simple story really.

[NYU 0]

Rudo, that was a really good post. I can understand your point of view, but I just can't help finding it a little silly that American matches are still constantly being compared to Japanese matches. Admittedly, you know a LOT more about Japanese wrestling than I do, but from the matches that I have seen, the type of wrestling and the fans that watch it are different. I still stand by my opinion that Japanese fans are a lot more respectful of the matches themselves, and the psychology that goes in them, than American fans are. What works in Japan might not work in America, and vice-versa.

 

I still have a problem with those that come into the WWE folder and bash a certain match, saying that a particular Japanese match did it so much better. Those Japanese wrestlers had a different crowd to deal with, different guidelines to abide by from the promoter, and probably a different story to tell. Yet, matches are continually being compared. The puro fan will name 2 Japanese wrestlers that mean shit to a WWE folder poster, then they'll have an argument, when that could have been easily avoided. To say that a match sucks because the selling wasn't up to par with a Japanese match is silly, and winds up causing more trouble than it's worth.

 

I don't want to type much more on this subject. The WWE promotes Sports Entertainment. Japan promoted WRESTLING. A Japanese promoter can tell 2 wrestlers to go out there, bust balls, and have the greatest match of their lives in 30 minutes. On a PPV, Vince will send them out there for 15 minutes, give them specific spots to do, and sometimes order them not to overshadow a different match. If the guidelines to a match are so different, how can they be compared, considering the limits on the American one?

 

My point: WWE wrestling should be discussed in the WWE folder. Puro wrestling should be discussed in the Puro folder. When you compare the two, especially to a fan who doesn't know TOO much about Japanese wrestling(like me), you're only asking for petty arguments, angry feelings, and dumb flames.

[Guest JumpinJackFlash]

The thing that worried me about the match(and my friends, since they paused on it and exploited it) was when HBK kissed Earl Hebner.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

I'd like to bring up that it was MIKESC who brought up Puro - where Bionic Redneck (the resident "purofan" in this thread) basically shrugged it off. Mr. Z then added to the point. Tawren said "Just a note-people who only watch WWE and bitch about people loving puro are just as bad as people who only watch puro and bitch about people watching WWE." to which you replied with your puro rant. Infact, the two "puro" guys in the thread (Rey, Bionic) didn't even bring up the subject _at_all_. Mr. Z and iB also made reference to K-1 (for whatever reason). So really, the bad comparisons here aren't the fault of the puro guys at all.

 

Just thought I'd point that out.

[Guest Ray]

The WWE promotes Sports Entertainment. Japan promoted WRESTLING.

Tell that to Bret Hart, Chris Benoit, or Ric Flair.

 

 

Shawn's selling sucked because it was completely illogical. It's that simple.

[Guest Ray]

I just thought of something....

 

 

If Jeff Hardy and Test wrestled the exact same match with the same moves and the same selling and the same spots, everyone would probably shit on it.

 

But it's Shawn Michaels, so...

[NYU 0]

Of course, Hardy and Test wouldn't have had the history with each other, and the story of whether or not one of them could go, though they suffered a back injury years ago, would be non-existant. This means that none of the emotion would be there, which is what made Michaels/HHH so special (and a damn good match, in my opinion)

 

Pretty weak analogy there. If you took Angle/Benoit from Royal Rumble '03, and substituted it with Nathan Jones and Matt Morgan, would people still give it its due here? Of course not.

[Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes]

Of course, Hardy and Test wouldn't have had the history with each other, and the story of whether or not one of them could go, though they suffered a back injury years ago, would be non-existant. This means that none of the emotion would be there, which is what made Michaels/HHH so special (and a damn good match, in my opinion)

 

Pretty weak analogy there. If you took Angle/Benoit from Royal Rumble '03, and substituted it with Nathan Jones and Matt Morgan, would people still give it its due here? Of course not.

*Imagines a 20:00+ Matt Morgan v. NAthan Jones Match*

 

AAAHH! MY EYES!!!!!!!!!

[Downhome 0]

If you took Angle/Benoit from Royal Rumble '03, and substituted it with Nathan Jones and Matt Morgan, would people still give it its due here? Of course not.

I don't know.

 

If I saw that I'd die, and end up liking the match that much more out of pure shock.

[Guest Ray]

Of course, Hardy and Test wouldn't have had the history with each other, and the story of whether or not one of them could go, though they suffered a back injury years ago, would be non-existant. This means that none of the emotion would be there, which is what made Michaels/HHH so special (and a damn good match, in my opinion)

 

Pretty weak analogy there. If you took Angle/Benoit from Royal Rumble '03, and substituted it with Nathan Jones and Matt Morgan, would people still give it its due here? Of course not.

Jones and Morgan PHYSICALLY COULD NOT DO the same match as Angle and Benoit.

 

Jeff Hardy and Test COULD do the same crappy match as HHH and Shawn.

[Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes]

Of course, Hardy and Test wouldn't have had the history with each other, and the story of whether or not one of them could go, though they suffered a back injury years ago, would be non-existant. This means that none of the emotion would be there, which is what made Michaels/HHH so special (and a damn good match, in my opinion)

 

Pretty weak analogy there. If you took Angle/Benoit from Royal Rumble '03, and substituted it with Nathan Jones and Matt Morgan, would people still give it its due here? Of course not.

Jones and Morgan PHYSICALLY COULD NOT DO the same match as Angle and Benoit.

 

Jeff Hardy and Test COULD do the same crappy match as HHH and Shawn.

GASP! Test draws heel heat!?!?!

 

 

Someone alert the media! And it appears Jeff Hardy has become a miracle worker carrying people to really good matches when he sucked in 2002.

[NYU 0]

Of course, Hardy and Test wouldn't have had the history with each other, and the story of whether or not one of them could go, though they suffered a back injury years ago, would be non-existant. This means that none of the emotion would be there, which is what made Michaels/HHH so special (and a damn good match, in my opinion)

 

Pretty weak analogy there. If you took Angle/Benoit from Royal Rumble '03, and substituted it with Nathan Jones and Matt Morgan, would people still give it its due here? Of course not.

Jones and Morgan PHYSICALLY COULD NOT DO the same match as Angle and Benoit.

 

Jeff Hardy and Test COULD do the same crappy match as HHH and Shawn.

You seemed to have missed the point of the already-weak analogy. You skipped over the whole "Hardy-Test didn't have the storyline, and the psychology, which made the match stand out as special." You just went straight for the rebuttal to the analogy. Ah, well. Anyway, don't be TOO sure Morgan/Jones couldn't pull it off if they try to do an exact model of the match. It might be possible if they spent enough time studying it. But anyway, fine.

 

Spike Dudley and Randy Orton put on a match just like Angle/Benoit '03, which they physically COULD do. Now how much praise would that match get? People are lying if they say they could be unbiased about it.

[Guest Ray]

You seemed to have missed the point of the already-weak analogy. You skipped over the whole "Hardy-Test didn't have the storyline, and the psychology, which made the match stand out as special." You just went straight for the rebuttal to the analogy. Ah, well.

The story was Shawn's back is fucked and he no-sells it. If you think that story made the match "special"...

 

Anyway, don't be TOO sure Morgan/Jones couldn't pull it off if they try to do an exact model of the match. It might be possible if they spent enough time studying it. But anyway, fine.

They obviously lack the athleticism to do so.

 

Spike Dudley and Randy Orton put on a match just like Angle/Benoit '03, which they physically COULD do. Now how much praise would that match get? People are lying if they say they could be unbiased about it.

If they did the exact same match, I certainly would praise it.

 

The blind Orton haters around here though...

[Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes]

You seemed to have missed the point of the already-weak analogy. You skipped over the whole "Hardy-Test didn't have the storyline, and the psychology, which made the match stand out as special." You just went straight for the rebuttal to the analogy. Ah, well.

The story was Shawn's back is fucked and he no-sells it. If you think that story made the match "special"...

 

Anyway, don't be TOO sure Morgan/Jones couldn't pull it off if they try to do an exact model of the match. It might be possible if they spent enough time studying it. But anyway, fine.

They obviously lack the athleticism to do so.

 

Spike Dudley and Randy Orton put on a match just like Angle/Benoit '03, which they physically COULD do. Now how much praise would that match get? People are lying if they say they could be unbiased about it.

If they did the exact same match, I certainly would praise it.

 

The blind Orton haters around here though...

Insead of 2,000 Germans from Benoit we'll get 2000 dropkicks by Orton.

[Guest MikeSC]

How was it a "good" match when the main story of the match -HBK's back- was conveniently forgotten about.

 

I think some people need to separate "I enjoyed it" from "It was good"

Thing is, you have to do some unrealistic thing with a storyline back injury to make a match watchable.

 

Logically, if his back was hurt, he'd be moving exceptionally slowly --- which would generate tons of griping and complaining.

 

Shawn doing his nip-up is comparable to a boxer who is trailing badly in the final round just going all-out for the KO. He's been pounded and dominated all night --- but he gets his crap together for one last run before a loss. Shawn took a beating, but simply got his crap together and rallied the best he could.

 

I'm simply stating that people wish to nitpick about the poor selling of the WWE --- but have a REAL hard time handling ANYBODY pointing out that their sacred cows are equally guilty of these "sins".

-=Mike