Matches that didn't age well

[Guest Anglesault]

I have the Unforgiven '01 DVD (I know, poor choice) I got it in March for my birthday, so I've only had it for like 2 and a half months (That was probably the last time I've watched it, I like it.) Now I just popped it in the other day. AND GOD DAMN, does that show suck. But what surprised me is the Edge/Christian match. Right after the match, it got really good reviews.  When i first saw it, I really dug it. But I couldn't sit through it this time. It was just BAD. From Christian being thrown into a piece of hollow plastic and SELLING, to the fucked up German suplex, crawling under the ring, the Christianized Spear, it was JUST BRUTAL. And this is less than a year after the match and about two months ago I thought it was good!

 

Hell In a Cell 98 is pretty worthless now. It's even lost it's "holy shit" value.

 

Can anyone else think of a match that aged poorly?

[Guest The Vanilla Midget]

hogan-rock from wrestlemania

take away the emotion and you are left with one terrible wrestling match (well, moreso)

[Guest TheMikeSC]

Matches that didn't age well?

 

RVD v Sabu---any of them.

RVD v Jerry Lynn --- again, ANY of them

Austin v Rock from WM15

 

Can we include matches that sucked at the time---but are now, somehow, worse in this list? :-)

             -=Mike

[Guest Nevermortal]

Hogan/Warrior from WM6. Soo...fucking..bad...

[Guest RavishingRickRudo]

HBK vs. Razor WM 10.  Amateur stuff compared to the shit goin on now-a-days.

 

I take exception to calling 'emotional' matches, matches that don't age too well.  I find that the most emotional, the ones that tell the best story, age the best.  Because the story transcends the moves.  You can have a basic match but if it is backed by an incredible and emotional story, I can't see it ever aging poorly.

[Guest JHawk]

Mankind vs. The Rock at Survivor Series 98.  I remember digging that one live (even the Montreal finish), but I saw it yesterday and thought "Dear God, they gave this 20 minutes?"

[Guest cabbageboy]

I agree on the RVD/Sabu matches....those guys had different primes really.  When RVD first got to ECW he was weak but Sabu was at his peak.  When RVD got seriously over and was at his peak...Sabu was decrepit.  Ironically when they could have had the most interesting matches they were mainly teaming.  Oh wait, there was that Wrestlepalooza match.....

 

The RVD/Lynn PPV matches are still pretty good but the best one was on an early TNN show.  The heat was unreal, we're talking Bingo Hall version of Rock/Hogan with some actual wrestling.

[Guest AnnieEclectic]

Jake "The Snake" Roberts v. The Model Rick Martel - blindfold match.

 

End of story.

 

-Annie

[Guest]

HBK vs. Razor WM 10.  Amateur stuff compared to the shit goin on now-a-days.

The stuff nowdays with the TLC matches are just non stop spot fests with little to no real psychology in them. Razor vs Michaels actually incorporated wrestling into the matches and made you anticipate the spots. I'll take the WM X ladder match over any of the TLC matches any day

[Guest cobainwasmurdered]

HBK vs. Razor WM 10.  Amateur stuff compared to the shit goin on now-a-days.

i SO disagree with that choice. that match is still amazing.

 

I had a friend who had never watched wrestling so i wanted to impress him, i go searching through my tape collection. flair's matches are too long and takes more of an understanding of the psychology, the ECW matches are too unrealistic, finally i happened upon the HBK/Ramon match, i slapped it in the machine and when it was over my friend was amazed ever since than he's been a HUGE wrestling fan.

[Guest bps "The Truth" 21]

I've said it before and I'll say it again...

 

the Rock vs. HHH Iron Man match from JD 2000 is sorely overrated.

 

they stall for the entire first 10 minutes.

 

then have 11 falls in the next 50.

 

I sometimes see people claim that Rock was carried in that match....no one needs to be carried through a match that involves a finish less than every 5 minutes...no one.

[Guest nWoScorpion]

HBK/Bret from WM12 seems very boring if you actually try to sit through 62 minutes. (i never saw Rock/HHH but im guessin it was worse).

 

I'm glad no one said Warrior/Savage because it was a retirement match and WWF never agrees to keep the guy retired.

 

HHH/Jericho from wrestlemania, lol.

 

Terrible ladder match....

Mankind Vs. The Rock (or was it Bossman) on a Raw in 1998-1999.

 

Terrible Cage Match:

Al snow vs. Bossman

 

Terrible HIAC:

Undertaker vs. Bossman

 

Am I the only person that sees a pattern of how much bossman sucks?

[Guest Anglesault]

Terrible Cage Match:

Al snow vs. Bossman

 

Terrible HIAC:

Undertaker vs. Bossman

 

Am I the only person that sees a pattern of how much bossman sucks?

 

Hogan's had his share of awful cage matches. [Age in the Cage, Bundy at WM 2(?)]

[Guest nWoScorpion]

True, but that was what? 16 years ago? I didn't expect to see good anything just about unless Steamboat, Savage or Bret Hart were on the card.

[Guest papacita]

Terrible ladder match....

Mankind Vs. The Rock (or was it Bossman) on a Raw in 1998-1999.

1st Kind lost the Hardcore title to Bossman in a ladder match, then lost the World to Rock when the Big Show chokeslammed him off the ladder. I agree about the ladder match..it was hot that night, but watching it later was real bad. WWF title changed hands too many times in 99.

 

I disagree with the Iron Man matches. Even though the McMahons ruined Rock/HHH, it's still a great match with a bullshit ending.

 

As for matches that don't age well with time...Taker Vs Diesel from WM 12. I loved it live but I was bored watching the replay.

 

Just about every match that I liked from 95 that I went back to watch again save HBK's and Bret's matches. Can anybody believe that I actually looked forward to a Bam Bam/Henry Godwinn match?

[Guest]

hogan-rock from wrestlemania, take away the emotion and you are left with one terrible wrestling match

Hulk Who?

 

This has been the Taker Mark

 

I HATE HOGAN

[Guest]

Most of the Hardcore matches in the Attitude era. A lot of them were merely moving from spot with a weapon to another spot with a weapon of some sort. They never really flowed that well for me and although some of them were good at the time, they're a pain to watch because most of the time it's no wrestling whatsoever, just a bunch of guys picking up things and whacking themselves with them.

[Guest Brian]

I thought the iron man match was more smart booking than anything else. Both guys have their flaws, hell the gimmick itself has flaws, but they covered everything. I have to re-watch it at some point in time. It was better than Bret/HBK, which had no flow, no falls, no legitimacy or realism, poor selling, and average story-telling

 

HHH vs. Rock aged really poorly from Backlash.

[Guest RavishingRickRudo]

The psychology in that ladder match was certainly nothing special.  I mean, the psychology in Hart vs. Hart ealier was better (and even then, that's not saying much). The only reason people ever call it a 'great' match because of it's impact on wrestling.

 

Your friend who never had watched wrestling... Why not show him No Mercy 99 and THEN the ladder match?  This is about aging.  NM dwarfed it.

 

Spot matches do age horribly, I agree, but most of the appeal of the WM X ladder match is the spots themselves.  Was it a 'spot fest' no, but in relation to NM, it was childs-play and the lesser match.

 

RRR- feeling a lil more Rudo-ie today.

[Guest]

It was better than Bret/HBK, which had no flow, no falls, no legitimacy or realism, poor selling, and average story-telling

I disagree here. The match was good and featured actual wrestling which is sorely missed. It also proved to me that Shawn could do more than lucha. Sure, the selling was off at SOME points due to the attitudes of both men, but it also made for a much more aggressive match with both guys stiffing the shit out of one another at certain points. Hell, just watch how Shawn works Bret's arm. It's so aggressive and realistic

[Guest RavishingRickRudo]

Oh boo.

 

Hbk vs. Bret Wm 12 was horrible.  Had it been a 60 minute match period, it may have worked, but it wasn't, it was an iron man match.  The story and psychology and format and concept of the match just conflicted and it suffered because of it.

 

HBK works Brets arm for a good 15 minutes with cross arm bar (a move which no Wwf fans is educated to) and Bret just ignored it afterwards.  Why do that when a)it doesnt effect the finish and b)you dont get a fall out of it?  It was just one big time waster.

[Guest RickyChosyu]

Oh boo.

 

Hbk vs. Bret Wm 12 was horrible.  Had it been a 60 minute match period, it may have worked, but it wasn't, it was an iron man match.  The story and psychology and format and concept of the match just conflicted and it suffered because of it.

 

HBK works Brets arm for a good 15 minutes with cross arm bar (a move which no Wwf fans is educated to) and Bret just ignored it afterwards.  Why do that when a)it doesnt effect the finish and b)you dont get a fall out of it?  It was just one big time waster.

It was to show that Shawn could grapple with Bret. The veteran Vs. flashy upstart storyline they were working here was pretty good in itself, but I'll agree that no falls in an iron man match is just tripe. However, I do see a problem with booking a regular match with a sixty-minute time limit, and doing the same finish. The average WWF fan (now, and for that period in time) is not willing to sit through a sixty-minute match unless there is a specific reason why it's going that long. If Shawn just sat there for five minutes with an arm-bar in a normal match, it would have gotten him heel heat, because that's the mindset that WWF fans have always been told to think in. The Iron Man match stipulations were simply there to make the fans go "hey, that guy is smart for pacing himself, because if he uses up too much energy, he won't have any left for the next forty-five minutes!!!" and so on.

 

As a wrestling match, it is too slow and lacks direction at times, but it's still worth seeing, even today. It was no MOTY (blah blah, Mind Games was better, blab blah) but I think it's aged very well for what it is.

[Guest]

I agree with something a friend of mine told me a few months ago... the Iron man Match is an acquired taste. Some think it's a classic while others think it's a bore. I think it's a classic and a great wrestling clinic. I do see the flaws but for the most part I loved it. But that's just me.

[Guest RavishingRickRudo]

The flashy young upstart vs. Old Vet was SO not the story of the match.  And if it was, it certainly was not portrayed well in the match.

 

I think had the Wwf said '60 minute time limit' fans would have clued in that the match would be long.  I don't think the fans would mind that because the story/feud should have been good enough to warrant interest.  

 

Ironman is not an aquired taste.  I love long matches as long as the flow is right and the story sound.  This was neither.  I love the concept of 'most pin falls within 60 minutes' because the psychology can work around it, this didn't have any of that.

 

I think most people like this match just because of the dynamics.. Bret Hart + HBK + 60 minutes + Wrestlemania = great match.

[Guest RickyChosyu]

The flashy young upstart vs. Old Vet was SO not the story of the match.  And if it was, it certainly was not portrayed well in the match.

 

I think had the Wwf said '60 minute time limit' fans would have clued in that the match would be long.  I don't think the fans would mind that because the story/feud should have been good enough to warrant interest.  

 

Ironman is not an aquired taste.  I love long matches as long as the flow is right and the story sound.  This was neither.  I love the concept of 'most pin falls within 60 minutes' because the psychology can work around it, this didn't have any of that.

 

I think most people like this match just because of the dynamics.. Bret Hart + HBK + 60 minutes + Wrestlemania = great match.

Funny, it seemed like that was the story that the comentators were shoving down our throats the entire time.

 

Well, even if they had given it a sixty minute time limit, what reason is there for Shawn to work a match like that? It's not like he was encorperating fifteen-minute mat sequences into any of his other matches, so when a fan see's him do it another match just because he has sixty minutes to beat Hart in, he think "why can't he just beat him in fifteen like every other guy he's wrestled." The psychology of it just doesn't work well. Again, maybe they would have stayed into the match because of storyline alone. Hindsight is 20/20.

 

Agreed, the psychology didn't work around the stipulations enough, and I think that was manely selfishness and ego problems from Hart and Michaels more than anything. And you're right that people do think in that type of mindsight way too often, just like everyone Angle + Benoit +30 mintues = classic last year. However, all the same, it doesn't mean the matches aren't worth seeing.

[Guest RavishingRickRudo]

HBK was in title contention for over a year, (he had a world title match at Wm 11) he certainly was not the 'flashy young new comer'.  Bret hadn't been world champion long enough to be called the vetern, Hell, there have only been 3 years that separates them, Bret was just a step ahead of HBK.  Which really should have been the story of the match, but it didn't trasfer well.  At least in the ring.

 

You, of course, would have to change the psychology if the match was just a straight 60 minute match, but from what they wrestled at Wm12, you wouldn't have to change it that much.

[Guest Hogan Made Wrestling]

The differences between Rock-HHH and Shawn-Bret is that in the former, the guys went out there to have a good match and push each other to the brink so that they both looked great, while in the latter the guys went out there to burn up 60 minutes while each avoiding putting the other guy over in any way at all.

[Guest RicFlairGlory]

HBK was in title contention for over a year, (he had a world title match at Wm 11) he certainly was not the 'flashy young new comer'.  Bret hadn't been world champion long enough to be called the vetern, Hell, there have only been 3 years that separates them, Bret was just a step ahead of HBK.  Which really should have been the story of the match, but it didn't trasfer well.  At least in the ring.

 

You, of course, would have to change the psychology if the match was just a straight 60 minute match, but from what they wrestled at Wm12, you wouldn't have to change it that much.

Much like HHH and the Rock, the Rock having a year and change on HHH, AND having feuded for a while when younger

[Guest godthedog]

personally: i think the bret/hbk iron man match has aged very well, while the trips/rock match has aged horribly in comparison.

 

the first time i saw trips/rock, i thought it was amazing.  the second time i saw it, this is what i noticed:

after the first half of the match, trips & rock got VERY winded.  the match visibly slows down.  they had almost nothing left in them, & they tried to cover it up with outside brawling, table spots, & a looooooooooong sleeper sequence.

there's a lot of obvious points where hbk is talking trips & rock through the match.

there's a whole lot of outside brawling.  way, way more than what was necessary.

 

the booking was about all this match had going for it.  there's lots of flaws, & the match just doesn't hold up to repeated viewings well.

 

my freshman year in college, for 2 or 3 weeks i'd pop the hbk/bret match in after classes everyday.  i could still do that.  people give this match a lot of shit mainly for 2 reasons: it starts slow, and there's only one fall.

i don't really have a problem with the one-fall thing.  the match has a TON of near-falls, & that's good enough for me.

i think with the dueling headlocks & armbars, they had enough reversals to keep it interesting.  and, unlike trips/rock, the match actually BUILDS as it goes on.  i'd rather have a slow beginning & a hot ending than a fast beginning with a finish that drags.

 

the bret/hbk iron man match holds up better, first & foremost, because the wrestling itself is beautiful.  except for shawn's botched ranas, just about everything is executed crisply and cleanly.  when shawn did the moonsalt into a pin on bret, it was graceful.  all 62 minutes look fluid and look good.  trips/rock just doesn't have that kind of aesthetic.

[Guest]

Exactly! I couldn't have said it better myself