Triple H was wrong

[Guest korndogg123]

Triple H is wrong about being undefeated in Hell In A Cell matches, unless of course he's talking about singles matches as he lost the Armageddon six-man match against Rock, Austin, Angle, Undertaker, and Rikishi

[tekcop 0]

Yeah. WWE also said HHH had never beaten Benoit during their fued. Don't pay attention to anything they say. It's usually a lie.

[Guest Dale Earnhardt]

Triple H isn't wrong,

 

He was never DEFEATED in a Hell in a Cell. He didn't take the pinfall in the Armageddon 6-way and therefore you could twist what Hunter says to exclude that one.

[WrestlingFan4Ever 0]

korndogg, I'm telling management on your ass. Kiss your career goodbye!

[Lord of The Curry 0]

It's funny*, I figured that Angle would try and insert himself into the HIAC on Monday by bringing up the fact that, when it comes to HHH and Kurt Angle, he's up 1-0.

 

*May not be funny to you.

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

HHH is also wrong in that he's a draw, when he is in fact, not. Alert the presses!

[WrestlingFan4Ever 0]

Is there anyway to find out what each wrestler made per year? I am really curious to see what the main eventers in the WWE make. I'm curious what HBK makes now as well as Angle, Cena, etc....

[AlaskanHero 0]

Triple H is wrong about everything ever. Because he's a liar.

 

Anyways, everyone should know by now that anything older than 6 weeks can be forgotten or revised in WWE Land.

[B. Brian Brunzell 0]

Yeah, six weeks sounds about right. Next thing you know, Ross will be talking about how Shawn Michaels and Angle have never had a match.

[Cuban Linx 0]

The Six Man HIAC seems to have been all but written out of WWE history, just like Taker/Bossman it's never mentioned at all, even when talking about past Hell in a Cell's.

[Jericholic82 0]

The Six Man HIAC seems to have been all but written out of WWE history, just like Taker/Bossman it's never mentioned at all, even when talking about past Hell in a Cell's.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

funny raw magazine this month mentions both of these and even shows pics. angle has even been known to brag that he beat all of these big stars in one HIAC. But apparantly HHH thinks its his match now cuz they keep booking him in it.

 

as for being a draw, I dont believe any one guy really draws anymore (even though raw and sd may have different audiences), but the crowd still reacts to him so you can make many arguements.

[Art Sandusky 0]

I remember back when Hell in the Cell was supposed to be the Smackdown match, while Raw got the Elimination Chamber. Funny how things cHHHange, now both are Raw matches.

[zyn081 0]

I think the Stone Cold & UT vs Mankind & Kane and the Snow vs Bossman HitCs are forgotten even more. Speak about wasted gimmicks.

[B. Brian Brunzell 0]

I think the Stone Cold & UT vs Mankind & Kane and the Snow vs Bossman HitCs are forgotten even more. Speak about wasted gimmicks.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hey, Snow/Bossman was a DOG KENNEL FROM HELL match. There's a difference, you know.

[Jericholic82 0]

I think the Stone Cold & UT vs Mankind & Kane and the Snow vs Bossman HitCs are forgotten even more. Speak about wasted gimmicks.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

well that tag hiac wasnt really a match as they just brawled and austin adn kane fought on top of the cell. but it is never mentoned, as well as a septemberish 98 HIAC on raw between mankind and kane.

[zyn081 0]

I think the Stone Cold & UT vs Mankind & Kane and the Snow vs Bossman HitCs are forgotten even more. Speak about wasted gimmicks.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hey, Snow/Bossman was a DOG KENNEL FROM HELL match. There's a difference, you know.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think the Stone Cold & UT vs Mankind & Kane and the Snow vs Bossman HitCs are forgotten even more. Speak about wasted gimmicks.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

well that tag hiac wasnt really a match as they just brawled and austin adn kane fought on top of the cell. but it is never mentoned, as well as a septemberish 98 HIAC on raw between mankind and kane.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

They still used the Cell. And were supposed to be matches. My point is that the 6 way is not the least known out of the Cell matches and HHH wasnt pinned so hes right. Take a Triple Threat match. You can lose the title and the match without being pinned.

[Guest JerichosHi-Lite]

S'funny, I've been saying about Armageddon HIAC for a while now. You could argue that HHH has never been beaten in a Hell in a Cell because in the 6-man, Kurt pinned the Rock (right?) so technically the Rock lost. But then, if Kurt won, doesn't that mean that everybody else lost?

 

It boils down to something I've had numerous discussions with friends about - in a Triple Threat match, is it only the one who is pinned/taps out that loses? Or is there one winner and two losers?

 

HHH does have an argument because technically he really never has been defeated in a HIAC, but he just didn't win that one.

 

Kurt's undefeated in HIAC, though. He should've brought that one up.

 

 

Also, kind of O.T. but I love (and by love, I mean hate) how HIAC used to be Taker's match and rightfully so, and now it's HHH's match. What does Taker have now? His 'Mania streak. They'll probably take that off him, too.

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

What does Taker have now? His 'Mania streak. They'll probably take that off him, too.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Well I hope they do. It serves for a great rub if done correctly. No one should be such a mark for themselves that they retire with that kind of streak intact. It should be used for someone else to come along and end his streak and career at Mania.

[Guest JerichosHi-Lite]

What does Taker have now? His 'Mania streak. They'll probably take that off him, too.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Well I hope they do. It serves for a great rub if done correctly. No one should be such a mark for themselves that they retire with that kind of streak intact. It should be used for someone else to come along and end his streak and career at Mania.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I used to think so, too, but when you think about it, Taker has sweet F.A. to his name. Only 4 WWE titles in, what, nearly 15 years? He used to have Hell in a Cell until someone took that from him. He's only main-evented one Mania, and it wasn't even planned ... for the total legend that he is, he really hasn't got that much to his name.

 

Whereas Triple H had endless accomplishments from the very beginning.

 

I'm a big big fan of Randy Orton's but I would've been pissed off as hell if he'd beaten Taker. I just think if they've gone to 13 victories with him, that there's no point in ending it. It's even THAT BIG a deal, his streak. It's really only ever mentioned at WrestleMania time. All it does it water down his opponent, but WWE can easily make you think his opponent will win, like they did with Orton this year.

 

I first noticed this when they did Tale of the Tape at (I think) No Mercy 2003. Brock had been in it not even two years and had all these titles, KOTR, Rumble victory, a Mania main event, and all Taker had was 4 titles and his Mania streak.

 

I just think that for the total legend he is, the streak's the very least they can give him.

[zyn081 0]

What does Taker have now? His 'Mania streak. They'll probably take that off him, too.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Well I hope they do. It serves for a great rub if done correctly. No one should be such a mark for themselves that they retire with that kind of streak intact. It should be used for someone else to come along and end his streak and career at Mania.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I used to think so, too, but when you think about it, Taker has sweet F.A. to his name. Only 4 WWE titles in, what, nearly 15 years? He used to have Hell in a Cell until someone took that from him. He's only main-evented one Mania, and it wasn't even planned ... for the total legend that he is, he really hasn't got that much to his name.

 

Whereas Triple H had endless accomplishments from the very beginning.

 

I'm a big big fan of Randy Orton's but I would've been pissed off as hell if he'd beaten Taker. I just think if they've gone to 13 victories with him, that there's no point in ending it. It's even THAT BIG a deal, his streak. It's really only ever mentioned at WrestleMania time. All it does it water down his opponent, but WWE can easily make you think his opponent will win, like they did with Orton this year.

 

I first noticed this when they did Tale of the Tape at (I think) No Mercy 2003. Brock had been in it not even two years and had all these titles, KOTR, Rumble victory, a Mania main event, and all Taker had was 4 titles and his Mania streak.

 

I just think that for the total legend he is, the streak's the very least they can give him.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Its true and UT has been the loyalist service there is. But he has headed the Minstry too and constantly been associated with the ME. That why he has never gone after the IC title and thats what I think made his Hardcore title reign more credible, he went for it just to get back at Van Dam. Only the WWE title means anything to him and thats the way it should.

 

He still has casket matches, buried alive matches, inferno matches, boiler room brawl matches....

[Danville_Wrestling 0]

Haha, interesting thread to put this in since these two bisect each other but wasn't HHH supposed to END the Undertaker's winning streak @ WrestleMania X-7 before the booking got changed? If so, thank God that didn't happen.