Hitman-heartbreak kid

[Guest]

Sure, Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels hate each other...

Sure, Both the Hitman & the Heartbreak Kid are contenders for the greatest WWF ( fuck you pandas ) champion of all time...

 

But when it comes down to the bottom line, who *IS* the better man? Both athletes had tremendous talent, and were able to adapt to any style they needed to in order to make a match worth watching. However, which do you think did this feat the best? Is Bret Hart superior to Shawn Michaels? Or is the Heartbreak Hotel just too full of talent for a Hitman to take out?

 

This has been the Taker Mark

[Guest]

Hart had some good matches over the years, but it seemed like HBK was able to carry ANYONE to a **** match. So, IMO, HBK was more talented.

[Guest Mark4steamboat]

Hitman could have a good match with about anyone where as Shawn often could have good matches with certain people. Shawn  had good matches in the rockers against larger teams but bret had great matches in the HF with teams his size and larger.

Its extremely close but im going to go with Bret.

[Guest nWoScorpion]

Shawn Michaels wa smore a high flyer while Bret was more technically sund. Bret carried everyone to goodmatch except the undertaker while Shawn had 2-3 great PPVs with him, but Bret was willing to do the job when necciscary, yet shawn was jobbing nightly asa Rocker. Overall wrestling wise Bret Hart, charisma, shawn Michaels. Its a toss up but Bret Hart is better. (i mean he dragged ***+ matches out of Glen Jacobs, Jean Pierre Lafitee, Hakushi, Diesel inside a 5 month period!)

[Guest KanadianKrusty]

(i mean he dragged ***+ matches out of Glen Jacobs, Jean Pierre Lafitee, Hakushi, Diesel inside a 5 month period!)

hey!, Hakushi and Jean-Pierre Lafitte aren't THAT bad, Hakushi aka Shinzei Shinzaki is awesome IMO and Jean-Pierre Lafitte is pretty good for a guy his size so it's pretty logical they had ***+ matches with Bret...

 

back on topic... I don't really know who was the best because they both carried pretty much everyone, and they were both awesome in the ring, but as far as wrestling goes, Bret is better than Shawn BUT, HBK was a better character plus he was always bumping like a madman while Bret wasn't.But overall, I think I would pick Bret.

[Guest Kahran Ramsus]

Shawn is the better athlete, by a long shot, but he didn't have the know-how in the ring that Bret did.  Overall, I would say that Bret was the better wrestler.  Much of it had to do with Shawn's attitude.  Bret was fantastic from 1991-1997.  Shawn's peak years were 1995-1996 (He was good in 1994, but spent most of the year as a commentator on RAW and managing Diesel.)  He was broken down by 1997, despite a few great matches that were too few and far between.  The Shawn of 1991-1993 isn't anywhere near the level of Bret in the same period.

 

On longevity alone it has to go to Bret.

[Guest]

I agree with most of you on this one...

 

I think it was nWo Scorpion that said Shawn jobbed a lot? As a Rocker, maybe so, but in that same period of time, Hitman was also doing the exact same thing. As Shawn's star began to take shape however, he grew that cocky egocentric personality that we all know all to well, which lead to Shawn being, to put it bluntly, an arrogant prick.

 

So in terms of just plain being a nice guy, I'd cast my personal vote for the Hitman, not just because he was my hero growing up ( You were up there too Taker! ), but because Bret was a guy who didn't have the cocky edge that Shawn did.

 

Hitman Rules, burn down the Heartbreak Hotel

 

This has been the Taker Mark

[Guest TheDames7]

....Bret got a good match out of Skinner at This Tuesday in Texas.  

 

Dames

[Guest]

....Bret got a good match out of Skinner at This Tuesday in Texas.  

 

Dames

Later that night he walked on water, cured the blind and fed the whole town with just 2 fish and a loaf of bread.

 

This has been the Taker Mark

[Guest Risk]

Bret.  Without a doupt.  Though Shawn's career was cut short by high risk moves and being an a-hole.

[Guest]

hmm...looks like Bret Hart is winning

[Guest Tod deKindes]

This is the kind of question that could be debated for years, just like the Montreal incident.

 

Whereas both men had their own qualities that made them unique in the ring, it is impossible to determine just who is better than the other. It'd be all based on someone's opinion and no matter what somebody says, there's always going to be somebody ready to disagree and offer his counterpoint.

 

To solve this problem, we need to combine both wrestler into one man (phone rings) Excuse me...

 

...

 

Yeah?

 

...

 

You're kidding.

 

...

 

You sure?

 

...

 

Ok. Auf Wiedersehen.

 

...

 

Looks like there's already a band called Poison with frontman Bret Michaels. Whaddya know...

[Guest Your Olympic Hero]

I have always been a bigger fan of Bret.

[Guest RetroRob215]

I have always liked Shawn more than Bret when it came to atheleticism and character.  Sure he was a bitch, but Bret is no saint either.

[Guest converge241]

I agree the most with Kahran's sentiments. Shawn is the better athlete and he had that certain "magic" that made him so great, but id have to go Bret hes just a little more fundamentally and psychological sound.

[Guest]

I'm going to throw a vote Shawn's way due to the fact that he got good matches out of Sid. Sid! Talk about your miracle workers.

[Guest dreamer420]

My vote goes to Bret.  Watching Bret Hart in the ring was amazing as every move was executed with smooth perfection.  He didn't injure other wrestlers, and I would always tell that he was giving 110% in the ring.

[Guest godthedog]

Shawn Michaels wa smore a high flyer while Bret was more technically sund. Bret carried everyone to goodmatch except the undertaker while Shawn had 2-3 great PPVs with him, but Bret was willing to do the job when necciscary, yet shawn was jobbing nightly asa Rocker. Overall wrestling wise Bret Hart, charisma, shawn Michaels. Its a toss up but Bret Hart is better. (i mean he dragged ***+ matches out of Glen Jacobs, Jean Pierre Lafitee, Hakushi, Diesel inside a 5 month period!)

are you on crack?  go watch the 'one night only' ppv from 1997, you'll see a certifiably great match bret gets out of the undertaker.  bret himself said that it was his last great match in the wwf.  their match from summerslam 97 is also quite good (though not as good as their uk match).

[Guest]

I recently had to answer this question in my head.  I was trying to, once and for all, establish who my all time favorite was.  After much deliberation, I came down to the final three.  Bret, HBK, and Flair.  I eliminated Flair on the basis that I watched the other 2 much more throughout the 90's and followed their careers a bit more.  It took me a while with the last two, but I finally had to go with Bret Hart as being the all time best.

[Guest dreamer420]

I guess when he started calling himself THE BEST THERE IS, THE BEST THERE WAS, and THE BEST THERE EVER WILL BE he wasn't lying was he?

[Guest areacode212]

Bret had a reputation for "turning it off" and not working very hard during house shows, while Shawn supposedly tore the house down every night. I was at a Montreal house show in early '95 which featured a Bret/Owen match and a Shawn/Pierre-Carl Ouellet (aka Pierre the Quebecer) match. As I recall, Bret/Owen was a bit too slow-paced for my taste, and Bret had Owen suffering in the sharpshooter for like 5 minutes, which bored me to tears.

 

On the other hand, Shawn/Pierre a lot more action and was just generally more exciting. Also, Shawn got involved in a cool mini-angle which made the show a lot more memorable.

 

Still, Bret was involved in my all-time favorite match (Bret/Austin from WM13). Hmm, who to pick? I'll go with Shawn just because I was always more of an HBK mark than I was a Bret mark. I still love Bret though.

[Guest Kahran Ramsus]

Bret had a reputation for "turning it off" and not working very hard during house shows, while Shawn supposedly tore the house down every night.

 

Really?  He always put on a good show when I saw him at a house show.  Maybe because I'm Canadian.

[Guest pinnacleofallthingsmanly]

Shawn Michaels

[Guest areacode212]

Bret had a reputation for "turning it off" and not working very hard during house shows, while Shawn supposedly tore the house down every night.

 

Really?  He always put on a good show when I saw him at a house show.  Maybe because I'm Canadian.

Yeah, I remember people often complaining about that whenever the "Who's the better worker, Bret or Shawn?" debate would come up, back when they were both active.

[Guest]

Bret had a reputation for "turning it off" and not working very hard during house shows, while Shawn supposedly tore the house down every night.

 

Really?  He always put on a good show when I saw him at a house show.  Maybe because I'm Canadian.

Yeah, I remember people often complaining about that whenever the "Who's the better worker, Bret or Shawn?" debate would come up, back when they were both active.

I'm sure you'd be at a loss when it comes to motivation after the bullshit Vince McMahon put Bret "Hitman" Hart through.

 

After the Hitman's loss to Bob Backlund in '94, he was drastically scaled down to mid-card level, which followed those 'great classics' with Jerry Lawler and his 'evil dentist'.

 

Not to mention that fued with Jean-Pierre LaFitte.

 

So within that time period i don't blame Bret Hart for lack of motivation, Vince had damaged the Hitman emotionally which almost led to Bret jumping ship to be the mysterious third man in the 6-Man tag at Bash at the Beach '96.

 

FUCK YOU VINCE, Bret remained loyal to you for WHAT? Fuckin' nothing, rot in hell you bastard.

 

This has been the Taker Mark

[Guest godthedog]

Shawn Michaels

way to back up those arguments.

 

anyway, my thoughts: i personally prefer bret, but i think it's just because i like his style of wrestling more.  i've got a bret hart greatest hits tape & a shawn michaels greatest hits tape, and i find myself watching the former a lot more often than the latter.  bret just seemed to have a better head on his shoulders with how to put a match together.  bret/owen and bret/austin have more repeat value to me than shawn/foley or hell in a cell.  when bret put a match together he always put dramatic value first, while shawn blended a lot of dramatic value with shock value.  

 

shawn was more relentlessly innovative than bret, and you could argue that the way HE put a match together was more responsible than anyone else for the current wwf style.  but i just really don't like his style as much as bret's.

 

they are probably equals in the talent department, but bret seemed the smarter worker (even down to the way he bumps) while shawn seemed the harder worker (never seen him dogging it in a match).

[Guest Choken One]

This question has been debated for years on years now, and we'll never have a right answer. Each superstar had thier own little intangibles that made them so special.

 

These two guys were the cream of the crop in the mid 90's, in fact only two other wrestlers have surprassed them in totalality, Ric Flair and Steve Austin in the last 25 years.  Who put on a entertaining show no matter what? Shawn. Even just commentating or managing, he was entertaining. Bret never had Shawn's charisma but Shawn never had Bret's techical skills.

 

I've seen both Hart and HBK perform at House shows, I watched each man wrestle Owen Hart...Who got a better match? Shawn. Bret seemed to take it easy and kept it on the ground to alot of booing and groaning and had the anti-climatic finish. Shawn later that night, tore the house down in a match with Ramon. Shawn wrestled Owen shortly after winning the world title and had the crowd hotter then anyother match, meanwhile, Bret Had a horrible and boring match against Foley.  So, Shawn gave effort in House Shows.

 

Shawn has had more High-Profile matches and many of them were considered innovotive gimmick matches, The Ladder Matches, Iron Man (although it existed long before), HIAC and he is said to carried more wrestlers to **** matches that had no business being in a **** match. Bret, never could carry the big lugs like Sid or Undertaker to **** matches, but Shawn could.  Bret perhaps, had more sound quality matches over his 8 year singles run with a wide varity of wrestlers like Bulldog, Skinner, Jean Pierre, Hakishi, Owen, and many more along with the big names.

 

 Who was the bigger draw? Hard to say since they were both at the top at the same time. I'd say Shawn had a better House Show draw then bret did.

 

Who was the best character, Shawn has had about 3 different characters, The ego-manaic heartbreaker (1992-1995), The self-confident boy wonder (1996) and the egotiscal jackass (1997-98), bret was the "good boy" from 1991 to early 1997 and the anti-American pro canadian for about 6 months. Who played the characters better? Equal. I really don't know who could play DXShawn the way Shawn did, however, Anti-America has been a old and tired gimmick, only with a new country during a time of no war.

 

Who had the better ending note? If you look at it in a Pure wrestling aspect, Shawn left on top of the game, sacrificed his body for a good show. He left with two ***- ****" matches and handed the torch to the next big thing that took over the indrustry and retired on the biggest show WWF produced in years. Still employed and has a wonderful marriage and kid and finally found his faith.  

 Bret had a less stellar ending note, after a disgraceful run with WCW and a one month title reign, his last match was with Kevin Nash in a weak and boring match on a low rated second rate show "Thunder" suffered a concession from a bad kick by a untalented star, Goldberg and retired.  Still bitter to the very end, divorced and lonely, still trying to reclaim his fame via embrassing apperences on hokey "Calling the dead" shows, unable to accept his brother's death.

 

It looks to me, in the end, Shawn won the war.

[Guest]

This question has been debated for years on years now, and we'll never have a right answer. Each superstar had thier own little intangibles that made them so special.

 

These two guys were the cream of the crop in the mid 90's, in fact only two other wrestlers have surprassed them in totalality, Ric Flair and Steve Austin in the last 25 years.  Who put on a entertaining show no matter what? Shawn. Even just commentating or managing, he was entertaining. Bret never had Shawn's charisma but Shawn never had Bret's techical skills.

 

I've seen both Hart and HBK perform at House shows, I watched each man wrestle Owen Hart...Who got a better match? Shawn. Bret seemed to take it easy and kept it on the ground to alot of booing and groaning and had the anti-climatic finish. Shawn later that night, tore the house down in a match with Ramon. Shawn wrestled Owen shortly after winning the world title and had the crowd hotter then anyother match, meanwhile, Bret Had a horrible and boring match against Foley.  So, Shawn gave effort in House Shows.

 

Shawn has had more High-Profile matches and many of them were considered innovotive gimmick matches, The Ladder Matches, Iron Man (although it existed long before), HIAC and he is said to carried more wrestlers to **** matches that had no business being in a **** match. Bret, never could carry the big lugs like Sid or Undertaker to **** matches, but Shawn could.  Bret perhaps, had more sound quality matches over his 8 year singles run with a wide varity of wrestlers like Bulldog, Skinner, Jean Pierre, Hakishi, Owen, and many more along with the big names.

 

 Who was the bigger draw? Hard to say since they were both at the top at the same time. I'd say Shawn had a better House Show draw then bret did.

 

Who was the best character, Shawn has had about 3 different characters, The ego-manaic heartbreaker (1992-1995), The self-confident boy wonder (1996) and the egotiscal jackass (1997-98), bret was the "good boy" from 1991 to early 1997 and the anti-American pro canadian for about 6 months. Who played the characters better? Equal. I really don't know who could play DXShawn the way Shawn did, however, Anti-America has been a old and tired gimmick, only with a new country during a time of no war.

 

Who had the better ending note? If you look at it in a Pure wrestling aspect, Shawn left on top of the game, sacrificed his body for a good show. He left with two ***- ****" matches and handed the torch to the next big thing that took over the indrustry and retired on the biggest show WWF produced in years. Still employed and has a wonderful marriage and kid and finally found his faith.  

 Bret had a less stellar ending note, after a disgraceful run with WCW and a one month title reign, his last match was with Kevin Nash in a weak and boring match on a low rated second rate show "Thunder" suffered a concession from a bad kick by a untalented star, Goldberg and retired.  Still bitter to the very end, divorced and lonely, still trying to reclaim his fame via embrassing apperences on hokey "Calling the dead" shows, unable to accept his brother's death.

 

It looks to me, in the end, Shawn won the war.

Very good peice of work there, well done

 

This has been the Taker Mark

[Guest cobainwasmurdered]

Bret Hart.

 

Kahran nailed it. Bret was better for a longer period of time. and I've been to lots of house shows that Bret and Shawn were on. Shawn acted like a prick and no sold everything will Bret put on an exhibition every time.

 

This is one of the questions that we'll be debatinf for years. Shawn was the better Show man byt Bret was the better wrestler.

[Guest thefrenchargel]

Bret never really had a year to match Shawn's stellar 96 run, IMO. The closest thing would be 94, I suppose, but most of that year was spent wrestling Owen, primarily, while Shawn was busting ass and dragging everyone to great matches, kicking and screaming. In the long run, though. Bret edges out Shawn by virtue of sheer volume of great work.