What seperates Smarks and Marks?

[Angle-plex 0]

I see people posting about how smarks like this, but the fans like something else. What seperates the two? Maybe 5% of the fanbase thinks wrestling is actually real. The rest knows it's fake and likes certain wrestlers for certain things. How is this different from smarks? How are smarks different from ordinary fans?

 

The actually is a somewhat serious question.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Fans are fans are fans. Not all 'smarks', and I hate labels like that, lilke the same things, and nor do all 'marks' like the same things. There is no more of a difference between the two groups than there is between any two fans picked at random. They're all different, no matter what label people choose to put on them.

[naiwf 0]

Intelligence.

[ANKLELOCK 0]

5% think wrestling is a legit sport?

 

The Hell?

[CanadianChris 0]

Intelligence.

Have you been in the WWE folder lately?

[naiwf 0]

Intelligence.

Have you been in the WWE folder lately?

 

No. I can't watch the product anymore so I don't really care to see people try to discuss it. On another board I went to the mentality was that if you're a fan or a mark then you MUST like everything. Needless to say, I didn't agree. Most marks I've encountered still think like 10 year olds, and as such I can't talk to them without wanting to inflict bodily harm.

[Angle-plex 0]

5% think wrestling is a legit sport?

 

The Hell?

 

Maybe 5%

 

I agree with HTQ though. It just irks me when people are saying so and so wrestler can't get a title shot because the fans don't think he's credible or something. Maybe the mark/smark concept worked in the 80s/dirsheet days but the internet have made all fans the same.

[CanadianChris 0]

Not everybody visits wrestling sites.

[Special K 0]

I think Tough Enough clued in 99.9% of wrestling fans that wrestling is fake, if they didn't already know. I'm sure there are plenty of very young children that think it's real.

 

So basically everyone's a smart or a smark now. (though what differentiates those two terms I have no idea). Smark seems to just be used to denote cynical fans now.

[RepoMan 0]

I think Tough Enough clued in 99.9% of wrestling fans that wrestling is fake, if they didn't already know. I'm sure there are plenty of very young children that think it's real.

 

So basically everyone's a smart or a smark now. (though what differentiates those two terms I have no idea). Smark seems to just be used to denote cynical fans now.

I'd agreee. My friend keeps up with the internet, but likes whatever Vince shoves down his throat and dosn't really care about stuff like workrate. He might be smart, and he's definitly a mark, but I he's not a smark.

[World's Worst Man 0]

The word "smark" seems to mean different things to different people. Some people smarmily use it to define all "smartened up" wrestling fans. Often times they do it just to annoy "smarts", because "smark" used to have a somewhat negative connotation. Some use the term to define fans who look at wrestling in a different way than the average fan. I personally define it to be a fan that's "smart" to the business, but is unable or unwilling to look at wrestling for anything other than the face value. Then a "mark" would be the casual/average fan who really doesn't know the inner workings all that well and also aren't able to see wrestling on any kind of deeper level. And then the "smarts" are those who understand the inner workings and also view/enjoy wrestling on a somewhat deeper level. Of course, these days you have the "anti-smart/smark" smarts, who are annoying, contrarian assholes, who despite me labelling them as "smarts", are really quite stupuid. But that's another rant for another day.

[razazteca 0]

5% think wrestling is a legit sport?

 

The Hell?

http://www.youtube.com/results?search=kent...s&search=Search

[Aero 0]

The biggest things to me are backstage knowledge and how they judge matches. For the latter, almost any smark can tell you how bad an upcoming Big Show-Khali match likely will be. But a mark might be excited to the degree of, "HOW CAN KHALI BEAT THE 500 lb BIG SHOW!?" To go way back, when I was growing up, I loved when Taker would feud with guys like Giant Gonzales and Yokozuna.

 

On backstage stuff, though, the average older fan today is definitely smarter than the average fan from say 1998-1999 when wrestling was at the height of its popularity. I look at it this way: In 1998-1999, almost everyone and their mom was into wrestling at least a little bit. Those that started watching around this time didn't care about what was going on backstage as long as Austin was stunning Vince and DX were on TV each week. Since then, WWE has obviously lost many fans. Today's fans seem like they're mostly (a) all the kids who started watching within the last few years and (b) all the long-time fans who've stuck with wrestling post-2001. The kids eat whatever WWE feeds them... Cena being the obvious example. I'm sure they're on the internet, but they're probably more likely to visit WWE.com rather than the Observer. But the other fans are older and have learned about stuff like HHH's backstage stroke, for example, throughout the years. Obviously, there are exceptions, though.

 

That's just how I look at it.

[JST 0]

Who the fock is Kent Jones?

[Masked Man of Mystery 0]

Who the fock is Kent Jones?

I know of a Kent Jones that does a report on Rachel Maddow's radio show, but I doubt that's who you mean.

[Guest The Beta Male]

5% think wrestling is a legit sport?

 

The Hell?

http://www.youtube.com/results?search=kent...s&search=Search

 

"Mr. Jones Shoots on his son.".... yeah, i`m not watching that

 

i think some in-ring experience will benefit anyone who wants to appreciate the match as a visual piece.

It certainly changed how i view the business and made me appreciate just how much goes into putting ona good show (it also confirmed the old viewpoint that it`s staged, but it sure isn`t fake... it hurts )

[Wrestlefreak 0]

Smarks

 

Smarks understand that wrestling is predetermined, and have knowledge of its inner workings. Thus, they are more critical of the product and demand alot from it. They can, however, praise good booking decisions or an angle that is done right. Generally, Smarks view the wrestling as the most inportant part of the show(as I do). It is possible for a Smark to "Mark-out", meaning that during a wrestling show, when for example, a wrestler executes a cool spot during a match, or a segment or promo etc is well done, a Smark may get as excited and be genuinely entertained as a Mark would be.

 

 

 

Marks

 

The technical definition of a a mark is somebody who thinks wrestling is a legitimate sport. However, a broader definition of the term can also be given as someone who is aware that wrestling is predetermined, but is not critical or analytical of the product on any level and is happy to accept the booking decisions and writing of a promotion without questioning them. Marks are usually entertained by the product even when the core fanbase is unhappy with it.

 

 

__________________________________________________________________________

 

P.S. These are only my definition of the terms, based on my views.

[foleyfanforever88 0]

I also thought part of it was that marks generally cheer for the good guy while smarks tend to cheer for who they like more, generally the more talented guy.

[Angle-plex 0]

By those definitions I would say the majority of the wrestling fans are smarks, which contradicts a lot of what people post here.

[buffybeast 0]

The biggest things to me are backstage knowledge and how they judge matches. For the latter, almost any smark can tell you how bad an upcoming Big Show-Khali match likely will be. But a mark might be excited to the degree of, "HOW CAN KHALI BEAT THE 500 lb BIG SHOW!?" To go way back, when I was growing up, I loved when Taker would feud with guys like Giant Gonzales and Yokozuna.

 

On backstage stuff, though, the average older fan today is definitely smarter than the average fan from say 1998-1999 when wrestling was at the height of its popularity. I look at it this way: In 1998-1999, almost everyone and their mom was into wrestling at least a little bit. Those that started watching around this time didn't care about what was going on backstage as long as Austin was stunning Vince and DX were on TV each week. Since then, WWE has obviously lost many fans. Today's fans seem like they're mostly (a) all the kids who started watching within the last few years and (b) all the long-time fans who've stuck with wrestling post-2001. The kids eat whatever WWE feeds them... Cena being the obvious example. I'm sure they're on the internet, but they're probably more likely to visit WWE.com rather than the Observer. But the other fans are older and have learned about stuff like HHH's backstage stroke, for example, throughout the years. Obviously, there are exceptions, though.

 

That's just how I look at it.

 

I agree. I've met casual fans who know wrestling is fake and scripted but are clueless on the backstage politics or drama that occurs. I gave one guy the explanation why Matt Hardy was fired last year after the whole affair between Edge and Lita. The dude had no idea any of this was going on in real life and how ugly things had become. Also, I'll point out some of the finer points of how a match works and all the casual fans I've met were like, really? So, to me, there is a difference between us and them.

[Smartly Pretty 0]

So basically everyone's a smart or a smark now. (though what differentiates those two terms I have no idea). Smark seems to just be used to denote cynical fans now.

 

Smart = someone who actually works in the buisness

[Lil' Bitch 0]

A smark would think Chris Benoit is the greatest wrestler of all time. A mark would think Bill Goldberg is the greatest wrestler of all time. A smark would know HHH would hold the title for a real long time only because he's part of the McMahon family. A mark would think HHH would hold the title for a real long time because he's the greatest wrestler alive today. A smark would know an angle is an angle. A mark would believe everything he sees on TV.

 

Those are just prime examples.

 

My biggest annoyance being labled a smark is that I'm a total negative WWE fan and I hate EVERYTHING I see come from the company, which I find to be completely unfair. My biggest annoyance with marks is that A.) They think its real B.) Grown-ups acting completely like 5 year olds C.) In general, they can't appreciate true workers like Benoit, Jericho, etc. and would rather root for typical hosses

[Angle-plex 0]

But who, in 2006, actually believes everything they see on a pro wrestling show? I know a nine year old that loves watching and knows it's fake and who's favorite wrestlers are Flair, Hogan, and Angle, yet he knows nothing about backstage politics. What would he be?

[naiwf 0]

But who, in 2006, actually believes everything they see on a pro wrestling show? I know a nine year old that loves watching and knows it's fake and who's favorite wrestlers are Flair, Hogan, and Angle, yet he knows nothing about backstage politics. What would he be?

 

A mark. Knowing that it's fake, but still being spoon fed everything Vince wants you to think makes you a mark regardless of how old you are.

[Papacita 0]

To me, backstage knowledge is irrelevent when determining who's a smark and who's not, because whether you're it's from a wrestling promoter or a wrestling reporter, chances are you're being worked one way or the other. Besides, with the internet being as prevalent as it is, I'm willing to bet that most fans (or at least half) have been exposed to at least some insider info. Hell, at my high school, I can remember some of the casual fans surfing sites like LOP and telling me about the Corporate Ministry at least 2 weeks before they debuted.

 

And I really don't like to get into all the generalizations either, because for every hardcore Benoit fan out there, you've got somebody like me who roots for Chyna. Speaking for myself, the only discernable difference I see between my "mark" days and my current view of wrestling (which is more "smarkish" than anything) is that now I have a better understanding of why I react to certain matches/angles the way I do. Overall, my tastes haven't changed.

[Guest hasbeen]

More interest in knowing the backstage developments, not just having the knowledge.

[JHawk 0]

Believe it or not, Lee Marshall of all people gave the best explanation of it:

 

"We're all marks, but you have to be in the business to be a smart mark."

[Papacita 0]

More interest in knowing the backstage developments, not just having the knowledge.

I'm guess this is directed at me. Either way, my point is that knowing and/or caring about backstage happenings doesn't make you smart by any means. To me the fan who posts "fuck Steph and Gewirtz" because of their rumored treatment of Heyman is really no different than the fan who boos heel X because he did something dastardly to face Y. You're marking one way or the other.

[Guest hasbeen]

That wasn't directed at anyone. It was my definition. While I'm watching the shows, I try not to think about the backstage stuff, just like when I'm watching a movie-if it's interesting enough-I don't think about how much money it will make, if the actor was a jerk during filming. Don't know if that makes me a "mark" at least temporarily.

[Jericholic82 0]

actually in the 98-99 era I was going online regularly thru my webtv and school computers and reading the news and rumor sites. mostly for spoilers so I could look like a psychic or somehting to my friends.

 

another example of a smark, can be someone who boos the face snad cheers the heels cuz they're cool (also sometimes, I think, just to be different and prove that they are not "marks"- hell I believe a large percantage of fans who claim they love great wrestling and hate gimmicks and sports-entertainment have no idea what they are talking about and have been brainwashed.)

 

But as said before, we who have knowledge that it is "fake" and the inner workings, expect the best since et is pre-booked/written