Loss

Which order would you place the following matches in? I'm curious. Misawa v Kawada - 6/3/94 Misawa/Kobashi v Kawada/Taue - 6/9/95 Misawa/Akiyama v Kawada/Taue - 12/6/96 Hokuto v Kandori - 4/2/93 Toyota/Yamada v Ozaki/Kansai - 11/26/92 When discussing the top five matches of the 90s, these are, most of the time, the matches that come up more than any others. So, how would you rank them compared to each other, and why would you say some are better than others? I've never heard much extended talk about the 6/95 and 12/96 tags for example, or comparing 6/3/94 to those matches. Nor have I heard much comparing AJW's peak to AJPW's peak. Misawa/Kobashi v Kawada/Taue - 6/9/95 Near-perfect match that just climaxes beautifully from one stage to the other. I've watched a lot of AJPW the past few weeks while converting VHS tapes for MisawaGQ and I think there are things I appreciate more in this match than I did before. After seeing the M/K v K/T 12/93 RWTL final and seeing Kobashi go after Kawada's leg, it's very satisfying to see Kawada get his revenge here. Kawada shows immediately, actually, that 6/9 would be his night, kicking Misawa square in the face just weeks after Misawa's carnival final against Taue where that played a big part. Misawa getting pinned by Kawada for the first time is the most perfect finish possible in these circumstances. The nodowa on Kobashi's knee and Misawa covering Kobashi to protect him remain two of my all-time favorite spots, meaning that if I were asked to name my five favorite moments ever in a wrestling match, these would both be there, and they'd possibly be the top two. Damnit, I'm cut short right as I'm wanting to finish my point, but I wanted to go ahead and post what I've already written, and I'll write the rest later today or tomorrow morning. Explanations will come later, but I think this is the order I'm sticking with: (1) Toyota/Yamada v Kansai/Ozaki - 11/26/92 AJW Dream Rush (2) Misawa/Akiyama v Kawada/Taue - 12/06/96 AJPW RWTL final (3) Hokuto v Kandori - AJW 04/02/93 Dreamslam I (4) Misawa v Kawada - AJPW 06/03/94 (5) Misawa/Kobashi v Kawada/Taue - AJPW 06/09/95

I thnk the frustration toward HHH lies in the fact that if he wanted the belt back tomorrow, he could get it, and immediately erase the past year of non-stop jobbing. He's definitely stayed out of the spotlight this year, but HHH deserves all the criticism he gets because of who he chooses to put over and who he chooses to bury. He has no problem laying down for Batista repeatedly. Or even Chris Benoit, a great worker who'll never be the type they can build around. Or Shawn Michaels, his best friend. Why couldn't he give that treatment to Chris Jericho, Rob Van Dam or Booker T when they were all very over and fans were wanting to see them take that spot?

JBL - Best promo in WWE and also very good in the ring. He was a midcarder for a very long time. Get over it. He has totally reinvented himself and is now in the upper echelon of workers they have, and his interviews are miles above anyone's in 2005.

AJ Styles Christopher Daniels Shawn Michaels In that order.

I agree that Taker was out of line, but poor Matt. 2005 has seen a lot of questionable career decisions on his part.

I will probably like this match when I see it, actually, just because I've heard that both Han and Tamura are very charismatic. I was referring to personality-free wrestling before, where it's all about the moves, holds and spots and there's zero connection. That's how I see Dean Malenko, but I've never heard anyone describe these guys this way.

Matt Hardy is the most self-destructive guy in wrestling, but I'll be damned if he's also not the most well-meaning.

I have a signed letter from The Rock detailing these matters in fact, but I don't have a scanner. Jeez, man, what more do you want? There's also the point that Hogan and Bret, and Hogan and Shawn, have had heat. And if you honestly think Piper has more credibility than Bret, I'm just going to laugh at you. And if you honestly think Rock is going to say anything public at all about wrestling at this point, keep waiting. This is not anything new. This is something Dave Meltzer has been talking about for years and years and years.

Bret Hart has said it. Hulk Hogan has said it. Shawn Michaels has even said it (albeit a long time ago). It's not exactly a secret that Vince has been known to pit his top stars against each other. That has nothing to do with "locker room morale".

Mad Dog, you stole all the good ones. The "TWO!" from the WWE crowd is sort of annoying as well, but not as bad as others.

Civility and heat can co-exist. Look at Rock and HHH. Bret and Shawn, as you mentioned. Hogan and Savage. Vince has a long history of driving a wedge between his top stars, supposedly because he thinks it makes the promos better.

There's a joke about Luger and Elizabeth and WWE Confidential that I can't quite figure out how to word properly.

Yes.

My memory is hazy, but they actually *did* kill Al Wilson, didn't they?

It'll never happen, but if everyone in the locker room would stand together and refuse to do stuff like that, they'd no longer be able to book guys to do it. But there would always be one guy who'd sneak by everyone and offer to do it anyway to get on management's side, which is why Vince perpetuates an environment where the wrestlers don't get along. Because if they all united, they'd be stronger than him.

They're mad at Vito backstage, so they make him eat worms on a pay-per-view? Seriously, what the fuck are they always so angry about?

I'm waiting on the line about HIAC killing the Big Boss Man to come eventually, at the rate they're going lately.

JBL going over is not a surprise, nor am I disappointed by it, but there was no reason to *not* put Hardy over there. JBL would have lost nothing and Hardy might have gained a lot. There's also no reason the match couldn't have been more competitive. On paper, that match actually looks pretty good.

You obviously can't read. I said the book has the potential to outsell any book that done THAT WWE DID NOT PUBLISH. That disqualifies Flair's book. And yes, I'd expect it to outsell Sex, Lies and Headlocks.

There are also frequent talent mismatches in the undercard, so there are probably a lot of situations where the better guy calls for lots of spots that he ends up not getting because the other guy gets confused or can't pull them off.

HHH does a lot of meaningless jobs. I actually agree with that. He loses when it's meaningless for him to lose and wins when he has no business winning, and it's been that way for most of his run on top. Jobbing to Undertaker at Wrestlemania X-7 when he should win while going over Booker T at Wrestlemania XIX when there's no way he shouldn't lose, for example. WCW wanted Muta to turn babyface and Muta was very strong on the idea, but Hart told him the fans would never rally behind a Japanese babyface, so Muta, taking his advice, refused to do the turn. WCW fired him soon after, and Muta apparently blamed Gary Hart for giving him bad advice and pretty much killing his career stateside.

Scott Keith states on his blog that he's being considered as a ghostwriter for Chris Jericho's book. Hopefully someone Jericho talks to on a regular basis like Dave Meltzer will clue him in that SK is not the guy for that job. I can't understand why Jericho, a pretty smart guy with a degree in Journalism, is not going to write the book himself, but maybe he simply doesn't have the time. Jericho's book, if written honestly without fear of hurting feelings, could be as telling as any book ever written about pro wrestling, considering that he's had long runs in FMW, NJPW, WAR, EMLL, SMW, ECW, WCW and WWE, trained in Stu Hart's dungeon and has crossed paths with nearly every big name of the past 20 years at some point or another. It's not being published by WWE, which means it could be good, and it also has the potential to outsell any non-WWE-published wrestling book ever written. In short, it's way too lucrative of a project to be ruined by Scott Keith.

You're not going ot get me to take up for Hogan most of the time, and I'm not going to extend what he said about Michaels to resolve him of blame for everything else he's done that he shouldn't have. But I won't change my original stance, which was simply that he's right about Michaels.

My definition of "good wrestling" is different than some of the people you'll find online. I don't mean "good wrestling" as in lots of crazy highspots and shit like that that a lot of people consider good wrestling, but rather just wrestling that makes sense. Booking is probably more important to me than getting a **** match every week, not in terms of modern WWE soap opera storylines, but in terms of building and hyping big matches by protecting people and pushing guys who catch on hard. To me, that's good wrestling.