Loss

1. "Heavy Metal" Van Hammer

I see that Michinoku Pro is still active today, although I take it it's not really a lucharesu (I hate that word but people at least know what it means) group anymore. Anyway, what Michinoku Pro from 2000-present would people recommend?

I'm sure OJ will correct me if I'm out to lunch on this one, but I see Devil Masami as Joshi's first veteran worker. She ended up in JWP in the late 80s when she was too old to work AJW and built a second career for herself that was different but in some ways more impressive than the first. We were talking about innovation before - Devil Masami would be like a model still on the catwalk in her thirties, but I don't know if that counts for something or not. She's impressed me in nearly every match she's been in, even the bad ones, and anyone who enjoys the silent film facial expressions of someone like Killer Khan will probably really love Masami. As a young worker, she, Jaguar Yokota and the Crush Girls were probably the four pillars of workrate and as she got older, she became great in a different way. She'll probably be between 50-60 on my list.

How does he compare to Atlantis, Pirata Morgan and Fuerza Guerrera?

Is it possible to request a mega matchlist o'doom here? I know Virus supporters really love Virus and I really enjoy what I've seen of him. But I'd like a Stomper List of matches with dates if anyone can provide it.

You just walked right into me comparing Takada to Van McCoy with that one.

Did he ever work heel? Just curious since I've only seen one indy match from him. What I'm getting at with that question is asking if he has shown that can do something other than the Sami Zayn workrate special. It's not necessarily a negative if he can't, but an explanation of any variety he has would be cool too.

I'm referring to Takada more at the peak of his stardom, 1995-1996 and before.

Thinking about some candidates in some very unconventional ways today, but here's something to throw out. How much does it help Takada that he got over as the real deal in spite of being a total fraud? In a carny world, that should be a major positive. Inoki did it on a grander scale, but it was also much easier to pull off in Inoki's heyday. I think it's worth looking at how Takada performed and how he was booked. Why did he get over as a tough guy? Obviously, a large part of it was smoke and mirrors, like the crap they pulled with Trevor Berbick in UWFI. But ECW tried a variation of the same thing with Paul Varelans, and Taz never became Takada, despite both guys working for insurgent companies in similar spots. So how much of Takada being perceived as the real deal comes down to ringwork? If you want to compare Takada to Brock, Brock is the more dynamic performer, but Takada was able to get over in a similar way without the real-life cred. There's something impressive about that. Whether that's all down to presentation is worth a debate.

Ok then, she's the Talking Heads. Any art-punk choice would work there, but I thought a headstrong female might be a good comparison.

I wanted to add that now that I think about it more, Toyota isn't really the best representative of DIY punk ethos for wrestling since she was classically trained. She's more of an art-punk type. She's the Patti Smith of wrestling.

It wasn't so much a conscious choice but sure, I'll elaborate. I do think Toyota is an innovative worker, but I don't see that as critical to her case. But I also see her as an influential worker, which I think is more important to her case. Progressive would probably fit her, but I also want to distinguish her from someone like Rob Van Dam, who I guess could also be called innovative and maybe even somewhat influential, albeit for very different reasons. I think the first people to do something usually aren't the best people to do it -- even early Rey isn't really a substantive wrestler -- but they make it possible for others to execute the same vision with the lessons learned. I haven't followed Joshi enough post-90s to know if someone tried to take Toyota's working style and give it breadth, although she herself was hinting at a proper encore as the 1990s came to a close. I don't know how I feel about the labels in general, especially how they apply to Toyota. I think positive influence (that comes from how matches are worked) is something I do factor here, but even then, I think the biggest idea in her favor is that she fully committed herself to a vision where she both reaped the rewards (and had lots of great matches that *do* hold up along the way) and embraced the flaws as the costs of doing business. I think it was a conscious choice because it was a departure from what she was doing in the early stages of her career. If I watch a Toyota match from 1989-1991, I'm going to see someone who could deliver a good or even great match, but I'm not going to see someone who makes such a lasting impression that I think about where I rank her on a list like this. Part of that is that she gained confidence and charisma when she decided, "This is who I am", which in turn made her more memorable. What I would recommend to see where I'm coming from is to watch these matches: Manami Toyota vs Toshiyo Yamada (12/09/89) Manami Toyota vs Yumiko Hotta (06/17/90) Manami Toyota vs Akira Hokuto (01/11/91) and then watch these matches: Manami Toyota vs Toshiyo Yamada (08/15/92) Manami Toyota vs Yumiko Hotta (09/03/95) Manami Toyota vs Akira Hokuto (08/21/93) It makes for a sharp contrast with the same opponents and shows that some very deliberate choices about how to work were definitely made along the way. If that wasn't the case, I would infer that the "after" matches would more greatly resemble the "before" matches. I agree that all styles aren't created equal. If you see it as an inferior style, it probably shouldn't matter much. I'm framing it more in the sense of being daring and taking chances that often stick and often don't, as opposed to working a style that's built to last. Toyota's case is one of attitude as much as it is outcome. If you want a punk analogy, it's similar to the numerous bands who have written and performed great songs that can't play very well.

Bumping this because I think Toyota deserves more debate and discussion. She really is a fascinating candidate. I'd like to take a more in-depth look at what I see as her pros and cons. Let's get her cons out of the way first and tackle what I think is her biggest weakness -- she doesn't have a style that is universally accessible and transcends time. I don't think anyone really does, but I think watching an old match from Terry Funk, the All Japan 4 or Jushin Liger is less likely to be as context-dependent (or even jarring) as something like the Toyota-Yamada series. It's easy to group her in with someone like Tiger Mask because of that because it's also Sayama's biggest weakness. But she is more enduring than that. If you like the current wrestling style in just about any company in the world, I would argue that the wrestling you enjoy owes a certain debt to Manami Toyota. Joshi was always faster-paced than the other wrestling styles, but she upped the ante. We're talking about a wrestler who worked a 60-minute sprint, and I don't mean in the Flair-Steamboat sense that they kept the action moving for an hour or close to it. I mean, she was doing fast-paced, rope-running sequences against Kyoko Inoue for 60 minutes, or at least that was their goal. In the last ten minutes, the match really falls off the rails. And that's not something I'd call a great match at all -- in fact, it rightfully drives a lot of people nuts. But if you value someone who knows who they are and is committed to their working style, it's hard not to at least respect that. If you value ambition, it's hard not to at least respect that. If you value attempts at making a statement, which I do, it's hard not to at least respect that. It's similar to a wrestler who is getting lots of GOAT consideration -- Bryan Danielson -- attempting to do a three-hour match against Homicide on a Ring of Honor show in 2004. I use the sixty-minute draw as an example because I think it captures in one match what Toyota haters despise and what Toyota fans really appreciate. But her case goes far beyond a polarizing match, and besides, that match is really more "feat" than "match". Young Toyota was a solid worker, but a very different worker than the Toyota that usually gets considered in conversations like these. She wasn't a shrieker and her style was much more conventional. She had a spell from 1989-1991 where I think she definitely proved that she could deliver good and even great matches working a more classic style. But they weren't transcendant and definitely weren't enough for a top 100. She was a solid worker -- lots of solid people are solid workers, so what? Not all of them can be in a list of 100. So then comes 1992 and we see her really curate a style that's all hers that made her much more popular and gave us the matches that do make her a worthwhile candidate. I wish she'd stayed a little more true to who she was when she had the plain tights that just said TOYOTA on them, but she made a choice and fully committed herself to it. She had the series teaming with Yamada -- her friend/rival all year -- against JWP's Mayumi Ozaki and Dynamite Kansai, two wrestlers with a similar dynamic in JWP without the friend part. She had the hair match which got such a strong reaction from the people who ran the Korakuen Hall building that they put heat on AJW for going through with Yamada's head-shaving after such a classic match. She had the WON MOTY (and legit ***** match from where I sit) when the two teams rematched at Dreamslam II. She had standout singles matches with a variety of opponents and wrapped up the interpromotional tag series to close out the year. There's a question that this run of her career -- up until 1996 or so -- raises. Do you penalize someone for changing to a more of-the-moment style that paid huge dividends because all of the work doesn't look as good now as it did then? Or do you praise her for understanding how she could differentiate herself and deliver matches that were great in the context of their time? It's at the heart of a lot of GOAT debate and she may be the candidate that evokes that more than any. As the decade wound down, Toyota started getting more conservative again. She wasn't completely back to her late 80s-early 90s self, but she added some veteran touches to her act to make it more enduring. She had the great, atypical match with Kandori. And she had what was one of my favorite matches of the decade against Kyoko Inoue in December of 1999. It wasn't a classic match, and I won't sell it that way. But it's one of wrestling's best examples of feeding many masters -- they gave far more breathing time to their stuff than usual, but they also stayed true to their series by working the types of fast-paced exchanges people expected from their matches. It wasn't their grand finale, but for the 90s it was, and I like to pretend that they never had another match, because it worked about as smart a match between two sprint-style workers who had a famous series could make their final match. I didn't make a list of match recommendations because I think most people know the laundry list and have rejected it for stylistic reasons. I made this post to challenge our notions of what a smart worker is. She's macro-smart, even if she's not micro-smart. She's not going to sell the leg, and she's not going to give consequence to each of her highspots in how she lays out a match. But it's hard to say she isn't a smart worker when she's known all along exactly what she was doing. If you're a "Great Match Theorist", she fits the bill. But if you're someone who prefers to look more holistically at what wrestlers do and why they do it as their career progresses, she's a fascinating candidate. Toyota will be in my top 10.

There is a lot of great wrestling in WoS, lucha libre and Joshi. Wow, is that a late entry candidate for biggest understatement of 2015. But those styles are also farther from the traditional American style than something like All Japan or New Japan, so they can take more adjustment from the viewer. Not ranking them is what it is -- I wish everyone would watch as much as possible and at least consider them, but at the same time, I get the logic of avoiding styles that carry the weight of a much deeper plunge in order to properly sort out a list. It's not what I'd do, but I do get it. For someone born and bred on American wrestling, I think in most cases the greatness is more quickly apparent when watching the best All Japan and New Japan guys. It doesn't mean they're better, just that accepting their greatness doesn't require quite as much investment.

I think the point is that you shouldn't rank them if they do nothing for you, but they deserve heightened consideration because of that acclaim.

I think in principle, that's true. I don't entirely agree with that approach, but I do understand it if the idea is that wrestling is an American construct that later spread to other places. So if time is an issue, perhaps he thinks that is where most of his focus should go. To be very clear, that is not intended to be a claim of American superiority as much as it a deference to the idea that pro wrestling's roots are in the American style.

And for the record, I think this is a terrific post and agree with virtually all of it. I want my ballot to represent the conflict between my favorites and the guys that I truly think are the greatest. And I feel like I have a lot of cases to make for wrestlers that I want to make sure get a fair shake. I'm with JvK that I don't care so much about the final rankings, but how they get there matters to me.

Dear Future Me, I've been hesitant to do a ballot so you don't laugh at my rankings. But I've decided to submit a ballot whether you like it or not. Perfect and Good have finally made amends. So go easy on me for once, you asshole. Sincerely, Current Me

If you break it down year-by-year, the times when Sting was the #1 guy in WCW are pretty isolated. He was a top guy for a very long time, but the #1 guy? You're talking: - Second half of 1990 - First half of 1992 Even most times he was the top babyface, the company was built around the top heel, be it Vader, Flair or Hogan.

I'm afraid to even ask but how are latter day Ultimo Dragon, Kaz Hayashi and Keiji Muto? Just a step down from their prime or actively bad? Or just there?

If someone wanted to see all of the best and most important post-split All Japan Pro Wrestling (from summer 2000-present), what matches would you recommend? I've seen some stuff pimped in the immediate years after and in the last year or two, but not much in between. I realize the glory days are over so I'm not looking for the hidden Misawa-Kobashi-level classic, but I'm guessing that we could squeeze out at least 50-60 hours of stuff that is fun-good-great and worth watching during that time, right?

I would absolutely love to do some match ranking projects.

It's hard to argue that point, and I already regret even making another post about it since I didn't say anything new anyway. I felt like I should back JvK up since it was one guy arguing a point opposite a collective and that was my only reason for adding that. Still, you're right. My participation or lack thereof is not more important than anyone else's. I don't intend to say anything else about it in a post or in a podcast.

Perfect always ends up the enemy of good with me. I can't tell you how many times I've been told that on job evaluations. It's my hang-up more than it is a statement about this project, which is why I'm not calling for changes to make me happy or anything like that. I'm just trying to explain where the mindset comes from in hopes that others understand it, even if they don't agree with it at all and think it's the wrong approach.

I have tried to avoid further posts about the project itself so I'm not a downer, but I also don't want to just be silent while people pile on. Here goes. It's the name. That's what I found difficult about it. That's what JvK finds difficult about it. That's what's causing the divide. If this was called "ProWrestlingOnly.com's 100 To Watch - 2016 Edition" and was an annual poll of the guys who we're digging the most based on what we've seen of available footage from all eras up to that moment in time, that would be really cool and it wouldn't create that type of dilemma. (Dilemma is overstating it since we're clearly a minority.) But "Greatest Wrestler Ever" implies a consensus list that is all encompassing and built to last. Heck, if the idea is to do it once a decade, of course it's intended to be built to last. My mentality on that is not even limited to this project. It's something that has even held me up writing about the 1990s. How can I name the top 500 matches of the decade when I haven't seen all of the matches? It's a semantics issue that if I can figure out a way to frame properly is no longer an issue. But it's created some writer's block for me, just like it's made it hard to participate here. I won't call it the top 500 matches of the 1990s, though. It's a matter of finding a way to accurately describe what it is I'm trying to do. I don't think the name of the project should change just to satisfy me, and I'm still someone who will make posts in the threads when I think I have something to add, just as I'll encourage others to participate and promote the project. But for me, it's about making a ballot that would look just as good in a few years as it does now. And since I don't even think I could make a ballot where I wouldn't want to change anything with two weeks of space, I'd rather not try. It'll just get me frustrated, and this should be fun. That others can have fun with this and treat it as a snapshot is great. I envy it. I'm still looking forward to seeing everyone's ballots, and I'm still a big fan of and participant in everything about the GWE project except the very last step.