Loss

Wrestler A applies a side headlock on Wrestler B. Wrestler B counters to a headscissors. Wrestler A then escapes the headscissors by flipping over on top of Wrestler B in a pinning position. Then Wrestler B bridges up. My absolute favorite wrestling sequence there is.

The most unfortunate side effect of the erosion of kayfabe has not been that people now know wrestling is fake. Everyone always knew that. The biggest loss is that people inside wrestling so openly discuss what they are that the language and mindset creeps into the programming. Windbag promos harping on someone's perceived weaknesses, lack of playing to the crowd and even the bigger emphasis on highspots can be attributed to that. I don't know that anyone really even tries to think about it like it's real anymore, which leads to matches that sometimes (not all the time) look more like move exhibitions than actual contests where there is a struggle or fight. Wrestling is silly much of the time, which is one of its best qualities, but it's so much more fun to watch when you get the sense that no matter how outlandish the situation, those involved really believe strongly in what they are saying and doing.

Belly to back suplex attempt with the victim rolling out and landing behind the other guy on his feet. It was a common Flair-Steamboat transition to lead into a reverse rollup nearfall, and it's something I've seen Daniel Bryan build on by running at what seems like the exact millisecond that his feet hit the ground.

I'm just going to list the ***** matches that I haven't seen anyone else mention (unless I missed it) and I'm avoiding the 90s for now. Johnny Saint vs Steve Grey (01/28/80) Dick Togo vs Antonio Honda (01/30/11)

What about Edouard Carpentier and Antonio Rocca? Not sure if they "invented" that faster-paced style or not, but they were guys doing more high-flying moves than anyone else in their era. And pro wrestling was an American export.

Also, the matches were better when Bret was on top, but I'm not sure WWE really became a "workrate" company until Benoit and Jericho jumped.

I get this, actually. The term doesn't bother me, but matches that are like this definitely do. The Cena-Bray Wyatt WM30 and HHH-Undertaker WM28 matches come to mind as the most glaring examples. Too much acting and bad attempts at Shakespeare, not enough wrestling (and I don't mean "action" by "wrestling" necessarily).

That's enough to make me ready to cancel my sub, to be honest, and I'm someone who originally thought everyone who could should subscribe just to help it become successful because of its potential to churn out hidden gems and transform what WWE currently is into something better. I had this pipe dream in my head that they would eventually add their entire library. Ha!

Spots involving announce tables, pointing at Wrestlemania signs, doing some type of extended trademark gesture before hitting a signature spot EVERY SINGLE TIME, dueling promos that don't sound like real people arguing, ring entrances that are too choreographed, babyfaces who act like entitled assholes, the way Michael Cole says the letter "W" and a lack of continuity in storylines. That about covers it for now.

Please stop talking about the Village Green Preservation Society in this topic. If you want to know anything else about it, PM a mod. Use common sense.

I like Terry Boy, but his singles matches hurt him because they usually disappoint from my experience. He's great in tag matches, though - I think that's where he shines more than multi-mans.

He doesn't really get much credit in traditional circles as a worker, but Blackjack Mulligan deserves some talk as well. He was a big burly brawler more than anything, but he had great timing and knew how to captivate a crowd. I'd at least like to see him fleshed out. If someone has already said this and I missed it, forgive me, but Andre would be fun to discuss in this context too. He has plenty of output that could be viewed. Also, how much Ken Lucas is on tape? What footage, if any, do we have of Mascaras outside of Japan?

He wasn't there long, but I did love pretty much everything he did in ROH.

Dave has said he'd love having an editor but he doesn't see anyone willing to stay up all through the night on Tuesday evenings from 10pm-5am when the WON usually is completed. I at least give him credit for printing a correction. He didn't fully own what he did, but it's a step that, albeit small, some writers wouldn't take at all.

I remember Dylan saying once that Jericho is either the worst great wrestler ever or the best bad wrestler ever. That seems like an apt description. He got over pretty strong and he has definitely had some great matches and performances, but he is also pretty overrated in retrospect. Jericho was my favorite wrestler a long time ago -- I think because he had the most charisma of anyone in the WCW undercard and it was also easy to rally behind someone who seemed to be a victim of politics in the WWF -- but he never really realized his potential, be it as a worker or as a star. I actually think Jericho is a smarter worker than Hardy (you'll never hear Jericho say something as mind-numbingly stupid in a promo as Matt saying as a babyface that he wished Edge would die in a car accident), but the execution of his ideas is often missing something. By contrast, I don't really think Matt Hardy is this great worker or anything. He's consistently good, though, which is probably enough to place him ahead of Jericho, as odd as that sounds in my head. I think about the Edge feud from 2005 producing two really unique, high-quality matches on pay-per-view, and I'd compare those to almost any of Jericho's matches.

I just wondered if anyone here has really watched very many of his matches. For someone who is such a big name, he's never really been discussed much as a worker. There is plenty of footage of him out there, including some really long matches. In fact, he has a 60-minute draw against Frankie Talaver from 1950 that is on YouTube. Anyway, I want to make it a point to watch a lot of his matches relatively soon, and I wondered if anyone else here ever has. Was he one of the first American wrestlers to incorporate comedy in his matches?

HHH explaining what WWE is and how storylines work to Austin was hilarious, I must admit.

I was just thinking "soulless" seemed like the right way to describe his work.

I don't think there's a blanket answer. It depends on the audience and where the appeal of the company lies. Picking a big, charismatic guy as NWA champ who wasn't a great worker would not have worked. Even Dusty never held the belt very long when he was at his peak in popularity. Picking a guy who fits that same criteria in the WWF worked exceptionally well.

Oh, I agree with that and I'm generally on your side on this one, although probably not quite as certain, especially on some of the later years. I just think it's possible to look at the composite view instead of *just* ranking wrestlers by drawing power or *just* ranking them by working ability, which looks like an area where we also agree.

I just saw this thread. In terms of the argument over what to weigh, Hogan smokes Flair for drawing power and Flair smokes Hogan in the ring. So then I guess the question is what mattered more - Hogan's ability in the ring or Flair's ability to draw? Was Hogan a better worker than Flair was a draw? I know it's an awkward question, but therein lies the answer.

Since I'm seeing the word "stooging" thrown around a lot in other threads, I have to ask: - Is stooging a bad thing? Is there inherent criticism when the word is used, or is it just meant as a descriptor? - How does stooging differ from selling? In other words, is this just a term used to describe wrestlers who sell for too much of the body of the match when they should be getting in more offense? Or is it a reference to comedy spots?

The thing is that the champ's defense against the local star was all that those fans were going to see. As far as they were concerned the champ was dominating competition everywhere else and their guy was the ONE he couldn't beat fairly. So you can't factor in the idea that the champion was getting his ass kicked in every match. Your Mayweather analogy actually works in favor of this method because in the fans' eyes that's probably what the NWA champ was 99% of the time and their local hero was the one guy who had his number. This is spot on. Yes, if you are privy to all the results and match footage, as we are now, the NWA champ formula of coming so close to losing the title and being saved by luck has plenty of holes. It wouldn't work now. But then, as far as most of the locals knew, their guy was the only one who could push the champion to the limit. That they were repeating that night after night in different territories is not in any way a reflection on the champ as a worker. The NWA World Champ was basically a prop. If you don't like the formula, that's fine, but even then, the issue is structural.

I don't follow basketball, but I suspect true words have never been spoken in this thread.

I would also add that the first year and a half or so of ARSION is probably good for a change of pace. Most of the matches are mat-based and don't go unnecessarily long. Also, version 1 of JWP (1986-1992) is something I've really grown to love that is kind of its own animal. My favorites are The Scorpion, Devil Masami, Mayumi Ozaki, Miss A (later Dynamite Kansai) and Shinobu Kandori. In response to your specific question, check out Aja Kong vs Megumi Kudo from 12/6/93. Also check out the Hokuto-Kandori rematch on the same show.