Loss

I'd never expect to hear you say this.

Honestly, I wonder if that is what is causing some of the problems. If nothing else, it would make an easy, convenient scapegoat.

This is awesome!

I've mentioned before that it's a little harder for me to rate workers than matches. Maybe I'll be able to do it at some point. I'm not sure Flair would be #1 every single year. But I think he has a case for #1 starting in 1982 every single year. I hope the opportunity to do side-by-side global comparisons of wrestlers in the 80s happens at some point. *wink* I also agree with Matt's point that you have guys with early runs or late rallies, but not really anyone other than Bret that was around and at that level most of the decade.

I think everyone else in the conversation is clearly below them and has all sorts of strikes against them -- Michaels, Dustin, Austin, Pillman, Foley, Owen. US wrestling wasn't very good in the 90s, at least compared to what was happening around the world at the same time.

I think Vader peaked higher, but Bret had a more consistent, sustained run. After 1994, great Vader matches are hard to find. I'd agree that overall, Bret was the best US worker of the 90s.

Also, I think the story was less that Pillman was frustrated, and more that the bookers put Badd with Pillman for 30 minutes in an attempt to embarrass him and show that he wasn't as good of a worker as he thought he was.

He got a rep for not really knowing how to work a match in the WWF, but he was from WCW and wasn't named Steve Austin, The Undertaker or Hunter Hearst Helmsley. So of course he did. He had some very good matches in 1996, so I don't think it's a fair opinion. I remember Cornette saying that the guys he worked with felt like all he knew how to do was his pat Johnny B. Badd match, whatever that means.

I don't mean literally -- more than he had a run booking Michinoku Pro and things were apparently all over the place.

My biggest problem with the DDP series is that some of the clever spots were repeated in every single match they had on pay-per-view. I love the way they built to Kimberly holding up the 10 for Johnny B. Badd at ringside, but it loses something when it happens in every match. They laid out one really good match and just kept having it over and over. That said, it was pretty well done.

Was RVD a ratings mover during his short run? Just curious. I remember thinking he'd be hugely over returning and that they needed to pounce on it because it would fade quickly.

It was in the latest WON that he's being investigated for stealing $30,000 from the local Iwate government and using it for his personal stuff. Anyway, I think this guy is a legit lunatic based on the stories we have heard about him over the years, and thought this would be a fun thread to capture all the stories we know about. I know about this, doing a porn movie and a supposed acid-induced booking run, but I'm sure there's more. Let's try to capture all the crazy stories in one thread. What else is there?

Kyoko and Yamada had to win the first match to stay in the tournament. If Hokuto and Toyota won, they would take it all. Kyoko and Yamada won. So at that point they were tied and had to wrestle again so the tournament would have a winner.

It was also in the WON at the time.

Have to listen to see what you thought of Edge vs Test. I may be crazy, but I remember that being a much better match than anyone would expect at the time.

I'm sorry, I mis-typed. "Those two" was Savage and DDP in 1997. I forgot to include Savage's name.

I love that the fake Mark Henry retirement thing was basically the best and most effective angle WWE ran in 2013.

On an episode of Legends Of Wrestling that aired on the network, Michael Hayes and DDP were both on the panel. Hayes said when people in the WWF found out those two were going to be working together, the joke was that they'd spend so much time planning out everything that the match would never make it to the ring.

I don't know about all of them, but Savage insisted on Flair flying to his house to practice before Wrestlemania VIII, which Flair hated and felt was unnecessary. He talked about it in his book.

I don't want to say it matters to me every time out, but when I hear inside stories of how matches are put together, it can sometimes make them more impressive to me. Not necessarily better, that's not the right word. But more impressive. When I hear that Davey Boy went under the ring and puked at Summerslam '92 and then completely blanked and Bret had to walk him through the rest of the match, it impresses me that they had a match as good as they had under those circumstances, and also makes me think more of Bret. I don't know if it makes me think more of the match or not, but it does make me respect and appreciate the obstacles that were there that could have wrecked the match. A match doesn't have to have that stuff happening for me to like it or think it's impressive, but as someone who likes increasing his understanding of what it takes to put together good wrestling matches, those stories carry a little weight with me sometimes, depending on the specifics. And while it seemed otherwise, I really wasn't making a value judgment as much as I was just sharing what Steamboat thought and what Flair has often said about calling matches in the ring and thinking on his feet. My only value judgment is that I like Clash VI slightly better than Wrestlemania III, so hey, I guess the Flair/Steamboat philosophy worked really well. Then again, Savage/Steamboat is a great match too, so that one did as well. Savage was a great wrestler who I enjoyed a lot. DDP, as mentioned, was able to get great results out of pre-planning with Goldberg. All that matters to me as a fan is that they got there, not necessarily how they got there. But sometimes, finding out how they got there is cool. When I hear that Clash VI was just Flair and Steamboat thinking on their feet for 55 minutes, I think, "Wow, it says a lot about those guys that they are capable of doing something like that. I'm not sure very many others could." It's all just additional info that we can do with as we please.

To you. That doesn't mean it doesn't matter at all.

Yes, I was just pointing out that the context of the original question was if they were going to release any full catalogs of other venues, not if they were going to release a few shows in isolation.

That's great. The question was asked of what Steamboat's problem was with the Savage matches. That was his problem. But I think this goes back to why I'm more comfortable ranking matches than workers. I feel like we have the information we need to judge the meal (the match). We don't necessarily have all the info we need to judge the chef (the wrestler). This is why I can rank the top 100 matches of 1990, but struggle listing the top 10 wrestlers. I can look at output and who's doing what in a match, but even that is sometimes part of the illusion.

I don't know if Henry was on the show he attended to be fair. And I think he was specifically referring to effort put out when the cameras aren't on more than he was talent in general.

That wasn't the point. It was that WWE is considering adding the entire MSG catalog. They haven't discussed adding the entire catalog for any other venue. We may get some one-off shows though.