Childs

Dave pimped him pretty hard in the latest Observer, noting that Cena believes little Dibiase is a future Wrestlemania headliner. I've enjoyed what I've seen of his tag team with Rhodes but haven't been blown away by his work. Wondered what others think of him so far?

Yeah, his life is anything but low-stress. He cranks a ridiculous amount of copy every week, and he's constantly competing for scoops, especially on the MMA front. I write for a living and I'm sort of in awe of his production. He must be working or thinking about work almost every moment.

It wasn't a lost decade but you can't just presume that the dawn of the '90s signaled a huge change in the business. We have a tendency to manage information by segmenting it into decades and other easily digestible bites. But the events we're talking about aren't dictated by the calendar turning. This is a frustrating tendency in arguments about all kinds of sports. For example, people try to say Jack Morris should be a Hall-of-Famer because he was the winningest pitcher of the 1980s. But how is that a greater distinction than being the winningest pitcher between 1976 and 1985? He just happened to register his best performance in a way that perfectly fit a calendar decade. Using the decades as bookends can be a fun device for making lists and such. But we shouldn't fall into the trap of assuming that anything changes much when we flip from one decade to the next.

American tag team wrestling, in general, didn't make a strong transition from '80s to '90s. Early '90s WCW still featured good tag stuff, but by the middle of the decade, the import of the belts had diminished in both major feds and the top teams had all faded. Japan was a whole different story, of course.

He said it was an impressive collection of reporting that made many valid points about the destructive nature of the business. But he expressed some reservations about Randazzo's blanket harshness. He hadn't finished the book and promised a fuller review at some point. He also published a letter of response from Randazzo. Overall, he endorsed it as a worthy read.

That made me laugh out loud at my desk. Also a hoot are the orgasmic posts over at the ROH message board. In case you were wondering, WWE is real wrestling again for the first time in a decade.

Dave just wrote about this actually, suggesting that ROH has plateaued at an acceptable level but with less growth potential than some had hoped. He predicts the company will be around and in much the same state at this point next year.

I thought Dave's reaction was very fair. He made it clear that his own experience and reporting led him to different conclusions than Randazzo on some matters. But he didn't try to undermine Randazzo's credibility (except on a few very specific points) and in fact praised the depth of his research repeatedly. "I didn't agree with every frame of reference," he wrote. "But the author did know and understand the subject and certainly had the right to the conclusions he made."

That's interesting. I've encountered more people ripping that tourney over the years than loving it. I've seen most of the matches, but I'll have to check it out as a whole experience. I know I liked Sting-Vader.

And I imagine that if he were coming up today, he would not let his body go. If you watch his stuff from the early '70s, he didn't look as bad. He was a pretty good athlete. I think he could make it, though not at the level he did.

The bit about Sasaki suplexing the trainee to death is pretty awful. And Inoki's looniness really comes off as epic (Saddam Hussein and the North Koreans? Wow.) Overall, the book is a good read because he really makes an effort to put every part of Benoit's career in context. It has a bit of a weird vibe. He rebukes and dismisses the business and Benoit's devotion to it. But at the same time, he writes with smarkish appreciation about some of Benoit's greatest matches. Didn't bother me but it definitely carries a different tone than it might have if it had been written by a journalist coming from a place of total non-fandom. Overall, it's not quite like any other book I've read about wrestling. And I mean that in a good way. He did a good job of getting inside via sources but retaining some perspective on what all the stories mean.

SLL, I think you make good points about the enduring strength of simple narrative structure. I'm not sure I agree, however, that all dramatic tension stems from the morality play that you describe. I see at least two other major types of wrestling narrative. One features the talented young performer, trying to carve out his place in a rigidly hierarchical world. The great All-Japan feuds, for example, never struck me as good vs. evil. There were underdog themes, but the guy everyone was chasing, Misawa, was the picture of grace under pressure, a hero in his own right. His efforts to defend his spot carried as much nobility as Kawada's dogged efforts to knock him off. Kawada was easier to identify with -- this dumpy little guy with no teeth who was never the chosen one but willed his way near Misawa's level. But those matches struck me as dramas about social position rather than quests to uphold ideals against great forces. The other type of narrative that comes immediately to mind is your basic tactical battle. It goes back to childhood questions like: If an alligator fought a tiger, who would win? That can take on a moral component, I suppose. The UWFI guys really did believe their techniques were more "authentic" than those practiced by Inoki. But I think a lot of wrestling is just, "Can my method beat yours?" Granted, that can lead to a lot of unmemorable, empty feeling matches. But if you have two practicioners who are skilled enough, it can be a lot of fun. None of that takes away from your overarching point. I wondered if you considered addressing in the essay why, given the tried-and-true nature of his storyline, fans react to Cena with such ambivalence. Is it because he was pushed beyond his skill level and by the time he became really good, booing him was entrenched as the "cool" thing to do? Or are fans somehow less tolerant of the "against all odds" hero than they were in the Hogan era? I tend to think it's more the first reason. But I wondered if you thought about delving into that.

Anybody see Joe vs. Angle? I was just wondering if it was any good.

I'm finding this Race discussion fascinating. I have to admit that my knee jerk reaction was, "Phil is crazy." But then I thought about the great Race matches I've seen and indeed, they were all against superworkers like Jumbo, Lawler, Flair, etc. I get excited when I see him in a '70s match because he did have a lot of offense relative to the era. I wonder if that just means he was like a color movie in the 1930s - visually enticing but not necessarily great. I'm not sure I've seen many matches between him and guys who needed to be carried. I hope Will's set will eventually shed more light on his overall work. Did enough of his stuff make tape to give us a rounded picture? I'd like to hear from some Harley lovers because I honestly don't feel I know enough to render judgement.

Did they only wrestle once? I have a Barnett disc with a match between them from Tijuana in early '97. But that's the only one I've come across. Excellent match.

Wild II vs. KENTAfuji from the 7/06 Budokan show, if I remember correctly. Although I also remember that match being pretty awesome, but not quite as awesome as advertised, fwiw. That was definitely the match that got him talking about Morishima as a revolutionary heavyweight. I just never remembered him actually putting Mori above Gordy. Anyway, yeah, that match actually was good and Morishima had some very good matches in 2007. I'm rooting for the guy, but he's had what, maybe 10 excellent matches in his career?

Did you guys notice that Dave called Morishima a better worker than Gordy in the latest Observer? I know he's expressed love for him previously but good lord.

I don't recall saying this. Can you point me to a post or something so I can see what was said? John I went back and read the thread I was thinking of, and that's not what you were saying. My bad. Where is the thread? I'd be interested in reading what other stupid things I may have been saying at the time. John http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?showtopic=4751

I don't recall saying this. Can you point me to a post or something so I can see what was said? John I went back and read the thread I was thinking of, and that's not what you were saying. My bad.

God, what a clusterfuck that match would be.

Trying to breath life into the AOTF angle?

I suspect Vince is genuinely disconcerted by an ex-wrestler who doesn't need the business. He's just so used to being on the power end of his relationships, even with Hogan, who was a bigger star in a wrestling context than the Rock.

John, I've seen you mention elsewhere that the Japanese wrestlers prepared better for the punishment. How did they do it? Just curious.