Childs

Regarding the conversation about booking, I don't think Kawada was ever regarded as the potential successor to the Jumbo-Misawa line. He was, rather, the antagonist in chief, with a deep personal connection to Misawa that added poignancy to his doomed quest. Kobashi was positioned as the successor. Their assaults on Mount Misawa unfolded in parallel, but I never felt Kobashi and Kawada were competing for the same spot.

That and his BOSJ matches from '96 against Liger and Benoit were the highlights. He didn't have a ton of great matches in Japan. Edit: Tim beat me to the punch.

I think Misawa does so many routinely awesome things that it's easy to take them for granted a bit. I've been watching out especially for what he does in tag matches recently and he was just an exceptional pro wrestler. I don't quite understand the point about him not being consistent during the peak run. He lets the partner shine sometimes, but everything he does within the context of those matches is on point. I do think Misawa had nights where he went on his version of autopilot which, as you say, was still pretty great. And he understandably took it easy during some tags and six mans. It's just that, when you see him totally engaged in every moment of a match, as he was in the '95 carnival final against Taue or the 1/20/97 TC challenge against Kobashi, you get something transcendent. So it becomes easier to nitpick him for being merely excellent. Misawa at his best was the greatest pro wrestler I've ever seen. So yes, it's his curse to be judged by that standard.

Yeah, you took the words out of my mouth. If I were doing a consistency rating, Stan would not be at the very top. More like a 7 or 8. Among the All Japan guys, I'd give Kobashi a higher score for sure. I'd have to think more about Misawa, Kawada and Jumbo.

For me, it comes back to: Do you find basic Hansen compelling? I do. The Japanese fans did. But you have to make that decision for yourself. I wouldn't describe him as inconsistent though.

As much fun as we had picking and poking at BIGLAV, I do think it was good for the overall process, not just for Parv.

He was consistent in the sense he was very much himself in every match. That led to him rolling right over a lot of lower card opponents, but if you find the Hansen storm compelling, he usually brought it. I guess it depends what you're looking for.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Doesn't any guy with big offense need opponents to bump and sell for him?

I learned I can no longer watch slow-build matches after midnight, because I am old and I will fall asleep.

I didn't understand that show at all; didn't help anyone or generate any intrigue around Mania.

I see it somewhat, though Sayama's displays of athleticism were more about flashes of speed and leaping ability while Toyota's were more superhuman feats of stamina. Toyota didn't have an exact equivalent to Sayama's surprising UWF run though she did produce some excellent matches working a toned down style. I think Toyota was fundamentally a better wrestler.

Again, I'm happy to pay tribute to Toyota as a remarkable athlete. But if, by evolutionary, you mean she pushed the style in a better direction, I'd say she did the opposite. If you only mean that she caused change with the force of her approach, I can't disagree. But for me, that doesn't get her on the list.

Fun listen guys. My list is pretty different from either of yours but between the two of you, you have almost all my picks.

But if a wrestler's work doesn't click for you at all, who cares how much thought he or she put into it?

There is and I get that, but in terms of age, Bock's '65-'75 are the equivalent of Flair's '80s, and we can't do a remotely fair comparison between the two. That's a significant issue when we're trying to figure out the top of the ballot. Maybe Bock's last six years were his best but I can't say that with any confidence.

I'm not seeing how this discussion has much to do with Bockwinkel. The issue isn't that he was a lesser worker early in his career; it's that we don't really know.

I'd start with the trio of shows they ran in January. They were all good and will give you an immediate sense of what you're in for in Queens. I'm jealous--that main event should be fantastic. If you like the stuff from this year, just start working your way back through last year. The company has been on a hot streak for awhile.

Bryan is cresting at the right time for this poll, no doubt. On the other hand, you have people revisiting his work from 15 years ago and saying it holds up, so maybe he'll have staying power in the upper reaches. It's an interesting question.

Who said that?

It's funny that you started this poll because I was just about to ask Matt how close he'd have Buddy to Bock.

Yeah, it's not a criticism, more of a yearning, because I love the guy.

I don't think 45 vs. 35 matters as far as his taped output, which is on the low side compared to other top 20 guys. The absent footage looms larger because he had such a long career and we're missing what we presume to be his physical peak. But it's not the volume of what's missing that matters to me in the ranking; it's the volume of what we have. And when I compare him to a Flair or a Tenryu or a Hansen, he's lower on output. I agree he's one of the most complete candidates in terms of demonstrated skill, and he's a top 20-guy for me, just not the No. 1 contender he probably would have been if we had a more complete accounting of his career.

Every time someone generalizes about the board like this, a small part of Loss' soul cries out.

Question, Matt: If a guy convinces you he has a skill, do you care at all if he demonstrates it 100 times as opposed to 50 times?

I basically agree with everything Matt says about Bock, and it's astonishing he wrestled the majority of the matches that make his case after he turned 45. With all due respect to Tenryu and a few of the great maestro luchadores, nobody had a greater post-45 career than Bock. Given his intelligence and base skills, I'd be shocked if he wasn't at least a very good worker for 15 years before that. But I can't give him full credit for footage that isn't there, and it keeps him from being a No. 1 contender for me. He and Satanico are the two most frustrating cases that way, maybe Billy Robinson too. I know they were just as skilled as the guys I have in the top few spots. I suspect their output was comparable as well. But there's too much unknown for me to nudge them above comparable talents.