smkelly

In terms of just workrate, I'd go with 4/16/94, for pretty obvious reasons. In terms of everything, I haven't a single idea.

All Japan. All from Ditch's site: Hansen & Spivey vs. Kobashi & Tsuruta 4/90 Hansen & Spivey vs. Tsuruta & Taue RWTL 11/90 Hansen & Spivey vs. Misawa & Kobashi 3/91 Hansen & Spivey vs. Tsuruta & Taue 6/91 Hansen & Spivey vs. Misawa & Kawada RWTL 11/91 Hansen & Spivey vs. Tsuruta & Taue RWTL 12/91 Spivey vs. Kobashi 2/93

High-energy - that is a good description of current WWE TV stuff. It is spunky and rhythmic, but wrestling like All Japan in the 90s, with its layer-upon-layer depth in story telling is what I aim to watch the most. Actually good wrestling without the addition of overly complicated or insulting angles. But when the WWE guys get to shine in a long or even particularly well laid out match, then I can ignore the lack of actual story and enjoy what is happening in the ring.

Us cynical "anti-WWE" guys fucking called it. And yeah, it seems like the roster split was reconnected tonight.

lol

Some news: (PWTorch) That doesn't sound good at all. I think Hogan took Flair's momentary lapse of sanity as a personal challenge to up the ante. People will cry about this one:

There's the way I defended Flair and then there is that way to defend Flair. Wow.

To be fair, Viscera got jumped by having a titanium rope kicked into his crotch. And then took a fisticuffs pummeling. But yeah, he was squashed like some early 90s superstar/jobber match. I love Youtube comments. From the HHH/Viscera page: Here's my problem with how big men are booked: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAvCEbyK8oA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VuFhTUi_9Y http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbOC6pi-72Y Regarding Show squashing large dudes:

Great call. Wrestling has always had this insane "size equals toughness" mindset, and it's just not true. Depends on what 'kind' of toughness you're referring to, actually. Nash has to be pretty tough considering the shape his knees - rest of his body - is in. Andre worked well past the point that medical doctors would consider 'safe'. Same for the Big Show too. Undertaker is a tough dude too. The injuries those men have sustained end careers in other sports. The thing with size is that if the man with size gets ahold of someone that has speed and technique on their side, the fight will likely end with the smaller guy getting popped like a pimple. That hasn't always been the case, but in a non-controlled environment, I have seldom seen a smaller man beat a much larger man in any kind of physical fight. Take the fight between Akebono and Royce Gracie. Akebono played to the strengths of Gracie rather than his own. Had the bout been fought differently, Brazilian jiu-jitsu master or not, the Yokozuna's size alone would make the fight a relative no-contest. What is the methodology of jiu-jitsu -- "an art of weaponless fighting employing holds, throws, and paralyzing blows to subdue or disable an opponent." Gracie could only use one of the building blocks that jiu-jitsu is all about, and which is how he won, by bending Akebono's arm at an awkward angle. And if this were a 'street fight' and not held under the scrutiny of the viewers in attendance, the people at home, and politicians - let alone the official - I doubt Akebono would have submitted, even if it meant his arm being broken - which has happened before, like when Tim Sylvia's arm was broken by Frank Mir. I did a Google search for the video I saw on television about six months ago -- alas, no find. Backstory: A large man in Arizona was having a stand-off with police...with his infant child in a car-seat...on the expressway. A police German shepherd was released upon the man, and a bunch of cops assisted in apprehending the man. It took the combined strength of all of the officers and the dog eviscerating the man's arm to subdue him. It was his size and strength that kept him from being taken down single-handily by the shepherd, whose bite strength is strong enough to render solid unbroken bones to dust (like 1,500 PSI) -- let alone the posse of police officers. Now had the man been the size of Royce Gracie (with or without the fighting skills) - the duration of the event would have been much shorter and probably deadly. And to answer your hypothetical -- I'd personal try my luck against Billington before engaging Andre in close-quarter combat. As I have speed and technique on my side too. Not as much speed, but I've never heard of Dyno being any kind of colored belt in any kind of martial arts, whereas I am. I know one thing, Dyno would ultimately win the fight because of his strength and speed advantage over me, but he'd know he had been in one afterwards. The thing with Andre is simple. If you can't immobilize a giant, the giant immobilizes you. It is all too easy to say, "I'd take his legs apart." But it'd be nothing more than sheer luck to land a debilitating injury to one of his tree trunk sized knees. I doubt he'd stand there and allow me to dropkick him in the kneecap. Also, I doubt that if the blow landed as intended, and even if it knocked his leg backward, that it would end the fight. I have enough of a punter's leg to kick his head off if he was down on all fours, but I'd have to get too close to kick him or land any kind of strike, and those strikes alone bring me way too close to a giant that is both in a lot of pain and very fucking angry.

Oh, Rey could hand the majority of the members here their asses in a real fight. Snitsky could probably kill all of us in a real fight.

Really? That's, uh, interesting, Loss.

Alcoholism - continued excessive or compulsive use of alcoholic drinks -- a chronic disorder marked by excessive and usually compulsive drinking of alcohol leading to psychological and physical dependence or addiction. Maybe Mitchell should use a dictionary or Google for references other than his presumably biased opinion. Nevertheless, I don't understand how Bruce wouldn't think that Flair was/is an alcoholic. They're called background checks for a reason.So the state is the victim here? Who runs the courts in the US, Mexico? They're called background checks for a reason.Dunno. Should State Senators be soliciting sex in airport bathrooms? Should the President of the United States get blowjobs from women that are not his wife? Should the current Presidential candidate even be a candidate (since he was making business deals for Texas as the governor IN Afghanistan which = "a no-no" because he didn't have the authority to do so and, it cost taxpayers to have an armed escort(s) 24/7 for the guy)? They're called background checks for a reason. Again, whose fault is it? I mean, I understand what you're getting at, but I don't think you quite understand. Flair, as you say, = money in the Carolina's. The obviousness of how Flair "gets to do things" is right in front of your face. He makes people money - and - "making money" The state/local governments are not victims here. And I'm not going to sit here and pretend that they are. I mean, if one man, Ric Flair, if he can swindle state governments and political candidates for the Presidency after everything that he has done (which the governments (state and local) know about)...then holy shit. The same applies to the innocent civilian sector as well. It's called the Internet and Google is the #1 website for a fucking reason. Type in 'Ric Flair' and do some research. I don't know about broadcasts in the Carolina's, but here in Michigan, there is a commercial for an Internet service called BeenVerified...and it plays all the fucking time on local channels. Maybe people are still dumb and naive and want to believe that they can trust people? At any rate, all this shows is that Flair was given "leniency" (in terms of money crimes) probably because he is worth more to the government paying back taxes than being incarcerated for tax evasion. I mean, rich men have gotten away with lots of shit in the court system because they were rich men.

I thought the intro summed up the point of it: John Eh. Obviously, my question wasn't, "WHAT was the article ABOUT?" My question was, "What was the point of the article?" As in, "What am I supposed to learn from this?" Which was, "Ric Flair is a scummy, irresponsible, cheating, money-stealing low life." Thing is, I already knew that. Just sounds like someone found some new information and decided to compile it a little bit more, which is why I am questioning it. What is the point of making an already horrible person look even worse when the facts he added only added up to something Ric had done before and was pretty much common knowledge to people that 1. know him and 2. know about him. I mean, I knew as far back as 2003 (1 year after I got online) that it would be behoove of me to avoid financial interactions with Ric Flair. Is it to protect the general public who don't know who Ric Flair is? I kinda doubt it.

'Nuff said.

What was the point of the article?

He better get a good farewell celebration.

How was the write up on the sixty-minute draw special he did a week or two ago?

INTERESTING variations of the name: Hans Schmidt IIRC he was the innovator of the evil NAZI heel schtick. He didn't accomplish much in terms of big title wins (like NWA) but he was successful at being someone everyone (patriotic Americans) hated. I dunno enough about the guy though, as I've never seen any matches of him. But judging purely from what I've read, I think he deserves a spot in the HOF. I'm not as high on Batista as most are. It took him a long time to become interesting to me. I remember when he debuted though - just another big WWE muscleheaded steroid guy. He eventually morphed into a solid, entertaining, and pivotal member of the WWE roster, but I wouldn't consider him a HOF caliber performer just yet. Maybe never if he never returns. While HBK/Ramon pioneered the ladder match in the WWE, it was Edge, along with a supporting cast that truly revolutionized the car-crash ladder matches the WWE has showcased since late 1999. He also has some stellar singles matches under his belt - mostly gimmick matches - but he was a capable worker nonetheless. If anything, he is a WWE HOF kind of guy. Yeah, I'd vote for Owen. He was an awesome worker when allowed to actually work. I'd vote for Hennig too. It is too bad that the later stages of his career were botched by WCW and then by his own stupidity. I would vote for Pedro - not on an in-ring basis, but for accomplishments only. VOTE FOR PEDRO~! Yeah, I'd vote for Dick. Awesome worker. Definitely HOF material team. I'm actually surprised that the R&R's weren't in the '96 class when just about every major worker/talent was initially inducted. Dunno. I'd probably vote for Sabu. He did his thing with hardcore wrestling and was a steady superstar in ECW for most of the non-WWE run of the company. Dave loved Sabu in '94 when Sabu was crashing tables and taking bumps hardly seen in a "bigger" American company. He was the King of the Indies for a time too. No doubt, HOF time for Sarge. He was the gimmick match man in the early 80s for the WWF. One of the best "big men" of all-time too. Dunno about Snuka. His most famous moment was a cage dive. Outside of that...things are blurry. No doubt about it. No doubt about it. Yeah, Sasaki has had enough good/great matches under his belt. Was the man opposite Han in RINGS. No doubt about it. No doubt about it. No doubt about it. No doubt about it. Is there a case for Vampiro in the HOF? If there is, enlighten me, because when I saw his name I thought it was a joke at first. No doubt about it. I have never heard anything good about BD. He was a good worker. But I don't know if he is HOF material. No doubt about it.

Eight four + star matches - three being 4 1/4 and the other three being 4 1/2 equates to a non-standout month of matches...heh?

How does one become "eligible" to vote?

I was being sarcastic, actually. The "Savage/Steamboat practiced their match = lameness" is really stupid. I mean, two guys practicing a fake match is stupid? And who cares if it is a self-conscious epic. They practice because it is athletic and they worry about having a good match because the sport is rigged and they want to be a good wrestler i.e. entertainer, i.e. actor. Pretty basic reasoning. I thought this forever. I argued with people for years that it didn't make sense. Yes, Steamboat knowing the best way to hurt Savage would be to take his title was a logical point, but it was also detached from the storyline and implied that he didn't care about the injury. Rude/Steamboat showed a lot more fire than Steamboat/Savage. I think I said all of those things. Then I saw the Toronto match and it changed things. The bloody revenge match had already gone around the horn by the time Wrestlemania hit. Steamboat had chances at the IC title and they had failed because he let his temper get the best of him. He wasn't going to let the same happen here. That missing piece of the puzzle changed the way I looked at the match. In a wrestling company with good announcers, they might have pointed out that we saw a calmer, cooler and more collected Steamboat than we had seen in recent months, and that perhaps failed attempts to beat Savage on shows all over the country has made him re-think his strategy. Maybe even adding that after talking with Steamboat earlier in the day, he said his game plan would now be to outwrestle Savage and take what's most important to him. But that wasn't the Gorilla way. Not that I blame him entirely. That just wasn't the WWF way. I bet they would have if it were Hogan instead of Steamboat, though. It is annoying that they had an opportunity to really make something out of Steamboat, but chose not to. It seems as though they've dropped several catches down the field over a span of twenty-four years. I think that would be an awesome catch-all thread. Nothing but stories of how Vince & co have fucked up over the years. Because they clearly seemed to have WM as the end of the feud, and the violence in the feud demanded more violence to end it in my eyes. It's like TNA starting feuds with a Last Man Standing match. Just like you don't have a throwaway uncharacteristic brawl in the middle match of the feud and then back to Hindu cow calm at the very end. Sure, Steamer went full circle. But that circle fucking sucked. Fuck that Ninja crap, if he could break code once, he should be up to par, and Savage up the ante too by being just as violent because he knew he'd need to. Maybe have the match as a boot camp match or a street fight. Steamer had faught in a snake's pit match already, and probably street fights and No DQ's before. So why not on that night? And then the fucking Honky Tonk Man? Really? The context of the title lineage fucks up the storyline lineage as in the feud between Savage/Steamboat, and Steamboat's character as well. So from a storyline perspective, he should have been a berserker turned semi or even full fledged heel because there was no way HTM would have beaten Savage or a strong heel for the title. But oh shit. If Steamer had gotten over as a heel, Hogan would have had a new "small" man to bump for him and to squash, which he did to Savage anyway. And the series with Flair in the NWA would never had happened! All joking aside, I really wonder what the hell Vince was thinking and for that matter, the head agent, which would have been Chief, right?

In RE's defense, i've known lots of parents who tell their kids stupid shit like that including my own so it's not an uncommon ocurance. Just because it is common doesn't mean that it is okay to do it, no? I mean, unless I am mistaken about psychology, the depth of that lie was more damaging than telling the child something differently, a lesser lie, as the lie told, it scarred RE for a probable length of time, which depending on when he heard it, to when he realized he was free & clear of said lie is the real question. Maybe NSFW material. I might be overthinking this, but God damn, what RE's dad told him...I couldn't imagine fucking with my dogs like that, let alone, traumatize my child with only words. The catharsis of that lie probably haunts RE to this day. Hence my concern. RE is clearly a product of his environment judging even by the minute things that we do know about his childhood. I'm willing to bet there is a history of mental illness in his family - cause obviously RE does, and more than likely his father too. RE's childhood again: I've been witch-hunted for being a so-called sociopath. But fuck that noise. That ^ there is a sociopath. No pause in telling his son a boldfaced lie that would obviously scare a child. Or he's at the very least an extremely dumb parent. Again. And unless I am just seeing something that isn't there, would you tell your child a lie like that - when you could just have ignored him, told him to get out, or just said, "Yeah, I do. Now get out and close the door." I mean, unless RE's dad had a twenty-five-inch cock on 'em, then just tell the little kid the truth.

Well thank God you're not RE's dad, guys, because I'd rather get publically beaten for being a monkey than to worry about sleeping on my father's penis! Simple as that. Don't even need to know that, that dad cuts his own fucking penis off! /Lewis Black

"From week-to-week, you never know what WWE is going to do with Santino..." "Again, you never know from week-to-week how WWE will present stars..." The larger implication of those two quotes (from Caldwell) is why I generally have a hard time watching/liking/being a fan of the WWE. (As well as the fact I love Santino!) One moment, guys like Miz, Sheamus, Barrett, McIntyre are the "future" of the company...but the following week...they're not. Plus, having a "smallish" roster makes for a lot of match-ups being thrown away on free television...as well the "we've seen this for seven weeks straight now" meme the WWE is guilty of. WCW may have been a failed experiment, but having a bloated roster, in some instances, is actually a good thing. In general, the WWE is not the worst company in the world right now - that honor belongs to TNA. For years, the WWE had other fuck-ups (in one way or another) to somewhat cover and conceal their limitations, like with WCW and ECW. TNA falls somewhere in-between WCW and ECW (I think) but even then, their exposure and fanbase is limited to especially what WCW's was, and in a lot of ways, even ECW. In-ring wise, they're as unpredictable as the booking of the talent. I place nearly zero blame of this on the feet of the workers themselves because I've been a fan long enough to realize that if they were told by the agents beforehand, "You have twenty-five minutes after intros to do your thing," that the results, in more cases then not, would be of my liking. At any rate, and as we all are aware of, "wrestling" has become a bad word because of Vince and co. desire to become affiliated more closely to Hollywood rather than the business they're actually in to begin with. Vince has always been cartoonish and possessed by delusions of grandeur, but unless he has an epiphany (which should have already happened because the WWE films have all largely bombed), I suspect the "Hollywood to wrestling ratio" will continue to favor the former instead of the latter. Nevertheless, the tropes the WWE have relied on for years-and-years are mundane, contrived, uncreative, and boring because of the rinse-and-repeat ad infinitum nature in which they are presented to the fanbase. I realize that all companies in one way or another have done similar never-changing approaches, but the singular largest company professional wrestling has ever seen should be able to move in a direction of newfound creativity a la Memphis in the 80s and early 90s did. But they're PG. And the times the WWE have pushed the envelope, they pushed a little too far or didn't know how to handle the outcome of a controversial angle (Katie Vick & the de-masking of Kane). So anyway. I can understand why peeps be hatin' on the 'E, and I can understand why peeps be lovin' on the 'E.

It would be cooler if I could read more than the big five blocks...