tomk

Don't really understand the link between being a fan of Bret's and takling his side in Montreal case. I’m not a particular fan of Bret Hart. He’s been in a bunch of matches I’ve liked a lot. Been in a bunch of matches that I didn’t care for. But I’m a guy who has held jobs, has signed contracts with employers, has subcontracted, and had folks sign contracts with me. If someone violates a contract they are in the wrong. Bret wanted the terms of his contract met, the WWF violated those terms.If someone violates a contract I don't work with them again. If someone fails to pay me, I don't work with them again. If I fail to pay someone I don't expect them to want to work for me again. In the real world you let alot of shit slide but you don't let that shit go. Wrestling is full of whores who are willing to let things go. Promoters bounce checks to, take advantage of, violate contracts of and fail to pay their employees. And for the most part the employees let it go, suck it up and go back to work for them. Letting things go isn't an admirable quality here. It's a sign that you're just another whore.

Yeah that is weird. Also is that the way it was reported at the time.

From the Amazon site, it is listed as 406 pages. FOUR HUNDRED AND SIX PAGES OF BABYSACK!! You are a masochist.

Where can I find Babysack accusation of Walsh?

There are about 63 wrestler spots currently on RAW/Smackdown/ECW. And a good 630 who could fill each of those roles. Take a look at the current roster. One might argue that Undertaker, Cena or Rey aren't replaceable. But honestly the WWF has booked all of them as though they are. Few paying jobs (fewer well paying jobs) + a large applicant pool + management who sees employees as being as disposable and replaceable as goldfish= an awful enviroment for unionization.

Does “weight room supervisor” really meet the definition of position of authority? In terms of hierarchy of authority among school staff , it falls way below principal, assistant principal, principal’s secretary, teacher, coach, assistant coach, teacher’s aid, counselor, trainer, nurse, busdriver for away games, and school security officer. Feels like a job on the same level as lunch lady, groundsperson, and the guys who run the chains for home games. I mean yes the lunch lady supervises the rules and discipline on the lunch line and is in charge of determining how many chicken tenders each student gets… but I wouldn’t call her a position of authority. I mean I’m not exactly sure what is meant by “worked under her supervision in the weight room”. If that means he had the highschool equivalent of a work study job under her management than that is one thing. But if it just means he lifted weights, the functional equivalent of the student who “labors to get lunch under the supervision of the lunch lady” than this is a stretch.

All I know of Minnesota comes from Pasiley Park productions but a 25 year old working as "weight room supervisor" fucking a 17 year old doesn't feel like much of a scandal.

The question is how she handles questions in general. On some level Vince is such an insane and reluctant interview that people forget that Linda hasn’t been particularly accessible either. I doubt you can find more than six interviews with her this decade. I remember one AP interview and one Gannett one. Both essentially fluff pieces. The narrative of “husband afraid of going to jail for conspiracy to distribute drug charges turning over the CEO position of his company to person with no MBA or management experience” doesn’t really feel like a bio to build a political campaign around.

Circus talk. What exactly his role in circus. Difference tween the worlds of circus and wrestling. etc.

I'm not so sure what there is to be upset about. Village voice says all wrestling is gay. ROH is just a more intimate setting. Why see Cher at a MSG when you can see Bette Midler at Mahattan center? Who would argue with that?

A few months ago, Alvarez was talking about how he's been watching some 1989 WCW matches and while he enjoyed some of them (he said some of the basics from some workers were better than some today), he said he couldn't get into the finishes since he claimed they ruined the match for him: "The one thing that I will always notice is that I would watch these matches, and I'll be 'God these guys are great, this is a really good match, it's holding up', and then the thing that kills it is always the finish. The finishes, and it's because, I guess part of the reason is because as wrestling has evolved, things that used to be finishes, aren't necessarily finishes anymore. Or guys use new things, or what used to be a finish before become a nearfall. I mean, you watch a match out of 89, and guys will be a great match or anything like that. And then somebody will hit a double arm suplex and pin the guy. And that would never happen in 2009! And you watch it and you kinda think 'What the hell was that finish?!?'. Or some guy will do a vertical suplex for the pin, and those are the things that don't hold up in 2009. But if you took a lot of those matches and added a modern finish to them, they would hold up just fine and a lot of them would hold up fine, and a lot of them would look a lot better than the matches nowadays." - Bryan Alvarez I thought some of you would find this recent Meltzer/Alvarez claim very amusing and mind boggling: "The Shawn Michaels of 1992 would probably be the best worker in the business." - Dave Meltzer "He would undoubtedly be actually!" - Bryan Alvarez "Yeah." - Dave Meltzer The whole “modern finish” thing is weird bit of commentary. I will say that watching 24/7 I tend to have the opposite experience. In the 80s your WWF wrestlers had a limited move palette that they were allowed to use. Two most dangerous looking moves in that palette were piledriver and top rope knee. Watching on TV I go “Holy shit that’s nasty”. But neither are really finishers. More often than not the guy who eats those moves gets up and hits the next move. I can't imagine someone whipping out either in 2009 and it not leading to a finish run. I also wonder what modern wrestling Bryan is watching? I remember when they added Cena to the Smackdown main event scene. There were these finishing trains where Benoit and Angle would whip out rolling German’s for pops and Cena would then come in and throw out a rolling FU which at time was essentially a modified bodyslam and get equally loud pops. If you watch Lance Storm in ECW the superkick is a transition move. It is 2009, Cena is wining matches with a bodyslam, Michaels is winning matches with a superkick, Muto wins matches with a knee lift and Takayama still wins matches with a German.

https://www.msu.edu/~lattimej/Mid-Atlantic.html There's a little more to the build to the tag and turn but still tag partner refusing to tag and eventually attacking partner. Surprsingly can't actually find it on web. The Dutsin/Arn match has same structure and is awesome. The Flair/Helmsley is a little different in that Helmsley alsomakes sure to bury the other heels. Still its a simple basic formula that works.

1) Hooters girls are blatantly fake, people trick themselves into believing that their flirtation is real. 2) There are a shitload of people who are worked into tipping waitresses at Hooters more than they tip a normal waitress with better quality wings. 3) People stalk and sexually assualt Hooters waitresses.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x70gc5_bu...vs-dustin_sport http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x70ghd_bu...vs-dustin_sport http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6129c_tr...s-masters_sport Undefeated streaks are basic wrestling booking and they can be ended with basic wrestling booking. Once Goldberg had the title he didn't need the undefeated streak too. They had him loose the undefeated streak and the title at the same time which left him with nothing. Joe lost undefeated streak early in his ROH title run. Lost several tags, including loosing tags against the Briscoes setting up singles matches against both and a non title street fight to Homicide real early into his title. ROh like many feds didn't know what to do with a guy once he lost tile. Samoa Joe lost title to Ares, and ROH didn't have any real challengers waiting in the wings ready for Ares and also didn't know what to do to sidedrain Samoa Joe. This is title booking problem not "undefeated streak" booking problem.

Hooters waitress is for most part considered customer service and not entertainer. Evangelic preacher aren't normally classified as entertainers either. But mechanics similar.

I’ve never understood why Golderg’s streak is treated as some sort of unique booking problem. Guys being booked with undefeated winning streaks have happened many times. Guy who has undefeated winning streak that leads to title is pretty standard formula. It’s an old formula that works and there are plenty of good old formulas that can be worked with it. The Nash v Goldberg match was especially stupid. You don’t end the streak and the title at the same time as you can get mileage out of both. But there are plenty of formulas for providing losses. There is the possibility of having Goldberg take a loss in a tag match: Flair/Valentine v Snuka/Iron Sheik, Arn/Dustin v Bunkhouse Buck/Terry Funk, Flair/HHH v Carlito /Masters formula. You can pretty much plug anyone into role of Goldberg tag partner (DDP, Benoit, Sting, Booker T, Coach Buzz Stern) who goes on to brag about costing Goldberg first loss. Leads to angry Goldberg and opponent getting title shot. It’s a formula that is hurt by how many guys had turned too many times. As each time the impact is lessened. Still basic formula that’s worked for over a quarter of century. Basic Bruno booking: Goldberg looses to Nash at Bash do to count out while brawling with Bigalow on floor. Goldberg holds onto title.Then can either go to Nash as guy who brags about costing Goldberg first loss or Bam Bam as guy who brags about costing first loss. Goldberg v Bam Bam where Bam Bam gets Goldberg to loose by count out. Goldberg hold onto title. Goldberg v Bam Bam where Goldberg looses by DQ (Bruno getting his Italian up and loosing temper). Goldberg holds onto title. Goldberg v Bam Bam with NO Dq or in cage with Goldberg winning cleanly. You can run the Flair/Valentine v Snuka/Iron Sheik formula straight into the Bruno formula. These are easy simple formulas that work. No real magic, nothing that makes Goldberg so unique that the basics shouldn't work. Once you’ve milked Goldberg with title for long enough you can eventually have Nash or Ronn Reiss or Prince Iaukea or whoever win the title.

That's the closest I've found to a genuine explanation. I tried to sit down and think of other forms of entertainment in which half the show's goals involve deliberately pissing off the paying customers, and really there aren't many besides purorasslin. Rafaeli, Anat and Robert I. Sutton. 1991. “Emotional Contrast Strategies as a Means of Social Influence: Lessons from Criminal Interrogators and Bill Collectors.” Academy of Management Journal 34 These things aren’t perfect comparisons. A police suspect doesn’t have a drunken crowd egging him on to heckle the guy playing the role of bad cop/cheer on (help) the guy playing good cop. But no two jobs are exactly identical. And I have to think that there is a reason so many retired wrestlers go into evangelical preaching ( crowd emotion management/"social influence" is transferable skill). I imagine if you gave Tully Blanchard or Ivan Kolloff breast implants, they’d be really good at milking money out of Hooters customers. They’re top level pros and know how to work.

Bob Roop was an Olympic athlete who promoters wanted to use as guy who would hurt non workers to prove legitimacy. Roop is really disdainful to that whole mentality…”real athletes win contests they don’t deliberately hurt opponents”…yet he’s sympathetic to the rationale behind the whole thing. Most of your protecting the biz stories are told by guys who are fully indoctrinated in that mentality. Roop is interesting in that he understands but doesn’t agree with a lot of it. As a result he comes across as a more reliable narrator.

I would highly reccomend the Scott Teal Bob Roop shoots. You can probably find them in easily uploadable format on the web somewhere.

I should also point out that there is a difference between job where emotional management is aimed at making customer feel well liked/wanted (Hooters) and one where job is getting customer angry. Those are very different emotions. Still people knowingly tip their Hooters girl more than they'd tip a busty barmaid elsewhere, and pays more for chicken wings than he would elsewhere. Customer knows it's blatantly fake, wants his emotions manipulated and goes. People get emotionally riled up by pro wrestling, even if they know its as blatantly fake as Hooters girl's tits. It's the reason they go to attend shows. Occasionally it goes to far.

Occasionally a customer at Hooters will go to cop a feel or follow a waitress home.

Yes the "people in the biz" has changed the nature and purpose of the Hall of Fame more than anything else. I still got the impression that there was an influx of observer web writers who got votes around 2003.

The waitress at Hooters isn’t your girlfriend, doesn’t want to date you, isn’t going to fuck you. The Hooters waitresses flirtations are blatantly fake. Customers go into Hooters knowing that it’s a work. Knowing that the waitresses are being overly friendly and flirtatious because it’s their job to make the male customers feel warm. Customers are in on the work and willing participate. The customer doesn’t know the exact rules of the work and may fall for part of it “ I mean she works at Hooters she’s got to be a legit slut/needy of male attention…she seems more genuine than the other girls” People will fall for the work enough to leave giant tips. Occasionally customers will try to cop a feel s or try to follow her home. Jobs that involve managing/manipulating peoples emotions will occasionally find people who get pushed over the edge.

My impression was that in 2003 there was a huge increase in number voters mostly in category of wrestling reporters…and that was year Shawn Michaels got in. I’m not convinced that larger voting body of “reporters”/”editorial writers” is something that would improve the HOF. I don’t know if Schneider still has Satanico’s contacts or if Javier Llanes’ digits are still listed on the Box y Lucha page. Assuming that the votes are done the way Meltz is now saying they are done, it might be worthy project to try to contact some 70s/80s era UWA/EMLL luchadors and try to get them ballots. But again I want to argue that time spent trying to figure out how the gaming of the voting works is time better spent discussing candidates.

I don't buy that. Yohe: If ranking is based on percentage of reporters from region and 100% of the reporters from Japan voted for Saito...one would assume that he would show up on top ten among reporters. Instead: William's suggestion of asking Dave to walk through how Yohe's ballot was treated seems like the best bet for getting some real understanding. Did Whalers or someone else like him post his ballot? Walking through how an actual ballot was treated should clear stuff up. Otherwise these attempts to reverse engineer something that makes sense just feel futile. Begrudgingly accept that it's a trade secret like formula for making hotdogs and move onto the task of pimping Cien Caras, Walton and Enrique Torres.