tomk

1) Is this accurate description of the majority of Hogan's high end matches? 2)If it was accurate would it be commendable? Why would this be commendable? Noone says that Inoki letting opponent take 90% of match and then brushing it off is commendable. It is Inoki at his laziest and worst. Hogan at his laziest does it, but don't see why we should applaud him for it.

Early in the 80s when he was a big blade freak, he had a bunch of cool brawling on the floor spots. Always like the press into the corner post. He can be really neat as proto-Taz:orange skinned guy who says "Brother/Brah" alot in promos with really good looking throws/suplexes. I like Hogan's ude hishigi juji gatame more than Taz' kata ha jime.

That basic king of the hill structure is used alot in the second or third fall (heel brawling fall) in lots of lucha matches. People still pop.

How much credit does Dr Zahorian get for his importance on overall presentation?

Meltzer Not sure there is anything convincing there. But that thread is all beside the point. That's a thread from 2007, in 2012 I would have no argument with HHH getting into HOF either. All that said: a) HHH got into HOF much earlier and B)When Meltzer does his list of HOFers with one sentence blurb for each one the sentence for HHH is some variation on top heel during attitude era. There are multiple arguments for Helmsley going into HOF, the argument that Meltzer thinks motivated his entry is "top opponent of top draws." Once "top opponents of anchor" became enough, there has been a desire to add more people who meet that criteria.

You don't hear that agument used against Russell, or JR or Walton because they aren't known for doing that. When Ed Whalen and Larry Zbysco get into the HOF for their commentary work, then one can make that argument. But they're not getting in. In Monsoon's defense it's worth thinking about the way WWWF/WWF arena cards are structured. Guys like Russel or Solie are really skillful at crafting ways to make deadly dull undercard draws interesting. Telling the audience what they're learning by watching this match. The purpose of the dry undercard Georgia draw is to establish that this is the kind of "clean wrestling" that the face aspires to, but is forced to go his fistus in face of the evil heel. The purpose of the dry undercard draw in Vince Sr.'s system was to be the concession stand match. A match that crowd would walk out on and buy concessions. Not sure if Vince Sr had percentage of concessions that other feds didn't. But the "concession match" was an important part of the WWWF/WWF formula. One could argue that Monsoon's commentary where he implied that everything on undercard was shit and not worth watching makes sense in that context. The last thing the WWWF/WWF wanted was a Solie or Russell telling you why you should stay in your seat to watch the undercard. But if the point of wrestling is to get the audience to buy concessions and not watch the matches; then we should talk about the designer behind the Macho Man T-Shirts and the guy who worked out the WWF ice cream bar licensing agreement with Good humor getting into the HOF.

I don't have the Matt Farmer numbers in front of me and I'm not the biggest fan of the way those are put together but, based on those he drew really well opposite Hogan (as well as teamed with Hogan) and drew well opposite Rock. I think once HHH went in in 04/05? there has been a desire to add top opponents of top draws.

I've yet to see a good complete Singh match. There are matches where the wrestling parts are intereszting but the brawling is awful. matches where the brawling is entertaining but wrestling is uninteresting. Plus alot of the stuff from the 70s early eighties doesn't have really satisfying finishes as they all feel like partial incomplete matches. That said, I think you could edit a bunch of Singh v Inoki matches together to create one complete satisfying match.

For whatever it's worth, Earthquake v Hogan at Summerslam supposedly drew more than Warrior v Hogan at Mania (only time summerslam outdrew Mania). I don't know how much that should be blamed on Warrior and how much blamed on the problems of face v face booking (which wrote about in another thread). But that hurts the argument about it as a "super match". I guess you could look at Hidaka, Kyoko Inoue, Black Warrior and Ultimo Guerrero and argue some sort of Sayama like influence. I thought he was one of top opponents of Verne. How did his program with Bruno draw? Good worker, with amateur background and pretty sure he's talked about as "legit" hooker. I don't think that should affect votes, but it does.

Watched less wrestling this year than I have in ages, so lots of this is being left blank CATEGORY "A" AWARDS (PICK YOUR TOP 3) 1. LOU THESZ/RIC FLAIR AWARD: John Cena, LA Park, Henry Last year I wrote that "L.A. Park is only guy I can think of where the combination of draw and match quality would justify. Cena and Dr Wagner really haven't had the matches this year.". This year Cena had the matches. 2. MMA MOST VALUABLE FIGHTER: Manny Pacquiao 3. MOST OUTSTANDING WRESTLER: Virus, Santito, Finlay 4. MOST OUTSTANDING FIGHTER: Andre Ward, Lamont Peterson,Vinny Magalhaes 5. TAG TEAM OF THE YEAR: Derrick King/ "Mr Teen Excitement" Drew Haskins 6. FEUD OF THE YEAR: I really don't understand CM Punk vs Cena getting votes here. It was a neat program leading to a match and a great match...after that it fell apart. I think a feud requires a program prolonged loner than that. Fuck Orton v Cm Punk lasted longer than Cena v Punk. Henry v Show or Lawler v Miz/Cole feel like they lasted long enough to be feuds. The failure of Punk v Cena is that the bookers didn't allow it to become a rivary or feud. 9. BEST ON INTERVIEWS: Mark Henry 10. MOST CHARISMATIC: Rock, "Mr Teen Excitement" Drew Haskins, Kenny "Deuce" Garner 13. BEST FLYING WRESTLER: Rey Mysterio, Ellis Coleman 14. MOST OVERRATED: Helmsley, Nash,I could see spmepne arguing for Kane or Sin Cara for third spot. But distance between top two and third is so much, not worth listing a third. 15. MOST UNDERRATED: Tamon Honda, Finlay, Luke Gallows, Rene Dupree, Trevor Murdoch, Chris Masters, Teen Excitement Drew Haskins and Derrick King are all freelance guys without contracts. 16. PROMOTION OF THE YEAR: EMLL, M-1, Todo x Todo 18. PRO WRESTLING MATCH OF THE YEAR: Parka v Mesias by Meltz calendar, Punk v Cena from MIB 19. MMA MATCH OF THE YEAR: Lamont Peterson v Amir Khan 20. ROOKIE OF THE YEAR: Bugambia del Norte 21. BEST NON-WRESTLER PERFORMER: John Laurinitis, Beaker 22. BEST TELEVISION ANNOUNCER: Henry "Discombobulating" Jones 23. WORST TELEVISION ANNOUNCER: Michael Cole 24: BEST MAJOR SHOW: Money in the Bank --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "CATEGORY B" AWARDS. ONLY PICK ONE 2. BEST WRESTLING MANEUVER: Ellis Coleman's takedown: http://www.mixedmartialarts.com/mma.cfm?go...&gid=340977 8. BEST BOOKER: Either Paul Domenich or whoever books EMLL currently (despite hating what he has done to primera caidas and actual match structure, I'm guessing that Ultimo Guerrero deserves a bunch of credit). 9. PROMOTER OF THE YEAR: Vadim Finkelstein or The Lutheroths 12. BEST WRESTLING BOOK: Does Yohe's Ed Strangler Lewis project count as a book? There is a bunch of stuff on wrestling in "Venus With Biceps", a coffee table book I read at friends house. Those two are closest to wrestling books I read this year. I haven't read Stan Hansen, Bill Dundee, Destroyer, or Kanyon's autobiographies. This may be worth a seperate threaf bt I think that in internet discussions, people rarely discuss the importance of cover art to wrestling books. Is wrestling book content overrated? The IWC seems to ignore how important advertising/ballyhoo is to books. Books are really not about actual content (in the end they all are essentially just letters and pictures on paper organized in different ways). This is especially obvious in the case of wrestling books which are filled with careless misspellings, odd grammar, haphazard organization, and self contradicting statements. A wrestling book's value should be understood to be truly less about the words used in them or how those words are organized. The wrestling books value is really about what it takes to get you to purchase them off the shelf (the covers). A good example of the IWC's myopia is that last year Mick Foley's "Countdown to Lockdown" got the observer wrestling book of the year award. It's cover design is just fucking awful, colors are obnoxious, photo is poorly developed and shoddy looking, and the shape of the book is dull. There is no way the casual customer would want to pick it up. OTOH, Kartinka Herbert's "Slam" cover is beautifully designed is larger and has a fucking elaborate die cut slip case. There is a whole long discussion to be had about die cuts and how a book cover with a hole in it is far more sophisticated than one that insists on the books closedness, not letting you peer into multiple layers. Might be worth us having separate discussion threads on back covers, book spine and binding, typography and paper stock as well. But I think those are topics that could be introduced later. Still based on covers, I think Venus with Biceps should be the winner. 13. BEST PRO WRESTLING DVD: Goodhelmet/DVDVR Best of All Japan 80s set.

Yes he did. 1) It was always refered to as "modified" or "variation" on bulldog. the hairmare bulldog is the correct WWF bulldog. 2) Was his goofy combo a bulldog/acecrusher? Cause I wouldn't count that. The more I think about it, the more I think the hairmare bulldog as official WWE bulldog must have started earlier than 2000, as its point that I remember Scott Keith stealing back when he was still regularly writing about wrestling.

Is the Mutoh/HBK/Chris Jericho hair-mareish bulldog actually an indie move? I kind of assumed that the WWE prescribed that unless you were a woman you were not allowed to do a bulldog with a headlock (equivalent to the WWE German suplex). My memory is that at points both Dustin Rhodes, and Lance Cade (guys who did a standard bulldog before) were doing the hairmare variety in the WWE. Cade would do a standard bulldog on Heat/Velocity and then would do the WWE Mutoh type on the actual Smackdown/Raw shows. From 2000-2010 (and it might have started pre-2000) you were more likely to see a bulldog with headlock on the indies than in the WWE.

Crap, you want to euthanize the elderly too.

At this point, I don't think the polls reflect the board.

From a results thread at wrestling classics Cawthon says of Bruno results: I think this is worth keeping in mind when we talk about what wins and losses mean and what adds or detracts value from belt.

When was this true? Fritz von Erich, Mulligan and Rashcke used the claw. Scott Irwin, Steamboat, Dynamite Kid and Bob Orton Jr used a superplex. Dusty and Abby and others did a big elbow drop. Austin Idol, Grege Valentine, Jack Brisco, Paul Ordorf, Buddy Landell all were billed as masters of the Figure Four. Mr Wrestling II and Jake Robers and a binch of other guys mastered the knee lift. Ordorf, Bob Sweetan, Ron Garvin and a ton of guys used a piledriver. Matt Borne, Morales, Dundee all used that top rope buttdrop thing. KokoB Ware, Jimmy Garvin, Killer Karl Kox and other folk used a brainbuster. Kabuki and Chris Adams used a superkick. Masked Superstar, Bobby Eaton, Honky Tonk Man and a bunch of other folk used a swinging neckbreaker. The WWF always limited guys to where only Bob Orton used the superplex and when the someone like the Bulldogs used a move that "belonged to someone else (DDT or superplex it) would be a "whatamaneuver", "I don't know what to call that". But I don't think there has been some sort of change from a period where moves "belonged to one guy" to a one where they don't.

He is the father of Edson Berto and Andre Berto.

Positioned in same role in previous, more succesful generations? Guys who held the IWGP Championship for over 300 days in more succesful generations: Inoki, Vader, Fujinami, Hashimoto, Mutoh Even if we ignore him being something like six inches shorter and weighing 30 lbs less than George Takano...people see Tanahashi as being a guy who would be in same role as those five?

Not sure if it was intentional or not, but I always thought it worked. It worked better than York's "hostess at steakhouse" outfits being sold as "corporate woman". If you do a 91 yearbook, I hope you find a way to put on the stuff where Budro wants to join the Foundation. His comic failed attempts to turn corporate provide a nice contrast with the actual sell outs.

I have some of those Patera All star tapes too. I want to say Tazmaniac was part of the roster.

Current Cena booking is that top face doesn't defend belt but instead chases it. Anyone who had a two + run as MSG opponent of top face in 70s and 80s would now start that run holding belt. Valentine was a challenger for world title in 70s. Under current booking the face would be chasing him. I imagine he'd hold the title twice in the 70s, his 84 IC title run would be a world title run (guy on top of B tours). Thats three world title runs right there. Once you have three, then the fed would trust him whenever someone got injured to work as interem title holder. Bossman had a series with Hogan. That series would be Hogan chasing Bossman. Beefcake was a uppercard face, I see him getting a less than one month run maybe winning it in elimination cage type multiperson match, the equivalent of Michaels 2002 run.

I want to seconf this. I look forward to anytime these two match up. Not just because plays to Cena's ability to sell and bump but also becuase Cena has really fun almost Backlundesque power moves where you really get a sense of every stage in what goes into a lift. Surprised that JBL didn't make anyones Cena opponent list.

I don't get the nos here at all. Guys who are lower in the pecking order than Putski was in the seventies, have had world championships in last decade. One of the goofy things in the discussions of Edge's HOF candidacy is people who cry "he was the #4 guy in the WWF, if he can't get in no one from the last decade can make it in". Guys in the WON HOF Guys in the HOF who had featured roles in the WWE between 2000-2011: 1)Chris Benoit 2)Shawn Michaels 3)Kurt Angle 4)Undertaker 5)HHH 6)Eddie Guerrero 7)Rock 8 Chris Jericho 9)Rey Mysterio Jr I'm choosing not to include Foley and Austin. From the 2007-2011 period alone where Edge was in main event mix and multiple time champ he was booked below HHH Shawn Michaels Undertaker Jericho Cena Orton Batista If the guy who is booked as 9th or 13th most important guy in fed can be multiple time world champ, I don't see how Duggan gets dismissed as a no. Kane and Bog Show have been multiple time champs. From the thread about wrestler of the year I wrote on the 24th If you booked the major top WWF faces from the 70s and 80s the same way as Cena has been booked (face wins title, face succesfully defends title next month, then looses it to next challenger following month), then anyone who worked a more than two month program opposite Bruno, Morales, Backlund, Hogan would have held the title. Heels like Steele, Kowalski, Patera, Hansen, Snuka, Duncum, King Curtis Iaukea, Don Leo Jonathon, Maivia, Patterson, Valentine, Orndorf, Bossman, Rude, Roberts,Piper, Bundy, etc. all get title runs. No way Tenta doesn't get a title run after injuring Hogan. Putski gets a face run of a couple months in 70s. Not sure if face Maivia or Monsoon get title run. JYD gets one. Beefacke gets one. Khan-Andre is set up by Khan having title.

Who says "jacked up guys" can't work? Internet is filled with guys praising the in ring work of Steve Williams and Chris Benoit.

Would you categorize Butch Reed as body builder with powerhouse offense? I really like Pequeno Pierroth's power offense too.