JerryvonKramer

I think it really stretches things to call me myopic, all things considered. There will also be post-2000 guys in my list, despite some of my misgivings about modern WWE style, or 00s Indie style. I won't rank Lucha workers or shootstyle workers, for reasons discussed.

Since when is having good non-gimmick matches a consideration? What difference does it make? I don't care what the stips are. Is the match good? HHH will be punished in my ratings when it comes to his base stats, he just isn't very good, and in other areas. He will likely get a 4 or 5 for "Great matches" and will also do well in Variety, which comes as a natural by-product of working on top of a big promotion for so long. If all the numbers end up coming to more than whatever the baseline is for guy #100, he will make the list.

Right, I'm just saying that there is sometimes a bit of SLIPPAGE there where it goes from being "Okay, so he's not a Jumbo / Tenryu level guy, but is still really bloody good", to "yeah, this guy wasn't all that and shouldn't make the list". You see the difference?

One other thing I'll put out there, if something like Hansen and DiBiase vs. Jumbo and Tenryu from 85 happened in a WWF ring at a major PPV, it would be remembered as a classic and raved about. It happened in an All Japan ring in the midst of a mind-blowing Choshu's army feud. Take a match like that and isolate it, and it's way way better than it would appear in the context of binge-watching AJ from the period. The charge brought against Ted is that he doesn't stand out in AJ, but he wasn't meant to, he was meant to be Hansen's number 2 and he played that part well. He also held his own -- and the FACT HE HAS THE RUN at all should be to his credit not his detriment. Many other 80s guys don't have the resume of AJ matches to their name. There's a very engaging match they have with the Funks which ends with Hansen barking at Ted to whip Dory with his belt. Considering the Japanese crowd would have known Ted as a West Texas guy and Dory trainee, and seeing Hansen really goading Ted into it, is one of the few moments of genuine heelery I've seen in an AJ context, but it also gets across the dynamic of the Stan-Ted team quite well.

Yeah. Sorry, should have said you and not K8.

Was it off the top of your head K8 or from my post just above which lists exactly the same stuff? lol I would like to hold off listing out DiBiase stuff K8, until I finish my 80s Catchup rewatch of the Murdoch series, and I'm currently in the middle of a bunch of Williams / Ted tags, which is a pretty underrated team -- underrated on PWO that is, not elsewhere in the fandom.

It's interesting how much Triple H's bad stuff is weighted against him relative to how much someone like Andre's bad stuff is weighted against him. And by the same token interesting how much Triple H's best stuff is taken into consideration vs. someone like Andre's best stuff. All that said, I couldn't care less about Triple H. I do recall liking the Foley match at Rumble 2000 a lot. His recent stuff is not good. I didn't like the Bryan match everyone raved about, and thought people went stupid about that. Hated Brock match. Thought the Sting match was comedy gold, but sucked from a wrestling standpoint. I have the same problems with his work, generally, as a lot of people here. Seems poor at constructing a narrative in the ring, uses that hammer as a crutch, etc. He still probably has 10 very good to great matches to his name, which is actually quite a lot. So he might make my list based on BIGLAV rating.

Is it really? A lot of old school workers have these abilities. In fact, the combination of these is almost a must have for anyone in order to get into my Top 100. I'd say that right now there are 70 workers locked for my list who all have what you describe here and then I've got another 50 workers battling for the last 30 spots who aren't much worse.. I mean, since you don't seem to be considering post-2000 workers at all, you obviously have a smaller pool of talent to choose from... and granted, I like Ted a lot, but this argument about Ted being a rare combo (a total package?) isn't going to make me rank him ahead of 20 other workers. It is rare because those guys you are talking about are ... the 100 greatest workers of all time. If you ONLY watch good wrestling, the best of stuff from the past etc, then it won't seem that rare. But if you watch the crap too, I think it is clear that not every guy had those talents. You can pick out any card and maybe there will be one or two guys on that card who have this combination of skills. And they will more than likely be the best workers on that card.

I think the claim that Barry Windham's early 90s run is better than Ted's 80s Mid-South run is really stretching it. And would go against not only conventional wisdom but also my very recent experiences of watching both runs. I'm not sure if anything else needs to be said, but I've been watching them both side-by-side -- 80s Mid-South as part of my ongoing thread, early 90s Windham for WTBBP. Do you really think Windham has a great run in 91, 92 or 93? When? How? I think I missed this when I first read the post. Are you really putting NWA champ 93 Windham over peak Ted? Seems nuts. Ted has a lot of very good to great matches in the 80s. See the aforementioned thread for reviews of lots of them. As I've said on WTBBP many times, Windham had a habit of not bringing his A-game to PPV matches and seemingly a lot of his best performances are buried on TV shows. I honestly can't think of what you could be referring to in the "early 90s run" though. He has that match with Arn that I LOVE from 92. But I can't really think off the top of my head of too many stand outs. JvK, I know you're a massive fan of WCW in 1992 - where would you put Windham in a list of WCW's best workers that year? Below Rude, Steamboat, Arn, Dustin and Vader for sure. It would be a close run thing between him and the next set down, which would include Austin and Sting (in his career year). The claim from Dylan is a real head-scratcher for me. Windham feels kinda lost and floating around in 1990. He has a decent match with Luger that year. Some good stuff with Pillman on TV in 91. String of very good tags vs. Dangerous Alliance in 92, again on TV. The awesome Arn match. And I could probably leave the stuff vs. Gordy and Williams from later in the year. Into 93 and the stuff with Flair is disapponting. I recall the Regal and Scorpion matches being good. But really I don't think it all adds up to being better than Ted's signature run in Mid-South. And I'd probably take Ted's 88 over Windham's 1990 or 1991. I suspect that Dylan is probably making those Dustin tags vs. DA from the 92 TV do a lot of work in his argument.

I believe this was the match in which he famously fell asleep in the ring, if I'm not mistaken, Kelly?

This is an extremely unhelpful contribution to this discussion, and I don't really appreciate it. You've also taken us over the page, which I don't appreciate either, because my previous post is now buried.

I'm in a much better mood today, so can respond to this properly. I think the claim that Barry Windham's early 90s run is better than Ted's 80s Mid-South run is really stretching it. And would go against not only conventional wisdom but also my very recent experiences of watching both runs. I'm not sure if anything else needs to be said, but I've been watching them both side-by-side -- 80s Mid-South as part of my ongoing thread, early 90s Windham for WTBBP. Do you really think Windham has a great run in 91, 92 or 93? When? How? I think I missed this when I first read the post. Are you really putting NWA champ 93 Windham over peak Ted? Seems nuts. Ted has a lot of very good to great matches in the 80s. See the aforementioned thread for reviews of lots of them. As I've said on WTBBP many times, Windham had a habit of not bringing his A-game to PPV matches and seemingly a lot of his best performances are buried on TV shows. I honestly can't think of what you could be referring to in the "early 90s run" though. He has that match with Arn that I LOVE from 92. But I can't really think off the top of my head of too many stand outs.

I think the aforementioned Superstars match vs. The Steiners is missing. But otherwise, still think this is his best stuff.

I made an imaginary "Best of Mike Rotunda" comp once, let me see if I can dig it up.

They basically had two matches on the same day, one in Okalhoma City, and one in Tulsa. I like the Tulsa match a smidge more and have it at ****3/4, but can't seem to find it online. The OKC match seems like it is on youtube, but 10 mins seems short and I wonder if it is cut. I will see about getting these online later on. I would also point to this match as an example of Ted having intensity in his work. It's him as a firey young babyface against the incredible Pat Patterson: I mean look at those knee drops on the arm!

Well it's not exactly one run, I'm talking dozens of matches over many years in his home promotion.

Try the Magnum TA matches, match with Flair and stuff with Murdoch after it. I think Ted works with real intensity and is far from boring. I'd be interested to see you review the Magnum TA matches just to get a sense of how you see things.

I should also say that we have lots of guys with extremely impressive appearances at MSG from the same time frame. To name a few ... Patterson, Dibiase, Patera, Orton Jr, Adonis, Hansen, Martel ... many others. It wasn't impossible to have a good match in that environment and Killer Khan has a fun one against Backlund. We also get a good few little one-shot cameos of guys "away from home" killing it at MSG: Ricky Steamboat / Jay Youngblood and Dynamite Kid / Tiger Mask both spring to mind. Tiger Mask in particular was arguably more crisp and better on his execution in that one match than in any single NJ match. Andre, however, steadfastly dogged it.

And I am not doing this to be an asshole. But just to point out that Andre doesn't get this sort of scrutiny, and in some other threads we have people dropping Bret Hart out of their top 50s "because he dogged it on house shows". You understand the point I hope.

I guess the biggest knock is, even from the 70s when he was at his athethletic peak, is that almost all his best performances where away from his home promotion. He's almost like two different workers, Andre on the road and Andre at home. I even saw an Andre vs. Sheik match from Detroit from the 70s, that I thought was fun, but I reckon pick up those two guys and stick them in MSG and they'd have dogged it. The clearest example is Killer Khan, with whom has a great match in NJ and a couple that are not great back home.

It occurred to me recently that he worked exactly to the promotion. In WWF (Vince Sr era) he was slow and lazy, and boring. In Mexco he worked more comedy. In Houston against Race he worked more NWA style. In Japan against Hansen, he got stiff. He was very adaptable, and that should be a plus point for him. And will be in my final estimation. However, that does mean that if the enviroment wasn't very good, he wasn't very good. The matches against Hogan in 1980 really should be better than they are. And Hogan was green, so that's on Andre the smart worker to get a compelling set of matches. The stuff against Studd and Blackjack Mulligan etc. is absolutely terrible. And most of it around EXACTLY THE SAME TIME he was having those matches in NJ. That stuff should count against Andre, and will in my final estimation.

If you really want me to be specific and name names, I was talking about Matt D putting Andre 9th on his list on the basis that he thinks he worked very well around his limitations in 1989, which seems to go back to a particular Demolition match. You asked, you got. I might just be moody today, but that's what I had in mind. Matt can do what he wants with his list, and I'm not bothered, but ideally I'd want something a bit more holistic and thoroughgoing when thinking about a workers' placement. I haven't seen every Andre match on tape, but I feel like I've watched my fair share of him. But I haven't really seen much from Matt beyond that late 80s stuff that would suggest a 9th-place rating. I do actually have something interesting to say about Andre and will do that in that thread.

It's not relevent to this thread in particular.

It's fair to say most of them are in Mid-South, and it's also fair to say that a recurring theme in this thread has been that people haven't watched a lot of Mid-South recently. I also maintain Savage series is criminally underrated by all in terms of two awesome workers who had great chemistry and heat while a promotion was hot. One legit criticism I would make of Ted is that he does have a dearth of LONG matches. Windham does smoke him there. That's the thing missing from his CV, it's that match where he goes 30 minutes with someone else really good and delivers a classic. It isn't there, I've looked for it. The closest we get are Hansen tags in AJ, which go 30 minutes. Almost all of Ted's best matches come in around the 10-15 mark. And he seldom worked longer than 20 minutes, except for that one Royal Rumble. I wonder why that was.

It's probably more of an output thing. He has a lot of stuff that falls into the "fun" range. I mean I like Blackwell, think he's great etc., but the point is that you don't get the sort of nitpicking that you might get elsewhere. For him, "the case" just seems to be "well, this guy was really good". There are reasons for that. But this is where someone like Blackwell, "rediscovered" in a way in recent years, might get a leg up on much more known quantitites. For some reason I'm a jackass to point that out. There we are. I think it is only Hase and Breaks who fall into that bracket. Although Orton and Adonis are both carried by at least an impetus that they seem like great workers in everything I've seen. What's a tiny sampling though? 20 matches or 10 minutes?