JerryvonKramer

Actually Pete, I think that challenge is on there. Seems like something went wrong on the edit and the outro music is in there twice. Once about five mins before the end, then us talking, then the outro music again. I got about 8 hours sleep in a four day stretch last weekend, and I guess that's what you get.

Pretty much every worker who got their start in the 70s seems to name Ray Stevens as the GOAT. Flair does. Kevin Sullivan does. I've heard numerous guys on shoots name Stevens too. Just noticed he wasn't nominated. Even though there is a footage issue, I think Stevens is just an interesting case in general since from the footage we have -- and we have hours of Stevens post-prime on tape -- it's very hard to see where they are coming from. What is interesting though is that a lot of guys in the business also think Shawn Michaels is a contender for GOAT and superficially at least, he had similar skills to Stevens, i.e. he was a huge bumper who made other people look good. I wonder if there's anything to a Stevens vs. HBK comparison in terms of how they are perceived by the workers and how they are perceived by people who post on PWO. Reviews here: http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?/topic/30606-ray-stevens-nick-bockwinkel

Right but by the same token, I've been on shows where I'll be arguing about some tiny thing with Chad or Pete and it turns out that we're 1/4* away from each other anyway. I also suspect that with a ton of my written reviews, people will skim the descriptive part where I'm running through the body of the match, until the final paragraph where I give an overall assessment and a star rating. That's fine I guess, people know the move-by-move breakdown is there if they want it. Structurally a typical review by me will be: - Opening remarks noting superficial things like the wrestler's appearance, entrances, commentary, incidental trivia notes, etc. - Description of the body of the match including most of the moves. Some analysis in passing. - Overall evaluation - Star rating Some others here -- Loss, in particular -- cut out the body of the match entirely in their reviews and only leave the assessment. I've toyed with that, but I find stream-of-consciousnes works better for my style, and sometimes there's things to mention in passing during the body. I also like typing shit like "Snapmare. Kneedrop. Cover." When reading other people's reviews, I mostly want the star rating. Feels like a cop out to me when it's not there. When I'm on shows, I always have an easier time discussing matches with Chad, Pete or Steven because they give out the star ratings and we can directly compare -- than with guys like Johnny and Kelly who seem to just love everything and accept things for what they are. Not trying to knock Johnny but it sometimes feels like he just loves everything.

You can leave a short list (1st choise and 2nd choice?) with me if you like, I'm around for the next couple of hours.

^ Killed the thread.

Can't they soft turn him just to get him cheered?

Even though it's clipped, if you are doing 1976, you really need to see: Jack Brisco vs Terry Funk (03/26/76), we get at least 10 minutes or so and this match just looks so excellent. I think Terry Funk and Jack Brisco were probably the top 2 US workers of 1976. Second that Davies vs Veidor match, it's great.

The WWF picks Blackjack Lanza.

Here, making pick now.

It's actually Steven Graham's reviews I'd like to see for this one because I can't imagine anyone in the world actually preferring the broadway to the Texas Death Match.

"Cena" isn't as common as "Owens", but then maybe I think that because I'm Welsh. Then again, Tom Jones did alright. He sung with Elvis don't you know.

Up-to-date to peach's Rip Oliver pick

Stu the doddery and forgetful old man.

His name is crossed though right? I did it myself, unless you're looking at another list?

Johnny Sorrow in defending something against criticism shocker!

I think Kevin Owens needs a more memorable name. I reckon a lot of the reason that certain guys are remembered is because of the "stickability" of a name. Hulk Hogan British Bulldogs Brutus the Barber Beefcake - alliteration Jake the Snake - rhyme Stone Cold Triple H The Rock - easy to remember Kevin Owens - just a bloke's name

I have some posters I'm less familiar with weirdly paired and mixed up for some reason. Rocket / peach dedhemingway / JHawk Maybe this will help me remember.

Oh my mistake. I knew he'd gone though.

You've taken him already peach!

Incidentally, Matt, Nick Bockwinkel, your hero, was 49 in 1983.

Lars Anderson was 44 in 1983, Ole was 41, Jack was 42, Jerry was 37. In pro wrestling terms these guys are not ancient. In your perception they may be because Jack and Jerry retired in 84, Ole retired more or less in 86 and Lars Anderson kinda disappeared and went to Hawaii. Ole can talk. Jack can wrestle. The real-life MSG crowd were literally watching the Strongbows vs. Wild Samoans on a regular basis. First I got shit for taking big names. The one time I took a guy for a "need" (Lars, who gives me a tag division), I get shit for that. What is this about?

I'll say that I'm pretty fed up of taking shit at this point.

Tag with Ole. He could go a bit in 83, Gene couldn't. Now have Brisco brothers and Andersons, so that's a tag feud in prospect.

My pick is Lars Anderson

Here's the match with Ali Bey as the lumberjack: http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?/topic/19186-harley-race/?p=5611635 You'll note that this review was written before the Facebook session!