JerryvonKramer

The delayed vertical suplex elevates the vertical suplex -- which, recall, I said was about a 6 or a 7 intensity -- to a fully fledged high spot. It's arguably about a 9 or a 10 and can act as a finisher (see Race late 70s / early 80s). I think there's an argument to say that the delayed vertical suplex is the king of ALL suplexes. What other move creates a massive pause in the middle of a match? It's almost custom made for the camera to hover round and marvel at it before the moment of impact.

I agreed with a lot of the stuff Loss said in the second half of this show. I might have even agreed out loud a few times.

My considerations are merely "as of what I've seen right now".

Rose/Wiskowski v Piper/Martel - sensational babyface performance by Martel, who was the MVP of this match. In the first fall he shows tremendous fire, in the second does an amazing sell job on his back. The work by Rose and Wiskowski is almost OCD in its focus and they give us four or five backbreaker variations all of which Martel sells as if his spine is being electricuted. Then we get the vertical suplex counter transition spot but because Martel's back has been so injured, it's only a hope spot. Awesome! Martel then delivers two suplex variations but they only serve to kill is back further so he can't capitalise. After the 2nd fall, finally we get a hot tag and I think Piper's flurry of fire, while admittedly manic, is a little bit disappointing. The booking for the finish and post-match stuff with Don Owen was brilliant though and if the job of this match is to make you want to pay for Tuesday's match it certainly did the trick -- give my ticket Mr. Owen! Considering everyone, ****1/2 and in contention for #2 match of 1980. What a performance from Martel here!

I've just paused the tag match to type this, but I'd put all those matches Dylan just listed (with the exception of Fujinami vs. DK) ahead of Rose vs. Martel. Other matches from 80 I have ranked ahead of it also include: Fujinami vs. Chavo, Inoki vs. Hansen (5/9), Backlund vs. Hogan and -- no kidding -- Ivan Putski vs. Larry Zbysko. I've got it about on par with Patterson vs. Patera and Jumbo vs. Slater. If I had to pick a best match on 1980 right now, it would be Inoki vs. Hansen with Bock vs. Robinson and Patera vs. Backlund as 2 and 3 respectively.

Battle Royal - really fun and well booked.

Rose vs. Martel - all very logical, but honestly I didn't find the early portion of the match aka "Rose works Martel's leg through a variation of the figure four" terribly compelling. Thought things picked up considerably when Martel took over on Rose's back and then the match finishes. Pete's massive rating is surprising for this one. If pressed on a star rating, I'd probably go about ***3/4

It's about time I watched some Portland. Here we go!

I'm not terribly interested in examples that don't fit the models I've outlined or having them pointed out. Yes, they are out there. Oh hum, so what? I'm more interested in young tim's idea of the hierarchy of the suplexes. I guess the reason I see the gutwrench and butterfly as "bigger bombs" is because they look more impressive and appear harder to pull off. This has almost nothing to do with the actual impact or mechanics of how difficult these moves are to do in reality, and almost everything to do with perception. The vertical suplex is more common or "basic" a move than the other two in terms of how often we see it, and the sorts of situations we most often see it. Would you agree with that tim?

Introduction While I was merely winding up Pete in the other thread, I do genuinely love suplexes. I like all the different varieties of suplex, but I hold a special regard for the vertical suplex. It has been bothering me for a while that some people may regard my love for high spots as being a disregard for structure or storytelling; that, for all intents and purposes, I am a "spot monkey" fan. This is not the case. I want to write this post to clear it up once and for all. If it ever comes up on a show or whatever, I will point people back to this defense of the vertical suplex. I also want to write this post as a way of showing how liking suplexes is not in any way shallow or superficial. There are more reasons for liking them than the fact that they "look cool". Most people who post here will know all this already -- most of it is obvious -- but sometimes that's all criticism is: pointing out the obvious. Part 1: Vertical Suplex during heel control segment As a storytelling device, the vertical suplex is actually doing quite a lot of work -- subtle and underappreciated work. When are we most likely to see a vertical suplex and who is doing the move? The most common occurrence of the vertical suplex is in the second portion of a match during the heel control sequence. In that context, here are some of the basic things it is suggesting: - The heel is really in control of this match now and the babyface is taking some real punishment - The heel is starting to bust out his big artillery and feels confident enough to do so - The heel is a technically proficient wrestler who knows his shit The net result of all of this is doing more than just the suplex itself ... it's the suggestion of the follow up. The heel has established that he's in control, that he's looking to take his offense to the next gear, and that he has a mastery of pro wrestling maneuvers ... so what is really enticing about this moment in a match is the prospect of what comes next. The vertical suplex is about as basic a high spot as they come. If the heel does typically two or three big moves in their control segment before the babyface starts coming back, then the suplex is likely to be the first one. It's a very exciting bit in a match. It is a move of potential. Other suplexes don't have this quality. The gutwrench or the butterfly suplex, for example, are ends in themselves. The message is a bit different, these moves say "look at me I'm a fucking great wrestler, my A game is deep, and I'm dominating this match". In fact, if I was ever laying out a match, I'd suggest using one of these moves to be the follow up to the vertical suplex. These sorts of moves are, in fact, the sort of thing that the "potential" I'm talking about above is pointing to. To make an analogy: imagine turning the volume up on your stereo, the vertical suplex is the dial transitioning from 5 to about 7, the other suplex variations are 8 through 10 (where 10 is using the move as a finisher). In addition to all of this, the vertical suplex during a heel control segment may also suggest: - The heel is working on weakening the opponent's upper back / lower neck area Part 2: Vertical suplex as transition to babyface comeback The second most common occurrence we'll see of the vertical suplex is when it is done by the babyface as a counter. We've all seen this spot hundreds of times. The heel goes for a suplex and is blocked and the babyface hits it instead. Sometimes this is done when the heel is standing on the apron and attempts to suplex the babyface to the floor (almost never succeeds / is always countered, like the piledriver on the floor). This occurrence of the vertical suplex is so common because it is arguably one of the two or three most effective transitional moves in pro wrestling. In one fell swoop you can see: - Momentum has swung - The babyface still has something left in the locker - The heel might have showed us a lot of flash already, but don't write off the babyface's wrestling acumen! He also knows his shit. Aka "anything the heel can do, the babyface can do better (or at least just as well)". Here is the real versatility of the move. You can't do this with many other suplex variations. The gutwrench and belly to back, for example, don't work like that -- the giver and taker of the move are in different positions so a counter is much more convoluted. This is also more effective as a transitional move than something like the babyface powering out of a piledriver and backdropping the heel. Why? You lose the visual "see saw" effect of the countered suplex and with it that "anything you can do" subtext. A backdrop is a "less impressive" move than the piledriver, whereas the countered suplex is parity embodied. Part 3: Vertical suplex as transition to hot finish, or limitations of the vertical suplex A final possible occurrence of the vertical suplex might come in a longer match that follows the matwork>strikes>throws structure. This structure was common in the 70s, during longer matches in the 80s and 90s, as well as in Japan. In this context, it is doing a different job again, simply: - Signalling that the match is moving into its final chapter, the participants have tried technical wrestling and they've tried beating the shit out of each other, it's time to get the bombs out I will concede that there are some better moves than the vertical suplex at achieving this. I think visually something like Jumbo Tsurta's backdrop suplex signals this transition more convincingly. In this hypothetical scenario in which I'm laying out matches, I'd advise against using the vertical suplex in this context. In a way, it is not quite "big" enough to say "fuck it, I've tried everything, now EAT THIS". It's much more about maintaining control (see part 1) or signalling loss of control (see part 2). It's not really a "big bomb" in itself, as such, but a demonstration of control through knowledge while teasing the tantilizing suggestion of further bombs. Conclusion The vertical suplex is a fundamental part of pro wrestling grammar. It has both hidden depths and real versatility. These qualities make it irreplaceable. It is not a "mere" high spot, but a move that achieves certain things that other moves can't. You can't just replace a vertical suplex in a match with a gutwrench suplex or a back suplex, for example, and expect it to be the same match, because it won't be. The move is saying much more than simply "I'm a big bomb", its main functions, in fact, are not saying that at all. You also can't replace the vertical suplex with a punch. The punch is an illegal move that should get you DQ'd (which says, "fuck wrestling and its rules, this is a fight!"), whereas the suplex is all about displaying wrestling finesse and suggesting that there's more of it to come. For all of these reasons, I love the vertical suplex.

Whoa. I'm obviously being faceious here. Hold your horses. I do like suplexes though.

I know all of this. But I still perfer to see a suplex or two than no suplex. A match without high spots is like a sentence without a verb. Try telling a story without any verbs and see how good that story is.

I do think "lack of suplexes" is a valid criticism for a match though.

That match finished 148 in the overall voting. Everyone I can think of had it bottom 5, including me. Very interesting that you are this high on it.

http://placetobenation.com/where-the-big-b...e-champions-13/ Chad and Parv sit through Clash of the Champions 13. - [06:17] Wrestling Observer and Torch roundup: Cornette and Lane quit, why wrestling fans everywhere should hate Fred Ward, Art Barr, and Meltzer’s crusade against the use of magic in wrestling. - [00:53:33] Review of Clash 13, featuring: El Gigante! Nightstalker! Moto City Madman! The Renegade Warriors! Kalua! The Botswana Beast! Col. Krueger and Col. DeKlerk! Prime Time Brian Lee! The Starblazer! And, yes, The Black Scorpion! - [02:17:07] End of show awards and question for the listeners: can you think of a worse booked supercard than this? The PWO-PTBN Podcast Network features great shows you can find right here at Place to Be Nation. By subscribing on iTunes or SoundCloud, you’ll have access to new episodes, bonus content, as well as a complete archive of: Where the Big Boys Play, Titans of Wrestling, Pro-Wrestling Super-Show, Good Will Wrestling, and Wrestling With the Past.

http://placetobenation.com/titans-of-wrest...um-august-1980/ Parv, Johnny, Pete and Kelly take a trip to Shea Stadium for this August supershow from 1980: On the docket: 08-80 SHEA HYPE: SEVERAL PROMOS WWF TV 08-09 BOB BACKLUND/PEDRO MORALES vs SAMOANS TAG TITLE SHOWDOWN AT SHEA 08-09 KEN PATERA vs TONY ATLAS IC TITLE SHOWDOWN AT SHEA 08-09 ANDRE THE GIANT vs HULK HOGAN SHOWDOWN AT SHEA 08-09 BRUNO SAMMARTINO vs LARRY ZBYSZKO CAGE MATCH SHOWDOWN AT SHEA Highlights include: - Titans of Wrestling celebrates joining twitter (@titansowrestlin) by launching a poster competition: can you come up with a great poster for the show? - More talk of Bruno Sammartino vs. Larry Zbysko as one of the all-time great feuds - Addressing the criticisms of Gorilla Monsoon as a commentator - Kelly offers a lesson on the history of stadium shows in the 1970s - Thoughts on stadium shows in general - Plus Sciculna and Shakespeare The PWO-PTBN Podcast Network features great shows you can find right here at Place to Be Nation. By subscribing on iTunes or SoundCloud, you’ll have access to new episodes, bonus content, as well as a complete archive of: Where the Big Boys Play, Titans of Wrestling, Pro-Wrestling Super-Show, Good Will Wrestling, and Wrestling With the Past.

I like Kurt Angle because he does suplexes and I like suplexes.

Coming back to this podcast, I loved Ross's rant at the kids he imagines watching the "hammerlock match" between Terry Taylor and Flair. You can hear him getting angry at the idea of them on their phones or iPads. I also loved the stuff about the clenched fist.

I think Dory Sr and Iron Mike DiBiase are right near the top of that list of guys who were probably great for whom we have absolutely no footage.

Absolutely it would. Cornette is playing in the Leicester Square Theatre right in the heart of Soho. It's the difference between booking a place in Times Square or, I dunno, somewhere in Atlanta (pick your own "city from elsewhere in the country" here). That's not to say Cardiff itself isn't expensive compared to other towns in Wales though. That said, I've been to comedy gigs at that same venue several times, which were priced more like £15 / £20. I didn't go, but I even think Mick Foley did one of his standup shows there and it was more in that £20 ballpark. It's one of the more "low rent" spots in the area. More used for gigs than plays. £50 is definitely at the expensive end. That's top West End theatre ticket prices. As a point of comparison, I'm seeing Richard II starring David Tennant at the Barbican in January and tickets were £55 each. I am still tempted to go to the London one for convenience though. I do hope Corny hasn't priced himself out of a full house in the capital with this.

Not a huge deal is known about Iron Mike other than he was well thought of by everyone and a really good heel. I thought Ted Jr was always really bland and have not seen Ted's other sons in action. Don't think they are very high on the list tbh.

I don't have many catchy names, but these are some types of traits you might think about including. Ring General - can call matches in the ring and dictate the pace and tempo of a match (e.g. Buddy Rose) Ring General (bump machine) - same as above but with the caveat that they always bump like crazy too (e.g. Ric Flair) OTT seller - a wrestler who sells in an exagerrated manner (e.g. Ricky Steamboat, Curt Hennig) Mat Technician - a guy who can work the mat with the best of them (e.g. Billy Robinson) Hooker - related to the above, but this is a guy with legit submissions skills who can also be an enforcer in the locker room (e.g. Lou Thesz) Shooter - as I understand it, this is the same as the above but with the slight caveat that they might use those skills in the ring to teach guys lessons once in a while -- if there is a distinction, a certain author who posts here from time to time might be able to help (e.g. Danny Hodge) Natural Jobber - someone with the look and skills of a job guy (e.g. Frank Williams) Power wrestler - big muscled up dude who works power moves (e.g. Steiners, Butch Reed, Ron Simmons, Lex Luger) Punchy-kicky - a wrestler who relies mostly on punches, kicks and stomps for his offense (e.g. Bruno Sammartino) Great Punch - a guy who throws amazing punches (e.g. Jerry Lawler) Needs 20 minutes to warm up - guys who work a slow and deliberate pace (e.g. Greg Valentine) Looks great, can't work - guys who are over because of their look but who are not very good in the ring (e.g. Sid) Totally fucking hopeless - guys who just can't do anything at all (e.g. El Gigante, Zeus) Gimmickally versatile - guys who can take to just about any gimmick (e.g. Barry Darsow) Tremendous fire - for babyfaces who are excellent at firing up and showing fire (e.g. Rick Martel, Tito Santana) Rag Doll - a worker who takes amazing asskickings through great bumping and selling (e.g. Ricky Morton, Tully Blanchard) Journeyman - a mediocre but experienced worker who can slot into the midcard or lower midcard and do a job for you (e.g. Doug Somers) Gatekeeper - this is perhaps more of a booked role than a trait, but it's an experienced but still over guy who must be defeated before facing the top face / heel in the promotion. Typically a new guy will come in and feud with a gatekeeper before taking on said top star. (e.g. Dominic Denucci, Jim Duggan in WWF) Crowd control - a guy who has the crowd in the palm of his hands and who constantly interacts with them (e.g. Jake Roberts) X Factor - this is a guy who has something special but indefinable that sets him apart and makes him seem like a massive star with massive presence, he can lift a room just by being there (e.g. Ricky Choshu, Hulk Hogan, The Rock) Stiff - a guy who works in a stiff and brutal manner (e.g. Stan Hansen, Vader, JBL) [some chance of injuring opponent on occassion] Snug / Tight - a guy who works "hard but safe" (e.g. Ron Garvin, Steve Austin, William Regal, Daniel Bryan) Light - a guy who doesn't work stiffly at all, sometimes to the point where his strikes look fake (e.g. Giant Baba?) Masked - prefers to work with a mask on, or at least can work with a mask on without any harm to his natural game (e.g. Bill Eadie) Heavy / Lead Ass - guy who is hard to lift or work with because he doesn't cooperate (e.g. Antonio fucking Inoki) Good hand - a guy who can work with just about anyone, not too stiff, not too light, not too flashy (e.g. Terry Taylor) [NB. Most "ring generals" are de facto also good hands, guess it's a question of degree?] Feeder - basically a guy who is good at feeding comebacks / hope spots as a heel or generating sympathy as a babyface. NB. This is a specific bit of the art of selling, as much to do with timing and feeling the crowd as it is to do with bumping etc. (e.g. Ted DiBiase) Shakespeare - believe it or not, this is the old inside term for the old Jerry Lawler / Baron Scicluna schtik of hiding the foreign-object-down-the-tights. I came across it a few months ago reading about The Baron. Probably not a big enough skill to include, but interesting at least. (e.g. Baron Scicluna, Jerry Lawler, Bobby Heenan) That's a start, others can weigh in and start adding or refining now. --------- I don't know how you're coding it, but lots of these would stack obviously. Ric Flair, for example, probably has half a dozen or so of these traits.

On the BT Sport stuff, depsite what anarchistxx said, I've actually been pretty impressed with them so far this season, even if I've mainly only watched James Richardson's European Football show and a couple of EPL games here and there. (I can't be arsed with Life's a Pitch or Kelly and Baker or Balding's show -- only so many hours in the week -- but do think they make a decent fist of putting out a good schedule). On a side note, even Match of the Day have stepped up their game a bit this year, the level of punditry and analysis is slowly getting better everywhere I think ... influence of Gary Neville. Anyway, my very thin hope remains that BT Sport back some emergent British wrestling promotion, whether or not under the WoS banner. Probably won't happen, but would be so cool if it did. Think the country is actually ready for it. I'd watch it! As regards, the WWE stateside situation ... is there any chance that Vince would still resent Disney for their relationship with WCW? How many companies aside from THQ who were "WCW companies" has Vince worked with since 2001? Not saying he hasn't, just genuinely curious to know. Can anyone see RAW leaving USA at this point though? Why would they do that?

UK fans ... I'm thinking of going to see Corny's one man show live, anyone else interested? We could meet up. I'm looking at the London show (£50 seems INSANELY expensive) or the Cardiff show (£25 much more like it). I can always go to Wales to see my folks easily, so it's a realistic option.

Is three not enough then? The Funk Family seem like they should be mentioned (Dory Sr / Dory Jr / Terry) Anyone know anything about Bob Orton Sr? They might get a look in too. Personally I'd give this to the Samoans though, unless you can count the McMahons. The Armstrong family at least derserve a shout out.