JerryvonKramer

For the guys putting Clash last, what's the reasoning behind that?

He can't possibly have been good.

Someone has to mention Ivan Putski in this thread.

After the Clash 7 show (at the end of GAB 89) we're going to do a big round up on comments, so what would be great is if people -- even if they haven't listened to the show -- could give their thoughts on ranking the three Flair-Steamboat matches to see if there is any consensus. I think the general feeling from the panel on the show was: 1. Clash 6 2. Wrestlewar 3. Chi-Town I think some people are really high on that Wrestlewar match though. My own feeling is that it's less exciting than the Chi-Town match and less intense than both of the other matches. It's slower, more technical and much more Steamboat-led. What it gains in structure and psychology, I think it might lose in balls-to-the-wall fierceness. The Funk angle is not part of the match, so can't serve to bump it up. So my ranking on reflection is: 1. Clash 6 - epic, perfect multi-layered match for the ages 2. Chi-Town - perfect 20-minute main event, very big match feeling 3. Wrestlewar - also very very good, but for me this is firm #3 Genuinely interested in people's views on how they place these matches.

Happened to catch Bryan vs. Jericho randomly while I was away. Looked pretty good although it was difficult for me to tell watching it, who was face and who was heel. My GUESS was that Bryan is the heel but based on crowd reaction and what he was doing, it was very tough to say. Decent match between two guys who look something like how I picture wrestlers to look. Bryan's offense was pretty good, reasonably intense. Jericho sold well. Was VERY surprised to see such a clean pin on a random tv match though.

I listened to Jason Mann's podcast on the 1990 Rumble recently so it's fresh in mind, I'll use that as an example. Here is what I imagine the instructions of each of the first 10 guys would be from Pat Patterson 1. Ted DiBiase - "Ted, you're going to go long tonight. Stay out there and keep stuff going. Eliminate Koko Ware and Jannetty early doors. Make a deal of Roberts, suggest alliance with Savage. Hang in there until Warrior is in, take a clothesline to get elminated." 2. Koko B. Ware - "You're going out there first tonight Koko, you know what to do." 3. Marty Jannety - "Go after Ted for about a minute and then you get out." 4. Jake Roberts - "Go after Ted, pop the crowd. It'll be 2 vs 1 against Ted and Savage. Ally with Piper. Keep it going ten minutes or so, let the ring fill up. You're getting eliminated by Savage." 5. Randy Savage - "Suggest an alliance with Ted, go after Roberts. Keep it going ten minutes. Tease feud with Rhodes, he'll eliminate you seconds after you get Roberts out". 6. Roddy Piper - "You're evening things out for the faces - Roberts is 2 vs. 1 against Ted and Savage, you make it 2 vs. 2. Keep it going 10 minutes or so, ring has to fill up. Start feud with Brown, brawl to back." 7. The Warlord - "Ring will be filling up when you enter. Mix it up 7-8 minutes. Feed yourself to Andre." 8. Bret Hart - "You're going about 15 minutes in there. Mix things up, keep it going. Remember issues with Brown from before. Help Ted out. Dusty will eliminate you." 9. Bad News Brown - "5-6 minutes, you have no friends. Target Piper. Eliminate each other and brawl to back." 10. Dusty Rhodes - "Pop crowd going in, make an impact. Eliminate Savage and Bret. Mix it up 18-20 minutes. Feed yourself to Earthquake" I don't see it being much more detailed than that.

Where the Big Boys Play #36 – Wrestlewar 89: Part 2 Chad, Parv, Lee Maughan and Jason Mann wrap up their review of Wrestlewar 89. In this episode: does Summerslam 91 have the worst main event ever?, in-depth review of the third part of the Flair vs. Steamboat trilogy including comparing and ranking the three matches, analysing the motivations of Terry Funk in the famous post-match attack angle, the life and times of Joe Pedicino and Boni Blackstone, and end of show awards.

"Best worst announcer of all time" is a perfect description of David Crockett. Honestly, though, I'd take him over Solie or Caudle at this point. Maybe he was annoying if you were watching week after week but he's totally awesome in a big match setting or getting over angles. I don't think even Vince himself got that mark fan thing down as amazingly as David did -- I think because David himself was an actual mark rather than pretending to be one. Soup - 80s retrospective awards show will be interesting. For Flair-Steamboat, I picked Steamer as MVP 3/3 times, you went with Flair twice. You've also said Final Conflict isn't making your top ten matches and frankly I'm shocked.

Was Blackjack Mulligan ever good?

Slightly surprised at someone not liking Final Conflict. I was blown away by that match. If it has a problem it's that the heel-in-peril / babyface shine sequence at the start on Don Kernodle is too long -- which you mention Superstar -- but that sequence needs to happen not only for the overriding sense that by the end of the match BOTH teams have been through a total war but also for it to make sense for Slaughter to take greater and greater risks. What I'm most surprised by is that you don't think we got any bitchin' Slaughter bumps. There's one where he comes off the top of the cage that got the full 10/10 HOLY SHIT mark out from me. I can't believe you're no selling that. I'd nudge you in the direction of our audio review from July last year, one of the very first shows we did -- it's one of the more in-depth match reviews, about 30 minutes on it: http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?showtopic=18986 Fast-forward to about 57 minutes in. Once you get past all our bum-love for David Crockett, you'll find Chad has many of the same reservations as you Superstar and that is partly because he was coming in with the idea of it as an all-time classic. He talks about how Youngblood and Steamboat were "too technical" on offense, even if the gimmick of the cage match is used. And we both rag on that heel-in-peril segment quite a lot as well as questioning its logic, especially as it is followed by another heel-in-peril segment. But I think by the end of the match we're both really into it. The intensity of Steamboat's chops, him taking an amazing spot into the cage, his selling, Kernodle's extended selling over a period of time, the stiffness of Slaughter and Kernodle's clotheslines, and so on. He has it below Valentine vs. Piper, but I've got a feeling I'd put it ahead of that. I seem like I'm a lot higher on it than him and I'd forgotten just how much he wasn't convinced of its greatness. We both agreed though that if we had to give ratings we'd both go ****1/2, which seems higher than you Superstar Sleaze. EDIT: On a side point, Chad -- if you read this -- would be interested to know if you've turned around on Steamer now we're the other side of the 89 trilogy because you are way down on him here! More than I remember. Also this was before our me on summary / you on analysis structure. We might think about going back to that style, I dunno.

I think Beefcake and Duggan were used in different ways. Duggan was typically a mid-card face who could pop the crowd who was used to put over the latest heel on the scene, usually as a pre-text to Hogan feud. He was a sort of lower card mini-Hogan (who lost matches) who'd help to build guys up for actual Hogan to take down. Beefcake was more of a guy who would have his own feuds and come out on top of them, often giving someone a haircut in the blow off. He didn't put guys over to anywhere near the same extent. For example, even vs. bigger name heels like DiBiase he didn't eat a pin but got a double count out draw at Mania. So all in all, undoubtedly, Beefcake was the bigger star. At least in how he was booked and used on the roster. Being Hogan's "friend till the end" didn't hurt him either.

Standard line with Leslie is that pre-injury he was serviceable and post- he was dogshit. He was really over though as The Barber.

I'm always worried about my views being ridiculously far from consensus, but Matt D takes it next level. I enjoy reading his views.

Surprised Dylan hasn't mentioned HHH yet. Was JYD ever actively good as a worker? I mean I've seen him in 83 when he's not as completely worthless as he was in the late-80s, but was he good?

Do you not think there's a danger of having the attitude that "since everything in wrestling is a work, nothing is true and can possible be true"? In the context of Gorilla selling his share of the company, those figures are not outrageous. Not compared with what he would have been getting if he was getting a 12.5% of all profits. I respect the need for a healthy scepticism, but some aspect of that Gorilla story must be true. You don't think Monsoon was a millionaire by the time the 80s were over? Just to play devil's advocate here, where's your evidence to back that up?

jdw - here are some links to Gorilla payment deal stuff: http://www.infinitecore.ca/superstar/index...?threadid=73175 http://www.infinitecore.ca/superstar/index...?threadid=77886 Meltzer in the Tribues II book: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=00XoU40...C&q=gorilla Frustratingly, Meltzer doesn't cite a source on that, but he must have been reasonably convinced of it to include it in the obit and then again in the book. What makes you so sure it's not true jdw?

The story about Monsoon's pay deal has found its way to enough places for me to believe it. Why don't you believe it?

Another little question that's been bugging me: what's the name of the signiture Bossman spot where the opponent is hanging over the bottom rope and he comes and jumps ontop of the back of the neck with his leg? Ivan Koloff and Maddog Vachon also do this spot. What is its name? EDIT: I never thought of checking Wiki, but apparently its called a "Leapfrog body guillotine" -- although that description has the attacker sliding out of the ring too (which Bossman often did and then he'd uppercut them in the face). The Ivan Koloff / Vachon spot is slightly different in that they put both legs over and jump ass first on the neck / upper back and didn't go outside after it.

My idea was this really: someone strongly associated with the old NWA such as Jim Cornette or someone who is seen as pre-historic in the eyes of most fans such as Bob Backlund is announced as the new General Manager. Week 1: He comes out and says that things are going to be different from now on. That wrestling has been going to the dogs for too long and he's going to bring back the values that made this sport great. He has a stooge, I think Bob Orton Jr would be fun, to pull out a scroll and they go through the new rules: 1. Closed fists are not allowed in wrestling and referees are to insist on an instant DQ. The same for kicking with the toe of the boot. 2. Throwing opponent over the top rope is an instant DQ, "unless it is momentum". 3. Biting, choking, eye-gouging and so on are absolutely prohibited. 4. The referee's decision is final unless .... 5. The General Manager spots an infraction that the refeee missed, in which case the General Manager's decision is final. That same week during a nothing midcard match, one of the wrestlers uses a closed fist. The ref lets the match continue and so the GM comes out and calls for an instant DQ. Week 2: TWO further matches end in DQ in this way, the first with the GM coming down after someone is thrown over the top rope; the second with the ref calling for DQ of his own volition. Week 3: This happens another TWO times. The second time is in the first two minutes of big main event world title match. Fans are really getting pissed off now. Week 4: The GM and his stooge come out with another scroll, listing the amount of people who have been DQed in the past 3 weeks for various infractions. The GM announces that they will each be serving suspensions and fined 2 weeks' wages for breaking the official rules of wrestling. The GM also has some tape he wants to share. It's a video montage of the current (face) world champ in various matches using closed fists, coming over the top rope or otherwise breaking the rules in his title matches. He strips the champion of the title, because he said he broke the rules to win it. Obviously, champ hits the ring and is pissed etc. GM announces that he is indefinitely suspended for persistently breaking the rules and warns him that he will receive a life ban for laying hands on a sanctioned offical such as himself. The now former champ is beside himself. Week 5: PPV - a tournament is held for the vacant title. There is one wrestler, sufficiently "old school" -- let's say Chris Jericho or William Regal -- who the GM is clearly backing. In each of the tournament brackets, guys are DQed for using fists or for other infractions, EXCEPT the old-school wrestler who virtually gets a BYE to the final. In the final, the old-school wrestler has a standard submission hold on, like a reverse chinlock, and the GM or his stooge get up on the apron and THROW IN THE TOWEL Arnold Skaaland style. We have a NEW world champion. Weeks 6-10: Over the next month, the champ has a string of title defenses where he wins 100% through DQs following various minor infractions. At the same time he's blatantly breaking the rules himself. Whenever he throws an opponent over the top, he or one of the commentators claims it was "momentum". Week 11: Face comes back under a mask calling himself "Charlie Brown from Outta Town" or "Stagger Lee". Week 12: PPV 2 - oldschool champ vs. masked former champ with GM in a cage above the ring. Stip: if champ loses, GM has to stand down. This would be the blow off. It would never ever happen, but by god I'd watch RAW again to see that.

I've read, quite a few times, that Gorilla's deal wasn't just $100k + employment, it was that plus the equivalent of an opener's appearance fee and a half for EVERY show WWF promoted. Considering we know they were doing up to 5 shows a day, that's quite a lot of appearance fees if true. Then again, probably peanuts compared to what Gorilla would have made with his 12.5% intact. It's a non-tv taping, which has matches like this. Buck was in there to job. My comment was kayfabe. I always like to imagine kayfabe thinking on behalf of the wrestlers. Race phoning up all the heels he knows. "Hey, is this Jerry Blackwell? You ever heard of Bruno Sammartino and Giant Baba? Those guys are teaming up tonight and I need a partner" *phone is slammed down*. "Umm, hello? Killer Kahn? Fancy a match against Bruno Sammartino and Gia..." *slam* "Hello, Is this PWI Most Hated Wrestler of the Year for 1980 Larry Zybysko? See, I got this situation, need a tag partner against Giant Baba and Bruno" "What? You think I'm stupid pal?" *receiver drops* And so on. Until he's forced to tag with Robley as the only guy who agreed to it.

You'd think Race would be able to find a better partner knowing he was going up against Bruno and Baba.

My personal experience is that it's both 1. a lot easier to disagree online on a message board than it is talking to someone face to face or over skype and 2. people tend to be more open to being turned around on things in person. In the times Chad and I have had real differences of opinion, after we hear each other out, I usually find myself seeing where he's coming from. Obviously in this case though, it's just that everyone is scared of the Big Texan.

I haven't rewatched this yet but where were Rude and Perfect? They were Heenan Family guys at this time right? I know there was a Rude's Brood match just before involving those two, but couldn't Heenan persuade one of them to pull double duty? Brooklyn Brawler was also a kind of weak ally of Heenan in 89 stepping in against Red Rooster back at Wrestlemania. I can't remember now but weren't any of these things mentioned? I think there has to be a better in-kayfabe reason for Heenan himself having to step into the ring. Obviously from a fan point of view, Heenan in the ring is no bad thing, I just think it would be logical for the Weasel to exhaust all other possible avenues before going down that route.

Certainly watching it in that setting raised my estimation of the match, which is mentioned. I think other people are contagious though, Will and Johnny's enthusiasm for the Siato match rubbed off on me. Ditto for the Vachon vs. Bock match which I really enjoyed more with everyone marking out at the brutal spots. I think it might work the other way too though; the fact I am so down on that Brad Rhennigans match made it a talking point and basically everyone else was down on it too or had it lower than they might have otherwise. Everyone was down on Steve O, and lo and behold everyone had it bottom or bottom from one. It's not a herd mentality, it's just a natural part of watching something as a group. It's a very different dynamic from watching matches on your own and posting independent thoughts on DVDR. I wouldn't watch the whole set that way, but I do think it makes you see some matches in a different light.

jdw, your reading there is exactly the idea that formed in my mind putting together the info. The only tiny detail I wonder about is whether Skaaland did actually receive $100,000 or actually less than that. From what I've read his stake was only about 10% compared with the 12.5% each that Zacko and Monsoon had. McMahon Sr had 65% -- his original 50% + the 25% he bought off Mondt minus the 10% he gave or sold to Skaaland. I would wager that if Vince Sr basically gifted the 65% to Vince Jr, he'd have been able to keep Skaaland sweet with the job for life and got that portion for very little, especially if, as seems the case Skaaland got his portion for very little in the first place. By all accounts, Skaaland was basically just a big buddy of Vince Sr's and Vince Jr keeping him on a payroll was a father's last wish kind of deal. That means Vince could have got his 100% stake for as little $200,000. I think the "hard times" narrative really comes from after this time when Vince Jr expanded too fast, too soon, the TBS fuck up and plowing every last cent into Wrestlemania. Vince wasn't a self-made man, it's very clear to see that. He was a gambler and a risk-taker with real business savvy and a large slice of luck / good fortune.