JerryvonKramer

Two more things: 1. On the subject of Murdoch, Funk and Ivan Kollof all being travelling "here today, gone tomorrow" type workers, have you ever played Total Extreme Wrestling with the Death of the Territories mod? (the only way to play it). I only mention this because all three of those guys, Murdoch and Funk in particular (as well as Gordy) will only ever take short term deals. I mean they wont sign for more than 3 months. I don't know if that was hard-wired by the modders, but has always struck me as great attention to detail. 2. If Sting is still a question, then why was Vader a shoo in candidate in 1996? Is Vader obviously a stronger candidate than Sting? And if so how? Seems hard to argue that if you make drawing figure of 90-93 count against Sting, which ALSO coincide with Vader's time on top. I'd say if Vader is in, Sting has to be in.

Dude, I've been shot down on these very boards for even mentioning Teddy in the same breath as Arn. Baba is on there here: http://www.pwi-online.com/pages/hallofame.html But for some reason is missing from the Wiki entry.

One thing that interests me looking at the original 120 is a couple of names on there aren't 100% sure fire picks. You guys homed in on Stu Hart and Dynamite Kid, the name that jumped out at me (naturally) was Ted DiBiase. Why? Well, when you look at the names that aren't there -- Tully, Arn, Barry Windham, Rude, Hennig -- and when you dismiss a guy like Edge out of hand, you then have to think about what puts his career over any of those guys. The more I look at it, the more it sticks out. You know me, probably the biggest DiBiase mark left, but it seems odd. And where the hell is Baba? I should probably take a long at that WON HoF thread I've been stoically avoiding since I got here.

Could listen to you guys talk about wrestling history all day. Still only 1:17 into the first one and think it is great. Just one question: what was jdw's involvement in the original WO 1996 Hall of Fame list?

Keep this info coming guys (great post btw Loss!), I'll edit the OP to include as much stuff as possible. Will make first edits tomorrow. Can someone explain to me Ole's involvement in the early 90s and when it ended?

That link has been truncated, doesn't work Here is a link that led me to get it via itunes. http://wallsofjerichoholic.blogspot.com/20...ecause-you.html

One thing I've been trying to put together for years now is a definitive list of who the main WCW booker was and when. Here's as far as I've got, help me out here: Executive VP pre-88: Jim Crockett 1988-92: Jim Herd Early-1992: Kip Allen Frey Mid-1992-3: Bill Watts 1993: Bill Shaw 1993-1999: Eric Bischoff Late 1999: Bill Busch (Time Warner man) 2000-1: Brad Siegel (Time Warner man) Head booker: 85-8: Dusty Rhodes 1988: Jim Crockett Jr. (Dec only) 1989: George Scott 1989-90: Booking comittee (Ric Flair, Jim Cornette, Jim Ross, Kevin Sullivan and Eddie Gilbert) 1990: Ole Anderson 1991-4: Dusty Rhodes (& Ole Anderson with Jim Ross) 1994-5: Ric Flair 1995-8: Kevin Sullivan (with Terry Taylor) 1998-99: Kevin Nash 1999: Kevin Sullivan and Terry Taylor (+ committee) 1999-00: Vince Russo and Ed Ferrara 2000: Kevin Sullivan, Terry Taylor and Ed Ferrara (+ committee which included JJ Dillon) 2000: Vince Russo and Eric Bischoff 2000-01: Terry Taylor, Johnny Ace and Ed Ferrara

In my view, Konnan's a guy who should never has started in the first place. God, I hate that guy. Probably my all-time least favourite wrestler right now bar none. By the way, is it just me or does Hogan -- superficially speaking -- still look in pretty good shape? I mean I know he can barely walk, but the dude is still stacked brother! Still got those 24-inch pythons. I guess if Vince could get ripped at the age he was, anyone can. I think the MX vs. RnR video above brings up a good point though: how many guys didn't retire but just kept working indies? HTM, Jake, Greg, aren't they all still out there? The only difference with Flair is that he's doing it on national TV. Do you think any of those other guys would turn down the same spot? Course they wouldn't. Bob Dylan's still touring at 71, if there's still people willing to pay money, or if there's still someone who'll book you, then why not? A guy like Flair simply doesn't know anything else. Does he even have a life outside of wrestling anymore? Here's what I don't understand though: WHY does he have to keep having matches? Why can't he have a non-wrestling role? I don't get that.

If Flair has retired in 2008, would people look back and say his timing was right?

Ok, thanks jdw, I understand exactly what you mean now, cleared it right up. That is more about particular spots rather than being on the backfoot in matches though, right? I think Flair was on top in a lot of his matches though. It's just that he bitched and stooged when the face was on top or coming back. I think for pure bitching and stooging, Honky Tonk Man is hard to beat. I mean it was his only actual skill but he did it well.

Can someone explain to me what "bitching and stooging" is please? I thought the classic thing was for the heel to control the match, i.e. heel is on top for 80% of it aside from the shine, hope spots and comeback.

smkelly - I think you could break those down into just a handful of generic types: Super villian - this is your Lex Luthor type, a schemer who'd rather have other people doing his dirty work for him, he'd concoct elaborate plans to ensnare the face, only eventually to be foiled. This was Vince, DiBiase, Heenan, Hollywood Hogan. Arrogant/ cocky heel - a huge variety of heels fall under this category. They think they are better than you and everyone else for whatever reason (in its purest form: Ornforff or Mr. Perfect). Under that you've got your Adonis/ sex appeal characters (Rude, Luger, Shawn Michaels, Venis) and your charismatic/ flamboyent characters (Flair, Tully, Piper, Rock), among others. Kickass - this is a heel who is a tough guy, he might back down sometimes or use cheap tactics, but this guy can also kick ass. Harley Race, Arn Anderson, Greg Valentine, Bad News Allen, HHH. Weak heel / Chicken shit - now pretty much every heel has a bit of this, but some, such as Honky Tonk Man or Jerry Lawler in the Bret Hart feud in '93 are booked to be UTTERLY cowardly and very weak and incapable of winning without cheating. Monster - self explanatory. Vader, Bossman, Bundy, Andre, Yokozuna. Almost everyone I can think of fits into one of those five categories. You can add other traits such as "foreign" or "sadistic" or whatever, but I can't think of another generic type of heel. Can you?

This is actually the only wrestling board I actively frequent (well, this and 80s project subforum of DVDR). I have posted elsewhere in the past, but recall becoming frustrated with people acting like wrestling history started in 1996. Believe it or not, I ask the things I do not to confirm anything, but because I genuinely don't know what people are going to say. Did I ever think anyone would bring up Adrian Adonis for best heel? Here is one place where commonplace assumptions and received opinions are challenged. And that's mainly because people have gone back and actually watched old Bockwinkel matches, or they've seen people's pre-WWF/ WCW careers in the territories, and are actually in a position to make an educated call. No wrestler's reputation is a given here. I understand of course that these things are subjective, but you can always point to evidence of sorts. I made the claim that DiBiase was the master of the 10-minute TV match, Loss wants a list of great 10-minute TV matches of his. There are opinions and then there are informed, substantiated opinions. I think that's the case with all forms of criticism. By the way, would also love to see a dictionary thread, think that's a fantastic idea.

Seems like an odd purchase for UFC. I mean what do they want with two 50-something retired professional wrestlers?

I'll come back to DiBiase tomorrow but on Perfect, I included him there because of all the heel over-sellers, the cliche cites him as the guy who did it the most and best. In terms of his overness and heat: you're right, I can't think of a strong reaction either. Certainly nothing on the Rude or DiBiase level or Piper in '85-6. He played the part to perfection though. His business with the towel and the chewing gum, his arrogance walking to the ring, etc. That said, I've never really thought of Perfect as an evil heel who was hated. I think he might have been a "cool" heel. It didn't take much for people to start cheering him in '92-3. I'm not sure if "bombing at the gate" is fair though. What was this? Late 90? 91 even? Weren't gates on the decline anyway? I'd be interested to see the figures for Hogan vs. Perfect compared to Bret's figures as champ. How much is the heel expected to be the draw anyway? A good heel will help, sure, but people are paying to see Hogan right? I think Bill Watts talks about this on his shoot, something along the lines of "JYD would get you the gate, DiBiase would give you the match". Isn't that what Perfect was there for? i.e. The match rather than being the draw? The other thing, and I assume you're talking about his run with Hogan, is that at the time Perfect would have SEEMED like an IC belt sort of guy to the average WWF fan. Where they ever buying him as a credible threat? I know he was 260lbs, but he worked like a smaller guy.

I agree with cmfunk's first point there, I love reading that historical information, especially about the territories, the sort of stuff that crops up in Comments that don't warrant a thread, and a lot of the stuff jdw posts. There's also a category of thread which is not necessarily best/ worst but focused on particular issues (e.g. The poor sportsmanship of Hulk Hogan) And then there's the sorts of threads that ask about posters' particular tastes, like Wrestlers you've Flipped on and a lot of NintendoLogic's threads. The only wrestling I watch now is the goodhelmet sets and old PPVs. Listen to and watch a lot of shoots too, and a couple of podcasts (Flairchop, Will's one). So I have little interest in the first two options. Even though that stuff is "current news" in a strange way it feels dated and it's part of the culture that in my view killed wrestling. Also the Flair stuff makes me genuinely sad so I try to keep away from it. I do realise I make a lot of threads, but there's a really good reason for it (at least for me personally), which is that this place is unlike 99% of other boards out there where you still get a lot of Shawn/ Bret fanboyism and all the other IWC stereotypes. This place throws up a lot of genuinely interesting and really informed perspectives and the sorts of discussion that you just don't see elsewhere, other than at DVDR which is just a bit too massive for me to post on outside of the 80s project. I realise too that oftentimes despite being the starter of the thread, the more interesting views are going to come from everyone else. And nine times out of ten, the discussion that ends up taking place is not the one I envisioned, but it's usually good stuff. For match reviews, at least for the 80s sets, I think DVDR is the natural place to read and write them. I do read the yearbook stuff here though.

Was Race/Flair from the All Japan set heel vs. heel technically?

I know we went back and forth on this a few months ago, but that was as part of a GOAT discussion. This is more about working heel and how effective the guy was at each of the component parts that his role required, rather than necessarily the great matches. And when it comes down to it, where are the weaknesses in DiBiase's arsenal as a heel? I'll admit, his best WWF match is a **** affair, and his best Mid-South matches are brawls and gimmicked brawls at that -- although on Goodhelmet's much quoted point about him being a brawler rather than a technical wrestler, it seems to me that AT NO POINT in his career was Ted seen as a brawler. He was WO's technical worker of the year for 1981 and on the commentary on the MidSouth set both Watts and Jim Ross pimp him as a scientific wrestler and he was seen exclusively in that mould as Million Dollar Man. Anyway, I digress, I would like to posit the following claim: DiBiase in his WWF run was the master of the 10-minute TV match. Working the crowd: he'd saunter down to the ring, always talking to himself, looking smug, generally with Virgil following him. He had a way of constantly reacting to the fans. Every match has the typical face shine and typical spot where he'll bail out of the ring. It's basics, ABCs for sure, but the crowd would always be 100% against him. Rude had the advantage of cutting the pre-match promo, which generated heat like anything. But DiBiase was generating heat just by his body language and breaking the face's momentum at the right time. It's very text-book, yes, but I'd argue perfectly done, and every time. Offence (heat segment): so in this hypothetical 10-minute match, typically you've got about 6 minutes of heel offence. DiBiase was a master at building that well and getting more and more frustrated at the guy not staying down. First of all punches and kicks, then the suplex, then the piledriver, maybe a backbreaker, maybe that awesome powerslam he does. Then he'd have two standard transition or hope spots: one is the spot where he puts his head down for the backdrop (Gorilla: "that was a cardinal mistake for a pro") and the other is when he takes it to the turnbuckle. There is in fact also the spot where he goes for the axehandle from the second rope and takes the shot to gut and flips over. Anyway, the point is that no matter who he was working, the structure is all there. Must have been easy for an average worker like a Beefcake to work a Ted match. Most of the work was already done, put slot A into slot B, done. Is it such a good thing to be so formulaic? I don't know, but of all the workers who did WWF-style, I'm convinced Ted was the best heel they had for a 10-minute TV or PPV match. Ok, IWC is not going to rave about them, but in terms of being effective, getting over and getting the most out of the crowd each step of the way, who did that better? Bump and feed: so Ted was trained by the Funks right? And he was very good at getting knocked down and then getting up for more, and showing that frustration that only the best heels have. It's hard to put into words, but it's something I think he did better, for example, than Rude and certainly better than Jake who everyone and their mother raves about. I'm not saying he did anything innovative, I'm saying he did the text-book stuff in a text-book manner. Best of all time heel? I probably wouldn't go that far. But let me ask you this: did people cheer Flair when he was a heel in the 80s? Yes. Did people cheer Hansen? Yes. Who cheered DiBiase from 1987 till 1993? Aside from those fans in the front row at Wrestlemania V? Let me ask you this: if Jake was such a great heel, why did the fans turn him face? If Savage was such a great heel, why did the fans turn him face also? And Gurrero? And Piper? If these guys are such great heels, how come they worked babyface for most of their careers? That's the thing: who are the real pure heels? People are talking about Valentine. He was over in the early 80s, but the crowd was dead for a lot of his stuff after 85. Can he really be that great? Well? That's one thing Rick Rude does have going for him in this discussion, he was never cheered. I haven't seen those Rude matches. I'd also throw in DiBiase's 10-minute match with Dustin Rhodes from 91. Also, while we're on this topic: I'd rate the '88 matches with Savage as being at least on pair with Rude's matches with Warrior. And DiBiase's own match with Warrior is arguably Warrior's best match outside of Hogan, Savage and Rude. ------------- I'm going to throw out some more names: Mr. Perfect Nick Bockwinkel Harley Race Bad News Allen/ Brown Brian Pillman Andre Hogan Jerry Lawler Vader

I totally agree with you in general Loss, what I'm saying is that Rude IS ONE GUY who seemed guilty of doing actual restholds. You're right, often a camel clutch. But one that seemed lazy and like he was taking 5 minutes rather than really cranking it. Other than him though, yip, it's one of my pet peeves too and I've ragged on Keith MANY times for shitting on perfectly legitimate submission holds / matwork because in his warped mind they are all restholds.

Crap. Sorry, Jerry. No problem. Maybe you could quote my post in the OP as it gives people a framework around which to think about what a heel does in the typical match. I'm glad Rick Rude is getting a lot of love here. He excels certainly in working the crowd. However, I wonder if Rude's shortcomings as a worker are sometimes underplayed? He was one guy who I'd accuse of actually doing a resthold rather than a proper submission -- and always the chinlock. Sure, he had great matches with Warrior, and one of my all-time favourite matches with Steamboat, but other times he can be disappointing. His match with Flair is poor by any standard. His matches with Sting aren't that great. And the matches with Jake Roberts are more memorable for the fued than what happened in the ring. That's not to say he wasn't a great heel, he was undoubtedly. His heat was off-the-charts, especially in WCW (see Superbrawl II pre-match promo), but all-time best heel? Did Rude have great pyschology? Was he really the best at selling or bumping and feeding? Did he pace matches perfectly? I'm not entirely convinced he did. I know we've been over this before, but someone explain to me why we've had several people name Rude already, but no one has mentioned DiBiase? What did Rude do better than Ted?

Oh, someone has made my third thread already. I had it all typed up in Notepad ready to post. Might as well put it here: Breaking It Down 3: Best Heels Ok, so much like the faces thread, I want to breakdown what the heel does in the match and then work out who does what best. The categories this time I'd say are: Working the crowd Best Offence (heat segment) Best selling Best "bump and grind" (i.e. selling of face's comeback, knocked down, get up, knocked down, get up, etc.) Best at calling it in the ring The heel categories are a bit looser than the babyface ones, so let me know any I've missed.

SLL - ah, I understand where you're coming from now.

Yes, but not straight away though, right? There was always the spot where Vader first goes down being a big deal.

Is this the Andre vs. Warrior match in question? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cONoP4jKQ8c That's hardly a clean job. And there seems to be a rematch from September 30th 1989 which goes longer than 10 minutes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91Wzf_KEUkU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3ajKcC1zZc DQ finish. Now another match, this time SNME from October, this time more like 7 or 8 minutes: DQ finish. Did the squash matches only happen on house shows?

Another match alternative structure I've just thought of is the babvface vs. monster heel. Best example probably being Sting vs. Vader. There you don't have a shine, you have the monster heel kicking ass. Then there's the spot where he gets multiple clotheslines but wont go down, then the spot where the face finally knocks him off his feet. We all know the structure of that match, but it's definitely an alternative from the standard formula.