JerryvonKramer

In other news, every single worker involved in the Ishin Gundun vs. Inoki's boys feud is getting a +1 ability to work brawls.

Be careful of going on stuff like that though cos Meltzer routinely had PWO pin-up Stan Hansen outside of the top 30 during the 80s and early 90s in those countdown lists.

The thought has just occurred to me that 1984 is a real strong contender for best year ever in wrestling. We always talk about 1989 and 1992. Look at 84. It's mental! Sarge vs. Sheik in WWF and Hogan becoming champ, a huge deal in history. Tito vs. Greg In Japan, AJ is kind of in a quiet time, but NJ has possibly the most rocking and rollingest feud in Japanese history with Choshu's Army vs. Inoki, Fujinami and the funboys, which has really got me super stoked while watching NJ set. Will and others have outlined what else was going on, but the two biggest promotions in the US and Japan were on fire. I think 84 might be to WWF/NJPW what 89 is to NWA/AJPW. Just kind of a sleeper pick year that people don't often out into that discussion.

Just made me spit my tea out. Ha ha.

Just a mistake by me. Added that in, so Borne is now on 23 (still not gonna make it). On the one hand, I've been a tiny bit generous giving Sting that point, but on the other, a real Sting fan would tell you that I've completely fucked him over on the other scores.

No, carrying lesser oppenents is in with that V rating. These are the only things you can get A points for: +1 ability to work babyface / heel +1 ability to work singles matches / tags +1 ability to carry a promotion / work as ace +1 ability to work as travelling champion [basic +1 bump for the 5 NWA champs] +1 ability to brawl / work technical matches +1 ability to work gimmick matches +1 ability to work [a different style] +1 ability to work a different gimmick +3 ability to get over in multiple markets So there are 11 possible points of which ... basically only Terry Funk has maxed in 150 guys. Anyway, Steve Grey re-do: Steve Grey Basic (offense, selling, psychology) 2/3 3/3 3/3 = 8 Intangibles 2 Great matches 7 Length of Peak 1975-87 = 12 years = 7 +1 ability to work tags Ability to work different styles / roles = 1 Variety = 9 34 That *does* look more right to me. Okay, that'll do. Incidentally this has put ... The Undertaker under the gun as the next bubble guy.

Looks like I forgot to add this one to the spreadsheet, even though he had a score already: Kuniaki Kobayashi 8 2 5 3 2 5 25 Another one I'd like to find room for. But with that mistake, he is 100 and Garvin is 101. Trouble here is that Garvin already has credit for Valentine stuff in his V score, and even if that 89 match is really awesome (as it probably is), it's only buying him +1 max and I don't think 26 is gonna do it by the time I'm fully done. Could possibly extend the L score to 1989, that gives him another +1 Garvin would cap out then at 27 with the highest of the B scores. Could be enough. We'll see.

I will consider moving the V rating up, his score did seem too low. And since he's in danger of falling off, I want to do what I can to keep him on. As a benchmark, Jack Brisco has an I rating of 3 and is probably the most natural babyface I can think of. Do you see Grey on par with him for intangibles? I wouldn't see him getting above that, too bland really. It's only just occurred to me that the I-rating has a natural tendancy to be more generous to heels, but what can ya do? Heels are cooler than babyfaces.

I can't be sure that he'll make my list, but more people need to talk about this guy. His run in early 80s NJ is as good as anyone who isn't Fujinami.

Okay, with the last update all 14 guys fell off, and some other huge casualties, which actually break my heart. Here were the last four: Bruno Sammartino Jake Roberts Killer Khan Robert Gibson PAINS me to see Bruno go. Next 4 bubble: Steve Grey 8 2 4 6 1 6 27 Buzz Sawyer 6 4 2 6 5 3 26 Dick Slater 6 1 3 6 6 4 26 Ron Garvin 7 2 5 3 5 3 25 I may need to find a way to increase Garvin's score, but I don't know where I can find the points. +1 at most for G, and maybe +1-2 on V? Dunno, but Garvin is currently 100. Next 5 after that: Kerry Von Erich 4 4 4 6 5 4 27 Abdullah the Butcher 4 7 2 0 5 9 27 Chavo Guerro (Sr) 6 2 2 6 8 3 27 Randy Orton 6 0 3 8 3 7 27 Sabu 5 5 3 3 4 7 27 Considering that I have yet to rank Fujinami, Choshu, Kawada, Regal and some other pretty big names, all of these are currently in danger. I might have to make some moves to "save" Garvin, but then again as Nick Cave once said "I don't believe in an interventionist God".

Robert Gibson Basic (offense, selling, psychology) 1/3 2/3 2/3 = 5 Intangibles 1 Great matches 6 Length of Peak [never one of the best in world] = 0 +1 ability to work heel +1 ability to work singles +1 ability to work gimmick matches +3 ability to get over in multple markets (Memphis, JCP, Mid-South, AWA, ECW, SMW, Japan, indies) Ability to work different styles / roles = 6 Variety = 7 25 Roddy Piper Basic (offense, selling, psychology) 2/3 2/3 2/3 = 6 Intangibles 9 Great matches 3 Length of Peak 1980-6 = 6 years = 4 +1 ability to work babyface +1 ability to work gimmick matches +2 ability to get over in multple markets (LA, San Francisco, PNW, JCP, WWF) Ability to work different styles / roles = 4 Variety = 6 32 Roman Reigns Basic (offense, selling, psychology) 2/3 2/3 1/3 = 5 Intangibles 1 Great matches 3 Length of Peak 2013-15 = 2 years = 2 +1 ability to work heel +1 ability to work tags +1 ability to work gimmick matches +1 ability to work as ace / carry promotion [HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA] Ability to work different styles / roles = 3 Variety = 5 19 Ron Simmons Basic (offense, selling, psychology) 2/3 1/3 1/3 = 4 Intangibles 3 Great matches 2 Length of Peak 2013-15 = 2 years = 2 +1 ability to work heel +1 ability to work tags +1 ability to work gimmick matches +1 ability to work a different gimmick ("Farooq") +1 ability to get over in multiple markets (Florida, WCW, WWF) Ability to work different styles / roles = 5 Variety = 6 22 Sabu Basic (offense, selling, psychology) 2/3 2/3 0/3 (+1 for being such a complete nutter) = 5 Intangibles 5 Great matches 3 Length of Peak 1991-5 = 4 years = 3 +1 ability to work babyface +1 ability to work tags +2 ability to get over in multiple markets (ECW, Japan, WWE, indies) Ability to work different styles / roles = 4 Variety = 7 27 Scott Hall Basic (offense, selling, psychology) 2/3 1/3 2/3 = 5 Intangibles 5 Great matches 3 Length of Peak 1992-8 = 6 years = 4 +1 ability to work babyface +1 ability to work tags +1 ability to work gimmick matches +1 ability to work a different gimmick ("Razor Ramon") +1 ability to get over in multiple markets (AWA, WWF, WCW) Ability to work different styles / roles = 5 Variety = 7 29 Steve Grey Basic (offense, selling, psychology) 2/3 3/3 3/3 = 8 Intangibles 2 Great matches 4 Length of Peak 1975-85 = 10 years = 6 +1 ability to work tags Ability to work different styles / roles = 1 Variety = 6 27 Steve Williams Basic (offense, selling, psychology) 3/3 1/3 1/3 (+1 for sick backdrop suplexes) = 6 Intangibles 3 Great matches 7 Length of Peak 1985-98 = 13 years = 8 +1 ability to work babyface +1 ability to work tags +1 ability to work gimmick matches +1 ability to work brawls +1 ability to get over in mulitple markets (JCP, Mid-South, Japan) Ability to work different styles / roles = 5 Variety = 8 37 Steve Keirn Basic (offense, selling, psychology) 1/3 3/3 2/3 = 6 Intangibles 2 Great matches 4 Length of Peak 1979-85 = 6 years = 4 +1 ability to work heel +1 ability to work tags +1 ability to work gimmick matches +1 ability to work brawls +1 ability to work a different gimmick ("Skinner") +2 ability to get over in multiple markets (Floirda, GCW, Memphis, Southwest, WWF) Ability to work different styles / roles = 7 Variety = 6 29 Sting Basic (offense, selling, psychology) 1/3 2/3 2/3 = 5 Intangibles 6 Great matches 3 Length of Peak 1991-7 = 6 years = 4 +1 ability to work tags +1 ability to work gimmick matches +1 ability to work brawls +1 ability to work as ace / carry promotion +1 ability to get over in multiple markets (WCW, TNA, WWE) Ability to work different styles / roles = 5 Variety = 8 31 Terry Gordy Basic (offense, selling, psychology) 2/3 3/3 2/3 (+1 for being agile as a big man) = 8 Intangibles 4 Great matches 6 Length of Peak 1980-92 = 12 years = 7 +1 ability to work babyface +1 ability to work tags +1 ability to work gimmick matches +1 ability to work technical matches +3 ability to get over in multiple markets (GCW, JCP, Mid-South, WCCW, Memphis, AWA, Japan) Ability to work different styles / roles = 7 Variety = 8 40 ------- No. rated so far: 150 Current threshhold score to finish top 100: 25

Masked Superstar Basic (offense, selling, psychology) 1/3 1/3 3/3 = 5 Intangibles 3 Great matches 1 Length of Peak 79-85 = 6 years = 4 +1 ability to work babyface +1 ability to work tags +1 ability to work gimmick matches +1 ability to work a differet gimmick ("Bolo Mongol" / "Ax") +3 ability to get over in multple markets (GCW, Detroit, Florida, JCP, WWF, SMW, Japan) Ability to work different styles / roles = 7 Variety = 8 28 Matt Borne Basic (offense, selling, psychology) 1/3 1/3 3/3 = 5 Intangibles 3 Great matches 1 Length of Peak 1983 = 1 year = 1 +1 ability to work babyface +1 ability to work tags +1 ability to work gimmick matches +1 ability to work a differet gimmick ("Doink") +3 ability to get over in multple markets (PNW, JCP, Mid-South, WCCW, WWF) Ability to work different styles / roles = 6 Variety = 6 23 Michael Hayes Basic (offense, selling, psychology) 1/3 1/3 3/3 = 5 Intangibles 8 Great matches 4 Length of Peak 1980-5 = years = 3 +1 ability to work babyface +1 ability to work singles +1 ability to work gimmick matches +3 ability to get over in multple markets (GCW, JCP, Mid-South, WCCW, Memphis, AWA, Japan) Ability to work different styles / roles = 6 Variety = 7 33 Mick Foley Basic (offense, selling, psychology) 1/3 3/3 1/3 = 5 Intangibles 6 Great matches 5 Length of Peak 1992-00 = 8 years = 5 +1 ability to work heel +1 ability to work tags +1 ability to work "normal" matches +1 ability to work different gimmicks ("Cactus Jack", "Dude Love", "Mankind") +3 ability to get over in multple markets (Memphis, WCCW, WCW, ECW, WWF, indies, TNA, Japan) Ability to work different styles / roles = 7 Variety = 8 36 Mike Rotunda Basic (offense, selling, psychology) 1/3 2/3 2/3 = 5 Intangibles 2 Great matches 2 Length of Peak 1986-89 = 3 years = 2 +1 ability to work babyface +1 ability to work tags +1 ability to work gimmick matches +1 ability to work different gimmicks ("Irwin R. Shyster") +2 ability to get over in multple markets (Florida, JCP, WWF, Japan) Ability to work different styles / roles = 6 Variety = 7 24 One Man Gang Basic (offense, selling, psychology) 1/3 1/3 2/3 = 4 Intangibles 3 Great matches 1 Length of Peak [never on of the best in world] = 0 +1 ability to work babyface +1 ability to work tags +1 ability to work gimmick matches +1 ability to work different gimmicks ("Akeem") +2 ability to get over in multple markets (Florida, Mid-South, WCCW, WWF, WCW) Ability to work different styles / roles = 6 Variety = 4 18 Owen Hart Basic (offense, selling, psychology) 3/3 3/3 1/3 = 7 Intangibles 3 Great matches 4 Length of Peak 1987-97 = 10 years = 6 +1 ability to work babyface +1 ability to work tags +1 ability to work gimmick matches +1 ability to work different gimmicks ("Blue Blazer") +2 ability to get over in multple markets (Calgary, WWF, USWA, Japan, ) Ability to work different styles / roles = 6 Variety = 7 33 Pat Patterson Basic (offense, selling, psychology) 1/3 3/3 3/3 (+1 for "playing to the back seats") = 8 Intangibles 4 Great matches 4 Length of Peak 1969-81 = 12 years = 7 +1 ability to work babyface +1 ability to work tags +1 ability to work gimmick matches +1 ability to work as ace / carry promotion +3 ability to get over in multple markets (LA, San Francisco, PNW, Florida, AWA, Amarillo, WWF, Japan) Ability to work different styles / roles = 7 Variety = 5 35 Paul Orndorff Basic (offense, selling, psychology) 2/3 1/3 2/3 = 5 Intangibles 3 Great matches 1 Length of Peak [never on of best in world] = 0 +1 ability to work babyface +1 ability to work tags +1 ability to work gimmick matches +3 ability to get over in multple markets (GCW, Southeastern, JCP, Mid-South, WWF) Ability to work different styles / roles = 6 Variety = 6 21 Randy Orton Basic (offense, selling, psychology) 3/3 2/3 1/3 = 6 Intangibles 0 Great matches 3 Length of Peak 2002-15 = 13 years = 8 +1 ability to work babyface +1 ability to work tags +1 ability to work gimmick matches Ability to work different styles / roles = 3 Variety = 7 27 Rick Martel Basic (offense, selling, psychology) 2/3 3/3 3/3 (+1 "for giving 100% in every match and being the living embodiment of babyface effort") = 9 Intangibles 4 Great matches 7 Length of Peak 1978-92 = 14 years = 8 +1 ability to work heel +1 ability to work tags +1 ability to work gimmick matches +1 ability to work as ace / carry promotion +1 ability to work different gimmicks ("The Model") +3 ability to get over in multple markets (Canada, PNW, AWA, WWF, WCW, Hawaii, Japan) Ability to work different styles / roles = 9 Variety = 9 46

Didn't know where else to put this, so here will do since this is kind of a one-day boot camp. Today is my "research day", and yes I should be doing work, but I wrote two books last year so the university can leave me alone for a while. Instead I am going to spend it watching wrestling until I fall asleep tonight. Today is probably the last day of proper footage watching I have before finalising my list. Chad and I are set to record next Wed, and my list will be finished by then. I'll be away for most of the rest of March. On the docket: - Finish up Fujinami vs. Ishin Gundan feud from NJPW 80s, make final rating on Fujinami, the last serious top 5 contender - Selected Regal, 90s WCW, 00s WWE. And ... - I can do some spot reviews of ANYTHING on request (provided they are *serious* GWE candidates) in any gaps, so will take any requests here, preferably nothing over 20 mins This is going to be a marathon today. It's last chance saloon time.

I'm way way behind on these shows but the Mike Jackson as "the Moolah of jobbers" thing made me laugh and also kinda blew my mind. What sort of mindset do you have to have to actually go to "the jobber pimp"? Also some good lines. Phil on being accussed of opening some sort of chocolate wrapper: "I'm an athlete, I don't eat that kind of garbage" Kris on the prospect of an ROH-invite only show: "I hope they remebered to bring the kleenex" Bix on "Kenneth Kobashi": "That was during the York foundation years" ha ha

I can't take this argument seriously when he took a huge part in creating atmospheres like in his matches vs. Necro, KENTA, Joe (in both PWG and ROH). My single answer to this is Dory Funk Jr, a man part of some of the hottest and most heated feuds of all time who most people aren't even rating because he doesn't make silly faces when he wrestles. If Lo-Ki gets any more for intangibles, I'm giving Dory +5 for creating those atmospheres in 10,000+ arenas not 700+ high school gyms.

Liger -1 on peak from 10 to 9 (89-04) Breaks -1 on peak from 8 to 7 (72-84) Saint No change to peak (72-87) Lo-Ki +1 on peak from 7 to 8 (01-15) Jun Akiyama +2 on variety from 8 to 10

PPV Vs Pillman 92 Vs Orndorff 93 (two matches one is a Clash) Vs Regal 93 TV matches: Vs Cactus 92 Vs Windham 93 Vs Dustin 93 Vs Pillman 93 Vs Vader 93 (two matches) Vs Regal 93 (four matches, one on a Clash) Vs Eaton 94 Vs Arn 94 I could be wrong but I don't think the 70s-style Regal bouts will be to your tastes. There is also the final go round with Flair in 94. Also, if you've not seen them, I'd seek out his matches with Funk (Clash 7) and Luger (GAB 89).

The only question for my purposes is: does Liger deserve a 10 for that category or not? Cutting him in 2004 gives him a 9 and probably alters the order of my top ten.

Memphis 5.5 Randy Savage vs. Austin Idol (5/7/84) Idol really was Lawler's number #2 at this point huh. Hogan haters note, he kicks out of the top rope elbow in the first minute here. Ha ha. Honestly, I thought this was just better than the Lawler match. More action, but not just that, a much better and more spirited performance from Savage who not only looked awesome kicking the crap out of Idol, but also made Idol look great by bumping huge for him. Idol himself isn't bad either, but this really is the Savage show. Very good match that shows what a good worker Savage was here in 1984 and it actually retroactively makes the Lawler match look worse for it. ***3/4 Memphis 5.6 Randy Savage vs. Austin Idol (5/14/84) This is worked at an even faster pace than the last one, more wild and more brawl-orientated. Savage once again looks phenomenal here. So quick and agile, and a strange mixture of both wildness and focus / coordination. Great punches once again also. This had less substance than the last bout. *** Memphis 5.7 Tommy Rich & Eddie Gilbert vs. Pretty Young Things (Falls Count Anywhere) (5/18/84) Here are the PYTs again. This is an absolutely awesome brawl. And one of the best match I've seen out of Memphis so far. Work is super violent and intense throughout. Both babyfaces are great at taking punishment and the heels are great at dishing it out. Koko in particular is just a beast in this match. This is a proper hardcore match, they go all over the arena, up on the stage, over to the back. It's almost like watching RAW in 1998 or something. Didn't see any kendo sticks though. I don't really understand the finish, which appears to make no sense at all, but this brawl is so good that it scarcely matters. Who'd have thought Koko was such an offensive powerhouse? ****1/2 Memphis 5.8 The Fabulous Ones vs. Pretty Young Things (6/25/84) Exhibit A in my idea that babyface offense is often a waste of time. Once the PYTs take over, business picks up. Fans of Demolition should go out of their way to watch these PYT matches so they can see what clobbering double teams can look like when done well. Koko is just a ball of fire in these matches. He seems to do the lion's share of the work, with Austin more as a kind of Dennis Condrey figure. This was another enjoyable tag. ***1/2

I'll have a think about these suggestions. Can answer this now: "Doesn't this penalise someone who isn't a classic brawler or tehnician but can do both?" No, in those cases I'll just go with one or the other. Funk has a point for being able to work technically, Ted gets a point for being able to work brawls. Some here will remember that I met Dibiase once at a show and asked him directly to his to face "do you consider yourself a brawler or a technician?" and his answer was "I was both".

Watching this 1984 stuff when he's part of the PTYs and I think he actually has more goods than I gave him credit for when I wrote this. I'm considering adding some points to his score after seeing this series with Gilbert and Rich and the Fabs, AND his tag run with Eaton and that Rogers match. He's an offensive powerhouse.

It's fair to say we look for different things cos I thought that match fucking ruled with an iron fist.

The system rewards guys who do things outside of their comfort zone, or at least show a very different string to their bow. Brawlers get points if they show they can work technical matches. Most technical wrestlers get points if they show they can work brawls Most guys who worked a variety of gimmick matches get points for that, but note not Abby or Sheik Guys who carried promotions and worked as aces get a point for that. Guys who worked tags and showed they could do that well get a point for that Guys who got over in a different gimmick get points for that Guys who transition from one style to another get points for that If a guy is typically a heel and shows he could get over as a babyface, or vice versa, they get a point for that Within the A category, people do not get points for: - moving up or down the card - getting older - showing they can work with different types of opponents (since the V rating is dedicated to that) - doing aspects of their role that is expected of them anyway, for example Akiyama playing FIP during a tag, that is covered in the point he got for working tags - sprints - long matches - squashes These last three are just expected of any worker worth their salt. The system doesn't reward guys just doing their jobs, it rewards guys who showed they could do different jobs.

Akiyama is the last guy out of the All Japan folks I'd point to as being one-dimensional. In fact I'm not sure there is a more versatile All Japan lineage performer. Like. Ever. The idea he is a "2" in being able to play different roles is so ridiculous that the only way I can take it seriously is if you haven't watched enough Akiyama matches to properly evaluate him. Which is fine in itself. But just because someone who is a "ten" exists doesn't mean someone like Akiyama who showed great range throughout his career is a two and I doubt gimmick matches and brawl carry 8 points in your category. Jimmy mentions this: Care to actually go through all the boxes? I can in a bit sure. I have discussed this once already, a few pages back, but getting over in multiple markets is no trivial thing. Getting over in New York isn't the same as getting over in Tokyo isn't the same as getting over at The Omni, different crowds, different contexts, different expectations, different specific set of skills required. It's not like the three points are for nothing.

One could, and I've made the case myself. However, remember that this isn't designed to be a "fair" system, it's designed to be a system that measures the six things that *I* think the GWE should have. It started with the case I made for Flair, taking into account the arguments put forward by Will for Lawler and by Dylan for Funk, and worked backwards. My argument against Misawa and co is *specifically* that the scope of their careers is narrow, so it is not entirely innocent that they are getting fucked in the A category. (lol "fucked in the A", ha ha). Chad also knows this, of course. And I'd expect him to make the counters he is. But it's also the case that he does not value that A category as much as other people. Its a fair point and while I obviously don't value Funk's runs relative to the AJ crew quite so highly, its your system and subject to your opinions and evaluations. It just so happens you've peeled back the curtain on your process so you're getting more pointed questioning than other folks. Yes, this is called transparency.