Mr Wrestling X

Here are 10 of his best (IMO) matches in no particular order: - vs. Vince McMahon (Wrestlemania XIX) - vs. Ultimate Warrior (Wrestlemania VI) - vs. Antonio Inoki (1st IWGP Tournament) - vs. The Rock (Wrestlemania XVIII) - vs. Roddy Piper (Starrcade 96) - w/ Team NWO vs. Team WCW (Fall Brawl 96) - vs. Kurt Angle (King of the Ring 2002) - vs. Keiji Mutoh (Wrestling Dontaku 93) - vs. Big Bossman (March 89 MSG show)

That's exactly why they did it and it's definitely not the first time, nor last time that they've performed such a blatant re-write of history (but we all know this). I do see where you're coming from with the 93 thing - that year in wrestling is full of, shall we say "interesting" bookings that don't sit well with people looking back (us). I don't know whether this particular decision was down to the WWF hesitating on whether to proceed with Yoko's monster push, or simply trying to give Savage a boost and realising that they fucked things up when it came to Yokozuna. It got much worse, at Wrestlemania for example, where Hulk Hogan essentially aborted Yoko's push just as it had began by stealing away the WWF title in squash fashion. But it all came to a head at KOTR where Yokozuna was allowed to defeat Hogan (albeit with some outside interference) and apparently "retire" him, although by this point the damage had been done and Hogan resurfaced in WCW (very much un-retired) a few months later. WWE continues to do this push halting shit today - it's hard to keep count of how many up and coming performers have lost in quick and unspectacular fashion to the likes of John Cena and Randy Orton. The 1993 KOTR confused me when it came to Bret Hart's performance in his KOTR matches - namely that he was barred from using the Sharpshooter (and winning via rollups instead) by order of Pat Patterson, which Bret claims in his autobiography. The only explanation I have for this strange booking decision is that Patterson was looking to get Bret over as a guy who could beat you regardless of whether he used his signature move or not - in line with Hart's "excellence of execution" moniker.

Really?! Man, someone will be in serious shit for that, mind you it could be argued that WWE did it because they didn't think anyone would notice, which was something I was getting at, although with the revelation that it was in the script all along, you've got to wonder whether they did it just to see if people would notice?

In terms of "wrestling" - John Cena is easily the superior performer given that he has risen above his regular routine on many occasions and produced some critically acclaimed matches - Cena vs. Punk at MITB, at that time was the first WWE match in nearly 14 years to have recieved five stars from Meltzer (if you are invested in his system). OTOH, Hogan rarely deviated from his regular in-ring performance from his second tenure with WWE from 1984-1993. Most of Hogan's matches at lesser events didn't end decisively so WWE could boost the hype for events such as Wrestlemania or MSG house shows. Hogan was very much a travelling champion, in the same ilk as Buddy Rogers, Bruno Sammartino and Bob Backlund before him. In fact, it wasn't until recent times that Hogan began to refine his in-ring performance to accomodate for modern audiences, just look at his work in 02-03 with WWE in which he took losses, went in the favourite and came out the loser and he even wrestled in hardcore and street fight matches. Hogan obviously has the "performance" advantage over Cena because Hogan mastered the ability to connect with the majority audience (which Cena fails to do) and learnt how to effectively sell for his opponent, regardless of who they were. Hogan's big matches were always well recieved from a performance POV because it actually seemed like he might lose, he did make superhuman comebacks, but he was so good at garnering sympathy from the audience and this is what Cena fails at (asides from the fact that his current character has no place in a modern wrestling product, particulary one that has began to rely on popular culture and the entertainment industry in order to further itself). The only time Cena has ever come close to reaching the selling level of Hulk Hogan was during his match with Brock Lesnar at Extreme Rules.

I think the decision to book John Cena in a feud with Big Show (for the 100th time, no less) comes under the WTF!?! label, considering WWE decided to go with such a predictable turn. We all knew it was coming and Johnny Ace seemingly fucked up when he revealed that he re-signed Big Show on the Saturday - which contradicted that match stipulation that "should any WWE superstar interfere - they will be terminated". So Johnny Ace botched and WWE quickly went into damage control mode because they realised people noticed (which is a somewhat positive thing that comes out of WWE's obsession with social networking media). It's terrible how they are booking Big Show anyway, sure he wanted his job back and gave into Johnny Ace, but there was no need for him to "embrace the hate" as heels so often do. It's redundant for a person to go "classic heel" in the "deal with the devil" scenario in modern professional wrestling, why not have Big Show do what Cena did during his reluctant tenure in Nexus? Show could come out and explain that he helped Laurinatis because he gave him his job back and how it was a no-brainer considering that Laurinaitis would never have re-hired him otherwise. But alas, this is complicated by the fact that had Cena beaten Laurinatis, then Big Show would surely have been rehired and given an apology by the new GM/authority figure for Laurinatis' actions, meaning that he had no need to bother siding with Laurinatis. Whatever Big Show said on this weeks Raw and Smackdown (taping) is also redundant because "bonus money" or whatnot doesn't really add up to him going full blown heel. Do you want a modern product WWE? Then stop fucking it up with classic standards that just aren't effective on modern wrestling characters.

I wonder how much Ric Flair has actually cost TNA? His downside alone is probably in the mid six-figure range, they'll no doubt have paid for his travel and accomodation and then you have the stories about people comping him drinks and paying his bar tabs! Flair should have stayed with WWE, sure he wouldn't have been able to wrestle but that's not really the issue. The real issue is that Flair loves the spotlight, he loves performing and WWE took him off TV. His deal with WWE was pretty sweet, he could have easily waited it out for a year and then negotiated a return to TV as a manager/mouthpiece in which he'd once again be in the spotlight, without having to break his retirement vow. I could see a return to WWE, because Flair desperately needs the financial stability that the company can provide, furthermore it seems like WWE feels some level of responsibility for Ric Flair, given that they apparently bailed him out of his debt to High Spots and allowed him to attend (and even be part of one) two HOF events despite being under contract to another company.

For some reason I immediately think of the Oddities, who were pretty awful. It's interesting because Kurrgan (who was a member of the Oddities) was also a part of a mid card stable - the Truth Commision - that did have some potential. (largely due to their mouthpiece - Don "Cyrus" Callis) I guess I'm also with the majority who hated the Dungeon, particulary Ed Leslie's rotten "Zodiac" gimmick. The Union was a pretty cool stable in the late 1990's and even though Mick Foley was wading in and out of the main event, the majority of it's members were working the lower and mid cards and that's why I've brought them up here. I think that one of the best mid card stables in recent memory has to be the original FBI (JT Smith, Tommy Rich, Little Guido, Big Guido, Tracy Smothers, etc) because they found a way to make one of the most ludicrous comedy gimmicks work, whilst still managing to be taken seriously as wrestlers.

Rick Rude > Val Venis Sure, the "Ravishing One" wasn't a "porn star", but many of Val's mannerisms, taunts and appealing to the females in the audience (whilst enraging the males) are very close to those which were pioneered by Rick Rude.

Oh to be sure, they weren't Edge and Christian or the Hardy Boys, but they were very over in the weeks leading up to and after their WWE Unified Tag Team Championship win over Big Show and The Miz. The reaction to the winning the titles, in particular was massive, I will say that Bret played a big part in them initially getting over, but following this they remained pretty popular due to several factors such as nostalgia, their wrestling ability and the consensus that they were the going to be the face of WWE's tag team division. I doubt it, I think that Bret genuinely missed the WWE atmosphere and was itching to make a return in some capacity. He probably saw the chance to assist the Hart Dynasty as part of his return, but I think the main factors in the "forgiving" came down to Bret wanting to make money and satisfy the itch left over from the wrestling bug's bite after being away from the place where he made a name for himself for so long. But Hart and McMahon had buried the hatchet to some extent as far back as 04-05 as they decided to make a DVD and Bret agreed to be inducted (and turn up and make a speech) into the HOF. Some people speculate that the Montreal "screw job" is actually the greatest work in pro-wrestling history and that Hart and McMahon were the only ones who knew the truth and everyone else involved was played. I mean several arguments could be made as to why this is the truth, I've thought about it myself... - WWF is on the verge of collapse as WCW is destroying them in the ratings and have a tremendous source of finance (Ted Turner) - Vince comes up with a plan to turn things around and he goes to Bret with his ideas. They both agree that Bret should accept WCW's constant big money offers as it will give Bret a huge payoff in the short term and will probably not help WCW in the long term, an assumption based upon their erratic booking history. - Vince decides to step away from commentating and make himself a character in his own promotion, he and Bret plan the Montreal scenario whilst everyone else is given the story that the match will end in a double DQ and Bret will surrender the title on the following Raw. Vince then recruits his "participants" and explains to them that they are going to screw Bret by changing the finish of the match without his knowledge (which isn't true). - The "screw job" occurs and after some rehearsed backstage drama, Bret leaves and goes to WCW. - WWF garners a large amount of attention following the angle and Vince finally has the opportunity to rebuild his product by using himself as a character to elevate new megafaces like Steve Austin, Mick Foley and eventually The Rock. - WWF finally defeats WCW in the ratings and gains control of the Monday Night Wars. - Meanwhile, Bret is laughing because WCW are paying him a ridiculous amount of money to work a limited schedule and they also allow him a level of creative control, where he can continue to work in a main event position without worrying about the rug being pulled from under him. If a scenario like this is the real truth, then nobody knows. I think that Vince and Bret were on reasonable terms as early as a year following the screwjob if it was a shoot, where the general consensus lies, but their relationship was strained again by the tragic death of Owen Hart which many members of the Hart family blame McMahon for. If the "screw job" was indeed a work, then the falling out between Hart and McMahon would surely be down to the Owen Hart tragedy and the way the WWF handled it, particulary the fact that Vince chose to continue with the show, despite the accident and the live announcement that Hart had died. Needless to say, Hart and McMahon probably still have some issues with each other, but don't let it get in the way for the sake of good business relations.

It's ridiculous... - WWE stresses the importance of getting over, but then wrestlers get heat for "going into business for themselves" - They hire wrestlers because of their in-ring ability, but then have them tone way back and their strengths are lost in the shuffle - They seem to love when wrestlers abide by kayfabe outside of the ring, yet they balk at wrestling tradition - They praise those that engage with the fans, but get pissed when they come across as too engage (bending kayfabe) on social networking sites

And on the other hand, they don't want any of their non-wrestler employees to know anything about wrestling and consider them to be a mark if they do. Add to these the fact that WWE doesn't consider itself "wrestling" from a branding perspective and here we have some great examples of the legendary contradictions that exist within WWE.

Indeed, it's certainly a possibility that some bad blood is left over despite Bret and Vince seemingly burying the hatchet. If this is true, it's ironic considering that the Hart family have made Vince a huge amount of money over the years. That's pretty much the standard response to any unexpected demotion in wrestling until the truth emerges, although there doesn't seem to have been any emerging truth on why this team were dropped so badly. It's possible, this is only a possibility though, that Harry Smith had been quite open about his desire to compete in MMA during the Dynasty's push. This may have stirred up people the wrong way and WWE has been very careful about handing out pushes since Brock Lensar decided that he wanted to be an NFL player in 2004 and Bobby Lashley left in 2008 and went on to become an MMA fighter and wrestle for TNA. Both these men were pushed massively (Lashley not as much as Lesnar, but that could be down to WWE treading carefully since Lesnar) in a relatively short time only to decide that they wanted to do other things.

I've just thought of another one - WWE splitting the Hart Dynasty within a few months of them reaching the pinnacle of the tag team division. I was reminded of this horrendous booking decision after checking out a video of Tyson Kidd's awesome new finisher ("The Dungeon Lock" - tube it). This team was massively over following the Hart/McMahon Wrestlemania XXVI storyline. By autumn of that year, they had been eliminated from a tag team invitational by the Uso's for the tag team titles (which was eventually won by Cody Rhodes and Drew McIntyre) and were split as a team. In fact, the brief feud that followed between Smith and Kidd was so brief that it's hard to even class it as a feud. Smith then disappeared from WWE TV for an extended period of time whilst Kidd was trapped on Superstars and NXT (where he still remains, although there is promise that a promotion to one of the main shows is on the cards). The other member of the Dynasty - Natalya, fared better, being paired with Beth Phoenix and booked as the dominant focus of the Diva's division, although she has since been lumbered with a questionale flatulence gimmick. It's absolutely boggling as to why WWE just waved away an over team of two young men that had so much potential, not to mention that they were both trained in the Hart Dungeon, have performed around the world prior to being signed by WWE and the fact that Harry Smith is also the son of Davey Boy Smith and a third generation wrestler as Stu Hart is his grandfather.

^ To be fair, it seems that most non-puroresu wrestling fans have only seen the "ganso bomb" match in 1999 between Kawada and Misawa. I discovered the delights of puro due to the magazines I read when I was younger, covering wrestling in Japan. I'll be honest and say that despite being a fan of puro, I do find it hard to get into some of the matches.

I'm not as old as you guys, so I wasn't around for this stuff! I did get the Greg Valentine joke though!

^ I suppose you could argue that this decline in NWA/JCP lead to WWE being able to acquire teams like Anderson and Blanchard and eventually even The Road Warriors. Like I said though, I still feel that tag team wrestling was just as good as it had been up until the mid 1990's with the likes of The Hollywood Blondes, The Steiner Brothers, Harlem Heat, PG-13, Stars'N'Stripes, The New Hart Foundation, The Quebecers, etc - but I'm sure many people can find reasons to argue with this assertion.

I disagree, tag team wrestling was still a selling point for promotions until at least the mid 1990's . After doing some research into the Mulkey Brothers and The Gladiators, I found that this happened in 1987 during the Dusty Rhodes era which as everyone probably knows, was a time of unpredictably on Rhodes' part as booker to the point where his style spurned a term - "Dusty Booking". Of course, backstage politics might have played a part in the seemingly aborted push of The Gladiators, it's possible that they rubbed someone in a position of influence the wrong way and were punished by losing to a jobber tag team, albeit in fluke fashion. Speaking of taking a loss a'la fluke, Triple H is pretty well known for losing to people in this fashion, but without actually losing momentum himself. You just have to think back to 2001 and 2004 when Triple H put over Jeff Hardy and Shelton Benjamin respectively, however the result didn't hurt Triple H and the shock victories were quickly forgotten about as Hardy went back to tag team wrestling and Benjamin stayed in the mid card picture. Getting back to questionable booking decisions, it somewhat irks me when promotions book shit such as the champion winning back a title that was vacated from them because of some controversial event. I always see this as a scenario in which to bump up the number of title reigns that a particular wrestler has had, just look at WWC where Carlos Colon has booked his son Carly (aka Carlito) to win the top title on a number of occasions that would make Ric Flair jealous. This is nothing new though as it's always been common place for a promoter to consistently book family members in the main event - often making them the star of the promotion.

I wonder if Michael Hayes was involved in the booking of the Booker T/Triple H storyline back in 2003? WWE had the right idea with Booker T when he first debuted - interfering in a match and attacking Austin and being allowed to look a threat to The Rock (although that didn't exactly work out...) but it was the booking that followed that really broke down the main event level that Booker T had reached during the end of WCW. You know, Booker T was pretty much the face of WCW in 2000-2001 and really stepped up to fill the holes that had been left with the departure of Hulk Hogan, etc. To be honest, I saw the King Booker push as WWE rewarding him for years of hard work and not complaining about his position in the company. Yeah, they could have done so much more with him and it would have served WWE in the long run because Booker is a good worker who can protray either face or heel to a high standard.

I honestly can't see it, there is no way in hell that John Cena (the real life person, not the character) could take several forceful elbow, hammerfists and closed-fist punches from an MMA heavyweight (and a UFC world champion no less) - known for knocking the likes of Randy Couture and Frank Mir silly - and come away coherent, balanced and with a strategically placed cut that happened to stop bleeding pretty quickly (cuts suffered in MMA matches tend to require stiches and staples). On the same hand, there is no way that Brock Lesnar could take a forceful chain-assisted punch to the forehead (where the cut was located) and not be completely knocked out cold! Hell, he'd be lucky not to have concussion and a fractured forehead! I could go with the bust lip that Cena suffered in the brawl being hardway as the result of a botch (with little force behind it), but there is no way that the blood in the Extreme Rules match was hardway.

^ Ah, but people will argue that the "usual way" is to have the heel (Lesnar) take out the face and win the match in such a way that the face (Cena) has an excuse to explain their absence - leading to the heel bragging about taking out the face until the face returns and they resume their feud. I'm really surprised that WWE allowed Cena and Lesnar to blade in that match, given that the ban on intentional bleeding is part of the deal between WWE and Mattel (which is a very important deal for WWE). Hell, not even Triple H and Undertaker were allowed to blade at WM and that really says something about how important getting Lesnar over as a monster (again) is to WWE, to the point that they'd risk the ire of one of their most important business associates.

Let's start of with the most recentone - Brock Lesnar losing clean to John Cena at Extreme Rules in his first match back. So many people are confounded about this and simply can't fathom the logic (and neither could I until it happened, since I couldn't actually think of any scenario where Cena would go over) that Lesnar lost. I think ultimately it comes down to two things - Brock being a good sport and voluntary taking a loss, perhaps to appease his detractors who are pissed that he's just turned up and been pushed to the moon, or then there is the possibility that Lesnar doesn't care whether he wins or loses because he's being paid a ludicrous amount of money to work a fraction of the dates that the rest of the WWE roster does. You also have to add to this the fact that WWE wants to get a Wrestlemania match vs. Rock, Cena or Undertaker out of Lesnar and you have the reasons for him essentially squashing Cena but ultimately losing. I personally think the former is true because WWE have made a significant investment on Lesnar and surely want to keep him happy whilst he is under contract. Say what you want, but I don't think Lesnar cares JUST about the money, I think there is a very real possibility that he actually wants to make his second stint with WWE work. I say this because despite being in excellent physical health, he is past the prime stage for the majority of athletic sports, his bouts of diverticulitis impacted upon his MMA career and took away the momentum that he went into the sport with and therefore professional wrestling is all that he is left with (although it's not like he's going to go broke considering he was making over a million dollars for most of his UFC matches) Thoughts? (and absolutely feel free to post your analysis of questionable booking decisions)

Lesnar vs. Cena was an awesome effort and the best match that Cena has had since MITB last year. I agree with the result because both men came out looking like gold and Lesnar didn't need to win when he dominated in the way he did and of course, the way that his loss occured, that came across as a moment of luck for Cena - it actually reminded me of those old Vader vs. Ric Flair WCW matches where Flair would be dominated (although not to the degree that Cena was here) and then get one lucky move, such as an inside cradle to take the win. Honestly, Lesnar has not lost a step in the five years that he's been away from the business and by working in an MMA style to his pro-wrestling repotoire, he's become much more versatile as a performer. He could have done with not taking that reckless bump that he did last night, but Lesnar is no ordinary man as anyone who has followed his career will know and we all know that he has no problem with doing something (the SSP at Wrestlemania XIX) even if he's advised against it. I'm fairly certain that both men bladed last night because had Lesnar really connected, Cena would have been knocked silly and the match would have been a disaster. I can possibly see the initial brawl's "busted lip" as being hardway, but it just looked so "saturated" when Cena was later seen backstage that it seemed to me to have been a blood pellet and makeup job. Lesnar actually dwarfs Cena, which is an impressive feat given that Cena has one of the biggest physiques in professional wrestling. I'll go out on a limb and say that I genuinely think that Cena is just a gym freak and not a steroid use, whereas Lesnar is a freak of nature and has always been built like a tank (check out his high school and college wrestling footage). It was pretty awe-inspiring to watch Lesnar effortlessly pick up Charles Robinson with one hand and toss him in the ring, sure Lil'Naitch isn't exactly the biggest of men but even still, Lesnar picked him up without any apparent exertion and tossed him through the ropes like a bear discarding it's prey. For a guy that has been severely ill with diverticulitis for extended periods of time, it's incredible that he's maintained this level of strength. I think that Lesnar will continue as dominant performer and sparingly lose matches from this point onwards, although I think the "bloody" and one-sided nature of his character will be phased out gradually in order to move into competitive matches in the build up to Wrestlemania XXIX where Lesnar will presumably face either Rock, Cena or Undertaker.

Speaking of early 00's in Puro, I don't think anyone can deny that Keiji Mutoh/Great Muta made one of the greatest comebacks in the history of professional wrestling. He was pretty much done following his disastrous tenure with WCW, in which he jobbed to nearly everyone, but then he returns to Japan and within a couple of years he's completely reinvented his wrestling style, got into great shape and adjusted his gimmick by putting away Muta and only taking him out for special occasions. So many years of doing the moonsault hampered his wrestling ability, but he managed to completely do a 180 and get back to the top by switching to a mat-based style where he can still showcase his phenomenal wrestling ability, whilst taking the strain off his knees and preserving his career as an active performer.

Lesnar's hybrid pro-wrestling/MMA attire is hideous, but at the same time quite intriguing. It seems as if Vince McMahon has finally accepted that he can make money by investing some interest in the MMA boom. Even if they just mention UFC on the air from time to time and talks about Lesnar's success in the promotion, it's still a big step for WWE... One has to wonder though, could this be part of the deal at Dana White's end for the seemingly smooth contract negotiations that WWE and Lesnar agreed upon during Wrestlemania week? Perhaps WWE agreed to a cross-promotion deal? All we know is that some kind of business relationship has been in the works since WWE and UFC agreed to allow Lesnar to appear in the WWE '12 video game. It wouldn't be the first time that WWE has worked a minimal cross-promotion agreement with UFC, just look at Ken Shamrock's run with the company, where WWE took any opportunity to mention Shamrock's success in the UFC.

I'm trying to think of which wrestler or wrestler(s) pioneered the "five moves of doom" routine (as it's known nowadays). My first thought was to say Hulk Hogan, as the whole "Hulkin up" part of any Hogan match immediately springs to mind, but I'm pretty sure I've seen earlier examples. I seem to recall some old NWA matches that ended with the same routine, with Terry Funk and Dusty Rhodes being the first examples that spring to mind. The "five moves of doom" doesn't have to be five moves, as taken from Hulk Hogan's match finish (punch, punch, Irish whip, big boot, atomic leg drop), rather the "five moves of doom" trope can be applied to any sequence of moves that is used to end matches by a wrestler on multiple occasions and in situations that offer little or no variation (take Hogan's punch ALWAYS sending his opponent into the ropes). Anyone got any ideas as to who was the first wrestler to perform the "# moves of doom"?