DR Ackermann

Thank you!

That's how I would describe Bockwinkel. Personally I never got that impression from Hart. Nothing he does stands out that much for me. But that is probably best discussed in another topic

Winged Eagle, my last post was in response to Grimmas. Grimmas, yes he is. Whereas Hart tends to step up in big matches, Eaton is consistently good. How is Bret better, you ask? Couldn't tell you. I don't think he is.

Well Eaton spent about the bulk of his prime working in tags. The vast majority of his main event matches and major opportunities were in tags as well. His work with Flair in 90-91 is probably on the same level as some of Hart's 10 best. Where are the Hart tags that come close to Eaton's top 10 tags? Also why wouldn't you factor in what amounts to the bulk or large percentage of a wrestler's output when rating them?

When did JCP or Turner stop regularly taping World Championship Wrestling in Atlanta?

Technically, wouldn't Finlay and Han be in different regions? US & Japan?

Also I just want to point out that Billy Jack Haynes wrestles his squash matches as a complete heel despite being a face. He shakes hands before the match and then just bullies his opponents. After they submit to the full Nelson he slams them to the ground in disgust.

Whether its true or not, he's saying that they expanded too fast and lost focus on what made them successful. They had a much larger fanbase in the south than anywhere else, and spent more money on shows that would make them less money. There are plenty of other factors that lead to their demise, of course.

Watching NWA World Championship Wrestling on the network and the Barbarian is a pretty fun squash match wrestler. He's got some nice offense. Also going through bunch of AWA stuff and Bockwinkel looks like the greatest worker in the world. He's an awesome brawler too. Also for all the talk about Hennig dropping off in the WWF, he got really good really quick. By 84 he's pretty awesome and I believe he debuted in 80.

I haven't thought about that before, and now that you mention it, Misawa does wrestle similarly in tags once he becomes the ace. It's not exactly the same and I see him as a better worker but I think there's probably something to what you said. I will keep that in mind when watching.

Also, let me ask you this. Are you putting Stan Lane or Robert Gibson on your list? A decade of great matches from both guys.

I'll start off by saying that it blows my mind that people would consider hima #1 contender. I just don't see how people can view him that way. But lots of people do. I can understand people thinking he's really good even though I don't. Tags in particular are a place where I think Jumbo's flaws are exposed and my criticisms of him given more weight. There are so many tags I've seen where he does the EXACT SAME THINGS OF NO CONSEQUENCE. He will tag in, hit 2 or 3 moves, body slam someone, do his knee attack, sometimes fist pump, sometimes not and tag out. Meanwhile the other 3 guys are building a narrative, building drama, doing things that will progress the match. He adds nothing, until it's time for the planned spots and shifts in the match, which he will do just fine. Part of that could be the way Japanese tags were structured, but he is always the least guy in those matches. I see the majority of his great matches coming in the late 80s and the 90s and I haven't seen any Jumbo singles from the 90s I consider great. I can go through your whole list later, as I have seen most of those matches. You didn't mention the Terry Funk/Jumbo 76 match that people love. That's a match I don't like and I think Terry Funk is the GOAT. The only reason I had Jumbo on my list was the "huge number of great matches." But then I looked at it and realized I didn't think so many of them were that great and the ones that were I generally found his performances in them to be unfavorable or decent like a lot of those 6mans. I don't think he's Ultimate Warrior. I think he's Terry Taylor with a long career on tape and some great opponents and opportunities. But really I don't think he's bad, just not that good. Warrior was bad. Maybe Jumbo's the most carryable guy in history? I just don't see him as the driving force in any match of his I've seen that was great. However, I think his matches with Tenryu after their split are tremendous for the most part and I would like to go back and see how much of that he deserves credit for.

I think this is interesting because of the disappointing series of matches (except one) against Stan Hansen when Hansen has said that his style was to go at people and see how they react. Not sure I would agree with it (I like Jumbo) but reading that did make me go "hmm., that's interesting." Can you point to any glaring examples? I've thought about that myself. I will...watch some Jumbo matches and get back to you, sigh. In the meantime I will say that I found the Misawa/Jumbo 1990 upset match pretty boring outside of the hot opening and closing which is something I could point to. Those sections of the match were laid out for a clear purpose. The body of the match was the blank canvas with a lot of opportunity and felt directionless. Just a 10-15 minute time killer because Misawa wasn't that good yet and Jumbo couldn't lead a match but he knew how to do stuff? Idk maybe.

There's some confusion there. I wa referring to Jumbo being a chore to watch. I will check out the other Jumbo/Martel matches. I think Martel was great and he will probably be in my top 50. What do I see as determining greatness? I've thought a lot about it and it comes down mainly to the ability to create drama. That's why I value selling so much, but it isn't the only way to create it. Timing is important, bumping can make things feel bigger, consistency- not only in the way of having lots of good matches but being consistent with the logic inside of individual matches. If a guy is working holds, is there a point? Is it compelling? There's a ton of stuff that goes into creating drama. Being able to project a sense of struggle is something I value highly. There's so much more I could add but I'll stop there for now. How well a wrestler plays particular roles is extremely important as well. Does he have a wide range or is he just awesome at one role, or is he very good at multiple, etc. etc. Longevity and/or peak...blah blah blah. Was he ever bad, and for how long and why, how quickly did he develop, etc. etc. To answer that last question, yes I do believe that every guy mentioned was a demonstrably smarter worker than Jumbo. I could be wrong, but that is how I see it and it would be disingenuous for me to say otherwise. Bret Hart was a smart worker, but not as smart as people give him credit. He had all the opportunities in the world to do great stuff but he lacked, in my opinion, that little something. But actually it was a big something. There's just no emotion. It's like watching a robot go out and wrestle. He's like a synthesized drum beat or something, he's doing things technically right with perfect rhythm but it's soulless. Bockwinkel is the wrestler Bret Hart wishes he was. Pillman is the inverse of Bret Hart in a lot of ways. Bad booking, undervalued, underappreciated, underrated. He brought a lot of character and emotion to what he did and was given relatively few opportunities to make his case. Before he got injured, he's consistently good on TV, as a face, as a heel, having great matches in a variety of styles, having great sub 10 minute matches. I look at Bret as a guy who had to sit down with a paper and pen beforehand to have a good match. That's not me knocking him for planning stuff out necessarily, but I believe if he was supposed to wrestle Doink the Clown and then 5 minutes before the match there was a change of plans and he was wrestling Jannetty instead we would get a really bland dog shit match.

Yes. I don't think Bret Hart will make my final list either. I have a working list of over a hundred guys in order that I have been adjusting slowly since September. I will check out the other Martel matches, but at this point it is such a chore watching a guy that I don't enjoy whatsoever (and yes, I am separating best from favorite).

Today's the day. Jumbo is off my list. I watched the Jumbo/Martel AWA title switch and I think I've finally figured out what it is about Jumbo that makes me think he's just not very good. He's competent and he works hard, but he's kind of clueless. He's much too deliberate; not in a stylistic way, but in the sense that he's cautiously approaching everything, unsure of what he should do next, like he's looking to someone for direction. When there are preplanned spots it becomes blatantly obvious that he's moving into position or getting ready to set them up. He knows what works because he's been wrestling for so long, but it seems like he hasn't developed the appropriate instincts of why and when to do what works. It's not organic. He overreacts to things in a really hammy sort of way. He reminds me of a basketball player who practiced every part of the game to the point that he does things in a picture-perfect, textbook, way. When he goes out to actually play he gets destroyed by all the other players who learned by actually playing basketball with other people, not by simply practicing the individual aspects of the game out of context. In the past I've begrudgingly given the guy credit, because while I don't like him, so many people think he's an all-time great. At this point I just don't see it and can't justify voting for someone I don't consider great.

Watching the second episode of Stampede. Really bizarre seeing Ed Whalen interview "Minnesota Fats" at ringside with Fats lying his ass off. JYD is an awesome heel promo too.

I was pleasantly surprised by how good JYD looked.

I enjoyed the Choshu/Inoki matches that made the NJPW set more than the Hansen/Inoki ones. I thought the match where Choshu finally beat Inoki was really good.

One thing that stood out to me is you gave Angle a 3/3 for selling, something he is notoriously poor at doing. And you gave Hansen a 2/3, when he sells perfectly for his role and I would consider him one of the elite salesman in wrestling.

That sounds pretty awesome. I would be down to see the whole card at once.

I remember going to a house show in 2002 just before Lesnar debuted on TV and he wrestled someone, I think it was Perry Saturn. Anyway, on that same show, Test beat Undertaker. So they probably had hopes and/or plans for him back then.

Great take on Watts Wrestling and why it's enjoyable on multiple levels. I wonder how I would feel about it in real time...

ENERGY WARRIOR

I was about to argue with Judy, saying how horrible Warrior was and blah blah blah and talking about how poor his performances were in general when it came to wrestling, and how he did better in big matches because they were rehearsed and laid out and a complete carry job each time because the matches involved the entire promotion working as one to put something together based around what little he was capable of or willing to put effort into, and also how clearly poor he was outside the ring if you weren't looking at things through the subjective eyes of a child or a moron, and then I realized he was a great candidate for the topic at hand. (And that was a huge run-on sentence) I wouldn't say he was completely worthless at all. He had a great look and he had energy and he knew how to work out. He did get into his character too, which I believe he developed on his own, and it appealed to people even though I personally feel he came of as a psycho that I wouldn't want my kids watching.