WingedEagle

That's insulting.

Yeah the big problem with Taker's aura is it often ended when the bell rang.

You skipped the Brothers of Destruction and their reign of terror that evoked comparisons to the Holy Demon Army. Imagine that supernatural showdown.

Is this available anywhere other than DM? For some reason that site is constantly six kinds of slow. Just unwatchable.

Let's not forget all the outstanding work before Foley showed up. Nor the fact that he was probably the worst opponent of Austin's run. No doubt a part of some great matches, but few and far between. And that's coming from someone who loves the Michaels & Brock matches for the most part, and doesn't find the Triple H matches awful.

Just wanted to add I'm very much enjoying this. Started cherry picking TNA matches a few months back based on WON star ratings but it'll be good to have a second reference to fill in some gaps on things that may have fallen under the radar or are getting a second look. I'm also watching matches, not shows, and fully recognize that means I'm likely enjoying matches a bit more than may have been possible in the moment. Almost through 2006, and its clear already at this point that I never gave AJ Styles nearly enough credit, even if he did rank highly for me on GWE. Just consistently excellent.

Difference is Taker benefits from great match (or 2-3) theory. With others it's great many matches theory.

That's from the Dome.

JESUS CHRIST! Fucking awesome, LOL I can't wait to blast through 00s Kobashi! Amazing.So fucking stupid, but AMAZING. Haha cannot wait for you to plow through that.

Sano's fall is probably due in part to the multiple names, the effort required to seek him out (particularly the shoot stuff) and the lack of a prominent run in a major company recently. I really think that if Naoki Sano had followed the NJ juniors run with more work as "Naoki Sano" in pro-style feds he'd likely be looked upon more, if not more fondly. Taker? Higher highs but lots more lows than Triple H and less of a stink for marrying someone on the roster who wasn't in the C suite. But certainly no more deserving.

This was exactly what I was talking about. Perhaps not always the strongest or loudest, but always great audio on his and absolutely no one was better at *using* the chop rather than just throwing it out there for the sake of it.

Believe it or not, I'd want to bring Lex Luger into this conversation. His just looks so damn perfect. Sexy Lexy. Sexy indeed! Not quite as violent as the big guns, but he had great form and usually worked up a hell of a running start. Nice sleeper.

Absolutely love a great chop and even morseso when it's smartly incorporated into a match. Flair probably wins it for me, but also a big fan of Joe and Kobashi on this list. Ron agar in another great one. Not a fan of when it's thrown after a huge setup with tons of lag time like WWE often falls prey to. Don't see how that's any different than the floppy junior spots that are criticized for being too contrived. Not quite related, but in the same hemisphere enough that it feels relevant is the best lariat. Always defaulted to Hansen here but after going back over some prime work from both I think Jumbo actually takes the lariat crown.

WTF? Andre is freaking awesome and totally belongs. How can you make an argument for Triple H over Andre? Pretty easily if one wants to. Andre has a few amazing matches. He also has a ton where he not only encourages the viewer to sleep but in fact does so himself. Not sure I'd necessarily rank Triple H above him, but he absolutely has many more matches I'd rate higher and would prefer to rewatch. Different strokes and such.

Zayn's very much of the moment. More of a spotlight on him than any point in his career which can't hurt.

Exactly. I think people mistake what I'm talking about when I say "objectivity", it has nothing to do with my list or with BIGLAV or anything like that, it has to do with pointing at evidence, whether input or output, a guy's career, what actually happened etc. etc. Objectively, Kenta Kobashi had more matches period than Magnum TA. This is a fact. Magnum TA's career was short. These are tangible, measurable things. Who had more "great matches" is a subjective value judgement, but most people who have seen a good chunk of both careers, would say Kobashi had more of them than Magnum. Again, this sort of thing is in the realm of objectivity. I have a hard time thinking about the argument that takes that evidence about both bodies of work and comes out with Magnum TA as the #1 worker. To me that goes against the grain of what is there. I really hate this part. Wrestler A has more great matches than Wrestler B. Does know automatically come to the conclusion that Wrestler A > Wrestler B. Yes Kobashi is better than Magnum, however there is more to being a worker than the end quality of a match. When does match quality matter? When does it not?

JVK's been consistent on this from day one. His system was an objective ranking of subjective evaluations and his best attempt at truly ranking greatness. Point your guns if you must, but this seems to be what accounts for many of the rankings that are at issue, yet defensible as long as someone vocalizes any kind of rationale. There's absolutely nothing anyone could say to persuade me that "Scott Steiner is the greatest wrestler ever" isn't an insane statement, much less defensible. But that has to do with how people are weighing greatness rather than anything at all to do with Scott Steiner. People clearly approached this with very, very different standards of greatness. As an example, there are a few names on my list that I'd call personal picks who I really enjoy through and through but couldn't credibly argue are "greater" than a few names I may have left off my list. But they're also at the bottom of the list rather than the basis for the entire process, whereas that sounds like what has served as the means for some lists. Nothing wrong with it, but if people are in fact using wildly different concepts of great then there are going to be some strong thoughts on the outcomes.

I'd stick to Japan. Not sure you'll find anything of value domestically, though it'll at least be quick.

He's said he goes after the trolls because its apparently good for business. Literally. You won't see him giving any hell to folks that ask legitimate questions.

Exactly, not covering LU tapings differently than any other company's.

There is a difference though, since reporting on the others is reporting on a wrestling company, while LU is reporting on a tv show. They don't do houseshows or live shows or anything, it's all canned taped stuff. Its wrestling. The Wrestling Observer Newsletter has always covered it. There is no difference. I don't really care, I don't have a sub. Him chastising anyone for caring is silly though. Helps to subscribe or be familiar with it before getting mixed up in the discussion.

There is a difference though, since reporting on the others is reporting on a wrestling company, while LU is reporting on a tv show. They don't do houseshows or live shows or anything, it's all canned taped stuff. Its wrestling. The Wrestling Observer Newsletter has always covered it. There is no difference.

Who would read or listen to Meltzer and not expect to hear spoilers? Not sure where this became a mystery. That's the last place I'd go looking to stay spoiler-free.

Wait until you get to Teranishi's performance in the '84 Gauntlet. I haven't seen enough of him to fill a comp, but he mad his performances count.

Fuchi ranking a shamockery. Need him & Oz to pair off in some intergender tags to break the hands of every voter.