WingedEagle

I'm not sure there's any distortion or unfair criticism being leveled against Akiyama. You're pushing for him to be considered as a top 10 all-timer. That's a high threshold and one that many people can easily dismiss while at the same time regarding him as dynamic and consistent with an epic run of good to classic matches that earn him a spot among their top 20, 30 or 50.

Parv, are you actually resubmitting your list to bump Misawa & Kobashi? Two thumbs up, if so. Listening to the Excite Series its hard to see how you'd have them behind a number of the folks that finished ahead under BIGLAV.

Okay I listened the whole way through. What's this big comedy spot I missed?

Are your top 80 settled already or do you just know that they're in somewhere?

That is almost exactly the position I'm in with Satanico. Enough to know I need to see more and he belongs, but not enough to comfortably say where. May slot in late as a nod to what I've seen thus far, or hold off entirely because if I go that route I'll have no idea where to draw the line on folks I've seen a similar amount of footage from.

This is what's always held down the big blow-off for me as well. To be fair, I've only seen a couple matches from the entire arc along with the cage match, but never quite understood how some of those names were part of this epic affair. Actually planning on rewatching all of it this summer (have it all on the computer and usually spend summer weekends away from the big screen) and very curious to see how it plays out in full.

I just don't see how its unrealistic and patently absurd for an Olympic gold medalist to "work" the mat with another professional wrestler, but perfectly acceptable for said Olympic gold medalist to abandon his Olympic talents and hit a moonsault, eat a Stunner, People's Elbow or anything short of grinding these amateur actors into the mat.

And they wonder why they can't get any money sponsors.

Kurt Angle is an Olympic gold medalist in wrestling. Chris Benoit has not even competed in amateur wrestling. He should not be able to compete when it comes to the mat work and grappling. Shouldn't Angle be able to use his mat work and grappling to theoretically wreck everyone on the roster? Where do we draw the line on reality?

I'll definitely be submitting before the deadline. Do you have a sense of whether most folks who are committed have already turned theirs in or are waiting until closer to deadline?

Takayama might be my pick. Kerry's solid as well with the real difference being that Tak probably has 3-4 of of my top 100 matches ever.

Ahhhhh that makes sense. Oh well. Next time! About 90 minutes to go on the pod. Hope to wrap it up this morning.

Bryan was my presumptive #1 or #2 coming into this. He's fallen a few spots the top of my list has taken shape. A few spots.

Anyone know if there are any fantastic comps I might want to pick up there? Haven't had time to browse the listings.

Other than the WWE Network, which of these is easily accessible on big screen? I'd try almost anything for a month if I can watch it on TV, but there's only so much I'm willing to budget for the small screen.

Definitely not highest single vote. No one ballot should be determinative. I'd lean towards higher average vote with leaving it a tie next best.

Someone I'll have no clue what to do with. His run from 2000 - 2004 or so is so great I'd probably rank him top 5 in the world over that stretch. How to place that in GWE terms? No clue.

About 90 minutes into this and I do not want it to end. Very curious to see how the lists shake out. Definitely some food for thought here as while I haven't sat down and put pen to paper for my own ballot, I've certainly been thinking about just what I prioritize. Will shake out some more thoughts on it in that part of the board but just wanted to add I found this very engaging. While I'm still more a fan of ranking and discussing matches rather than individual wrestlers, this and part 1 will sit right next to the top 100 match countdown as the type of pod I can easily go back and listen to once a year. Just broad goodness all around.

V3 falls into the pool of luchadores who could place for me with time to dig deeper. One day I'll get to all of those with top flight brawls, but doubtful before deadline.

Always interesting to see what does / doesn't appeal to people. Seems to be bigger spectrum on matwork.

Nope, nothing disparate about that. The difference is I might come to the same conclusion without knowing anything bolded above. Traveling NWA World Champion comes to town against local star and puts him over while walking away with the belt. The end. My haziness or dubiousness (spell check says I didn't make it up, but who knows) is where the conclusions come from micro more than macro. But hey, we've all got what works for us and can't expect everyone to see it the same way. As long as we keep coming back its all good, right?

I think there are lots of things we can infer from things like card placement. - We know an opener, a midcard match and a main event don't have the same goals. - We know an NWA title match and a WWF title match in 1985 have different aims. - We know a match designed to set up a feud is different from a blow off. I think it is valid to talk about purpose on that general level. What we can't know about is intention or specific orders from the back, unless those things are revealed to us in dirt sheets. And even then, we know the perils of that. Agree with this almost entirely -- there are certain big-picture things we can deduce, but think that's generally because they are clearly demonstrated. If something is subtle, and not built upon subsequently in the match, commentary, angle or match that follows shortly thereafter, I'm wary of drawing any conclusions beyond strict variance, and wouldn't want to use that as a basis for evaluating the participants' intentions or thoughts. All we have is the execution.

Karl Rove for the kill again! *ducks*

I've learned more about wrestling, and more importantly, thought more about how I watch and think about wrestling, from this place than anywhere else online. But outside of perhaps some very narrow, specific instances, I just don't see how the insight is available to view a match with the proper context to evaluate the purpose, options available and other short-/long-term factors shaping what occurred, and could occur, from bell to bell. We don't know what was behind those other doors.