Jimmy Redman

I remember doing a Top 100 matches list years ago and it was pretty much 95% modern WWE, with a handful of TNA and twentieth century matches thrown in. It would probably look exceedingly ridiculous now, but that's where I was in my wrestling viewing at that time. I kind of feel like I should attempt a list now just to see the difference. To be honest, I still find it hard to compare my favourite WWE matches to my favourite "other" matches, because it's so hard to go past the ones that you grew up on and lived through. In that sense I actually find it much easier to compare wrestlers for GWE than compare matches for a Best Matches list. But I find it much more enjoyable to make lists of matches than lists of wrestlers.

The problem with Dolph's Shawn tribute act is the same problem with indy geeks doing 90s AJPW tribute acts: taking the most surface level aspect and running with that, without understanding everything else that went into making the original work. I also feel like with modern/current guys, it's easy to get blinded by how we currently feel about them. I have Dolph fatigue as much as anyone, and it's easy to forget how good he actually was between 2010-13. He's someone who can match up really well with a guy and they're married for life: he's had long feuds or a constant series of matches with guys like Bryan, Kofi, Orton, Sheamus, Cena...and generally any match with any of them will be at least good. The downside is that so many repeated matches can blend together. He's also a good tag worker and I enjoyed his run with Swagger. His match with Sheamus on Smackdown, June 22nd 2012 is one of my favourite TV matches. The best Orton match is also on Smackdown, October 2011 I think. Both are really good examples of what was Dolph's best role: a bumping heel who could make your top guy look like a million bucks, while also showing just enough to push them to the limit. And hell, the double turn match with Alberto at Payback 2013 is one of the best WWE matches of the decade. That said, he's been woeful for a while now and still hasn't learned how to work as a face after two and a half years as one.

Well it kind of fits Edge's gimmick at the time though, he was the Rated R Superstar, he walked around like a rockstar and dressed in what I'd call douchebag chic. So it makes sense that his "come as you are" get up was his fancy jeans and flashy belt and nice shoes. He was literally coming as he was. It's just that guys in the 80s who would "come as you are" looked a lot scruffier.

Damn kids these days don't even wear cowboy boots to a street fight! Seriously I love that Edge/Shawn brawl as well. Jesus now I want to go back to 2007. I'm kind of glad I didn't suffer from DX fatigue last time I watched this stuff because I actually enjoyed almost all of that feud, in terms of matches.

Yeah let me say again, I'm speaking purely hypothetically about Earthquake, I have no real judgment on him since I may have seen him wrestle once or twice in my life. I just take issue with the idea that a small athletic guy is inherently better than a big fat guy because moves. You can take another guy as an example, Vader or Mark Henry or whoever, guys that I know are capable of having awesome matches.

To be fair to DX (I know, I know) Hunter wasn't supposed to be on one leg - he blew out his quad during the match, there was a DQ and then they used chairs to beat them up, so it's not like they jobbed them out. And that handicap match...I don't blame anyone with DX fatigue hating it, or hating the result but man, I seriously fucking loved that match. It may be my favourite handicap match ever to be honest. It's the most effective presentation of a handicap match I've ever seen from WWE. Normally when they run one they might vaguely talk about the tag team being able to tag in and out and what not, but they just sort of treat it like a kind of wacky tag match. They never really get across the danger of one guy trying to fight two guys at once. So when the one guy wins you're not even surprised, really (also because they usually have the one guy win, but that's another issue). But with Shawn vs Rated-RKO, the escalation of violence in the feud (as you say, the bloodbath was the night before) and the presentation of the match by the workers and J.R. really put over just how much of a suicide mission Shawn was on. There was a palpable danger to it that is often missing in WWE, and they made you feel like Shawn had no hope. So after Shawn got his ass beat, he made one of those glorious Shawn comebacks and pulled it off and it felt like the miracle they were selling it as. So yeah, I mean I get DX hatred and not being into it, and I get that WWE has guys win handicap matches all the time, but if you watch this particular match on its own merits, I feel like they did so much to really earn Shawn's victory. And I don't think it was even remotely close to a burial. Edge and Orton lost the feud, but they weren't buried and really, they turned out fine and both were the top heel on their brands within a couple of months. You can fault DX for a lot of things, but I don't think the Rated-RKO feud is one of them.

This is where I couldn't disagree with you more. To me there's almost no inherent value in being a "technically good" wrestler in and of itself. By that I mean how good you are physically at working holds and executing moves and what not. I would care about that if wrestling was a sport, judged on technical merit like figure skating or diving something, but it's not, it's a work. The goal is to entertain, to tell a story, and however you manage to do that is what's important to me. If you can use your technical ability to do that, then that's great. But if you have loads of technical ability and are boring as shit or don't know how to craft a story in the ring, then I have no use for it. And if you have little technical ability but bring a bunch of other things to the table, then yes, I think you're better than a guy who can execute moves properly but can't actually...work. You can even look at a guy like Sabu, for whom being physically crisp would make no sense for his character, or a guy like Cena who's awkwardness is part of his charm. Sometimes being less technically proficient is an asset. Physical execution is just a tool, and I have no use for it UNLESS you can actually use it to be exciting or interesting or craft good stories. And of course, a lot of people do. I love a guy like Tamura for how smooth he is in the ring, for example. But execution for execution's sake isn't enough for me, and I don't value it intrinsically higher than any number of other tools that a wrestler may have. So to take your example (purely hypothetically because I have no dog in the Quake/Malenko fight), then I don't think Earthquake's potential "caps out" at ***1/2 or so just because he's a big guy who works a more physically limited style of match. And at the same time I don't believe Malenko's ceiling is inherently higher just because he happens to be 200lbs and able to execute a wider variety of moves. It's what you do with it that counts. If I saw an incredibly awesome Earthquake match, I'd throw all the snowflakes I could at it, whether it had a single wrestling move in it or not. And I'd have no problem ranking it over a Dean match that was smooth as hell but not interesting in any way.

Brainfollower I don't think your approach really puts you into conflict with the voters at large, nor should it stop you from voting, or stop us from calling it Greatest Wrestler Ever. What's clear from reading all of the discussions about criteria and voter intent is that there's no concrete parameters, and everyone is interpreting what "GWE" means to them in their own way. JVK has his mathematical formula, Loss wants to watch everything on earth, Matt D is concerned with tools and how they're used, Will knows what he likes...etc. and etc. Someone I forget is going by who he'd want to watch the most. Some people go by Great Match Theory. Some like you are looking at things like promos and importance (and you're not the only one certainly). We all come to this thing from our own place, and that's the beauty of it. I mean we all experience wrestling in our own way anyway. Some people can separate promos from matches, while others can't fathom such a thing. Some people watch in the moment to have fun, others watch more analytically. Some people stick to what they like, others try to be open minded and see everything. And so on, and everything in between. In making a list you have to decide for yourself what wrestling is to you, and what great wrestling is to you, and you'll reflect that in your list and the choices and methodology behind it. And it will be different for everyone, but everyone will have a list that is true for themselves.

Yeah I nominated him to get opinions from people who have seen more of this guy than me. I've liked what I've seen from the Fuerza feud and the Santo team, and I'm wondering what else is out there. He doesn't seem to have any rep as a worker that I've seen discussed. I'm beginning to realise that I have a strange but irresistible attraction to masked dudes in goofy ninja outfits throwing savate kicks and reckless dives: Octagon, Sasuke, Samurai, Hayabusa, Pentagon, etc. So as an aside, point me towards more dudes like that and feed my habit.

I forgot that I meant to do this. vs Eddie/Rey, SD 21/4/05 (debut) vs Haas/Holly, Judgment Day 2005 vs Haas/Holly, SD 26/5/06 vs Benoit/Booker, SD 4/8/05 vs Rey/Batista, SD 16/12/05 vs Rey/Batista, SD 30/12/05 vs Rey/Batista, SD 6/1/06 (Cage) vs Mexicools, SD 3/2/06 vs Londrick, Velocity 11/3/06 vs Londrick, SD 7/4/06 vs Londrick, Judgment Day 2006 vs Hardyz, ECW D2D 2006 vs Londrick vs Hardyz vs Regal/Taylor, Armageddon 2006 (Ladder Match) vs Hardyz, Royal Rumble 2007 That seems enough to be getting on with.

I'm not ruling him out yet, but it doesn't look likely and if I did rank him, it would be extremely low down. Bazza is a guy I've seen pimped around here for years, I see all the praise and the arguments...and then I watch him and he just doesn't resonate with me at all. He's mechanically fine, really smooth and gifted athletically, but I don't get anything more from him than that, and mechanics is one of the least important things to me.

Looking at who seems to be ranked highly by a lot of people, unless things change before then my most glaring omissions look to be Fujinami, Dandy, Barry Windham, Ikeda, Ishikawa, Harley.

"Surprise" is probably the wrong word, but that was just to make it mirror the other thread. It's more like, your most left field choice, or the choice where you're the only one out on that limb. It's one thing to nominate someone or consider them, and then another to actually put them on your Top 100 list. I'm definitely voting for Sheamus, and I have a feeling he'll get on a couple of ballots, so I don't think he's such a strange choice. For me I guess the obvious one is that I'm pretty sure brainfollower and I are the only Trish voters.

Oh of course! Well there you go, there's one good match of his I did see. And thanks everyone else for filling me in. Keen to watch Cesaro/Cara when I get the chance. My God...I absolutely loved that match. Honestly I'd have it at #3 for the whole year behind the girls. I lost all of my shit over it.

If I can talk about NXT...the women's battle royal was awesome for many reasons. - Asuka's pre-match promo which made me excited for her killing every woman in the known universe. - The start of the battle royal with Asuka ready to take on a dozen women at once...if I were them I would have ran. - The end of the battle royal with Asuka dispatching two jobbers and then HOLY FUCK EVA MARIE. This was so fantastic because I immediately had so many conflicting emotions: anger that they actually had Eva Marie eliminate Asuka from anything. Joy at the thought of Bayley kicking Eva's ass again. And unabashed, unbridled glee at the thought of Asuka murdering Eva and feasting on her insides. - These guys completely telegraphed this finish by having Asuka bump Eva on the ramp and having Eva powder out, and they followed through with the obvious but then STILL got me by having Carmella swerve the swerve and win. A+ for effort NXT. So now we get Bayley vs Carmella (Fun babyface match? Carmella heel turn? Third party interference? Who knows!) and the mother of all televised ritual sacrifices that will be Asuka vs Eva. And they hold off Bayley vs Asuka for a rainy day. I love NXT.

Can someone explain Cesaro's 2015 to me? I'm not disbelieving, I just haven't watched much of the TV and can't think of anything of his that's been talked about. I see him here and on people's Most Outstanding ballots, and I'm curious as to what I've missed.

I can't see Octagon in the index, so I nominate Octagon via the Yearbook threads.

Is it online anywhere? I haven't been able to find it.

I can't remember what else you've reviewed of his so apologies if I'm repeating something, but for a snapshot of AJ in TNA I'd say: vs Abyss at Lockdown 2005, vs Joe in August 2005 (their first meeting), vs Bully Ray Last Man Standing in 2011 and vs Chris Daniels Last Man Standing in 2012.

I have no issue with that, and like I said I'm happy for anyone who enjoys it. I'm just explaining why I'm not a fan of it beyond a one-off anomaly, and it's that "playing a game between ourselves" aspect that turns me off.

Would "dick measuring" be a clearer term? Nobody literally does it (I'm guessing, iI'm the lesbian in this conversation...) because it is a metaphor. Guys comparing the size of their penises (metaphorically) as an indicator of manliness.

In terms of Angle though, for argument's sake, if we can point to his bad ideas and instincts, what do you make of his good ideas and instincts? Even though he bothers me so I find it overly simplistic to attribute all of his negatives to his instincts, and all of his positives to either his opponents or physical talent. For me like, sometimes he has good ideas. He's masterful at playing the bully ace to a midcarder or a rookie. He knows exactly how to stooge and bump and look foolish like a comedic rudo. He has a great sense of timing most of the time. And so on. Or is it just that the bad overwhelms the good? (It does for me with Angle, certainly)

My take on the Ishii-Shibata dick flashing style is that they take a perfectly good idea - macho displays of toughness - and take it to its logical extreme, whereupon it crosses a line for me. It's an odd thing to say about two guys legitimately beating the fucking shit out of each other, but the way they do it comes off as...fake. I think it's because they enjoy it so much. Even when you get to the point where they're grimacing and starting to sell, we've seen them hit each other with enough strikes and no sell them with laughter and jokes that you know that this is what they LIKE to do. It's showing off. When a man is waving his dick around he LIKES waving his dick around. It's fun. So it's hard to buy into the idea that the match is a struggle of any kind. It's just two guys sword fighting with their penises until one is supposed to lay down. It treats moves and other wrestling matches with quite a bit of contempt too. I mean when you take moves that normally kill dudes and sort of look at your watch or feign a yawn...it's pretty blatant fourth wall breaking and makes a mockery of wrestling. And in turn it makes a mockery of their own match, because if you can no sell 37 of those kicks and strikes and moves, why couldn't you no sell 38? It's like that South Park skit come to life, where they do a bunch of bullshit and then say "your turn to lose" and he lays down dead. Again, it just comes off fake. I was thinking about this when watching Hashimoto/Choshu '96, the match where Hash kicks the shit out of Choshu, and Choshu refuses to stay down. The contrast between that and what Ishii and Shibata do was staggering, even though the broad idea was the same. And I think it's because what Choshu was doing wasn't fun. He wasn't enjoying it. He was getting the shit kicked out of him and it was all over his face that he was getting the shit kicked out of him, even though he was kneeling there asking for more kicks. It was what these dick waving exercises try to be but never accomplish: a manly, defiant display of toughness. Taking someone's best shots (and I mean TAKING them, not letting them hit you and brushing it off) but refusing to stay down. It was real in all the ways that Ishii-Shibata wasn't. And that's not to say, I mean, I liked Ishii-Shibata a LOT...the first time. I think it was the 2012 or 2013 G1 where they had their first big no-selling match? I really did enjoy that tremendously. And I don't begrudge anyone enjoying any of their matches, to each their own. But for me it's an extremely perishable style of match. It was fine once, in isolation, because it was a novelty to see THAT much no-selling in one match. But I don't ever need to see it again. The problem is that once Ishii and Shibata started off like that, they couldn't retreat from there and thus every one of their matches seemingly has to be like this. There's nowhere for them to go. Which is why you should, you know...sell shit sometimes.

In my dreams this match main events WM29. Instead we get it here at a house show with the roles completely ass backwards, but at the same time it was a fun 8 minutes and I'm still glad it exists.

In that Jeff Hardy match they hit like 16 different finishers - which is not an exaggeration. Truly one of the worst things I've ever seen. Despite opening with that, Angle will get on my list through the strength of his best performances. He has, as has been said, all the tools, just terrible ideas and instincts. So when the latter don't get in the way too much he can do good stuff, and he has an awful lot of good stuff for someone who can be so awful. There's the Austin matches. I am in love with the Smackdown Six period and his team/angle with Benoit. He was also good in that period working with newcomers like Cena or Rey and giving them the right amount. When he would goof off and show ass he was brilliant, he had the credibility to let babyfaces run rings around him because you knew he could turn it around in an instant. He was one of the best "lucha base" type of guys in WWE for that reason, and also because he could take offense like a champ. There are other examples of that kind of Angle too - the Jannetty SD match, the Lethal match in TNA...when he's in there with a "lesser" opponent (not in terms of talent but in terms of card placement) he tends to let things breathe more - he acts like a bully, gives the faces plenty of shine, bumps around, kills them when the time comes, and makes them look like a million bucks and like they could pull it off (whether they do or not), usually without resorting to a million finisher kickouts (but not always). Angle vs midcarder is one of my favourite match ups. Angle and Rey had over half a dozen matches in WWE and I loved ALL OF THEM. Rey is Angle's best opponent and it's not even remotely close. I think in another life Angle had a great career as a rudo because he just seemed like the perfect base for Rey in WWE. Solid enough for Rey to fly around, goofy enough to get his pants pulled down during Rey's shine, and then vicious enough to catch him and beat the crap out of him. At the moment their January 2003 match is my fave because at every turn I think "here's where Angle finally catches him and splats him" and then they pull another one out of the hat, again and again. Most of their matches missed the mark but I love the Eddie match at WMXX. Just ridiculously love it. In fact their whole feud was an incredible performance by Angle out of the ring, I still vividly remember the angle on SD where Eddie was handcuffed and Angle walked calmly down the ramp taping his fists with a completely blank expression on his face. He looked like he could have killed someone that night. I shit on Angle a lot but he has a ridiculous amount of charisma and presence, across the entire spectrum from comedy to serious, face to heel. Angle is a guy whom when he actually nails it, just really nails being a pro wrestler, I despair and think "Why can't you be like this all the time?!?!" If Angle worked to that level with any consistency, if he had even half as much masturbatory, finisher kicking bullshit on his resume than he does, he'd be one of my all time favourite guys. But he only hits that mark every blue moon, and frustrates the shit out of me the rest of the time. So he's on my list, but there's a ceiling for someone who causes me that much mental anguish.