Jimmy Redman

To not pile on to Natalya, if you want to check out a match where she is actually good, watch any match she had with Alicia Fox on Superstars. Particularly 7th July 2011.

Bryan/Claudio vs Quack/Jigsaw from Bryan's Indy Farewell Tour 2009.

I agree that Kofi can be sloppy, but I think he has a pretty good grasp of psychology. He knows how to get the people behind him, he sells well when called to, he throws in nifty counters and always works a series of matches by building off previous ones (there's a phrase for that isn't there? 'Learned psychology' or some shit?) and he has a lot of interesting finishes. Of course, this is all speaking of when he actually has something to do. And a lot of the time, he has nothing to do. I get people having problems with Kofi physically, because he's super sloppy and isn't a guy who looks like he's hurting the other guy. But I find it hard to fault him for the psychological aspects of working.

I pretty much have the same view. She's always worked really well when I've seen her live (although I think generally speaking all of the girls do, simply for having so much more time and being able to work a real match), but on TV she is surprisingly disappointing when she's working with anyone other than Alicia Fox, with whom she has amazing and inexplicable chemistry. Although for what it's worth, I thought her Summerslam match (with a Bella?) and the AJ match from this week were pretty good.

One thing I am is very fluid in my rankings and ratings of matches. I like to rewatch stuff and if my opinion of a match goes up or down as a result of the latest viewing, so be it. I often take into account how I felt watching a particular match live or for the first time, but I don't always and I'm not bound by it. To me, a rating for a match isn't definitive as much as merely a snapshot of how I felt about it at a certain point in time.

On match thoughts, I have a whole bunch of lists in notepad form, both Microsoft Notepad files and actual, real life notepads, since I got bored easily in school and would make MOTY lists to pass the time. I don't really do star ratngs, but do jot down shorthand notes on matches and rank them for MOTY lists. Having said that, I do have a really strong memory and can recall most relevant details, dates and thoughts off the top of my head. For example, I was just having a conversation elsewhere and could recall the dates for three random Kofi Kingston matches instantly. Very rarely do I have to actually look up my notes or Google for the date of a match or show or whatever.

Cena vs Lesnar? Although technically that was Extreme Rules I guess.

His schtick is pretty embarrassing, though. It is something that would really turn off a new fan, or an old fan trying to get back into the show. Surely there are better ways to do a comedy character than that? People who say this I think betray a real lack of awareness outside of the "bubble", because in my experience, every casual and non-smark fan I've ever met loves the shit out of Santino.

I'm not wild about him adding the rana as a regular move, to me that worked perfectly as a super rare surprise move that he had to bust out in desperation after not being able to beat Punk for half an hour, you know? Because I mean, John Cena using a huricanrana is...weird. Anyway, on some level I do love the irony of John Cena turning into a MOVEZ guy. One thing I have always wished Cena would do moves-wise is throw more lariats. Cena is a guy who can look really awkward or soft or loose in the ring, but man he can throw some God damn wicked clotheslines. Those things always look nasty.

(tim) Are you not overrating CM Punk's contribution to the indy scene based on his WWE success? Maybe others will disagree, but at the time when Punk was on the indies, yes he was a big 'star' in that context, but he was on the same level as a few other guys like Ki, Joe, and I'd definitely argue Samoa Joe was a bigger name who worked 'on top' for longer, had better matches and even 'drew' more if you think of things like the Kobashi match. I have no issue with Bryan in this sense because he was 'on top' of the indies and the consensus best wrestler in the world from 2006-09. But Punk, purely in terms of his indy career, doesn't seem on the same level. I certainly don't think you can place Punk and Bryan together on a level above everyone else.

Its 2013. They're not breaking anything that wasn't broken a long time ago.

Primo and Epico.

For a really random example, Ryback had this amazingly fun match with Justin Gabriel on a Smackdown sometime around the middle of the year. Gabes got a surprising amount of offense in and they worked a great 'little guy-big guy' match up. I feel like he had a similar match with Kofi on SD as well, where Kofi just kept coming and coming with offense until finally he was stopped and killed dead.

To be fair to them, they are playing it as a joke. It was basically a parody of the TNA "WE HAVE A BIG SURPRISE SUPERSTAR FORMER WORLD CHAMPION COMING!!!" bullshit announcement. I have inordinate interest in TNA becoming an ironic promotion that exists solely to mock it's own boneheaded mistakes. Just use the giant list of fuck ups on the WO Board as a reference, and go nuts.

That is something I could watch over and over and over again. And never get past the first elimination. Once things settle down I'm out, but everything up until then is absolutely golden. The entire pre-match promo, and then "Who was that guy?"

-What he does well: Match pacing. In this regard, I view him as essentially flawless. I can not recall a Tanahashi match that I have thought went too long or did not go long enough. He always hits the sweet spot, and has an uncanny ability to hit is peaks at the right times. He is a great babyface who clearly connects with the audience. His record as a draw is knocked around these parts for not stacking up to the past, but it is clear that New Japan has turned around with him on top, as attendance, revenue, and iPPV numbers can confirm this. He is not an elite draw, but he is a good one, and greatly responsible for New Japan's resurgence. What you think that is worth is up to you, I find it relevant enough to be part of the picture for sure. -What makes him more special than other great wrestlers of his era: A streak of delivering in big match main events that hasn't been matched in many years, if not ever. If you don't like the style, I suppose you can stop reading now. Nothing I say can convince you. The Okada series is the best modern series of matches since Misawa/Kobashi, and i've had serious debates with myself that it may be better. As some may know I review all New Japan shows for my website, and I have rated three of these matches 5-stars this year alone, as I felt they were perfect. Believe it or not, I am a hard marker when it comes to this. I've doled out one other 5-star rating in my entire life to this point. And despite the off handed passive aggressive insults tossed toward me in this thread, i'm no kid and not new to wrestling or puro for that matter. As I pointed out earlier in the thread, a mark of a great worker to me is how many people they carried to the best match of their career. Off the top of my head, I would say definitively that Okada, Karl Anderson, Minoru Suzuki, Yujiro Takahashi, & Tetsuya Naito have had the best match of their career vs Tanahashi, and that's just in the last calendar year. Some would argue Tomohiro Ishii, but I preferred the Ishii match against Shibata. Many would also argue Nakamura, but I prefer modern Nakamura matches to his previous incarnation and I think Nakamura has topped his Tanahashi matches since with other people, but I am the minority. The only other wrestler of this era who consistently delivers in this area is Daniel Bryan, who had match after match in 2006 onward that were easily the best match of this opponents career, including with mediocre workers like Jimmy Rave, Delirious etc. So this is clearly an area that to me sets Tanahashi apart for nearly everybody else in this era. Tanahashi was also instrumental in creating a new superstar in Okada, who has now started to prove himself as a draw on his own. Okada was a complete non entity that flopped badly on the Dome show in 2012 when he returned from excursion, and thanks to his great series of matches with Tanahashi, he's a bonafide star. Tanahashi just did the same thing for Naito in the G1 Finals, and it appears Naito is well on his way to joining Okada. So this ticks the influence box, as does his working style, which is clearly being emulated by many in Japan, much to the likely chagrin of people here who don't dig modern Japan. There are little things. A few months ago, he had the best lumberjack match i've ever seen with Devitt. Wasn't a great match, but i've never enjoyed a lumberjack match ever, except for that one. His G1 performance this year was fantastic. Night after night, delivering great matches with his entire block, when positioned in the main or semi most every night while others got "nights off" by being placed in prelims. Tanahashi was expected to work hard and have his standard of match every night, and delivered. And did it twice on the final day, one being what I thought was a five star draw with Okada, and then the star maker with Naito. All six of the Okada matches are great, and all were worked differently. One was a 30 minute draw, another saw Tanahashi work heel, one saw heavy arm work on Okada to take out the Rainmaker, etc. And I have barely touched on the first part of his career, where he was having great matches that nobody paid attention to because New Japan was struggling. So there you go. Nothing super in depth, but some basic bullet points to show where myself & others are coming from.

To rank their series I'd go, 1. Invasion Attack (4/13) 2. King of Pro Wrestling (10/13) 3. G1 Climax (8/13) 4. Dominion (6/12) 5. New Beginnings (2/12) 6. Tokyo Dome (1/13) I feel like I need to rewatch Invasion Attack to know for sure which of the two I prefer the most. They are the only ones of the series I'd call great though. G1 was good but a clear level below. The other three I thought were OK at times but had massive flaws that I couldn't get past.

On the other hand Rollins has a pretty whiny voice and is the biggest shithead in the Shield. He has the pretty boy look and bumping style, but I think as of this moment, Reigns has more potential as a face with his cool vibe and badass look. People will want to get behind him, the same way they did Batista. Rollins is female bait, but I don't see the wider appeal yet.

Also in the context of HOF voting, there are wrestlers who vote. And for a guy who's career is as removed from the present as Rose, for people who aren't going to go back and watch stuff themselves, his reputation from the time is the only thing they can really go on in appraising his working ability. The same way that we treat historical candidates of whom we have little to no footage.

For Tanahashi I'd use the dreaded "good, not great" cliche. I don't hate him, he has a lot of good matches, is capable of having a great match, but I just don't think he's particularly great.

On the Angle/Eddie/Jericho group of guys, as far as it being on work alone, it's fair to say, and I think Dave pointed it out in every case, that they all only got in after having main event runs in WWE, and reaching that level of stardom was an important push to get them over the line for a lot of people. I think it would be impossible for anyone to get in on work, at least from the US, without having a main event or otherwise notable run as a star somewhere. It's not even becoming a big draw necessarily, but just appearing to have a certain level of stardom. I don't think you can therefore say that those guys got in solely on work. It was work+. I think an interesting test for a 'solely work' guy would have been Danielson IF he didn't go to WWE and reach the main event. But now that he has, he's in the same category as the others. People are putting them in for work, but they also want to see them reach a certain level as well.

I've been thinking about Bryan vs Lesnar a lot, so here is my five second booking to both get to that match, and to run the Bryan angle until Mania. ______________________ Everything with Summerslam and up until Night of Champions stays the same. Night of Champions is Orton vs Bryan and goes the exact same way: Bryan hits the knee and wins, but Referee Scott Armstrong fast counts. Hunter strips Bryan the next night, but instead of holding up the title, he gives it back to Randy. At Battleground, the main event match is Punk vs Ryback & Heyman in some big gimmick to blow off that feud. The Rhodeses win their jobs back vs Rollins & Reigns just the same. Bryan has to beat Ambrose to earn another shot against Randy. Orton is ringside, reluctant stooge Big Show is sent out to stop Bryan, but has his big change of heart and Bryan wins. Hell in a Cell is Orton defending against Bryan in the Cell, with Shawn as the referee. If Bryan loses, he can never get another title shot. A whole bunch of bullshit happens, Shawn is bumped, the Shield runs in, Show chases them off, Hunter gets involved, and then finally Kane returns from the dead to help his tag team partner Bryan, only SWERVE~ as Kane has sold his soul to the Corporation. Orton wins. Survivor Series is a big elimination match with the Corporation team of Orton, The Shield and suit-wearing Libertarian Kane vs Bryan, Big Show, the Rhodeses, and possibly Punk as the fifth guy joining the fight. If not, whatever babyface is around. I really feel like this match is theoretically perfect to re-do the Austin/Bischoff asshole finish, so that is always an option, but after being monumentally screwed on the last PPV I think Bryan should win here. For TLC Bryan aims for personal revenge against Kane, while Show moves into the title picture in his stead vs Orton. Bryan pins Kane, Orton retains against Show. In the New Year, everyone realises that Bryan's only hope for a title shot is a Rumble win, so Hunter tries to stack the deck against him. Bryan foils him by winning ridiculous qualifying matches, but Hunter gets the last laugh by making him #1. In the Rumble itself Bryan goes the distance, fighting off attacks from the Shield and other Corporation members, and finally winning. Orton probably retains against Show again, or possibly Punk. Post-Rumble Hunter has the big meltdown and says that if nobody else can get rid of Bryan, he'll do it himself. Bryan has to put his title shot on the line against Hunter at the PPV. At Elimination Chamber, Bryan pins Hunter clean as a fucking sheet. Later, Orton is forced to defend the WWE Title in the Elimination Chamber (by Vince/Board of Directors/etc.), and the winner ends up being none other than the returning BURRAWCK LESSSSNUR. Next night, Hunter and the Corporation are stunned that a) he lost to Bryan, and Orton lost the title. Brock comes out and they tease a confrontation, before SWERVE~ and Hunter reveals his brand new Corporate Champion. A guy that Daniel Bryan couldn't POSSIBLY beat. Game over, heels win. All of which leads to Wrestlemania 30, Lesnar vs Bryan for the WWE Title. At which point you can either replay Eddie/Lesnar and cement Bryan as he finally wins the title and completes his journey, or have Bryan look like a million bucks in defeat and build to something else down the line. I haven't taken into account how anyone else fits into the Mania card, or around this angle, nor have I really taken into account reality by saying things like "Hunter' and "clean as a fucking sheet" so close together, but there's an outline anyway.

Cheers for the write up on the previous page W2BTD. Like I said I'm really interested in the other perspective on Tanahashi, given it's something I really don't see myself.

For what it's worth, I just watched the most recent Tanahashi vs Okada match, and I liked it a lot. It may be their best match together, although I'd need to watch both it and Invasion Attack again to know for sure. In any case I liked them both a lot. It stayed away from a lot of my biggest issues with Tanahashi - weak offense, leg work that takes forever and goes nowhere, getting all his shit in at the end - which helped. I much prefer it when he works Okada's arm rather than his leg, as Okada tends to sell the arm better and with the Rainmaker it tends to influence the back end of the match much more. Okada, by the way, has improved his selling a metric fuckton and was really good here holding the entire match together with his selling. I never had that moment where I felt like they had stopped the selling part of the match to start running through highspots, like I've had in their other matches. Every time it was teased Okada would bring it right back with the pain. For that reason I think this match is the most complete of the series. In terms of negatives, it was only little niggles that came out in this match, like the ridiculous dance routine that they do to "counter" the Rainmaker approximately a thousand times a match. Fuck that spot. And the fact that they always go so motherfucking long for no reason and lose my attention in the middle third of the match, although to be fair that is less a criticism of Tana and more of puro main events in general. Also, that leg sell troll that Tana did early to establish him as the heel was like the weirdest shit ever, and I'm not sure I liked it. Tana is good at being the subtle heel without obvious and weird shit like that, but if it worked in getting people into Okada's eventual win that much more then whatever.

Again, maybe this is better suited to a Tanahashi thread and not in here as pertains to HOF voting, but W2BTD, forget for a minute the question of HOF voting, or comparing Tanahashi to whatever wrestlers you don't want to compare him to. I'm still, and I doubt I'm the only one, very interested in the actual case for Tana, on his own merits. It may sound like a completely obvious question to you, but to me and others here it isn't, because we don't see what you see in him. So I genuinely want to hear from the pro-side, for my own interest. What do you like about him? What things does he do well? What makes him more special than other great wrestlers of his era? What are his best matches and why? It's not enough to just say "everything" and "all of them" here, as if it is self-explanatory, because it really isn't. If you aren't interested in going through him or wrestling in that much detail, then fine, but this is kind of the place for it, and when you throw statements around that end in "of all time", it's something that wants exploring. And it's fine if you don't want to explore it, but don't blame that on everyone else dismissing your arguments when you haven't actually made any yet.