Sidebottom

I've enjoyed reading it since 1996. I put Fin Martin up in the top 5 wrestling opinions I'm interested in hearing.

Excitement and skill in wrestling: wrestlers putting on a good show. I wasn't suggesting cries of an objective standard. There is a huge difference between rating entertainment and sport.

Summerslam 1995 was the best PPV they had run in years, it was superb. Don't forget the women's match and Kid / Hakushi. Both were great.

Sorry, but the idea of rating an actual sporting contest is stupid. If somebody won via a KO in ten seconds, does that make it a zero star fight? You're not actually being series, right? http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/30453/the-10-greatest-world-series-games http://www.mensfitness.com/life/sports/10-most-memorable-mlb-world-series-wins http://www.sportingnews.com/mlb/story/2012-10-23/greatest-world-series-yankees-dodgers-reds-red-sox-mets-braves-twins I could literally post another 100 links to people rating the Greatest WS Games of All-Time... without putting much effort into finding those 100. We could do the same with most every major sporting event. In fact, people in the first *two days* of this season's NBA were talking about how many really good games there were. People do it all the time. I'm 100% confident that you "rate" sporting events as well on some level. Of course I do. An exciting football match is easy to spot over a boring match. Basketball, baseball etc. But "excitement" doesn't always correlate to skill. So are we basing on excitement or skill? What is one star and what is five? I'm into chess for example. I can watch a chess match between two great players working each other into a stalemate where nothing of consequence happens, but where both are so good at their game they don't move an inch. Is that good or bad play from the players in terms of being rated? In MMA, if we saw an amazing looking KO due to somebody's incompetence or lack of concentration does that get five stars? But if the athlete were more skilled to avoid contact, or to give the knowledge to the opponent that the strike would not be effective in the same scenario and therefore would not attempt the blow (resulting in a more "boring" fight despite there being an increased skill level by both), would that garner one star? I think written word is the true friend of sports, not numbers.

I think Barrett has such a great natural charisma and I'd like to see him do more. I don't believe it's too late for him to be credible again, WWE are great at spinning its history. JBL would be a fantastic example of this.

Sorry, but the idea of rating an actual sporting contest is stupid. If somebody won via a KO in ten seconds, does that make it a zero star fight?

In the Hardcore Diaries, Foley states that the violent match proposed for Backlash 2004 was shot down by "somebody". He then says that "somebody" didn't mind the match style when it was benefiting him. The only other I remember Foley having a pop at HHH was when Lillian Garcia helped the WWE out by coming to Raw to do the announcing when they were in a tough spot, and HHH compared her to a horse on air. He said it was spiteful and in poor taste, which is perhaps fair enough if it bothered Lillian and wasn't some sort of private joke she got a kick out of.

That Mark Henry match was rotten, it sure doesn't belong with the other matches you quoted which were all excellent. The Mark Henry match would have been better if it happened 5 years later.

He was on Barbed Wire City as well and has done various other shoot DVD appearances.

There are a few ECW timelines I'd like to buy that would seem feasible. Spike Dudley 1998, Impact Players 1999/2000, Tommy Dreamer 1995 would go down a treat with me.

Excellent stuff Loss.

There's a strong chance it will be shit. Bret, Warrior, Foley, Flair and others have proved that if you're out of the WWE eye for too long, the reactions are not going to be great in your average audience.

But by 2005, the video sales money they badly needed would have turned into illegal downloads.

Sting in 2014 WWE TV is a hard one. I envisioned him hanging in the rafters at Post Mania Raw coming down to save DB on a crusade against injustice leading to a match with HHH. That's a match and a role I'd like. Then he could position himself as an authority figure down the line.

He has done loads. He also wrote a big book when he had more senses about him. That trailer didn't entice me at all. When something needs to rely on a hook like that, unless it delivers, it's going to fall flat. Wanting to buy a DVD for a single story which will no doubt be written about on the Internet in five minutes isn't going to work for me. Chances are as others have said, it will be that Pat hit on him years ago. Big whoop.

To me, this is like them watching the E&C-Hardys match from No Mercy '99 and their takeaway being "WOW WE NEED TO PUT THE BELT ON EDGE BY NEXT SUMMER, HE'D BE A GREAT FACE AGAINST HUNTER". The reality is so far removed from your example it's not even funny. Roman has been strongly positioned on television for over a year and largely protected. Edge in late 1999 was a nobody on the roster. You're not about to see Roman win the IC title on a house show and lose it the next day as a last minute gimmick to enhance the storyline arc of a PPV...

Kane can really be the kiss of death of a storyline. Bryan really should have been booked with somebody else coming out of the gate...

Can you give us some details? On Pipers (rubbish) podcast, he said of the confrontation he had with Nash backstage in WCW. Piper said Nash didn't hit him and Piper took him down. Nash who has spoken about this for years got angry as he claims he slapped Piper to the floor. Nash went on Twitter and called Piper on it, calling him a bitch and an old man etc, stated that Eric, Hulk and Kid were there to see what really happened. Then Kid went on Twitter and said it breaks his heart to speak ill of Piper, but he was talking shit. Piper telephoned Nash and the two made up. It looks like Kev is going on Pipers podcast.

Well said Loss, some forums are unbearable to read due to the buddy buddy bull shit and vomit inducing back patting. As for the original question, it's such a subjective thing. Some of the greatest matches I have seen come from Japan, yet my favourite style of wrestling is American by a country mile. For every great Japanese match I have ever watched, I could probably think of 10 American ones to counter it. By the time I have run out of Japanese matches to name, I'd still have a lot of American ones left in the hat. Just enjoy everything for what it is.

As is Keiji Muto's. Insane to think two of the all time greats had one of the best years of their careers in 2001 on other sides of the world, both with fucked up knees.

This sort of stuff bores me to tears now. It's the same stories being told over and over and over just from different talking heads now. It's all filmed in the same way too. I stopped watching at the obligatory death match chapter.

Nope.

OR she thought you might turn gay... haha

1992 babyface Bret Hart and 1992 sicko Jake Roberts would have been a delight. The two never went at it at any point.

Just watched a cracking match between Bret and Bad news Brown from Wrestlefest 88 when Bret was still in the Hart Foundation. The crowd was super into Bret the whole way. Bret moved far more fluid than he did in the 90's even, a pleasure to watch.