BillThompson

I like his dickish heel stuff too, for the record.

I don't think Chikara is doing that though, they are presenting their universe as very real. Not buying into that universe on face value is a reasonable and understandable response. But, if you're looking for a promotion that keeps kayfabe alive look no further than Chikara, because a character dying and being brought back to life is extreme kayfabe to that universe.

The more I watch of Angle's 2000+ run (I'm at the end of 2001 presently) the more he moves up my rankings. I'll port over the reviews from my blog at some point, and I'll add in some thoughts on matches that didn't make the blog, but I really believe more than ever that he was a great storyteller who doesn't get any credit for that aspect of his skillset.

Not in my book, less than Davey and way less than Owen.

I'll echo Dylan's thoughts. It's hard to give Shawn leeway for the "environment of the WWF" at the time when, off the top of my head, Bret, Owen, and Davey Boy were all able to produce far more high end matches in that same environment.

I separate the art from the artist. What an artist does in real life certainly informs their art, and that has to be taken into account. At the same time an piece of art can be taken and viewed as something separate from the artist's real life proclivities. Basically, it doesn't effect me one way or the other, because I can enjoy a Benoit/Invader match and still recognize they are murdering sacks of shit.

Won't make my list. He's a guy I find actively bad, and everything he does in the ring annoys me to one extent or another.

Thanks for the info. I know it's not a big deal to some, but I'm a stickler for card name, promotion, date, arena, and wrestler names.

I'm at the point in my Network PPV rewatch project where the invasion has just begun. It is incredibly bungled right from the start, and really outside of the way they manage to turn Angle face, and the influx of new talent, it's pretty much been a disaster so far. Having Steph be the figurehead of ECW instead of Paul Heyman, jobbing out the majority of the WCW/ECW talent to WWF guys, and even when the WWF guys do lose they manage to destroy the WCW/ECW guys post match most of the time, and so on and so forth. It's all so bad, and a perfect example of how not to book an invasion angle. Funnily enough I'm sure if one asked Vince or Stephanie they would say the way they did the angle was perfection.

Agree with that, Gibson was certainly competent, often good, and occasionally great.

That it was a great 7 minutes match. Is that the street fight where Windham and Arn are the Horseman? I do remember it being pretty great. I'm not writing off short matches by any measure, I get a lot out of short matches. But, there's a part of me that can't get past the idea that a five minute match is only a smidgen of what could have been presented. The short film comparison doesn't really work for me either, as with a short film you know that's what you're getting before you get it, which isn't the case with a short match.

It's not, but I think the difference here may be that while Booker was always a good to great wrestler Morton is one of the best of all time. It's kind of like being on the same team as Babe Ruth, Michael Jordan, or Wayne Gretzky; you can be pretty darn good but you're still going to be overshadowed because of the terrific work of the other guy.

The selling that you are saying is present I didn't find to be present at all. Shawn sold the leg for a very small time, basically when Razor was working on it, then he immediately forgot about it and flew around the ring for the rest of the match as if Razor had never touched his leg. It undermined Razor's work, and the match as a whole. But yeah, to each their own, I'm the first person to espouse the subjectivity of pro wrestling so I'm perfectly happy with any opinion that opposes mine.

I think it is deniable, his terrible performance in that ladder match being one of the many reasons why it is deniable.

That's hard to peg down, but she's fashioned a lot like a monster type wrestler. She's not strong like Kong, or intimidating like Havok, but she's a mauler who comes and comes and comes and never gives up. She's relentless and it carries over in her wrestling, but I also find her to be very adept at selling, timing, and a host of other intangibles.

This, I agree with.

AAA wise I would definitely recommend watching some Chessman. For the women to check out I say Sasha Banks, Emma, Heidi Lovelace, LuFisto, and Cheerleader Melissa. Not sure if any of them would make your list, or my year end list, but they are worth a look.

I think you've already seen mine, but really there aren't many people outside of a few female wrestlers I would consider pointing you towards because your list covers a lot of ground.

Yeah, that's my issue. Shamrock/Owen from Fully Loaded '98 is a great example. I love that match, and though it has a flawed ending with a few more minutes it easily would have been an all-time great match. But, at just a shade over five minutes I don't think I can say more than it's a really good match with a truly great Owen performance that I love.

I loved it, but I found it interesting that, unless I missed it, Austin completely sidestepped how badly the exchanging of the blade and setting up of the blade job was bungled by Hebner.

No

Unfortunately I'm not sure many promoters/bookers understand that today. This isn't a get off my lawn thing either, rather I don't think promoters/bookers at any level are willing to put forth the sort of effort that conditioning requires. If something isn't getting over right away it's quickly abandoned, or instead of conditioning they force something they want upon the viewer without any regard for teaching the viewer to like that thing.

I was watching Verne Gagne versus Red Bastien from the Chicago Film Archives today and I got to thinking about match length and a match being great. I'm not the biggest great match guy, it's not something I hold as vital to my perception of a wrestler. But, I made my blog about great matches because that's what I want to write about and I feel it will help keep my blog fairly positive which is a big deal to me for reasons related to my other writing. Either way, the reason I bring up match length is because I've always had this idea that a match has to be at least over ten minutes to truly be a great match. A sub ten minute match can be really good and have great work contained within, but it lacks something from not reaching that ten minute mark. I guess I'm just looking for thoughts on match length and how it effects your take on a given match, wrestler, wrestling in general, and so on and so forth.

Do we have any idea of the promotion and a date for Verne versus Bastien?

I know that this is from September 16, 1986, in WWC, and the final of a tournament for the Television Championship. However, can anyone, like El Boricua, tell me what card this is from, or at the very least what arena?