Shining Wiz

An athletic wrestler with knowledge level X will always be better than an un athletic wrestler with knowledge level X. And I think the wrestler who is a bit more athletic is usually a better performer than the less athletic but slightly smarter wrestler. All the knowledge in the world isn't a guarantee of being a good wrestler just as being the most athletic isn't. But it's usually easier for an athlete to put the pieces together than it is for the knowledgable to be passable in the ring. Otherwise, Heyman would be on this list rather than a manager. All that being said, Lawler had a good understanding of his physical abilities and used his knowledge to accentuate them.

I get not being a huge fan, but not in the top 500 is hyperbole in the extreme. Even if you don't like the hype he gets as the greatest ever, he's got more than enough skills, good matches and performances that, even without his comeback run, he'd be contender for most and possible shoe for some in for a top 100.

Not going to make my list, but a really solid pro. Probably no classics, but probably never in a stinker either. Perfect mid card guy in the territories, and decent upper card guy when the territories starting getting thin on available talent.

I always found him really stiff (movement sense, not hard hitting sense) and wooden. Obviously had a great connection with the crowd, but has never floated my boat. Any suggestions to see if he can win me over?

I always wonder if those matches don't hold up well because they became the building block for a generation or two of really athletic wrestlers to base their style on.

Charles, Chad, Parv and myself did a podcast on the whole project and this was a question we discussed. It will be up Wednesday. Great.....look forward to hearing it.

I can't think of a bad Finlay match, or at least not one that wouldn't have been worse without him. Just on the basis of his WCW and WWE runs I'd consider him based on talent if not great matches.....I'm looking forward to digging into his WOS and other European work.

Avoiding the more well trodden issues some have with Flair, how much (if any) does it hurt him that he stayed around too long and has a relatively long period of not so great matches at the end of his career? I'm throwing this question in here, but it is one that will apply to a lot of candidates I think.

From watching ECW on the network, Scorpio might be someone who falls off my list. Great athlete, superb flyer, but his matches don't seem to come together very well. I'll be curious what I think of his NOAH and WCW work now as I don't think I've watched them since they happened.

+1

How was that the best "shoot" match I've seen? That was awesome.

I'm not sure either, to be honest. I've seen the 7th, and at least one more full match, and I think highlights.

The series with Nikita is really good and heated. All the better when you consider how new Nikita was

Nice recommendation. Garvin isn't someone who would have immediately come to mind for me, but between this and a fun back and forth with Ron Starr I watched earlier today, he seems likely to end up there. Might be the only guy from that era actually tainted by a title win.

Our of curiosity, what Volk Han match did you watch? I ask because I think your criticism of shoot style matches can be valid. What you described - trying to making it look real without hurting your opponent - is why the style is so hard to pull of (and likely why we don't see more of it). However, what makes Volk Han so good in my opinion is that his matches have very few of those moments. In fact, where he gets himself into trouble on occasion is that he gets his opponent into a predicament that is near impossible to get of and has to just release the hold to continue on. That's sort of the opposite of what you are saying though. I agree with OJ too that the "100 match" thing shouldn't be that much of a detriment. Its not like we are talking about a wrestler with just 15 or 20 available matches. Relatively speaking, 100 matches is a large sample size for a wrestler. Add in the fact that the vast majority of those Volk Han matches are featured matches and good matches at that, and he easily as a strong case. Not sure where he'll land on my list exactly, but its certainly in the upper half if not significantly higher. I watched a match with Maeda focused on arm bars and leglocks. Maeda won with a footlock in a weird leg tie up position. I think it might have been Han's RINGS debut. It looked like one good grappler flow rolling with an ok grappler and trading off sub chances. Fine for what it was, just all the times subs are misapplied, no effort when in good position and forgoing more obvious and easier subs to stick with what they are doing bugs me. I also watched Big Nog control him in what I assume was an actual mma fight.

Interesting.......just watched my first Volk match. He is, as has been said, the best shoot style wrestler I've watched. Problem with that is, however......I don't like shoot style very much. The problem with doing "real" moves in a "fake" match is that you can't actually put the move on for real, and you end up looking like you're doing a half speed demonstration. I admit this is likely a bigger issue to me more than most others around, but it's hard to get past.

1. Joshi 2. Lucha 3. WOS 4. Pre-90's japan

How DARE you call me sensitive! I am offended, sir!

For the record, I have no problem with the level of thought that goes into wrestling around here. I've enjoyed it....main reason I've been as active since joining when I had expected to not be. And the group think I referred to isn't necessarily wrong or even all that bad, just something I've noticed in terms of the ups and downs in opinions. I just didn't like the dismissive tone. Then again, may have just read that in on my own. Either way, moral of the story - good board, good peoples, good thoughts, good reads.

Food for thought.

You might be right, but the idea that you can't possibly think Bigelow is great unless you haven't seen wall to wall Tenta or Blackwell just strikes me as closed minded. I don't think thinking Bigelow being better than somebody like Blackwell is some wacky offbeat opinion. One thing some of you guys have to keep in mind, is that some of these guys being mentioned here, particularly Tenta & Henry, are much higher regarded around these parts than in most other circles. And that's not because people haven't watched those guys wrestle. People just like different shit. I'm noticing this (though with a touch less stank on the comments than Ditch put on it) a fair bit in these threads. I think I mentioned it in the KENTA thread, regarding how there appears to be a certain level of group think or mob mentality regarding the opinions of certain wrestlers. I've noticed in several other threads as well. My fandom has existed entirely outside of the bubble of places like PWO, and I think my opinions of who and what I like are going to be pretty different than many floating around here. Not that either is good or bad, just different. What is bad is the dismissal and degredation of people's opinions when they're not in line with the group consensus. I will now step off my soapbox. and go back to being casually hardcore.

Along with Bryan and Cesaro, one the few 'modern' wrestlers likely to make my top 100. Had a run of fantastic performances running from at least 2007 until now, and in a variety of environments, in front of a variety of crowds, and performing a variety of styles. On top of all that, before making the change from Generico to Zayn, he became the most sympathetic babyface in wrestling without ever saying a word. I think the physical ability it takes to reach that point without ever cutting a promo would be impressive in ANY era, but when you consider the emphasis on talking out a story rather than wrestling out one over the past 25 years, it's all the more impressive.

30 minutes in to Robinson/Inoki...much better.

Casual hardcore fans......this is the most hipster comment I've read here yet. That being said, I agree Bigelow is overrated.

Giving this a watch.... First off, good lord Baba is an odd looking human. Possibly the skinniest arms ever. More importantly, and this is a problem very few here will probably have, but as a grappler Robinson's offense is actually hard to watch at points. Why would you purposely give someone your back, then put both hooks in for them? And how is that offensive? I do like his insistence on working the leg, even if Baba is not as consistent selling it. The slingshotting yourself as a defense to a belly to back is.....odd. Wouldn't that hurt you more? And why would that hurt Baba? So, Robinson looks nice and crisp in this match, and while it's not bad, certainly doesn't blow me away or think that either guy is a shoe in.