Cap

Gunner vs Riddle seems very likely. You never know with SCI though.

Yep, I also think that is a completely valid and worth consideration I would ask, in complete earnestness, would you be willing to or inclined to blaze the trail of bringing up other criteria within each category. For example, would you be interested in bringing up how draw or historical impact is important within the "quality" category or how each match in the "importance" category stacks up with regard to quality? Or even if you aren't heading that up, would those types of conversations appeal to you in the process? I would like to see those conversations as a way of highlight not just he obvious ways in which a given match shines, but how we may understand its overall case. I don't want to say too much about the specifics of the ballot just yet, but I can safely say that is a concern we have indirectly (and somewhat directly) discussed just that in this process, particularly with regard to that match and kept in mind in terms of where it ends up. Ultimately much of the organizing of the ballot is theoretical. I sympathize with both the above concerns and it is my (I think our) hope that conversation manifests itself in a way that considers the entire case, gives people flexibility to talk about matches how they want , and considers varied matches side by side (including The Empty Arena Match and 6/3/94 eventually) however people see fit. The categories certainly do draw ones attention to certain types of conversation, but ideally the execution of threads and the conversations themselves don't allow those categories to be absolute boundaries. I am honestly not trying to quell critiques. Actually, I am happy to see these types of concerns voiced like this. It doesn't just help me think about the process (for now and the future), but also it gives me faith that people will approach the deliberation process thoughtfully, not get too bogged down in distractions or dead ends, and ultimately help improve the project long term.

First and foremost, I think it is important to recognize that this is – as all three of us working directly on it agree – a work in progress that can and should evolve over time. The format is not and cannot be perfect in satisfying everyone’s orientation to or expectations of a project like this. We understand that changes will not just be made from year to year, they will be required to maintain meet the goals of the project. I, for one, hope that those who are averse to categories as they are still support the project and help it gain momentum. We have put some time and effort into this initial ballot, but it could get easily derailed and never meet its potential if it isn’t given a chance. Generally speaking, and I can only speak for myself obviously , but I believe the main reason we settled on these categories was functionality. We tried to do region and even played briefly with the idea of time period but wound up with very uneven categories that sort of felt laden with traps that would ultimately penalize certain regions and/or time periods. Objective bracketing of matches seemed to implicitly privilege dominant orientations to or narratives of wrestling that we were hoping to circumvent, at to the extent that we could structurally. It also sort of felt like putting a square peg in a round hole to me, like we were breaking things up into sections because that was objective, knowing that it probably didn’t match the reality of how the matches would be viewed, discussed, and judged. Ultimately, we found the “importance” and “quality” categories to be more functional because they broke matches up in ways that we believed people would naturally compare/contrast matches anyway, while not setting them in a necessary binary that prevented one from voting across categories. The categories (although separate) are not mutually exclusive. A few matches were on both lists and at the end of the day we included them in the section that we felt most voters would generally associate them with regard to their primary case. Intuitively, my gut tells me that these will be talking points with or without the categories and I (perhaps Grimmas and Elliot agree) think acknowledging them outright could help mitigate needless quarrels about which is MORE important by drawing attention instead to productive ways we can functionally compare and contrast matches based on how their cases have discursively evolved over time (while encouraging discussion and votes to be based on the entirety of a match’s case). The cases for these matches aren’t going to be created in a vacuum. They are more or less created in the ways matches have been discussed, hyped, reviewed, and so on in the endless see of wrestling commentary that is out there. Discussion/debate about matches will be nuancing points and determining which matches can and should edge out others for inclusion. It is actually to avoid the “unnecessary choices” between the two criteria while simultaneously acknowledging the reality that “Both types of matches have a worthy place in history, and both are too quickly dismissed by the other side” as Loss points out, that we broke the ballot into these categories. Functionally speaking, you don’t have to choose between draw/importance and quality/artistic merit if you don’t want to. You can disperse your votes among both categories however you see fit. The categories primarily ensure that there is a relative even distribution of matches that are typically associated with different criteria present on the ballot. Granted, we could, once we put the lists together, drop the categories (a discussion I am not necessarily opposed to having), creating one big “televised match” category. However, I am – as of right now – skeptical of artificially dropping distinctions that even those averse to the categories have seemingly acknowledged are discernable and consequential categories for people as they discuss and judge matches. The categories provide a way to potentially prevent the dismissal of one criteria or another from aversely affecting matches who’s primary case is made on said criteria. For those who may be more drawn to one or the other category (I believe a reality of internet wrestling fandom), those voters would not be put in a position to punish matches who’s primary case is made on a criteria they are less interested in or less knowledgeable of. They could simply vote in one category and not have their votes count in the % calculations for inclusion or all together deletion from the ballot for the other. In short, the system was designed to give voters flexibility while acknowledging the organic ways voters are most likely to bracket matches off. Does this draw attention to one criterion and perhaps away from another for certain matches? Yes, that is a risk if not an outright drawback of this system. Will all voers think in this way? Of course not. However, I don’t believe this asks anyone to choose between the two criteria. We sort of had more faith in those who would come to discuss matches for the project and those who might vote, that they could recognize these as somewhat organic (though not objective) categories created from discursive patterns and talking points over time that would naturally inform discussion and judgment and that each match should be considered for all of its noteworthy characteristics and positive and significant contributions. Again, I want to reiterate, this is and will remain a work in progress. What we have done is work to get something off the ground that we can work with.

In addition to everything Grimmas outlined we also have a "angles/segments" section that will function much the same way but be separate in terms of voting. That is, participants will not have to use one of their allotted match votes and will in fact get a smaller set number of votes for the "angles/segments" category. Sorting out what this all might look like has been fun and quite a bit more challenging than I thought. That said, I am pretty proud of/happy with what we have.

I kinda wanna see Styles vs Owens and that is about it. I may throw this on in the background while I work sometime this week, but I am not sure I will even do that. I hope Zayn doesn't lose. I hope Rusev doesn't get shined on too much. I also genuinely hope Jinder wins because I not only don't hate his push like some people do, but the whole thing would feel like such an incredible waste of time if he didn't at least make it one math past a randy orton feud. Other than that, not a ton of interest in this (and I more or less like the individual parts of the show). I have been catching up on recent-ish progress shows and that is far more compelling to me right now.

I was recently in the midst of a mini road trip with a coworker who had a previous career in radio. He informed me that in the early 90s his station had a good relationship with the WWF because of their promotional work. Apparently Jerry Brisco called him up one day and said that the guy that did ring announcing for their house shows in Florida got let go and they asked him if anyone there would be interested. He asked if he could do it and they said "sure". So my buddy worked for a few years in Fort Lauderdale, Miami, and once in a while in other locations doing the ring announcing for all the non-televised matches. Pretty neat. We spent the last hour of our car ride talking about wrestling. He had completely disconnected and had no idea that there were so many promotions running right now. I think he is going to go to a CWF Mid Atlantic show with me sometime.

I wont be surprised if this has run its course. It feels like it is losing a lot of steam. Even with Joe/Brock being the best build they have done in a while and a pretty good match, Brock just isn't bringing what he used to (in terms of hype or match quality). Reigns winning the big rematch at Summer Slam and then building to a match with Cena at Mania while Brock builds to a Mania career blow off with Joe or Strowman or Balor makes the most sense to me. I would just hope that he has enough give-a-shit left to make his final match(es) good. I think it sucks. I am a fan of Brock and I am perhaps holding out hope for something that is no longer possible, but I just think it feels like a wasted opportunity. Just a few years ago Brock was producing high end matches that really stood out and felt special. He has proven he is capable of great matches. They have proven they can build compelling TV around him.

I wouldn't be terribly surprised if he gets the callup after SummerSlam if he doesn't win the strap. Either he wins the belt or he will be sort of out of place. I am imagining NXT is a quick tuneup for him, but I could be wrong.

Lorcan vs Burch was tons of fun, really good, stiff wrestling. I also thought Moon vs Riot was solid stuff. Dane vs Drew was pretty good. It was nothing I would write home about, but it was solid and got the job done. I just felt like this crowd was dead. Lorcan and Burch got a little reaction out of them, but they had to blast each other to get what little they did. The main seemed to have NOTHING behind it in terms of the crowd and that surprised me a little. I don't usually give a shit about the crowd, but it really stood out to me during those two matches and it was sort of distracting to me, oddly.

I am really excited to get to go this year. I keep having work/person stuff pop up for August and so far SCI has avoided any significant scheduling conflicts. I have been looking forward to this since I moved to the region. Seeing Garrini added was exciting. That guy is so hungry right now and makes huge strides every time I see him. Darby Allen vs Joey Janela is my pick for first round match of the night. That has the potential to be a special kind of crazy. I've had a chance to see both men live this summer and actually felt like they both are really live performers. I like both on the whole, but there is something about they way they commit to everything they do that makes them stand out a bit more when you are in the room. An under the radar guy I am looking forward to seeing is Jason Kincaid. Part of it is my WV homerism, but he is another guy I have seen live a few times now and he always exceeds expectations. He is so deceptively athletic that it somehow surprises me every time and the surprise is more jarring in a live setting somehow. Even with his recent surge I think he largely underappreciated to an extent.

Wasn't it Road Dog that called Hunter a "Hall of Fame Human Being" for his DVD? That almost made me throw up in my mouth.

Finally getting around to some of Styles hyped NJPW stuff. Just watched this today and agree with the sentiments here. It was a quite good match, but I am not sure it is near great. I gave it 4. It is athletically impressive, especially some of Okada's offense, but never hits the next level of urgency and intensity that would set it apart. I like both men a lot and I do think Styles brings another layer to Okada's matches that is somewhat fun, but I am not sure they are really the optimal dance partners. Still... real good match.

I agree that they should have stayed together a little longer (at least). It seems like just when tag divisions get some momentum they start breaking people up. Ohh well.... they are broken up now. Neither of them are particularly interesting as singles guys to me.

I am really upset with myself for not going to this one (too tired, too busy, too much road recently) as it seems like it was probably best experienced live. That said, I loved it on screen. The story was one they have built for some time, with Nick needing to dig into his darker, more sadistic background to beat the insurmountable odds. Him getting the jump on Lee was also a great move for the story of the match, hitting two cutters in the first 30-45 seconds of the match and knocking Lee off his game. They used the no holds barred stip well. I love how they build how far Richards is willing to go throughout the match, how he just kept getting a little grittier and how Lee keeps adapting or overcoming whatever plunder Richards was willing to throw. I think both men came out better for it in that regard. My favorite example was when Richards is hitting him with double trashcan lids and you can see Lee wince under one of them and then just snap back with a brutal kick to the dome. Everything looked stiff, but not malice, just that they were all in on making this special. I also love that they establish mutual respect between the two as Richards doesn’t win the belt, but he wins Lee’s respect down the homestretch. That was another way of getting a sort of victory for everyone. I didn’t like how finisher heavy they went for Richards. He hit 4 cutters, one on a chair and couldn’t finish Lee. In a way they are bordering on making Lee invincible (a la Roman Reigns at the height of his face push) and it might be the only kind of nitpick I have about the title run. I get it and I think it is a crowd pleaser and it can work, but sometimes that little element just isn't for me especially when it makes me feel like someone isn't vulnerable or beatable. I also thought the match was well executed but didn’t have the tightness or consistent urgency down the stretch. Overall though, I loved the match and thought it was probably Richards best work and another notch in the belt for Lee. ****1/4

Most of these are probably covered in what you already sent him, but some matches I would rec.... Shinsuke Nakamura vs Sami Zayn - NXT - 4/1/2016 - WWE Network Kenny Omega vs Tetsuya Naito - NJPW - 8/13/2016 - NJ World (Maybe youtube or dailymotion) Brian Kendrick vs Kota Ibushi - CWC - 8/31/2016 - WWE Network The Revival vs DIY (2/3 Falls) - NXT - 11/19/2016 - WWE Network Trevor Lee vs Brad Attitude - CWF - 12/30/2016 - Youtube Kenny Omega vs Kazuchika Okada - NJPW - 1/4/2017 - NJ World (Maybe youtube or dailymotion) Zack Sabre Jr vs Timothy Tatcher - Evovle - 2/25/2017 - Floslam Walter vs David Starr - WXW - 3/10/2017 - FloSlam Walter vs Ilja Dragunov - WXW - 3/12/2017 - FloSlam Trevor Lee vs Chip Day - CWF - 3/25/2017 - Youtube Katsuyori Shibata vs Kazuchika Okada - NJPW - 4/9/2017 - NJ World (Maybe youtube or dailymotion) Jeff Cobb vs Matt Riddle - Progress - 5/28/2017 - Progress on Demand Trevor Lee vs Michael Elgin - CWF - 6/3/2017 (air date is later) - youtube

Nice. Summer SIzzler is always awesome. I have had a pretty good summer of indy wrestling so far: Modern Vintange/CWF Summer Heat, AIW JLIT, Evolve 88. I will likely hit up a few more CWF shows this summer and I have tickets to the SCI. Moving from Utah to NC last year has been great for my attendance to wrestling shows.

That would be hearbreaking to me. I hope that isn't the case.

I loved FPW Returns so much. I still have it and my ps2 hooked up in the bedroom. I think I am going to finally upgrade to a PS4 at the end of summer and get the new 2k game and eventually this.

I am kind of hoping they are taking the build they had and build something bigger. Reigns wins the title at SS and frees Brock up to slow burn something with Joe that comes to a head at Mania. They we get the longer match they deserve to have.

Good solid fun. I haven't watched the ambulance match yet, but the rest of it was good. I likely wont revisit the show as a whole or anything, but it was worth my time.

Lots of little things bothered me about this, but it was by no means a bad match. They were physical. It was gritty. Joe delivered the intensity early on and both men kept it up for the most part. The crowd didn't bite quite as hard on the coquida clutch as I think they thought. They kept Joe looking pretty good in defeat, but having Brock just pop off an F5 and a pin after spending time in the cc seemed odd to me. I like the idea that it is a sort of hybrid between a flash finish and a finsher-finish, but it was eh in the moment. I'll give them credit for trying and really thinking about what they were doing. I think they booked themselves into somewhat of a corner. The build with this was so good that it demanded something with substance, but at the same time they seem to have made other plans. I said it in the ppv thread, they built to a Brock Circa '12-'15 type match and we got Brock '16-'17. This was good and it could have (should have) been epic. Maybe they will get another shot at it after Brock drops the belt to Reigns. ***3/4

The build was for something more than a Brock match. They didn't deliver. They at least built to a brock match circa '12-'15. I keep assuming we will eventually get that again, but maybe that just isn't the case.

Brock/Joe was fun for what it was. I am somewhat overly critical of I think. There were little nitpicky things that bothered me, but aren't worth harping on. I am not disappointment really, but I am somewhat guarded. If that is the last time they wrestle it seems like they partially wasted the best build they have executed in a long while. If there is still meat on the bone for this feud down the road (seems quite possible), I am pretty good with all this. I am getting a little tired of Brock's offense being reduced to suplexes though. They need to return him to form, let him have some longer matches.

Very good tag match, especially since they overcame what appeared to be a few miscommunications. Last few minutes were great. Fuck.... fuck... fuck... that arm spot was bonkers. These two are going in hard on one another. Regardless of what happens here, I hope this feud continues.

They really should do something like this. With SOOOOOO much tv time and SOOOO much talent, this would be a way to use their resources effectively. I know it isn't going to happen, but I would far prefer this to the rumble as a way to determine a number one contender for Mania.