Cap

I am so glad Pillman finished ahead of Jericho.

Good to see the last three, especially Gordy and Dynamite. Dynamite was one of my first favorite wrestlers as I moved from being a fan into being super-dork-fan. That was of course due in part to a lot of the hype around him and especially his match with Tiger Mask. However, I really like him more on rewatch than a lot of people. He is so crisp and aggressive (perhaps TOO much so). But that sort of urgency is really important to me and I think it makes even his bad matches better. His later stuff always disappointing me, but whenever I catch his earlier matches I usually enjoy them. Good tag wrestler, good singles wrestler, hybrid style, highly influential. Gordy on the other hand is someone I came to really late and I find him almost mesmerizing. The way he moves for his size. His selling and bumping always impressed me. If anything, I always wanted more Terry offense. I always thought that if Gordy acted more like a monster and balanced that a little bit better with his bumping and he fit politically he could have had a really fun NWA title run. He did his job really well most of the time though.

This! I love me some Sid Vicious (my personal favorite of his names) and usually enjoy watching him. I am not going to say he is great or even good really, but I do think he is better than the general narrative frames him. He worked pretty hard and was very limited, but when someone really worked with him and played to his strengths he wasn't bad. I honestly think he was asked to do far too much and the people in charge were far too often not conscious of his limitations. He has absolutely elite presence and brings a lot to my general enjoyment of wrestling by being fucking giant crazy person.

I like the topic, but I don't know that one is better than the other, honestly. If you are talking about them from these two guys I think the chops may JUST edge out the punches in terms of the different readings and meanings registered, but the punches sort of pick with the diverse number different punches that add their own layers. As discussed earlier, Flairs chops come throughout the match in a variety of ways and they serve multiple purposes. I am particularly drawn to how good they are at getting over opponents (JVK #4) and the chop as a way of moving into a comeback (#5 and 7). I would add (or maybe group in with the latter two) that one of the chop's must interesting functions is that change of pace. It can reset a match that has started to lag or lose direction. It can pick up the pace or slow down the pace. It can be a way for him to turn the tides for himself or his opponent weather he is heel or face. All this of course depends on how he throws them, where he throws them, and how he and his opponent respond to one anther after each. That ability to reset and transition is one of the things I value most in wrestling. Sometimes a match gets off to a rough start and two people are just off or the pace never got set and the great ones can fix that. Flair was definitely able to do that and part of it was how well he was able to use the simple move so strategically. As much as I love the 2000s indy boom, I do feel like that point was missed when many of those guys were adopting chops early. Another thing to consider is that many of those folks seemed more influenced by Kobashi's use of chops than flairs (exception being Am Dragon and how he would use chops in a match). That really demonstrates the point that the way Flair used chops gave them a great deal of depth. Lawler's punches have a similar but different set of strengths I think. I recently started getting into Lawler in Memphis so my ideas aren't really fully formed on his punches, but over about a month or so I went from kind of rolling my eyes at Lawler and his minimalist offense to being a really big fan. He won me over through the course of watching lots of matches, particularly the higher end stuff. For me though, it was the Bam Bam match that really got me with him. Even though I think at least two of the Dundee matches were better, The Bam Bam match might be the best example of how incredibly diverse Lawler's punches are in terms of function and meaning. Of course he throws multiples kinds of punches (we know this) and that gives him some advantages over the chop (at best it isn't thrown half as many different ways). The punches though - as far as meaning and different ways of reading them - tend to lend themselves to the brawling psychology. Perhaps that is obvious but if you think about the different things the punches do I think they play more into producing a great brawl, while the chops probably do a little more in a longer NWA championship style match. For example (and this is my limited knowledge of Lawler), Chops.... 1) Help get the opponent over through no selling or through surviving those famous Lawler punches 2) Get the audience amped for his comebacks 3) Get blood and in turn creating some of those visuals that are often important to the brawl 4) Target blood, adding a viciousness to a good brawl and forwarding more brawl specific psychology 5) Break noses, again the psychology of a brawl. If you want your opponent to have trouble breathing and get some of that exhaustion you get after 45 minutes of a longer match, one way to do that is target the nose. I always thought - even when it isn't explicitly discussed - that was part of the psychology of a brawl 6) Finish fights - a perfectly placed and timed punch always sort of seems like a reasonable ending in these contexts. 7) Bring out the chicken shit in the heel - begging off the strike itself. 8) Inviting the sprint slugfest. Obviously this is very similar to the point about inviting the chop exchange, but once again I think the slug fest is a different thing. The chop fest makes more sense in a longer match as a punctuation or transition point. The slug fest can do that but I tend to think of it more often than not like the abandoning of game plans and the throwing of bombs. It can manifest itself quite differently too. 9) Impact on a worked limb. I am sure people more familiar with Lawler's work could name a few more. The point is, I think it probably does about as many things as Flair's chop (the count is actually completely irrelevant to me), but each means more within the context of what they are trying to produce. Each gains layers of meaning and wrinkles when they are used in context. Each can serve unique and interesting roles out of context too. Lawler's punches are really maximized in a brawl setting, but when he isn't facing a brawler they serve different purposes (maybe more limiting, maybe not). For example, Lawler was so good at using 10 different kinds of punches to the point where they don't feel like a singular move too, which really helps him get the most out of his "punch" in a given match. However, in some cases I felt his "limitation" stood out a bit more if he was wrestling someone using a more diverse offense. Not all the time, but sometimes. This isn't to say that Flair's chops don't work well in a brawl. They most certainly do as we saw countless times, but I don't think they have the depth Lawler's punches do in that setting and I think Lawler's punches lose some depth when he is taken out of that brawling setting and into a more 80s wrestling match. Ultimately, I think it is more interesting to look at how each fits within the style and what each can do than to pick one. I get the point, but picking kind of feels like picking between bands from different genres to me. Right now I would probably pick Lawler's punch, but that is because I am pretty into brawls right now and I watched a punch of Lawler recently. A month ago it would have been Flair's chops. A month from now it might be Flair's chops again. Plus, since Lawler uses 20+ different kinds of punches it is kind of like comparing Flair's one more to Lawler's entire offense (which I don't buy is all that limited). Both are interesting case studies for the value of minimalism in one's offense and attention to storytelling, masters classes in the topic really. As a side, I think that Flair vs Lawler match from 8/14/82 is probably the best example of how versatile both can be in the right matchup.

Sami and Cesaro landing side by side seems pretty appropriate to me. I think they are both guys with pretty legit cases for the list, but I can understand them being here (or even falling off). I honestly go back and forth on who I think is better. They have gone back and forth a lot in terms of skill and output and it has been really fun to watch along the way.

Aside from the high points, I have really liked Garvin as a studio worker in general. He always had that aura of a guy who was about to wreck some poor guy off the streets, but the matches remained entertaining and - more importantly - meaningful. I also watched a few of his matches with Savage not too long ago and really liked them. They worked well together and I think it highlighted that there was a method to his pace and style - it wasn't just blandness.

I get that Nak is not everyone's cup of tea, but I actually don't think he gets enough credit for his pre-personality-boom stuff. I thought he was quite good, if a little bland. His blandness doesn't really stand out that much to me, especially in the mid to late 2000s. His match with Brock was really fun. The first Nakamura match ever saw was his 2004 match with Bob Sapp. I got the show dvd on a whim probably a year or so after it happened. i came away thinking "Holy cow, Nakamura is good". I am not saying it is a classic, but he worked Bob Sapp so well and I thought both men wound up looking pretty good. His whole more recent stuff is absolutely fantastic to me. I get that he takes nights off and he is also probably the worst guy to bring in for a one off on an indy show because the match inevitably gets off the rails with whoever he is going against trying to play off his mannerisms so much (the match is usually at least 1/3rd cheap pops). That said, his high end stuff is just great. Both matches with Okada from the last two G-1s are awesome to me (much better than either man vs Tanahashi as far as I am concerned). I still believe the Ibushi match is aces. The La Sombra match from 2013 was a really well put together match with tons of drama and intensity. The recent Styles match was really good (not elite, but it delivered). I am also super high on the Zayn match, which I think is probably the match of the year so far for me. All told, there probably isn't anyone I would be more confident in betting on to have a 4.75-5 star match in a big spot right now. Even if you just took him from like 2013 to now, I am not sure many people have more high end matches in that amount of time. Pretty elite in my eyes.

I love Bob Backlund, but on the average backlund match I just get frustrated by how little the heel works on top in his matches. I like those Hansen matches, particularly the one 9/30/80 in japan, but I always find myself wanting more fired up Backlund comebacks than I get. I really think he is one of the most underappreciated guys overall though, not here perhaps, but in general and even by the WWE and their history machine.

Chicana and Nakamura are two of my personal favorites. They stand out among their peers to me and I tend to find a lot more enjoyment in their matches and love what they do to make a match great, ergo I am a lot higher on their matches and them as overall wrestlers as others I think. I too am a little surprised by Nakamura is below tanahashi, but I am not surprised he is here. I noticed a general backlash against the flood of love for him coming out of his 2015 performances as people really started to take a close look beyond the high points. Seems like a reasonable spot overall.

I am sort of in the camp that can watch Benoit if he is on a show I am watching or something like that, but doesn't really goo looking for Benoit matches anymore. I probably sat down once or twice since the whole thing to actually watch a Benoit match or matches. For me, like many, it isn't so much that I can't watch someone who know did something so terrible, it is that his career is such a clear and declarative reminder of what this business can be and what it can do to the human mind and body. He is - for this generation and maybe ever - the most glaring example of the dangers as they extend well beyond self harm. Other wrestler's families have been abused and have suffered, but Benoit's actions - as the logical extension of all that - highlight it all. To me, and I know people feel differently about this, there are obviously degrees when it comes to crime. Not all crime is created equal and not all outrage is equal, but I put sexual assault very close to murder. In turn, I do find isolating Benoit a little odd, but I get it. He was such a symbol for hardcore and internet fans for so long. For me, I wasn't into the E at all really at the time. I kept an eye on a few people, but I didn't watch regularly. However, I was really excited because he was set up to face Punk at the next ECW ppv (if I remember correctly) and I was going to make sure to see that. It is absolutely a different case than others, but I do think the more moral objection to Benoit is not proportionate to the general moral outrage people tend to express about other wrestlers. And I am not blaming anyone for that. It makes a ton of sense. Personally, I don't seek out stories about wrestlers and their shitty behavior. I don't put my head in the sand, but I never go looking for it. I don't watch wrestling for moral direction. I think it is because generally there is a distinction between what we watch and appreciate and the people who put on the show that most wrestling fans implicitly understand and accept. Sometimes, as is the case with Benoit, it is really hard to maintain that distinction though. Ultimately, for me it is a just a complex thing that is hard to really put into words. I am not saying I am personally stressed by this or feel hardship at all. It is just hard to articulate how I feel about it. I can watch Benoit matches, but what he did certainly did affect my orientation to and my desire to watch him.

I think Cena matches will hold up better over time too. Even The Rock's better matches don't hold up quite as well for me at least. I was never a huge fan, but I just never have a desire to watch Rock matches.

Yeah but the rock promo would just be a string of dick jokes that ended with him implying anyone who didn't vote for him must be gay.

The whole list feels like it has a little pep in its step now. Well played putting HHH in the KENTA picture. Sting finishing a little higher feels somehow like a very small degree of justice for that shitshow at last year's mania. Ok, enough about HHH. That is a great point about Chigusa in the notes. She has an incredibly fun and impressive career, and i really only have started sampling her work. Jaguar Yokoda is someone I am really excited to get to know more about soon, same with Pirata. We are really into the business end of the list.

He convinced no one that he was the greatest wrestler ever though.... ergo, he is no Big Poppa Pump.

I am pleasantly surprised with how high Koji landed. I love him, but I feel like people in general aren't as high as I am on him. Dynamite Kansai was another one I was pretty happy about getting a good spot. Koji would have absolutely made my 100, easy and Dynamite probably would have as well. .... then I saw they both fell behind...... him.........

I second this....

Thez falling one spot behind Lugar is great... but is anything really funnier than The Big Bad Booty Daddy getting a number one vote. Being somewhat sympathetic to the defense of Steiner as #1, the pick itself might be the most pro wrestling thing to happen during this whole thing. This seems a really reasonable place for Inoki. That picture though...

ahhh... just got home and checked... so much happend. Brody and Luger fall and HHH still lingers, still mocking us with his absence. Vilano and Perro DOWN! The best bleeder in the history of wrestling TOMMY RICH is down. ugh! This is getting REAL.

I really thought Tracy might sneak into the top 100. I love that guy. Every time I pop on some Smokey Mountain Wrestling i say "Fuck, Tracy Smothers is awesome" at least once... even when he isn't on the show. I am happy to see Bam Bam here. I kind of figured he would be lower. His Texas Death Match with Lawler is probably my favorite Memphis match (not the best, but my favorite). His career seems to be full of gems like that.

Brody, HHH, then Luger... I am an optimist.

Lets just transport Necro to peak Memphis and Continental. Life isnt fair. Omg YES! Necro in BattlARTS, ECW, and Puerto Rico in '98-2000. Assuming that the footage would be available. That's an easy one, though. Necro as a lucha brawler speaks for itself, but I can never get past him in PR. I was just thinking that as I read. Necro in PR would be outstanding. Necro vs Sangre Chicana has been on my dream match list, but Necro in some of those bloody PR brawls (of which I really have a relatively limited knowledge) would be AMAZING. Necro/Colon vs The Sheephearders.

Lets just transport Necro to peak Memphis and Continental. Life isnt fair. Omg YES!

I think someone said it on a podcast, but there is no one I can think of that I DON'T want to see face Necro Butcher. Mark Henry vs Necro Butcher - Yes Please Scott Steiner vs Necro Butcher - Oh my god... YES! Giant Baba vs Necro Butcher - The gods were cruel for denying us this joy Verne Gagne vs Necro Butcher - WHY NOT?! Necro Butcher vs MS-1 - That one isn't even funny it is just amazing sounding. HHH vs Necro Buthcer - I'd pay for that! So much fun.

Did taker get a #1 vote? It wouldn't be nearly as fulfilling/shocking as this, but it would still surprise me a little.

If you don't have a healthy fear of Scott Steiner there is a solid chance that you might actually be Scott Steiner