Cap

That is probably true. I haven't really sought out a lot and haven't seen anything from his signature run in years. I am pulling from a real hodgepodge of his work when I think of him, so I probably need to give him a more thorough look.

I don't care about guys working safe. To me, that's an issue between workers and has little to do with my experience as a viewer. I completely understand why it's relevant to wrestlers when they talk about who's good, and I find that kind of analysis interesting in its own way. It's just not something I thought about for one second in the context of this project. Makes sense. I think sort of along these lines. If anything I tend to be bias toward stiffness as bringing a rawness to a match (Hansen, Brock, Super Dragon, Joe, Ki, Most of AJ and AJW in the 90s, Necro Butcher). As for HHH, I talked about him a bit. I do NOT think he is great at all, but I tend to think of him in this context because of matches cited mostly by others and because his list of matches that I have (or would have) at 4+ stars is probably disproportionate to how I feel about him as a wrestler on the whole. Another case for me that sort of makes sense in a different way for me is HBK. I actively didn't like HBK for a while. Some of that was having the return most recent in my mind; some of that was push-back against the WWE's narrative, but I didn't care for him. When I started rating matches, seeing him in the AWA, and revisiting some of his higher points as IC and WWF champ I really couldn't deny the output to the point where I like him a lot more now even though my thoughts on the details of how he wrestles didn't really change much. The AWA stuff expanded my view of his input a little. He still isn't one of my favorites. he probably wouldn't make my top 100, but he has a pretty impressive list of 4+star matches and a pretty diverse set of opponents, a few I even list among some of my personal favorites. His output made me like him more even though my general feeling about his input changed very little.

yeah, Snuka at 13 blew me away. I guess I can see his appeal, particularly in the time period. I honestly always kind of grouped him in with Warrior and Goldberg as guys with a ton of presence and charisma but who were more often than not just not very good in the ring, though they all had their moments. I can think of a few matches for each I actively like. I personally go back and forth on Goldberg. I think if he wasn't such a baby about his character he could have been pretty good.

Sure... of course his record as perfect is bull shit, but that isn't the point. My guess is that on the continuum he would fall somewhere "safer" or "less painful" than your average All Japan match in the 90s. I am just curious if that is something anyone thinks about when thinking about what constitutes a great wrestler, or if it even might be something sort of implicit in their thinking.

Sort of a tangential point, but does the issue of safety play into anyone's thinking, particularly in this discussion of Kobashi vs Hart? Hart has said numerous times he didn't like some of the Japanese style (read: those All Japan guys) because they didn't protect their opponents and he is always going on about how he never hurt anyone. I am sure Kobashi wasn't necessarily reckless or intentionally hurting people, but there is no doubt that the style he thrived in was a put it all on the line style in a lot of ways. I saw someone refer to Mori' as an injury machine (or factory or something) yesterday and it got me thinking about this.

If Vince McMahon had seen that picture Kevin Von Erich would have be a evil villain character from a harelquin novel and the feud with Savage would have been AWESOME.

Del Rio has always been a guy I wanted to like and in a few moments (return against Cena, quite a bit of his time on on LU) I did. However, despite how much I want to like him, he bored me to tears. Even his fire bores me. I don't really know why, but I just can't relate to him as an intense and compelling wrestler, at least not with enough consistency.

I am almost through the two podcasts where you go down your list and after hearing your list and hearing you talk about it, I came away much more impressed with how this worked than I thought I might. I think everyone probably tries to implement some sort of system of watching, thinking, vetting ideas, or whatever to check their own biases and favorites against something that resonates more broadly While I am not sure I would use it myself, this system seemed to really accomplish that. The idea of numbers being used for this always gave me the willies and I always thought of it as a way of more or less quantifying ones own opinions, but I gotta tip my hat to it.

I do think that the All Japan guys of the 90s were less restrined in what they had to work around to have a great match. Most of the "story" played directly into the matches itself. I am not sure this is really accurate, but my gut tells me Bret was dealing with more hurdles and restraints in terms of time, story, goal of the match, etc. It just seems to be a shorter leash to me, but I could be wrong. EDIT: But I don't think putting on great matches is always, or maybe even often the goal. And even if it is I don't think what is considered a great match is always static, especially between wrestlers and fans, so I am not sure it really matters if it is the goal.

Grimmas, to be clear, I am not saying you were. I was juxtaposing how I read your takes on Kobashi (you like subtle selling more than big selling and others jive with what you look for in wrestling greatness a LITTLE more) here against Ohtani's Jacket (Kobashi lacks in-ring smarts). Again, that is just the way I am reading them and what I am inferring from them.

I think it is one thing to distinguish between liking subtly over big selling or something like that and claiming that Kobashi wasn't a smart worker (both seem to be points that are coming up in different spots on this thread regarding Kobashi). I just don't buy either the conflation between the role he plays in the ring and his wrestling intelligence nor the variety of conflations between certain styles and "intelligent wrestling".

People seem to forget his early career with crazy hair. I kinda did, though his early career was sort of in a blind spot though. I think if nothing else, this project will be remembered as a great success for the top tier picture selection.

I second this....

Kobashi would never lose his smile though.

That Ricochet picture though....

Are you talking about the character or the wrestler? I am confused. I think the dude is probably a good bit smarter as a wrestler than he gets credit for sometimes (though I never really thought people thought he was dumb), but I think you nailed his character in the 90s. I meant both. The All Japan guys didn't really play characters. yeah, but I never thought it was a 1 to 1 comparison. They all understood their strengths and played on those. Kobashi's was athleticism, strength and energy. I never assumed that reflected an actual lack of thoughtfulness about how he wrestled and put a match together.

Are you talking about the character or the wrestler? I am confused. I think the dude is probably a good bit smarter as a wrestler than he gets credit for sometimes (though I never really thought people thought he was dumb), but I think you nailed his character in the 90s.

Not to return to a dead horse, but this is the whole point. It all depends on what we mean by "great matches" and according to who. I will say that HHH remains a fairly good case study on this to me though. My list of ****+ might be a little shorter than the one provided, but he wouldn't sniff my top 100. He wouldn't sniff my top 100 even if that were the list I acknowledged as his "great" matches. Some of those matches I have looked at pretty carefully since doing reviews and I think they are actively great in spite of HHH's best efforts. I would say there is only 1-3 I can think of that I think HHH was a fairly active contributor too in terms of making the match great. He also has quite a few matches that were in a position to be fantastic and came out some of my absolute least favorite matches of all time, and that is the kind of bad wrestling I am very willing to count against someone. It isn't like all the matches of his I hate come at the tail end of his career. They are sprinkled throughout and they are his brainchild. He wanted them to look like that because he thought it would be epic (more or less the whole HBK feud stands out here). He is - to me - the case of a guy who has been put in tremendous positions to excel. Of course some of those are going to hit. I don't think that makes him top 100, probably not even top 200. He is the perfect examples of how many elements can go into making a good match, to me at least.

not the only example of Kobashi being excessive. It isn't, but I do feel too often the crutch against Kobashi boils down into "I liked him until he started throwing out Burning Hammers and chops." The chop era of Kobashi is probably my least favorite section from him but then he has the tag match with Taue vs. Tenryu and Akiyama where Kobashi plays a better apron role than Bret or almost any others in wrestling history. The GHC matches I have watched recently feel varied between the Akiyama Dome epic, the Takayama slugfest, and the craftiness of Ogawa trying to steal the title. Kobashi is able to adapt to each of those three opponents in captivating ways. Kobashi certainly was someone that had such a huge desire and drive that it was a necessary evil in a lot of ways for him to reach the physicial limits and emotional crescendo in the matches he performed in. Not everyone of those matches completely delivered as stuff like vs. Misawa from 6/99 shows, but when they do connect with him like 1/20/97, 7/98 vs. Jun, and 3/1/03, I am left at the end of the match staring into space for minutes of the time completely drained but coming to a realization that the match I just witnessed took me to a peak that I thought was unreachable from viewing wrestling. When I watch those matches, I get the feeling they continue on and on (...and on and on) long past any sensible point. In fact, I get the feeling that it's 3 or 4 matches crammed into one. It's like the Crash TV version of match building. Am I the only one who doesn't mind Kobashi's ridiculousness? He seems like the absolute peak of a Movez wrestler. Every worker is flawed, but most of them are flawed in a way that is less fun not more fun. No, you aren't. I love Kobashi. He would be REALLY high on my list. I mean even people who are kind of low on him tend to have him among the best 50 wrestlers ever, so it is sort of parsing words to me, but I get your sentiment. I always feel like I am way higher on Kobashi than most for the exact same reason. I get the subtly and nuance of the guys he is always compared to, but there are very few wrestlers ever that I could confidently throw on a random match and know I am going to be entertained. Kobashi's 90s matches to me pack a lot of punch and I actually think are exceptionally well told and layered stories. They are just punctuated with a lot of exclamation points sometimes. Plus, I don't care how over the top of it is, Death Wish Kobashi as NOAH champion was one of my favorite things in wrestling history.

Ohhh I have been following. That more or less what I was referencing. The second part was more or less my own abbreviated case for Rick. I just listened to the part of the podcast where you got to him and it didn't strike me as odd at all.

I think HHH is a fairly good example. he has a lot of highly thought of matches and I would have trouble calling him "great". I don't think he is really bad though. He is a great case study because the opportunity he got/gets to be in big or great matches work both for and against him. He has a nice little list of matches, probably one that outpaces his actual skill, but he also gets crucified for getting the chance at those matches and sometimes too eagerly dismissed for them. For example, the triple threat match at WM is not a match I particularly love, but it gets its fair share of praise. I rewatched that a few weeks ago for whatever reason and just hated HHH in it. I just mumbled to myself about how this is classic HHH, finding himself in a great position with talent around him, bringing the match down but still getting the line on his resume. That is probably unfair because I don't think he is the shits really. I think he is really good in spots, but the disproportionate opportunities he gets to be in big matches leaves me with a narrative of "fuck HHH"

I am a bit of an ROH mark, at least until probably 2010 or so, but I thought it was very solid. Not a lot of it stands out as elite or anything, but had some good matches and really shined at times. I think his best overall performance was probably the 4 way match, followed by the title match with Dragon (surprise surprise). It is worth checking into.

I don't think he said it was ONLY based on 10 or so match. It seemed like just an abbreviated point. I think Rick has a really cool little case. I see him as a reasonable bottom of the list guy if you value tag wresting a lot, like that they had sort of a unique set of moves for their time and place, and especially if you value how his unique face character was brought into the working of the matches themselves.

I also had it 4. This is one of my favorite feuds/series of matches ever. Every match is a blast to watch. This one was such a wonderful set up for the feud. It laid the base for the urgency and hatred they would bring later on. I came into this not knowing much Colon and being pretty familiar with Hansen and came away with a higher opinion of both men.

Ohhhh Paul London. Paul was one of my favorite wrestlers in the early - mid 2000s. I think he is pretty underrated in the rise of the indies at the time. I mentioned it elsewhere, but I think his later PWG work is really really fun stuff. I know that is not everyone's cup of tea, but that is the kind of wrestling you can probably show a non-wrestling fan and they will sort of get sucked into and I value that in a lot of ways.