evilclown

Sociopath was strong. Of course most sociopaths are pretty good at mimicking appropriate human behavior when it is in their best interest.

That's legitimately funny. I have a platform with millions of potential readers. But my nefarious pro WWE plan is to talk about this on an obscure message board! BIAS!

I'm actually shocked that anyone could watch CM Punk's video or listen to pieces of this interview and not think he would be pretty much impossible to work with. Also, he's a grown man and a millionaire. Surely he's capable of determining whether or not he's physically capable of wrestling and seeking medical treatment as needed?

Guy seems like a complete sociopath. Funny how it's everyone's responsibility to get him to the top but he leaves the company when it's his turn to put over new talent like the Shield and Bryan.

Nah. There's no need. I didn't intend a grave insult and don't welcome some internet blood feud. Besides, complaining about wrestling is almost part of being a hardcore wrestling fan at this point. Could you even produce a wrestling show that wouldn't lead to various degrees of outrage from the internet? I'm skeptical. I'll just see myself out. Was an ill-advised post for this group. I'll make my case to a broader subsection of fans later this week. Apologies again if I offended you.

That's a weird way to paraphrase what I wrote above. Your anger doesn't seem appropriate. If it doesn't apply to you what's the problem? No one has singled you out. There's no need to defend your anonymous internet honor with weird attacks and accusations of wrongdoing. If you feel like you can actually find joy in WWE, that's great. Feel free to disregard. If, however, you watch it every week for years at a time and find yourself perpetually angry and disappointed I'm talking to you. And lots of people here seem to be among those who will never be happy with WWE wrestling. Why not just stop? That's my message. There's no reason to subject yourself to something you don't enjoy.

Of course that's not what I wrote at all.

Considering the bulk of the material in the book was never written about in the Wrestling Observer you can imagine how seriously I'm taking this claim of plagiarism. I'd be happy to engage any specific critiques, but I'm not interested in some kind of personal battle of wills with an anonymous internet guy making pretty absurd and hurtful claims of illegal and unethical behavior.

Many people here and throughout what we call the IWC are perpetually aggrieved customers. The problem is your expectations. Fans seem to a have a certain vision of what wrestling is and should be and expect WWE to fit into that mold. Unfortunately, it's a ship that sailed 30 years ago, if it ever sailed at all. The prevailing form of wrestling is not the one you seek. If you go into a show looking for it and judging anything that doesn't resemble it harshly, disappointment is almost a given. To borrow a jdw musical analogy, many wrestling marks are like Beatles fans—only they're Beatles fans wanting Please Please Me long after the band has moved on to a different sound and philosophy. Other issues, like a desire for clean finishes that have almost never been a part of wrestling historically, create the same problems. Wrestling, by design, has very few definitive endings. It's a never ending serial with the same characters, played on an endless loop. That's its great strength, because the stock characters and stories are instantly recognizable, and its greatest weakness—it can also grow wearisome to those who stick around for the ride too long. I admit to not having articulated these ideas well and to being a little miffed at the response here. I apologize to anyone offended.

That doesn't even make sense as a critique. I wrote the book in Pages for one and it's meticulously sourced to include dozens of interviews with core subjects.

I don't think it's falling for it. It's just not being used to it because most people here are pretty earnest and anyone who acts like that gets banned pretty quickly, no matter who he was friends with in 1998 or if he has 500,000 people reading his stuff. If you can't enjoy something like this it's because you are intent not to. That's not "trolling." I'm deadly serious. You should be reevaluating everything about how you approach wrestling and whether this is right for you as a fan and a person. Because that was good. It was well performed, to the point even the wrestlers who traditionally struggle seemed to find their path. If you can look at WWE when it is hitting on all cylinders, when the announce team is less annoying than usual, the wrestlers are inspired and one match moves into another and suddenly two hours are gone—and not enjoy it—I legitimately worry that you are incapable of loving it. If that's the case, you are wasting your time. Wasting it. We all learned here that life is fucking short. Don't be cynical and call any dissenting voice a troll. Anything but. I get why you'd want to do so. It's probably deeply disturbing that your identity is called into question. Maybe, just maybe, you aren't a wrestling fan anymore. You're a wrestling observer. A critic. Wrestling has moved to a new place and you can't find it in yourself to make that trip. I'm not blaming you for that. But don't sit in the proverbial stands with your arms crossed across your chest, determined to pick apart any perceived flaws. That's just not healthy. And I can't imagine it is fun. Trolling would be saying that instead of watching wrestling fans in their various environments, you should perhaps stick to going through your stack of WON's and highlighting the passages you want to include in your next book. But I'm not sure that's constructive. Was that supposed to be insulting? My books are written using journalists, historical research and living participants to form the base of a narrative. I used the Observer sparingly in Total MMA, we didn't use it much at all in The MMA Encyclopedia, but a handful of chapters in Shooters did lean on Meltzer's written work and extensive interviews with him. The Wrestling Observer is one of a small handful of serious journals about wrestling and wrestling history. I'm not sure, in fact, how one would write about contemporary wrestling history without relying on it in part. In my book Shooters I don't cite the Observer until chapter 16 on Inoki. Early wrestling history isn't an area he's written about at any length or with particular authority. I used Dave again as a major source for Brawl for All, Lesnar and Angle in WWE and some on the formation of shootstyle wrestling. There's no chapter, however, where he's the primary source for anything, though he certainly has a very strong body of work and a memory like a steel trap. I expect, if I write about wrestling again, I will indeed use Meltzer as a source. Anyone would—and should.

I don't think it's falling for it. It's just not being used to it because most people here are pretty earnest and anyone who acts like that gets banned pretty quickly, no matter who he was friends with in 1998 or if he has 500,000 people reading his stuff. If you can't enjoy something like this it's because you are intent not to. That's not "trolling." I'm deadly serious. You should be reevaluating everything about how you approach wrestling and whether this is right for you as a fan and a person. Because that was good. It was well performed, to the point even the wrestlers who traditionally struggle seemed to find their path. If you can look at WWE when it is hitting on all cylinders, when the announce team is less annoying than usual, the wrestlers are inspired and one match moves into another and suddenly two hours are gone—and not enjoy it—I legitimately worry that you are incapable of loving it. If that's the case, you are wasting your time. Wasting it. We all learned here that life is fucking short. Don't be cynical and call any dissenting voice a troll. Anything but. I get why you'd want to do so. It's probably deeply disturbing that your identity is called into question. Maybe, just maybe, you aren't a wrestling fan anymore. You're a wrestling observer. A critic. Wrestling has moved to a new place and you can't find it in yourself to make that trip. I'm not blaming you for that. But don't sit in the proverbial stands with your arms crossed across your chest, determined to pick apart any perceived flaws. That's just not healthy. And I can't imagine it is fun.

So, this happened.... What kind of storyteller wants to give someone exactly what they expect? Consumers don't know what they want. They only think they do. Rock v. HHH Backlash 2000? Terry Funk vs. Abdullah the Butcher 1978?

I'm not sure what you're suggesting, but I've certainly never been paid by WWE for writing about them. I have also never had anyone from WWE ever ask me to tone down my reviews of their shows. Maybe that's because I generally like them so much! Who can say? But they certainly have never censored me in this manneer, even when I have been very critical.

So, this happened.... What kind of storyteller wants to give someone exactly what they expect? Consumers don't know what they want. They only think they do.

It was a fun pro wrestling show. If you didn't like it there's something wrong with YOU not with WWE. Maybe you are no longer a fan of pro wrestling as practiced in America for decades? Who can say? Booking what everyone wants to see is a good way to go out of business. I agree, however, that the finish here sparked enormous controversy. Whether it was good or bad will be best determined in six months. I remember the complaints about Daniel Bryan, but that ended as one of the very best stories in WWE history. No one? Or you? Was an interesting enough match with some clever back-and-forth and counters I haven't seen. Pleasantly surprised. This match was okay. I remain unimpressed with Paige. It was a comedy match. And it was funny! So...score! Yeah! I thought the second fall of this match was outstanding. Cesaro "jobbing" doesn't really concern me. It's not worth worrying about. His time will come. In an excellent match to the surprise of all. These two beat the hell out of each other in a stiff and fairly crisply executed wrestling match. Zoinks! That's a good thing right?

If you're a pro wrestling fan and you can't enjoy good pro wrestling for whatever reason, I find that sad. I wish you could.

I work for the biggest wrestling site on the planet beyond WWE.com. 500,000+ fans read my SummerSlam review. That's not a boast, more just to tell you that I have a pretty good idea what regular wrestling fans are thinking. It's not often what you are thinking. Which is fine.

You haven't refuted any points made here. Interesting. What is there to "refute?" You didn't like something that was self-evidently awesome. I'm not prepared to debate that with you. I'll take you at your word that you didn't like it. That's sad to me though.

Exactly. I didn't care for the show either. This show isn't a show that you would put up on the Wrestlemania 17, Superbrawl 2,GAB 89, or Spring Stampede 94 where you're shocked people didn't like. This is a card that had some hits, some misses, and a lot of in between. Exactly. I didn't care for the show either. This show isn't a show that you would put up on the Wrestlemania 17, Superbrawl 2,GAB 89, or Spring Stampede 94 where you're shocked people didn't like. This is a card that had some hits, some misses, and a lot of in between. I guess if your worldview involves comparing every show to the very best shows ever you will be consistently disappointed.

I think it's interesting to watch wrestling fans in their various environments. This is one for the most extreme fans. It's quite a thing.

The minority. Fans all over the internet were loving this show, though not the finish. Perhaps the minority of people who want to convince themselves Great Khali is a great wrestler or whatever the counter intuitive movement of the moment is.

Sorry you can't enjoy something you claim to love. That must honestly be an awful feeling. It makes me sad to think about it.

Man, I applaud the effort it must take to find a way to crap all over this great show. That's some serious will power to deny what have to be creeping feelings of joy. When the guys at Segunda Caida are loving something, and you're too cool for school, might be time to reevaluate things. That was a better and more entertaining show than anything I've seen this year.

Strangler Lewis was one of the earliest proponents of throws that I can find. He frequently spent much of a match dumping his opponents to the mat with a hip toss of sorts.