evilclown

I don't understand the mental gymnastics people are doing to pretend Tanahashi is some kind of major draw. The truth is, the wrestling business is still in the dumps in Japan. This guy is playing to crowds that would have made Muta commit ritual suicide, let alone Inoki or Baba. Has he even been able to convince an audience that any of his matches are big matches? And yet he's the "best big match wrestler of all-time"? Really? Better than Flair or Buddy Rogers or Gus Sonnenburg or Jim Londos or Misawa? Is this a historical wrestling Hall of Fame or not?

Are you serious here? He would have been like the 12th best guy in 1990's AJPW.

This is actually a huge weight off my shoulders. I have never gotten a good interview with a Japanese star. This might explain why.

This may be the worst wrestling "history" ever. How he managed this many inaccuracies in 2013 is beyond my reckoning.

Some of the most entertaining fights actually came after that. Among my favorite MMA moments of all time were these tiny Japanese Pancrase guys trying to figure out how to fight 6-11 Semmy Schilt. He would later become K1 champion, so he was a pretty good striker, and he could literally reach the ropes from almost anywhere in the ring. Those were fun logistical problems to watch guys desperately try to solve.

I will be reviewing this for Bleacher Report!

Jason DeLucia tells a funny story about beating Funaki with a heel hook to everyone's surprise, including his own. Funaki, apparently, was going to try to give him a point or two to make it look good but misjudged where he was in the ring and was forced to tap out instead of grab the rope. So DeLucia got a rare clean win over the Pancrase founder. Pancrase was fun, but the more I hear about it from people who were there, the less I'm inclined to consider it seriously when determining legacies and historical import.

This is particularly funny as you address him multiple times in this very thread! He owns a space in your head quite clearly.

Again, a fixed fight is different than a "work." It's different conceptually and in execution. As for the Coleman match, he told me he was consulted on the finish in an on-the-record interview.

UFC actually sold to the same guy who started the ADCC grappling tournaments and promoted a few shows in China, Sheikh Tahnoon Bin Zayed Al Nahyan. He's the son of the former leader of the United Arab Emirates and basically a mark for MMA.

He says they weren't worked, but he was basically filling time. Their first show had less than an hour's worth of ring time. I talked to Mark Kerr about this. It's in the book I think, but he said they sort of hinted around about him not beating the shit out of Takada. "Japanese fans like the technical aspects of the fight. I think they'd like a scientific match." That kind of thing. The two had trained together, but I'm told that this was not a work. There was a lot of drama at the time about Vitor changing his last name to "Gracie." I have been told he wanted badly to win a fight with his grappling to prove he was worthy of it. Vitor's life is super, super weird.

Ken definitely cops to carrying guys. Funaki did it as well.

There's a huge difference between someone throwing a fight and a worked fight. I don't know that there have been any UFC works.

More than fight fixing, Pride was especially notorious for changing the opponent or even weight class at the last minute. They would allow their favored fighter to train for months for a specific opponent without telling the other guy until the last minute. They would also get a fighter to prepare for a certain style, like a jiu-jitsu artist, and then switch them into a bout with a kickboxer closer to the fight.

I was also able to confirm Funaki's win over Ken Shamrock in September 1994, a week before UFC 3, as a work.

Multiple fighters confirmed for me, on the record, that there were works in Pancrase. They didn't always offer specifics, but it was part of the deal, to the point Ken's dad Bob told me they were sure that UFC promoters were going to tell them who was supposed to go over right up until they went out to the cage. Some specific fights I remember being discussed were Frank's early win over Suzuki, a Jason DeLucia win over Funaki in 1994 that may have been a work gone wrong, and Ken Shamrock's losses to Suzuki in 1994 and 1995. Frank Shamrock's early success, in particular, is considered suspect. Former Lion's Den fighter Scott Bessac told me "Frank was all work." I can also confirm that Coleman-Takada was a work.

I printed out a few from the forum but it always boils down to how they can fit into the conversation. Yours ended up being perfect. I thought he was a fun guy to talk to, but I guess I didn't ask enough questions about backstage politics and who's dating who to satisfy some.

Thanks all. I had a chance to sneak some of those in. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1824649...aking-it-in-wwe

Tell me more?

You guys are tougher than me. I get choked up easily. I am the reason for Olympics-style sports coverage.

You guys have been really helpful by providing some great questions for me to use in my WWE interviews. I'll be talking to Antonio Cesaro in a couple of days. Anything for him?

I agree with this. I think that's a cool storyline you can appreciate. I guess I'm talking more about the guys angry because Damien Sandow did a job on WWE Main Event. The people who couldn't appreciate Misawa over Jumbo was a great story because they were Jumbo fans. If that makes sense?

I think wrestling is infinitely worse when you care about who wins and who loses. I've been down that road and it's kind of exhausting and can really distract you from the broader picture. When you step back and look at wrestling as an over-the-top spectacle and broad farce, it's much, much better. When people get focused in on their guy losing to Cena or whoever, it kind of reminds me of someone who would be upset at Mr.T losing to Stallone at the end of Rocky III. Yes, Clubber Lang was awesome. But he was created to job. Anyway...

The most interesting person writing about wrestling right now, bar none, is Steve Yohe. And I wouldn't trust Steve to write an 8th grade English paper. I say that with love. So I agree with John that craft may not be paramount, at least not me. Of course the best of both worlds is the writer who can combine interesting analysis and history with an artistic flair. That would be something special. It happens rarely. I think Mark Kram and Joyce Carol Oates are boxing writers who had it. MMA doesn't have it yet. Neither does pro wrestling. Maybe one day.

He's an average stylist at best. The idea he's writing essays "worthy of New York Magazine" is only true of the version of New York Magazine that includes the likes of Will Leitch. I suspect he's the beneficiary of the typical incestuous New York literary arrangement. Works for a publisher; given freelance work by editors who want to write for that publisher.