ohtani's jacket

I liked the 1970 Inoki/Dory match, though it wasn't as fresh as the '69 bout. I liked Dory's subtle heeling when it was done in the ring but reaching for the ropes for leverage and his heel work on the outside were charisma-less. I also liked the first fall more than the two that followed, which made it a bit top heavy. The first time I watched it I wasn't sold on the feigned desperation as the time limit approached, but the second time those beats seemed okay.

What are some of the underrated Hotta performances? She has the Aja match and the tag team with Takako, but what else is out there?

I understand what you're saying, but I think it's a slippery slope. The notion that all styles aren't created equal is the type of thing that leads to people saying luchadores are doing it all wrong because lucha doesn't look like bread and butter NWA wrestling, or they don't work their gimmicks into their matches as well as US guys, and therefore the style is inferior. What you're arguing seems to be the opposite side of the coin -- that certain workers get a free ride because "that's the style." My thoughts on the matter are that workers should be judged first and foremost on how good they were within the style they worked. I think it makes more sense to judge Toyota as a Joshi worker than to judge her style based on how people would react to it in different environments. If people don't think Toyota's work is very good within the context of every other girl wanting to work the go-go style then that's cool; but when they start applying some kind of foreign criteria that's when things get iffy. I get the idea of applying universal criteria or even cherry-picking good Joshi; but the idea that the style is fundamentally flawed or fundamentally wrong because it doesn't look the way wrestling should look to an individual person doesn't work for me. Not with the weight of history behind it, and the number of people were involved in shaping it to be the way it is. Anyway this is getting a bit off track. I think you can like or dislike Toyota regardless of how big a Joshi fan you might be or how much interest you have in it, but that doesn't necessarily make a person's criticisms fair or right.

Hiroshi Hase vs. Shiro Koshinaka (8/5/94) Couldn't fault the effort here. Both guys put in huge shifts and made a big effort to build this from the ground up. There was a long opening mat exchange that spilled over into some testy and heated moments, a clear through line with a logical sense of progression, the right amount of escalation to the moves they were using, and an epic-minded finishing stretch reminiscent of the All Japan boys. It wasn't always smooth, but you were never left without a clear idea of what they were trying to do, and I think if you like Hase you'd enjoy this bout. His selling down the stretch was particularly good. EDIT: Just saw this match got shat all over in the Yearbook thread. Weird.

We were mostly talking about her work ethic and athleticism in regard to whether she put any thought into her work. I think she put a ton of thought into how she wanted to work. You could argue that she wasn't clever enough to adjust her mindset to different match situations and that there were times when she shouldn't have gone out there with her usual approach. And of course there's always going to be folks who feel she needed to be reeled in (or worse.) I don't think her athleticism and her drive are reasons why people should vote for her. They're simply some positive qualities in light of the criticism of her. They work in Toyota's case where they may not work in others; but I think if people are going to vote for her it will because they can't deny the number of good matches she had. Now if you think she actively hurt every match she was in, she's not going to get within sniffing distance of a list like this. In regard to whether she was worse than her peers, outside of the top handful of Joshi workers can we really say she was worse than Mita, Shimoda, Hasegawa, Otsuka, Cuty Suzuki, Manami Suzuki, Takako Inoue, Ito, Fukuoka, Watanabe, et al.? If she was only the 10th best worker during the interpromotional era, for argument's sake, does that really make her so much worse her peers? And honestly, if you think Joshi is a lesser style, you can pick apart the top candidates just as easily. Kyoko, Hokuto, Aja, Bull, Devil, etc. all had flaws. I can't agree with the not all styles are created equal argument. I don't like the path that takes folks down. They're all wrestling styles and they can all be done well. I firmly believe it's a matter of personal taste.

I can see the similarities between Toyota and Sabu since they were both darlings of the tape trading scene who were held up as pinnacles of workrate and later maligned for their botched spots, lack of selling and poor psychology, but I think that's where the comparison ends. Toyota, during her peak, was the latest in a long lineage of Joshi workers dating back to the late 70s whose preference was to work the go-go style and who, I believe, made a deliberate choice to work that way to distinguish themselves from the men as athletes. Toyota pushed the bar higher than ever before, but she wasn't as innovative as Sabu. Sabu took ideas from all sorts of territories and meshed them together in a new style that was unlike anything that was happening in the US at the time. Toyota was influential in Joshi as most girls wanted to be like her. Sabu had a wider impact on pro-wrestling overall with workers borrowing more stylistic elements from his matches than Toyota's, and Toyota arguably being influenced by Sabu herself by including table spots in her work. And that was at the height of her acclaim in 1994-95. I can't speak for Sabu's selling. Toyota's doesn't really bug me. I don't really watch her matches for great selling and it's not a major revelation if she doesn't sell what. What bugs me about Toyota is the amount of excess in her big matches from '94-96. I find that period of her work distinctly unenjoyable. She's not alone in that category, though. I think it was a problem with most Japanese wrestling from the late 80s through to the late 90s and would trim the fat off a lot of bouts if I could. I like her stuff from '89-93 and I like quite a lot of her stuff from '97-02 as well. I can't think offhand of what her best selling performance was. The question of whether I think she was great is tricky. I think she was one of the greats of her era and only a handful of women were better. And I think that makes her one of the best workers in the world during that time frame. But when you add in Joshi workers from other eras she starts to drop, and then when you add basically everyone I've ever seen she drops further.

I also think peak vs. peak is the way to go, but on a case by case basis. Some workers have peak in their favour and others benefit from longevity. It's a matter of balancing that out. One thing I'll say for Toyota is that she was an extremely driven young woman and a ferociously hard worker. You pretty much had to be to make it in All Japan Women. I think she put thought into her work but from an athletic viewpoint. Not everyone can be a great character because it takes a certain amount of acting skill and the ability to performer. Toyota's character work was okay at times and she became more comfortable with it as she grew older, but her focus always seemed to be on outshining everyone athletically and I tend to judge her on that even if it's not my favourite thing in wrestling.

I wouldn't disagree with this, as I'm currently watching a lot of joshi from that era. My argument against Toyota is that I find myself more enthralled with everyone else in those matches. Toyota is mostly really good, but I don't value her style nearly as much as I value someone like Mayumi Ozaki. When I first learned that there was a such thing as Joshi, Manami Toyota was the wrestler who I heard about the most. When I actually started watching, she was in a lot of the best matches, but she was often my least favorite part. Not saying she's bad, just not good enough for her to get into the best 100 wrestlers of all time in my view. But Mayumi Ozaki worked essentially the same style as Toyota; she just happened to be one of the greatest actors in wrestling history and an all-time great seller. You might get a bit more character work with Ozaki, and she was more willing to bleed than Toyota, but the same execution issues are there, the same structural flaws, the same pacing problems; and if you want to talk about wrestler's valleys, Ozaki's work takes a plunge after 2000-01. I mean, really, Ozaki is one of the worst examples of a valley there is. She's like Ohtani except that no-one can really defend the past 15 years or so and come up with evidence of where she's still good. Despite all that, I still love Mayumi Ozaki and think she's one of the hundred greatest wrestlers of all-time. Toyota's had a rep since the heyday of the dirt sheets and the early days of the internet and she's had a counter rep for almost as long. The backlash against Manami Toyota started a long time ago. Nothing is ever as good or as bad as people say, and I know I was able to find a balance with Toyota in my own viewing, but her rep is a double-edged sword. People are just as likely to not vote for her because of her negative rep as they are to vote for her because she was a 90s favourite. I think that's particularly true of people who are influenced by what they read on the boards and by people they share the same tastes with. Or people who don't have the time or inclination to explore a worker who turns them off. I mean with a guy like Inoki it's easy to think "yeah, I don't really like him and I'm sure what people are saying about him is true" and then not watch stuff. I've been kind of surprised by the two most recent Inoki matches I watched ('71 against Brisco and '69 against Dory), and I'm starting to wonder if people aren't basing too much of their opinion on his work from the 80s when he was entering into his third decade in the business and already had a full two decades worth of work behind him. Maybe folks are looking at the wrong stuff. I'm not sure yet, but it's worth exploring so that's what I'm doing.

Y'know what I just watched and thought was better than the Jack vs. Dory match from Florida? The 1969 Inoki broadway from Osaka. I honest to God, cross my heart and hope to die, don't mean this to be a troll of Parv. I love reading Parv's posts and could read him reviewing paint drying, so let me list my reasons: * the match is 90% complete as opposed to the 65% that's shown of the Florida bout * you can actually hear the crowd as opposed to the dubbed over commentary from Solie, Brisco and the football coach * the Japanese commentary is unobtrusive * Dory gives a much stronger performance than in Florida * Inoki is excellent in his role and arguably better than Jumbo at any point in the 70s * the matwork is far superior in the Japanese bout * there's no pointless ref bump * Dory Funk Sr. and Race add to the bout in a way that only the mention of Eddie Graham on commentary can in the Florida bout * Inoki is as good as anyone has ever been in a similar role to the one he played * fewer resets than in the body of the Florida match

I don't think that means the same to Americans as it does in Kiwi vernacular.

If I choose pre-1996 does that mean I have access to every piece of footage in recorded history up until that point? If I choose 1996-onward, does that mean I can see every match that will ever be wrestled or only up until I die? How does climate change affect all this?

The Perro Aguayo vs. Mils match from LA is also worth watching.

If Rey hadn't gone to the WWE, I wonder how he would've been remembered in comparison to his contemporaries such as Psicosis, Sasuke and Ultimo Dragon. His WWE run makes up such a huge part of his case that the consensus has to lean toward his WWE work being proof positive of his greatness. I can see how that might bug people, though, especially fans who valued him for his athleticism and high spots and not his selling and storytelling. With Bryan, I wonder if he'll be similar to Eddy and Benoit in that he'll finish high this time but maybe not so high in 10 years time when he's been gone a decade.

Mils was a talented worker whom the Destroyer said you had to really struggle with to get him to give you anything. I kind of like that aesthetic; I just wish we had more than three really good Mascaras singles bouts on tape. That may have been because of his attitude but I'm not wholly convinced. I have a feeling there were more than a few great Mascaras performances even if the ratio of great match-to-booking date was low.

Robbie Brookside vs. Franz Schumann (5/9/98) Schumann debut in '85 and was pushing 40 here, so I guess that's why he looked so different. I couldn't decide whether Brookside seemed more like Chris Jericho or Edge, but either way he was distinctly uncool. This was falls count anywhere. I hate falls count anywhere matches. Schumann looked noticeably gassed. If you ever wanted to see what a German indy is like, I guess this is your ticket. Meanwhile, Schumann is 0 for 2

What you're saying may be true for some viewers, but for people who've watched a lot of 60s and 70s wrestling, I think they can make distinctions between workers, and I don't think it really means what filter they use. Whether they'e looking for someone timeless, or trying to see things through a 60s & 70s mindset, they're still separating the wheat from the chaff, and the direct comparisons are there in other 60s & 70s work and not their favourites from the 80s and beyond. I'd certainly judge Mascaras as a 70s worker, but in comparison to Sargeant and Robinson and Szakacs and everyone else I think is good from that era.

That seemed to be the implication to me. That those workers' best bouts were directly attributable to other wrestlers.

My two cents -- I'm not big on re-watching stuff since there's a ton of stuff out there I still haven't seen. There's a lot of workers whom I've closed the book on, and for me that type of closure is more helpful than not. Naturally, that means I find those workers less interesting than the ones I'm following now, but if I were thinking of voting for them, I'd probably try to recollect how I felt about their high points and whether those memories compelled me enough to vote for them. I don't much care for Liger or Jumbo, for example, but I do have fond memories of some of their key match-ups such as Liger vs. Ohtani or Jumbo vs. Tenryu. So rather than being into the worker as such, I'd have to weigh up how much those memories mean to me and whether I like the match-ups primarily because of Ohtani and Tenryu or if that's what I consider optimal Liger/Jumbo and how much I value that. There's no way I'd feel compelled to vote for anyone on principle. One thing I don't really agree with so far is the suggestion that Inoki, Mascaras or Toyota were carried in their best stuff. Those bouts strike me as a step-up in performance as opposed to carry jobs.

Hiroshi Hase vs. Yoshiaki Fujiwara (8/8/93) This was a chance to Hase against a guy who could actually wrestle, and a chance to see a bit more of Hase's mat game, which is something that is sorely lacking from a lot of his bouts. Hase's work on the mat isn't that good, but he has nice takedowns befitting of his amateur background. Fujiwara is just a pleasure to watch. The contrast between this and the Choshu match was interesting since here Fujiwara had a counter for every signature spot that Hase tried, which turned the bout into a tremendous defensive scrap. There were at least two awesome Fujiwara counters in this, some tremendous work out of the corner when Fujiwara bled hardway, and some fantastic strike exchanges instead of the usual signature shit. Only went 15 mins or so, but they did a good job of going that long. Didn't leave you feeling short-changed at all. Struck me as one of the better complementary bouts to Hase's best stuff. One thing I'll say for Hase is that he was a versatile worker. I'm not sold on the idea that he was a great one but from this sample along he's worked the classic Japanese tag style, sprints, mat contests, dome show bouts, brawls and beatdowns.

Never fear, Parv. I enjoyed that bout.

I really liked Harley's stuff in Texas. His Flair matches are good outside ot the Starrcade one, which isn't all bad but the rest of their matches are clearly better.

Hiroshi Hase vs. Riki Choshu (5/1/94) This started off with a hiss and a roar when Hase slapped Choshu during the first tie-up and Choshu responded with a violent flurry of headbutts and stomps. The commentator mentioned it was a senpai vs. kohai match, and I thought this could be really good as few wrestlers match the intensity that Choshu brings to the ring. But then Hase took over with a long control segment where he went though his signature spots one by one without any of them seeming like high spots. Choshu got more mileage out of a backdrop suplex than Hase managed with his entire arsenal. Granted, it was a flaky dome show match, but a minimalistic masterpiece would have been so much better. Choshu took back control of the bout, and it was fairly predictable from there as he swatted Hase aside. Not the sort of bout I'd hold against Hase since dome show matches trip everyone up, but there wasn't a lot to like about the way he laid it out, and the contrast in intensity between the two workers was stark. And that was with Hase absolutely trying to eyeball Choshu and step up to his level.

Looks like the Mutoh match used to be on DM but got yanked. There's a New Japan match against Benoit that might be your best bet for enjoying their work. People always seem to sleep on the second Hashimoto match as well.

Now that I've officially given the mantle of number one Satanico fan away, I thought I'd point out that EMLL had weekly TV from 1983-1989. It didn't air in the capital state (at least not on terrestrial TV), but it was available outside of the state, and on cable in the US, which is mostly how we have that '83-84 footage. Somewhere in the Televisa vaults they have all the footage and earlier stuff too like the match where Chicana lost his mask. There is some bridging footage between '84 and '89 Satanico featuring a run of Infernales matches w/ Masakre. They're mostly from '87.

You should watch the Regal vs. Larry Z feud if you haven't seen it.