ohtani's jacket

I just watched the Lesnar segment on youtube and I have two questions: 1) Why did they cut to a behind the shoulder shot of the Titantron before Lesnar came out? 2) Why did Cena let Brock pose and hit the F5 on him? Yeah, it's wrestling, blah, blah... c'mon, the set-up was a handshake.

Updated my list with some of my recent picks: Steve Grey vs. Keith Haward (2/5/85) Jon Cortez vs. Keith Haward (1/13/87) Keith Haward vs. Chic Cullen (3/5/84) I really like Keith Haward. He had no personality whatsoever but he was a wrestling machine. The Cortez bout is the least problematic as the booking holds back the other two matches, but I really liked how Grey was forced to bring the physical side of his game to a catchweight contest with Haward and the Cullen bout was really solid wrestling with a really shitty finish. And one of Flik's picks, which I wrote about at Wrestling KO: Abe Ginsberg vs. Pete Curry (10/23/74) This ruled. It was one of Flik's choices over at PWO for the best WoS bouts. And a good thing he mentioned it too as I would've never watched it on name value alone. Ginsberg seemed like an interesting character. He wore a black leather helmet to the ring and Walton commented about how he often had a go at Kent through the ropes. He was all business here, however. He went up a class to take on a heavyweight in Curry and for a heavyweight match this was peppered with awesome looking holds, stiff moves and smash mouth wrestling. Sadly, as with a couple of other great looking workers this is the only Ginsberg match on tape. Gutted. Speaking of Wrestling KO, here is my monstrous European wrestling thread -- http://z11.invisionfree.com/wrestling_ko/i...c=2555&st=0

I guess if Vince was on the bones of his ass he'd have to take risks. It's kind of funny when you look at the Wrestlemania XIV card considering how much of a game changer it seemed at the time, but there have been some unbelievably shitty Wrestlemanias during boom periods. In fact, Wrestlemania is like the Oscars: you know it's going to be crap, but you watch it anyway because you want to see who wins. Somewhere along the way when they started building up the WWE brand, Wrestlemania became the biggest stage of them all where all these legendary matches take place and now there's an expectation that every year you're going to see something showstopping. I mean there was always the hope that maybe something great would happen at Wrestlemania, but now they actively try to make each and every Wrestlemania memorable. So I guess the question is would Sheamus v. Undertaker deliver on that even if it was a great match? I read the thread over at DVDVR and this is nothing against Brian Fowler, but would he think Sheamus v. Undertaker was some of the greatest storytelling in the history of the business? Because ultimately that's what people want from Wrestlemania when they plonk down their money. It seems like a bit of a juggling match to me. You could probably argue that it's a double mainevent one match should be used to elevate a new guy, but this whole Undertaker has a great match at Wrestlemania thing has taken on a life of its own in the past few years. I guess they're just milking it dry.

I guess they have no confidence in them drawing. After all, isn't there a tremendous amount of casual fans that make up the Wrestlemania buyrate? It does pose the question of what they're going to do when their previous stars are too old to keep coming back.

The issue is that WM is mostly a nostalgia show now. Has been for years. Save for Punk vs Jericho, the entire WM card was built around Taker, Michaels, HHH and Rock. The rest was an afterthought. Since when did Wrestlemania undercards not suck?

Isn't the basic problem that the only match-ups they can save for Wrestlemania and not run on TV or their 11 other PPVs are ones involving returning superstars?

lol, that was funny.

I was trying to remember if I'd ever seen anyone bleed hardway in WoS. Veidor/Davies is definitely a match that I think Loss would enjoy.

That was a hell of a post, Herodes.

Like Big Daddy or Giant Haystacks or Kendo Nagasaki? I think there's a big difference between a bit of pizzazz and character / charisma and, for example, Jimmy Hart vs. JYD in a waterslide race or Roddy Piper playing trick or treat on Halloween night. Those were some of the more colourful characters, but the presentation was still largely realistic and as a legit sport. Well, ultimately they were matches filmed at halls around the country, but c'mon Big Daddy was not pure sport. Even huge stars like McManus, Pallo and Kellet who were great workers were entertainers first and foremost. There was a lot of technical wrestling, but I think the pure sport aspect gets overplayed because of how the matches were presented on TWC. Walton tried to sell something like Catweazle as seriously as he could, but the audience weren't under any illusion that it was anything other than comedy.

I think RINGS was presented like Pancrase. WoS was out and out pro-wrestling to me. The pure sport aspect I think is overstated. UWF-i was worked like pro-wrestling so I can understand why that might appeal to you. I can't remember ever seeing blood on WoS. I don't think it was allowed on TV. I don't know about building from match to match, but most of the long term rivalries revolved around title belts. I don't think there were a lack of feuds. There were plenty of reoccuring match-ups along with short term programs. The problem is that we don't have the complete picture in regards to footage. This tended to happen in the heavyweight ranks where the belt seledom changed hands. In the lighter classes the belts changed hands frequently. I can't think of any examples off hand as I've watched most out of it out of context and in nonsequential order. The lightweights certainly chased each other in terms of the belt. There were a lot of return matches. Revenge may have been a motivation in these bouts but not outwardly so because of the gentlemanly pretences. The heels tended to look for revenge more than the faces. If a heel lost, they'd often offer up a wager in order to get a return bout and things like that. I suppose there was an element of revenge in return title matches. Many of the matches existed in their own little vacuum because guys were making their first television appearance for a number of months, but in terms of the feuds Walton would always refer back to their previous match-ups. The catchweight bouts I like so much take place in their own little vacuum.

Like Big Daddy or Giant Haystacks or Kendo Nagasaki?

There were a lot of angles and gimmickry on top involving Big Daddy that nobody watches because Big Daddy sucks. There was also a bunch of gimmickry with Kendo Nagasaki and workers of his ilk. The heavyweights would occasionally call each other out as well. I've seen Tony St. Clair come to the ring in street clothes on more than one occasion, as well as angles involving Bomber Pat Roach and others. There was the occasional gimmick match too such as the handicap matches or the money per round or fall bouts. There was also the arm wrestling shtick that Myers used to do, and of course tag matches were British wrestling's version of a cage match or some other type of rare stipulation bout. Title matches were also important and built to within the course of a year. In a sense, I agree with MJH that because TWC showed it in inconsequential order you don't get a sense of what was happening in any given year. On the other hand, it wasn't as angle driven as All Star Wrestling and for the most part it was about having a favourite wrestler who you looked forward to seeing on TV.

What are some examples of other styles or matches you find emotional? There are a few things you should bear in mind if you ever decide to delve into World of Sport. Firstly, you need to be mindful of the weight classes as the lightweight, welterweight, middleweight and heavyweight bouts are all wrestled differently from one another. Generally speaking, the catchweight bouts are the most exciting though the lightweight bouts provide the most action. Secondly, the matches aren't supposed to be brawls. They're supposed to be clean, sportsman-like bouts. Of course when you put a heel and a face together it often breaks down, but there are A LOT of face vs. face matches compared with other territories. There were also certain types of workers who were prone to having their face vs. face match-ups turn heated generally because of how stiff they worked. Occasionally, they'd have a heel run that was similar to US wrestling. Mighty John Quinn and the Caribbean Sunshine Boys were good examples of this. And of course there were the perennial heels like McManus, Breaks and Cooper, the gimmick workers like Catweazle, Kung Fu and Kendo Nagasaki, the tough as nails comedy workers like Kellett and Cszelaw, and the super heavyweights on top. Once you figure out which type of weight class you prefer and what type of matches you like it's easier to wade your way through matchlists. As I said, the lightweight bouts and catchweight contests are the easiest to get into at first as well as the heel shtick. The heavyweights take a lot of getting used to as they're the "blue-eyes" babyface workers and can be pretty bland. Steve Viedor is a guy who it took me forever to get into whose stuff I really dig now. I recommend you start with the Tony St. Clair stuff I've recommended as his 70s matches got a ton of heat. He wasn't the greatest worker but a strong foil for the best heels of the day. As for the rounds system, the best way to think about it is that they have to get two falls either from a pinfall or submission and that they're always battling against a time limit. I don't agree with people who've said there are no nearfalls. If you watch a match where both guys are desparately trying to win in the final rounds there will be plenty of nearfalls. This is usually the case with the lightweights. A lot of matches peter out into draws or are slow, technical matches but you can weed those out once you're familiar with the workers.

I had a similar experience watching old episodes of New Zealand's On The Mat and I assure you WoS was light years ahead in terms of quality. I also think living in Japan has dampened my enthusiasm for Japanese wrestling as the years go by. But do you feel the same about Powell and Pressburger? Ealing Comedies? Are You Being Served? Only Fools and Horses? EastEnders?? Emmerdale Farm??? Coro Street??? What aspects would you describe as overly British? The crowds? Walton going on about everyone's day job? Jim Breaks' accent? It was such a beautiful style why would you want to change it? All Star Wrestling tried to go the WWF route and apparently had some post-TV success booking angles. The wrestling in both companies was absolutely shit from about '86 onwards. Once they started sharing the ITV time slot and the match lengths were cut back it became brutal. I don't think there were enough surviving masters for that to be effective. You can piece together matches from the same taping but that's about it. Which matches and workers do you like?

The 70s stuff is definitely the best era, but there was a lot of excellent wrestling from 1980 to '84. Things went downhill when the talent started jumping to All Star Wrestling. I was referring more to the injury finishes and all the other screwjobs. Yeah, 2/2 was the airdate. There is storytelling and drama in British wrestling and there are definitely nearfalls. There are a lot of long and sometimes dry technical matches, but there were a variety of other styles too. Jones and Rudge and Jones and Wright are a type of smash mouth style that was not uncommon. I've listened to a ton of Walton and he's not without his faults, but I've also listened to a ton of Monsoon recently and there is no comparison. Walton sometimes buried workers, but Monsoon was a giant pain in the ass.

My ongoing list of recommended matches: WoS Billy Howes vs. Jacques Lageat (5/5/62) Mick McManus vs. Jackie Pallo (5/5/62) Masambula vs. Tony Charles (aired 2/9/72) Jim Breaks vs. Adrian Street (2/12/72) Jack Fallon vs. Tibor Szakacs (aired 4/19/72) Davie Barrie vs. Sid Cooper (11/16/72) Steve Veidor vs. Tony Charles (11/16/72) Les Kellett vs. Johnny Czeslaw (11/16/72) Ian Gilmour/Jeff Kaye vs. Johnny Saint/Steve Best (aired 12/2/72) Clay Thomson vs. Reg Trood (aired 12/30/72) Jim Breaks vs. Johnny Saint (3/14/73) Pete Roberts vs. Caswell Martin (4/4/73) Jim Breaks vs. Johnny Saint (5/3/73) Jackie Pallo vs. Johnny Kwango (5/3/73) Alan Sarjeant vs. Clay Thomson (6/6/73) Les Kellett vs. Bobby Barnes (aired 9/25/73) Alan Sarjeant vs. Eddie Capelli (12/13/73) Robby Baron vs. Peter Szacaks (3/14/74) Mick McManus vs. Tony St. Clair (3/14/74) Tibor Szakacs vs. Prince Kumali (8/15/74) Abe Ginsberg vs. Pete Curry (10/23/74) Alan Sarjeant vs. Mick McManus (11/20/74) Johnny Czeslaw vs. Romany Riley (12/4/74) Sid Cooper vs. Clive Myers (1/23/75) Tibor Szakacs vs. Prince Kumali (2/13/75) Steve Grey vs. John Naylor (4/10/75) Robby Baron vs. Alan Sarjeant (4/17/75) Steve Grey vs. Ken Joyce (7/31/75) Clive Myers vs. Steve Grey (10/8/75) Clive Myers vs. Steve Grey (11/20/75) Johnny Saint vs. Mick McManus (11/20/75) Jim Breaks vs. Bobby Ryan (12/2/75) Kung Fu vs. Mick McManus (4/21/76) Zoltan Boscik vs. Steve Grey (aired 5/8/76) Steve Veidor vs. Gwyn Davies (5/26/76) Mark Rocco vs. Marty Jones (6/30/76) Marty Jones vs. Mark Rocco (10/12/76) Terry Rudge vs. Marty Jones (11/30/76) Zoltan Boscik vs. Alan Sarjeant (12/29/76) Clive Myers vs. Alan Sarjeant (2/21/77) Steve Grey vs. Mick McManus (5/11/77) [Cup Final Day] Jim Breaks vs. Vic Faulkner (7/5/77) Kung Fu/Pete Roberts vs. Johnny Kincaid/Dave Bond (10/4/77) Tony St. Clair vs. Dave Bond (11/7/77) Clive Myers vs. Steve Grey (12/6/77) Tony St. Clair vs. Dave Bond (12/6/77) Mark Rocco vs. Marty Jones (7/26/78) Bobby Barnes vs. Steve Grey (7/26/78) Marty Jones vs. Tony St. Clair (9/26/78) Steve Grey vs. Mark Rocco (10/11/78) Mark Rocco vs. Chris Adams (12/6/78) Jim Breaks vs. Young David (Davey Boy Smith) (12/3/79) Jim Breaks vs. Young David (12/19/79) Ken Joyce vs. Tony Costas (1/9/80) Jon Cortez vs. Pete Lapaque (1/28/80) Jeff Kaye vs. Tony "Banger" Walsh (1/28/80) Johnny Saint vs Steve Grey (1/28/80) [Walton rant match] John Cortez vs. Jeff Kaye (2/5/80) Pete Roberts vs. Pat Roach (2/13/80) Jim Breaks vs. Young David (Davey Boy Smith) (2/13/80) Pat Roach vs. Gil Singh (4/21/80) Mark Rocco vs. Pete Roberts (5/28/80) Johnny South vs. Ringo Rigby (8/5/80) Jon Cortez vs. Keith Haward (11/5/80, JIP Rd 1) Jim Breaks vs. Jon Cortez (2/2/81) Johnny Saint vs. Steve Grey (2/11/81) Jon Cortez vs. Bobby Barnes (3/31/81) Steve Grey vs. Jim Breaks (5/12/81) Terry Rudge vs. Alan Kilby (6/18/81) Clive Myers vs. Keith Haward (7/15/81) Jon Cortez vs. Steve Grey (7/27/81) Marty Jones vs. Johnny South (10/7/81) Alan Kilby vs. King Ben (10/7/81) Johnny Saint vs. Vic Faulkner (11/18/81) Ken Joyce vs. Johnny Kidd (JIP Rd 4, 1/27/82) Fit Finlay vs. Young David (Davey Boy Smith) (3/9/82) Pete Roberts vs. Wayne Bridges (5/11/82) Steve Grey vs. Jackie Turpin (8/11/82) Marty Jones vs. Dynamite Kid (1/19/83) Dave Finlay vs. Ringo Rigby (2/16/83) Terry Rudge vs. Pete Roberts (3/21/83) Fit Finlay vs. Alan Kilby (3/23/83) Jim Breaks vs. Steve Grey (4/7/83, JIP Rd 2) Dave Finlay & Skull Murphy vs. Marty Jones & Clive Myers (6/13/83) Dave Finlay & Skull Murphy vs. Marty Jones & Clive Myers (8/23/83) Terry Rudge vs. Dalibar Singh (10/11/83) Pat Roach vs. Tom Tyrone (10/11/83) Steve Grey vs. Steve Speed (1/25/84) Keith Haward vs. Chic Cullen (3/5/84) Steve Grey vs. Clive Myers (3/5/84) Marty Jones vs. Dave Finlay (4/4/84) Danny Boy Collins vs. Jim Breaks (4/26/84) Chic Cullen vs. Rocky Moran (5/2/84) Terry Rudge vs. Tom Tyrone (11/20/84) Marty Jones vs. Dave Finlay (11/23/84, JIP Rd 4) Steve Grey vs. Keith Haward (2/5/85) Mike Bennett vs. Danny Boy Collins (2/12/85) Steve Grey vs. Clive Myers (3/20/85) Ray Steele vs. Pete Roberts (9/3/85) Pete Roberts vs. Indio Guajaro (11/13/85) Marty Jones vs. Bull Blitzer (Steve Wright) (4/23/86) Steve Grey vs. Ritchie Brooks (7/3/86) Jon Cortez vs. Keith Haward (1/13/87) Johnny Saint vs. Robbie Brookside (4/28/87) Steve Regal vs. Robbie Brookside (handheld 4/12/90) Wales Rollerball Rocco vs. Kung Fu (Rhyl, taped 7/12/83) Robbie Brookside vs. Doc Dean (Pontardawe, taped 4/4/1989) Germany Axel Dieter vs. Moose Morowski (No DQ, Hannover 1980) Franz van Buyten vs. Dave Taylor (Pirate Fight, Hamburg 10/5/86) Franz van Buyten vs. Rene Lasartesse (9/27/87) Terry Rudge vs. Franz van Buyten (Hamburg 10/1/87) Johnny Saint vs. Terry Rudge (10/8/87) Steve Regal vs. Terry Rudge (Hamburg 10/7/88) France Gilbert Cesca vs. Billy Catanzarro Rene Ben Chemoul vs. Gilbert Cesca Francis Sullivan/Albert Sanniez vs. Bernard Caclard/Tony Martino Gilbert Cesca/René Ben Chemoul vs. Anton Tejero/Inca Péruano (3/12/65) Anton Tejero vs. Walter Bordes (8/29/67) Michel de Santo vs. Michel Chaisne Claude Roca/Walter Bordes vs. Albert Sanniez/Pierre Bernaert (8/29/77) Jean Corne/Rene Cabellec vs. Jacky Richard/Guy Renault (10/12/81) Belgium Franz van Buyten vs. Frank Merckx (Pirate Fight, 1984) Franz van Buyten vs. Le Grand Vladimir (1984)

Lucha libre and British wrestling are the two forms of wrestling I'm passionate about and since people don't watch enough of both of them I thought I'd start another beginner's guide. So what is it that people don't like about British wrestling? The sudden injections of comedy? The rounds system? The awful finishes? The cooperative looking holds? Perhaps people don't like how wrestlers falling out of the ring is sold like death or perhaps they don't like how guys do massive flips off finger locks. Or perhaps it's as simple as the general repetitiveness. Whatever it is, let's hear it. Personally, I struggle with German wrestling. The clipping and the handheld camera work always make it difficult to follow.

The British Kendo Nagasaki.

Thanks, this was really interesting. Though I guess they must all do an excellent job if I don't notice any of them

I think like anything else in lucha it can either be done poorly or really well. The way I would justify it is that the technico's technique is supposed to be too strong for the rudos and the rudo dominance is supposed to be too strong for the technicos. Sometimes a guy will be out of position or sort of walk into the pinfall or submission, or there will be a guy who wasn't involved in the fall too much who shouldn't be pinned so easily, but I think as far as the crowd is concerned it's all about who won. Luchadores tend to struggle with one fall matches so I think any change in the number of falls would take some getting used to.

Loss just made a comment about Nick Patrick being awesome in 1997. I've got to admit, I rarely pay attention to referees. What is it that people notice about them?

It certainly happens a lot, but when you have a trios with three great workers like Los Infernales (Satanico, MS-1 and Pirata Morgan) or even the version of Los Infernales where Masakre replaced Morgan, the rudo beatdown segments are awesome because of how inventive each spot is. Those guys had a finely honed three man rudo act and about a thousand different beatdown spots. The lucha you see when you turn on Galavision often has the same rudo beatdown in each match. It's gotten pretty slack. Why didn't I think of this? A Brazos comp would be perfect for getting people into lucha. The Brazos worked every trios style there is, which would make it the perfect introduction to that particular form of lucha.

That's one of the things about the lucha style that I never got used to. Sometimes the matches feel like they're sharply divided into different acts, and in each act one guy will beat on another guy forever without any receipts. The control segments often seem more sharply delineated and strictly observed than in almost any other territory. I can't explain exactly why I don't like it, but it still feels weird and forced to me when the entire primera caida is the faces beating up the heels unanswered, then vice-versa for the segunda, and then back to the first plan for the tercera caida. I guess I've just been programmed by all the other styles of wrestling to expect more back-and-forth reversals than that. I don't think it's quite that delineated. Often the technicos will get off to a flyer or the rudos will jump them, but the primera caida can be relatively even until someone makes a mistake or one side makes its move. Sometimes what seems like a "rudo fall" can end with a surprise twist and vice versa. But no matter what happens it almost always carries over into the next fall. You seledom see the second caida begin with a role reversal. The only time you really see that is with shock falls where the loser of the first fall wins the second straight away. Sometimes the turning points within a caida are done well and sometimes they're lazy. When they're done well, they're one of the most exciting things about lucha. The third caida is almost always a back and forth slugfest with several changes in momentum.

You will sometimes get a type of face in peril during the rudo beatdown sections, particularly when it's a trios being used to set up a wager match. To me the great thing about trios is that there are so many different styles, whether it's a comedy match or a brawling trios; fast paced and high flying or all matwork. Often the best matches are a combination of all those styles. You always know that if the rudos win the first fall then the technicos will have to make a comeback in the second or if the technicos win the opening fall the rudos will dominate the second, and so on, but there's a number of ways they can play it and they're able to shorten or lengthen the falls to control the rhythm. Once you learn the basic format of everyone squaring off once and then either swapping partners the second time round or speeding things up, then the way either rudo dominance or technico momentum overlaps each fall and leads to a turning point or swing in momentum then trios matches are easy to follow.