ohtani's jacket

Reminds me of that match he had with Shamrock in '99 when he went all shooty.

Seems strange to have a heel go over at a major show like Wrestlemania.

I can't wait til it gets to Wrestlemania. Dave might be all excited about the gate, but that was a truly boring show. Dave was really high on Owen. An Owen/Flair match would've been interesting. As for fans leaving a Flair/Windham match seven minutes in... I guess that says something about why US pro-wrestling is such crap these days. Props for Nagahori in the women's top 20. I wonder if Dave remembers who Nagahori was these days.

Sayama did a fantastic job with the Tiger Mask gimmick... Yeah, almost every opponent he wrestled was better, but that meant we got to see a hoard of great workers. Can't complain.

WWE isn't slick. It's made on the fly. They don't even use matching shots half the time. CMLL's camera work & editing is way better. They get shots that WWE only come up with in post.

RAW was on while I was typing my reply... None of the production values impressed me, from the production design to the backstage skits to the camera work. The CMLL I aaw from last year had better production.

(1) What do you ultimately think Vince McMahon will most be remembered for as a promoter? National and international expansion, as well as surviving each scandal, crisis and downturn in business. (2) What do you think is the most important positive change that has come from the WWE vision of what pro wrestling is? The marketing and promoting of wrestlers. (3) What do you think is the most important negative change that has come from the WWE vision of what pro wrestling is? Steroids. (4) What is something that you have always felt WWE does well that they don't get enough credit for? Their booking of angles and long running feuds. (5) What is something that you have always felt WWE does horribly that they don't get enough criticism for? I personally think their production values are crap. (6) Overall, do you think most people are fair when discussing WWE, or do you think people tended to be blinded -- either by fanboyism or hatred? Eh, it's all reactionary. Even the people trying to be fair are reacting to unfair criticism. (7) What match would you point to as the match that most defines the WWE version of wrestling? It depends on the era, since the style has changed numerous times... In general, I think matches like Hogan/Andre, Hogan/Warrior, Bret/Shawn and Austin/Rock define the WWF booking philosophy. (8) Could the WWF have had their initial success without Hulk Hogan? Why or why not? It's unlikely they could've achieved national (let alone international) expansion without Hogan. Having said that, the expansion was well booked and promoted and they had a very good roster. (9) Could the WWF have been more financially successful in the post-Hogan, pre-Austin time period with different people on top? Why or why not? Not really. It's a simple equation, what goes up must come down. (10) Who do you think was a bigger star at their peak -- Hulk Hogan or Steve Austin? Hogan. (11) What do you think is Vince McMahon's greatest accomplishment as a promoter? Surviving and making money. (12) What do you think was the greatest contributing factor to WCW overtaking the WWF from 1995-1998? Bischoff's aggressiveness in doing unto Vince what Vince had done to the territories. (13) What do you think was the greatest contributing factor to the WWF overtaking WCW in 1998? Vince vs. Austin being a hotter angle than the NWO. It really began with WCW botching Starrcade '97 and Tyson's appearances getting media play. WM 14 was generally seen as a satisfying show, and the RAW where Austin was supposed to fight Vince with one hand tied behind his back was the clincher. (14) Which world champion was the best in terms of ring work and why? Probably Bret. (15) Which world champion do you think meant most to the company? Hogan. (16) Which world champion had the worst run? Nash in '95. (17) What do you consider the high point in WWF or WWE history? Wrestlemania III. (18) What do you consider the absolute low point in WWF or WWE history? 1995. (19) Looking at things from their point of view, why do you think WWE frowns on employees being big wrestling fans? From a booking/writing standpoint, they wouldn't know how to make money. From a personnel standpoint, they'd have a hard time getting their work done. Information leaks might be a risk too. (20) Do you think the WWF has ever done a good job at booking tag teams in a meaningful way? If so, what time period? In the late 80s, sure. (21) What is the best non-main event feud the company has ever produced and why? Savage/Steamboat, Savage/Roberts, Virgil/Dibiase, Bret/Owen. (22) What is the worst main event level feud the company has ever produced and why? Undertaker/Undertaker, Undertaker/Yokozuna, Diesel/Mabel. (23) What do you think was the single biggest contributing factor that caused the end of the 1998-2001 boom? A boom can't continue forever. It has to stop somewhere. Speaking as someone who stopped watching in 2001, the product simply became boring. (25) Where do you think they'll be in five years? Depends on whether Vince is retired/alive or whether someone gets real hot.

I don't see how ROH can't run a spot show in Tokyo... They have TV, they're covered in whatever mags are left and they have NOAH's backing. It shouldn't be that difficult.

Eh, that might be true, but Tateno's weight often ballooned in Japan too.

That Tully/Windham match was really good as far as I remember. Funny how fans today would be itching to discover a 27 minute Tully/Windham match. So much for the UWF closing shop or Dump continuing wrestling... Dump became a comedian, TV talent and actress. Omori was her comedian partner for a while. Asuka tried to lure her out of retirement, but she started a family instead. The Matsunagas didn't cope very well with this difficult period Dave is talking about & 1989 saw a number of girls run away from the dojo due to bullying.

I really enjoyed all of the Flair/Luger matches from Starrcade '88 through to the Clash that Loss wrote about, with the exception of Starrcade '89. They're tremendously entertaining. Flair did a great job of working the matches around the way Luger was being pushed, even if he had no intention of dropping the belt to him, and Luger looked great, even if people say he was difficult to work with. The Clash match is really good, and Loss is right about the post-match beatdown, which was so good that the Hansen/Luger matches were incredibly disappointing to witness. After this, Flair kinda got exposed in the Doom/Horsemen tag at Halloween Havoc, but the next Clash against Butch Reed was interesting. The match falls apart when Flair resorts to formula stuff, but he could be a semi-decent brawler at times. The grudge match against Pillman in '91 is a good example.

I don't have a problem with people acknowledging it, I have a problem with the leap from this business is fucked to Michael PS Hayes has a great left or whatever... Others don't, tomk explained about Mid-South. That's fine, I'm not suggesting we all develop guilt complexes. What I'd like to know is how people can separate their feelings about the business from their fandom, if indeed they do... I mean if you're resigned to the fact that the business is fucked, but still enjoy watching matches, then to some extent you're switching off whether you're outspoken about the business or not.

Of course I can be inconsistent and flat out wrong about things. If you want my honest opinion, I don't think I could watch wrestling anymore if I felt as strongly about things as other people do, but I keep watching because I've always watched it and don't want to stop, except for Benoit matches which I avoid. (Something I'm not entirely comfortable about.) I think people can negotiate their way through a pro-wrestling career, but most don't. Really I have no justification to keep watching and have the most respect for people who've stopped. Tnen again, I couldn't enjoy anything if I worried about all the shit that goes along with it.

OK, fair enough.

It's not about whether you can/should acknowledge that musicians have fucked-up lifestyles and sometimes die from it... It's about how you acknowledge it... Saying there should be no music anymore, while still listening to your favourite albums, is really no different from apologists. The whole thing is a touchy subject & people are gonna react to it in different ways... including wishing it would go away or being worried that it will threaten the business... Some people square all the blame on the business, others think it's inherently fucked to begin with. Whatever position you take, "I can enjoy it and criticise it" is not a defensible line against taking shit about A and marking out about B, and moreover, it's not a defence for talking shit about people who can't bring themselves to criticise the business. The assumption is that those people are marks, but that bingo sheet had relevant aspects to any dialogue about this issue, particularly for people who can't accept that all wrestlers have psychological problems or that Benoit's brain is why he killed himself and his family.

It comes across like people are picking and choosing their spots to criticise, based on whether they like the wrestling product or not. I'm sure that's not true, but that's how it comes across. I know people here have no illusions about workers & promotions they like, but time and time again people fall back into old habits of pimping workers and matches they like with no regard to their concerns about the business or the participants' welfare... It's confusing. For example, if Bob Roop becomes a pimped worker after the Mid-South, is he a fuck-up for being in the business, a great worker or a fuck-up and a great worker?

I don't think it's wrong to be non-apologetic, so long as people don't end up spinning as much BS as apologists. Personally I don't think the issue is as clear cut as people make out and yes I have a hard time understanding how people have squared that concept.

My comment wasn't about the Mid-South project specifically, it's about people's attitudes. I think it's OK to say "I don't like the business, but I like wrestling", the point is whether you can separate the two. Where's the consistency in criticisng ROH and praising Mid-South? They both come from the same sleazy business. If there's no contradiction then are we gonna get a criticism of Mid-South? (I hope not, but that's the way it comes across to me -- this stuff is ok, this stuff is the object of scorn.) While we were having the porn vs. wrestling debate, it seemed to me that people who watch porn are a lot more honest about it, just like nobody who has a cigarette is kidding themselves. I mean the only people who watch porn and think, "Well I enjoyed that but something has to be done about it" are anit-porn lobbiysts. I'm not saying people have to learn to live with it or stop watching, or that they shouldn't care, they just need to be consistent... Otherwise, for every remark on that Bingo sheet, there's a counter remark for non-apologists.