oldcasper

If something presents itself as pro wrestling, or if the fans and culture believe it is pro wrestling then it is. If we can accept that you don't need a ring, or a referree, or rules, or even an audience, or competitors (Invisible Man), why does pro wrestling need to be a work for it to be wrestling? There has to be a boundary but it can never be a firm boundary because wrestling has always had common tropes and then pushed against them. I still think the footage has to be there and the case made that it is wrestling, but I don't have an argument against nominating Ali and Frank Shamrock.

Lurking here for a while, I have got a lot of value out of the nomination threads. I think they are an effective way of trying to make the list of nominees a little more manageable (even though we are over 1,000). The best thing about a nomination process is it forces someone to think about who they are voting for and why. A short paragraph and three matches isn't that much effort to put in if you really want to vote for someone. I wouldn't be opposed to having a 'second' process, similar to GME but that would be dependent on enough people about to take part and second. I think there is a clue in the title - it's 'Greatest Wrestler Ever' so for me, every nomination has to be a very strong candidate to appear on the nominee's list. If folk are just nominating, 'wresters I quite like, or are interested in' that kind of broadens the scope of this. As others have shared, the absence of those not nominated will hardly influence the final result, and there are few that I think are huge omissions (I did really like jetlag's run through of A-B though in the other thread). I think many of us saw the odd ballot here and there were 70% of the 100 were not nominated - that doesn't reflect a failure of the process, it reflects either someone relatively early in their wrestling journey picking out the WWE wrestlers they know, the ultra niche of the niche (some dude picking all their friends from an indie type deal) or a troll. Hindsight is a powerful thing, and it feels like a large proportion of voters got on late with this (in terms of weeks before the deadline). Some of those people have submitted some great ballots but been unaware of the process of nominating. The promotion of GWE in online spaces has been brilliant but the nomination question is more of an unintended consequence of the promotion and late interest, rather than a failure of the process perhaps. (None of this is a dig at Grimmas or anyone else involved - the work has been superb and I think everyone can see how much effort has gone in to make this fun and interesting).

I had a lot go quite early (but not counting now). Seeing some people say 'hey I haven't lost anyone yet' as we get into the last 200 doesn't necessarily mean they have impeccable taste and insight. Neither does it mean the list is predictable. It does suggest that there is a 'changing canon' even if it is never expressed consciously.

I started to type a somewhat sarcastic comment, but I felt that wouldn't do the question much justice. Recency of footage is a big part of it, and also I think there is a perception in the modern wrestling fandom to constantly defend the wrestling they watch as the greatest thing ever. It doesn't help that taste makers continue to tell fans that they are watching the greatest matches of all time each week. I own my biases, but I am feeling that the wrestlers in the lower hundreds feel much more interesting from a curiosity basis than I think 150-300 will. At the same time, with so many to vote from and hundreds of ballots we will a homogenisation of the middle leaning to those most known. It also reflects that tastes somewhat change and there is little value in feeling sad about it.

I heard someone say it was poor recently but I really like it. I love the way they get over the football tackle and how Verne has worked him out. Great stuff!

Nice to see PUNQ mentioned in the thread. Their tapes were an absolute goldmine back in the 00s - used to pore over the lists. What I'll say about Hoffman is that whilst there is only a smattering of matches in 75 and 77 watching him is like watching him is a beautiful experience. Intuitive, organic, like a dance but not choreography. There's only a little but it's captivating.

I was on a long break from wrestling in the 10s so I am only going off what I read here. Is it fair to say that 2016 was characterised by a quest for a 'truth' and an assumed degree of rigour and depth which in something as personal and subjective as wrestling led to heated discussions? (By rigour and depth I mean strong confidence in every rank rather than attempts to score 'objectively' using arbritary scoring systems like BIGLAV) 2026 feels more like, 'an exploration of richness in discovery' and perhaps an awareness / reflection that 'this is where we are now'.

Kido is one of those wrestlers who if the line was drawn a little higher at maybe the 200 mark would finish a lot higher. He's great in the first UWF, and I think he's bags of fun in the New Japan / WAR feud. Am glad to see Alan Kilby got a vote, I can't say I have seen tons of his work but what I have is very good. Like many he'll suffer from a lot of early career footage not being around. It is at this stage where a handful of people's #100 picks for more personal reasons stick out if they get more than the odd vote.

Kido is one of those wrestlers who if the line was drawn a little higher at maybe the 200 mark would finish a lot higher. He's great in the first UWF, and I think he's bags of fun in the New Japan / WAR feud. Am glad to see Alan Kilby got a vote, I can't say I have seen tons of his work but what I have is very good. Like many he'll suffer from a lot of early career footage not being around. It is at this stage where a handful of people's #100 picks for more personal reasons stick out if they get more than the odd vote.

Long time lurker but first time poster (so hello!). I really appreciated the nominations threads for revisiting, and remembering and guiding my viewing / thoughts. 2036 is a long time away of course, so there is plenty of time for those who didn't get nominated but plenty of votes for that to be rectified. The high level of responses has been fantastic and maybe some didn't know about nominating, or found it easy. That's a different challenge than the value of nominations.