Grimmas

To establish the claim that lucha is less popular than puro because of racism, at some point you have to actually point out someone being racist, rather than just softly and broadly appealing to racism in the surrounding culture, which doesn't predict one way or the other whether someone will like or dislike lucha. And who are you talking about with the "overall coverage"? PWO is such a small cross-section of total wrestling fandom, yet you are asking personal questions of people posting in this thread. Wrestling coverage that we follow and the narratives built are American. Americans think Japan is cool, and have a lot of issues with Mexicans. Those are true statements. Lucha is dismissed by overall coverage, so we are left with few explantations 1) lucha is inferior to puro 2) lucha is very difficult to get into, and that barrier is too much 3) there is something else going on here Is it ridiculous to think that a culture that thinks Japan is really cool and that is ok with voting in a President that says he will deport all illegal Mexicans and build a wall around Mexico, would lead to some racist issues? I am no way calling someone like Parv a racist. He's not. However, since he got into other wrestling outside American, puro has been praised greatly and lucha dismissed. AJPW is greatest ever, El Dandy is a joke, , etc... etc... those narratives came from American coverage. It's probably a mix of a billion things, but to just dismiss any racism seems foolhearty. stro can keep saying all he wants that people are claiming it's all about racism, but nobody has said that. He's either trolling or just can't read.

You miss my point oj. It's not that anyone here is being racist, however to pretend the reason Lucha has gained no ground and has no coverage or narratives has nothing to do with racism seems bizarre. Japan is neat and cool. Mexicans is nothing. Personal and overall coverage are different things.

Keep your bullshit aside please.

Question when you first looked into wrestling from outside America did you watch Puro or Lucha?

To think the way Americans view Mexico and Japan has nothing to do with this is ridiculous

People who are against Lucha seem convinced Lucha fans are irrate when Lucha is put down. How is wondering why it's ignored in coverage and overall narratives being irrate?

Lupus-Trauma for being awesome vs DIY-Revival for being awesome and being there live. One of those two will be number one,but I'm having trouble negating the live bias.

The problem with that is lucha draws incredibly well in America, it's just it never gets talked about or reported. A random indie show in Chicago or where will out draw your random ROH house show.

I missed Konnan on the list, somehow. I think they spelled it weird 1991: 49 1992: 143 1993: 125 1994: 34 Vampiro 1991: unranked 1992: unranked 1993: unranked 1994: 255 Cien Caras 1991: unranked 1992: unranked 1993: unranked 1994: 158 Perro Aguayo 1991: unranked 1992: unranked 1993: unranked 1994: 223

1991 #1 Hulk Hogan #20 Great Muta (highest puro) #111 Negro Casas (highest lucha) #142 Mil Mascaras 1992 #1 Sting #18 Jushin Liger (highest puro) #156 Negro Casas (highest lucha) #187 Mil Mascaras 1993 #1 Bret Hart #19 Great Muta (highest puro) #77 Ultimo Dragon (maybe highest lucha or might count for puro?) #127 Mil Mascaras #328 Silver King (highest lucha) note; Negro Casas and El Hijo del Santo not listed 1994 #1 Bret Hart #15 Great Muta (highest puro) #62 Love Machine (highest lucha) #94 El Hijo del Santo (second higest lucha) #188 Mil Mascaras I think that's enough.

PWI and that British top 50/100? magazines list really demonstrate what I am talking about.

or Grimmas is saying he doesn't feel obligated to watch puro anymore, since puro fans don't feel obligated to watch lucha. That's a completely difference statement. I find this statement really weird. People not feeling obligated to watch wrestling they don't feel emotionally attached to (or that don't like a particular style) is something that happens across the board, not just lucha. There's a ton of fans that don't like or know about indy wrestling and don't feel obligated to seek and watch the most pimped matches. Same for British wrestling, lucha and even puro. I felt obligated for years to try to seek out the best stuff of the year in order to make a best match of the year list or to feel worthy to talk about who is the best. If you only watch your favourites how can you claim to make a best of anything list? Aren't you just making your favourites list then? That was my mindset, but that is a minority mindset, so I'm dropping it. Honest curiosity, are you changing the way you watch wrestling because you think you will enjoy a new/different viewing habits/patterns (or whatever) or are you changing because you don't like that you feel like others (or maybe enough others?) are doing it? I am curious as to why you are changing how you watch wrestling... frustration? fatigue? something else all together? Felt pointless. Why hold myself to a standard that nobody else does? Stick to what I like. Also I feel Lucha needs more advocates and if I cut out boring Puro I I can have more time for Lucha.

True.

What sucks is that it seems some people didn't learn anything. Flair was #1 and that is all that mattered? One thing I feel is needed is more champions for some huge areas of wrestling and a brand new narrative to be constructed.

There is american, puro, and lucha as the three most successful and biggest wrestling. American getting praise makes complete sense, it's our local stuff in our language. Puro and lucha are in different languages and has to bee seeked out. That's the only reason, as a comparison.

or Grimmas is saying he doesn't feel obligated to watch puro anymore, since puro fans don't feel obligated to watch lucha. That's a completely difference statement. I find this statement really weird. People not feeling obligated to watch wrestling they don't feel emotionally attached to (or that don't like a particular style) is something that happens across the board, not just lucha. There's a ton of fans that don't like or know about indy wrestling and don't feel obligated to seek and watch the most pimped matches. Same for British wrestling, lucha and even puro. I felt obligated for years to try to seek out the best stuff of the year in order to make a best match of the year list or to feel worthy to talk about who is the best. If you only watch your favourites how can you claim to make a best of anything list? Aren't you just making your favourites list then? That was my mindset, but that is a minority mindset, so I'm dropping it.

Somehow I need to watch more of, but everytime I saw him really impressed. 60 is too young to go.

or Grimmas is saying he doesn't feel obligated to watch puro anymore, since puro fans don't feel obligated to watch lucha. That's a completely difference statement. EDIT: As for GWE, I think the amount of wrestlers that people were exposed to was a good thing. The discussions, the exploring was good fro everyone.

A word on my reporting. So, I'm ignoring the 12 other shows CMLL does a week. Just imagine it's random trios with nothing of consequence happening. For "Super Viernes" on Friday nights you will get all the results. If that is a big event like the Anniversary Show you will get a full write up of everything. Then on Sunday with the CMLL TV, you will get ridiculous lucha skits, plus more descriptions of the matches that air. This will keep it easy for me to keep up with.

I didn't mean the title to be an attack. I think it's pretty fair that puro gets super praise and lucha gets dismissed, but I can see how it would sound like a battle cry or something.

But it's different and challenges you to think more than "oh look at Kobashi chop this guy really hard" so just say it sucks and move on. I do feel victimised for not liking lucha, truth be told. Well let me say that's pretty ridiculous as there are more people in this thread saying "I've never really gotten into lucha" than beating the lucha drum. If you've been "victimised" in this thread it's because you went out of your way to try and antagonize people who do like lucha by saying "it sucks" or dismissing and mocking people's posts defending it or trying to explain why it's not as popular as other forms of wrestling. If you walk down the street with a kick me sign on your back, you don't get to claim you're a victim when someone kicks you. It's not at all me who needs the thicker skin, it's Lucha fans if they really see someone saying "Lucha sucks" as antagonism. Got to deal with that better I think. Cos you know most people aren't actually as polite as I am online. LOL!!!!!!! Let's see what happens when someone says Dory sucks or Flair isn't a top ten wrestler of all time. Do you find that antagonist? Outside of the context of GWE, I couldn't care less Ok, now let's say that was the majority of people. The majority of people thought Flair was at best top 25 of all time, not close to number. In fact, a huge chunk of those people think Flair sucks. Flair never won maybe 1 WON award. Maybe only a handful of 5 star matches, at most. Maybe only a couple. Now what?

This is getting off topic. As I've said before opinions don't happen in a vacuum, Kobashi has a whole critical narrative around him and Taue has had another one. Whether or not people are aware of it, statements on either of them will be taken with reference to those narratives.Typically on any given thing you'll get an orthodoxy that emerges, then a revisionist position and then possibly even a counter revisionist one. A lot of my positions might be described as "counter-revisionist" because most of the time the push back has been too much. Flair, Dory, three pillars, many times the criticisms are pushed to an extreme. Other times like on Luger, Garvin, and a whole host of others, I'm more on board with the revisionist message. If you want to say I've made the three positions up, it's cool because I don't know if you haven't noticed but I've barely discussed any of these things since April. None of this has anything to do with lucha either. There in lies the problem. The narrative on lucha is completely flat out wrong. The narrative is, it's hard to get into, has no psychology and is all floaty and dives. No luchador is a great worker, except maybe Casas. That is just plain wrong. It's also why it's so easily dismissed. The narrative says it sucks, so why would it get any coverage or look at? How established is this narrative though? Who says this? Sounds like stuff I've said but in all the talk I've ever had around those views I've felt quite firmly in the minority. Minority maybe on PWO. However look at GWE, it's not even true there. The overall online wrestling community's narrative is as you said. Essentially Meltzer's narrative is as you said. Yeah, Phil Schneider and Dylan Hales may challenge you, but that's not the overall narrative. Thinking lucha sucks is the majority, not anywhere near the minority.

But it's different and challenges you to think more than "oh look at Kobashi chop this guy really hard" so just say it sucks and move on. I do feel victimised for not liking lucha, truth be told. Well let me say that's pretty ridiculous as there are more people in this thread saying "I've never really gotten into lucha" than beating the lucha drum. If you've been "victimised" in this thread it's because you went out of your way to try and antagonize people who do like lucha by saying "it sucks" or dismissing and mocking people's posts defending it or trying to explain why it's not as popular as other forms of wrestling. If you walk down the street with a kick me sign on your back, you don't get to claim you're a victim when someone kicks you. It's not at all me who needs the thicker skin, it's Lucha fans if they really see someone saying "Lucha sucks" as antagonism. Got to deal with that better I think. Cos you know most people aren't actually as polite as I am online. LOL!!!!!!! Let's see what happens when someone says Dory sucks or Flair isn't a top ten wrestler of all time. Do you find that antagonist?

The way facts are presented in the title comes off as a bit whiny to me. Very "us vs them" mentality. It sets a predecent even before the discussion begins I think. Not that it should excuse "blah, lucha just sucks" kinda answers though. Did I ever say "lucha is inferior" ? I don't think I have. Plenty of people have expressed plenty of perfectly reasonnable ideas and conceptions of why they don't really get into it in this thread. If it's really hard to get into it, and saying lucha should be dismissed and puro is better. That means lucha is inferior.

This is getting off topic. As I've said before opinions don't happen in a vacuum, Kobashi has a whole critical narrative around him and Taue has had another one. Whether or not people are aware of it, statements on either of them will be taken with reference to those narratives. Typically on any given thing you'll get an orthodoxy that emerges, then a revisionist position and then possibly even a counter revisionist one. A lot of my positions might be described as "counter-revisionist" because most of the time the push back has been too much. Flair, Dory, three pillars, many times the criticisms are pushed to an extreme. Other times like on Luger, Garvin, and a whole host of others, I'm more on board with the revisionist message. If you want to say I've made the three positions up, it's cool because I don't know if you haven't noticed but I've barely discussed any of these things since April. None of this has anything to do with lucha either. There in lies the problem. The narrative on lucha is completely flat out wrong. The narrative is, it's hard to get into, has no psychology and is all floaty and dives. No luchador is a great worker, except maybe Casas. That is just plain wrong. It's also why it's so easily dismissed. The narrative says it sucks, so why would it get any coverage or look at?