Matt D

He's about to challenge you to a duel.

Don't look at me, I really like the two Hogan vs Taker matches from 91.

Dynamite isn't a bad pick. His misfortune is that his most famous stuff is far from his best. But even there, I blame Tiger Mask and WWF tag formula more than I blame him. I didn't vote for him, but he was a gifted wrestler who managed to stand out in a lot of places. I would have voted for him before Taker or Angle. Dynamite needs to get more personal blame for Heel In Peril than he gets. but it's admittedly worst in 1988.

I guess it's an accomplishment for lucha that it only lost Psicosis (And Ultimo Dragon who has chunks of his career there), relative to, I don't know, Joshi.

Good cardio

Much of the Flair criticism was about him vs other number 1 contenders, not vs #101 "The Rock" or anything.

Remind me to watch this stupid chop match next month.

I regret not voting for Jerry Estrada. Not that it would have mattered.

Everything has been worth it.

Finlay was boring to me in person in 1998. Tastes mature.

I voted against people for Texas, so that's sort of countered.

Luckily we're past the workrate mentality that included wisdom like "chops=great tehnical wrestling" and pretended amount of moves used is a valid criteria to judge wrestlers on.Exactly! I'm fact a wrestler should be able to get bonus points for having a compelling match doing nothing but punches!!!! True, but someone should also get props for a match focused around body part work with lots of cool, varied offence working on a limb, not just taking a lazy approach to it and calling it minimalist. Less can be more, especially if you are a Jim Breaks who can make little things seem incredible...but nobody is telling me Kenta Kobashi would have been a better worker if he had ditched all the bombs and varied shit and had a tiny move set, relying on punch exchanges and personality to have great matches. Steve Austin vs Undertaker in 2001 is a prime example of a lazy, lazy match where they just work punch exchanges for twenty minutes. Give me dives and suplexes and bombs over that anyday, so long as they are put in smartly. No, but if he did 20% less stuff in his matches I'd love him 100% more.

Oh hey, Virus made it.

if that's the case, I put forward a motion that whenever the list is presented, we present 1-110 instead of 1-100.

Christian is doomed.

We just jumped big to 68 ballots for Waltman.

The sprint match with Bock, too, is pretty much the antithesis for the old idea of what Larry was.

Today is the day that hope dies.

Flair, the choice of anonymity.

Today will be the worst.

Man I wish Larry could have stalled just a little bit longer.

Shawn's Elbow is part of his finishing sequence. That's something I struggle with when it comes to the match. Shawn just doesn't have the weapon in his arsenal to take Taker down. Yes, him flooring him with superkicks was part of the build but he never had to hold him down for three with them, certainly not at Wrestlemania. Shawn had never been able to pin Taker. On the other hand, Taker has the escalation of moves. Chokeslam -> Last Ride -> Tombstone. All Michaels had, really, was Superkick -> Kip up, Elbow, Superkick. But even then, that's just not ENOUGH escalation. That's, in part, why the countout moment is so important. I had an issue with the caught cat skin/moonsault. I think one of those two was just a little too cute. Having one was okay. Having two was problematic. I think that's endemic of a bigger problem when it comes to matches like these (self aware epics or whatever). It's very hard to find the line and the natural inclination is always for complexity over simplicity. There are points where I think it works (the Choke - block, kick-block, chokeslam, and the sunset flip attempt on the Last Ride before Taker hits it), but when it doesn't work or when a simpler choice would improve upon it, it sticks out badly.

Well, yeah, the major difference is in his run prior to the UFC. But I don't think that's the only difference. I don't think he's religiously against selling, for one. In some ways, I liken current Brock more to Hansen at his worst, just without a lot of the positives.

We can just find and replace on Brock Lesnar if we have to. I feel very differently about Angle and Brock, though I don't think either should be in the top 100.

I won't react to Angle, for the sake of my own sanity and yours. Anything else, though, I'll react to.