Matt D

You guys should be discussing finishes in this too. Do you want Lawler to job clean in new york? etc.

He became Magnum in May 83 right?

Has anyone ever looked at Slaughter's talent relations/scout/agent work in thinking about his candidacy?

And far more importantly, because he couldn't follow history and go with this:

A cunning plan to trade for Masao Ito in 1984.

I think placing Punk in the 80s is really tough. Maybe a cross between Chris Colt and Jake Roberts.

Hopefully Buddy doesn't try to marry Barry's sister.

He's trying to work you. Tell him you're sending Andre and send Pete Doherty instead.

I'm not participating but I like watching how people are really thinking about their territory in their picks and not just who might be best statistically or whatever.

This is where this is headed:

I really love AAA entrances too.

As you say, I'm the one that points out that we're doing the same shit now that we've done for years, just with more stuff to look at. Of course in 2005 we had more stuff to look at than in 1995, and in 1995 we had more stuff (if we cared to chase for it) than in 1985, and 1985 was light years ahead of 1975 in what was available to collectors / hardcore fans. It just part of a continuum. As far as Enlightenment, to consider us or the nonsense we're talking about to be the Locke or Voltaire or Kant of pro wrestling is pretty much up there in the Kerry Von Erich Delusional Zone. That's not what I'm saying John. Also, I just watched Bossman vs Kobashi, liked it a lot, but also think Tenta could have had a very similar match in 92-93. Some of the flourishes like the powerbomb and missed top rope move and the sunset flip reversal of a piledriver reversal would have had to be different (simpler, but also effective looking given how good Tenta's stuff looked. I think the crowd would have reacted just as much). They'd have to get to the initial legwork a different way too (probably with Tenta knocked out of the ring when Kobashi moved him for the first time with his offense early on. The grabbing of the legs could come from there). But the way Bossman gave and sold, the way he worked the crowd, the great cut off with the punch out of nowhere, these were all things that Quake were pretty good at (With that last one, I would have actually loved to see Kobashi vs Yoko, because again, they could have had a pretty similar match thematically).

I just ran a search and it all goes back to the Bret vs Flair thread. Of course it does.

So basically, he just has Ryback's gimmick.

Wait... have we gotten so full of ourself that we're claiming to be the Enlightenment of Wrestling Fandom? I've long been called an arrogant condescending fan, but even I won't go there. Hey, you, more than anyone else, are the guy who is always the first to remind us that we're not doing anything new here. No new ideas under the sun and all that. All we're doing is organizing, classifying, and looking for patterns in order to better understand the world around us, or in this case, a hobby that we're passionate about. I'll admit that there's something sort of 18th century about how we do it and it's not particularly robust relative to how people look at other mediums, but trust me, I'll take that over Parv using literary theory or Foucault to break things down any day, personally (and I don't say that because he would so much as because I know he could.)

How many wrestlers career goal was Great Match Theory? Seriously, who comes up with tropes like this. It was idiots like ourselves who came up with nonsensical terms like Great Match Theory (or My Turn, Your Turn to be equal opportunity in mentioning nonsensical terms) to explain some bullshit that *we* are seeing, be it in the Work or in our own circular discussions about Work. The vast majority of wrestlers that we're talking about would see us tossing out phrases like Great Match Theory and wonder what in the fuck are we talking about. Just shit on the entire Enlightenment, why dontcha John?

Good is subjective, though, because wrestling isn't stats based. It's more of an art than a sport. That's part of the problem here. You can find patterns over time on what the wrestler actually does to make the matches great, how he handles different situations, and .. Again, we've done this though. let me say that people have been brandishing it like a dragon to be slayed when it's not exactly illogical, as Loss said. But it's a starting point in figuring this stuff out to me, not an end point.

I know we're having fun here, but the issue is quantity of quality vs elements of quality and patterns over time. Frankly, they're two ideas that should build upon one another, not push against one another.

Man, I can totally picture a John Tenta match. I think Kobashi would have been really great in one. EDIT: I actually have a much harder time with a Kobashi match since I sort of see him as an element that plays into other people's matches. That's probably lack of familiarity on my part. Please note that when I said that I basically meant "90s AJPW style."

Only if I can be remembered as that asshole that said the word holistic too much. To be fair, I always do mean it

Id be way more interested in Kobashi working Tenta's match than Bossman working Kobashi's match. Just saying.

Steven is a great guy but I'm not letting him near my actual kids.

Parv might.

You can stick it out til you get to the Zack Ryder/Rosa Mendes dream sequence. I know you can.

I wish that Jannetty didn't have the Goldust match in 96 or else I could rationalize putting him higher than Michaels pretty easily.