Matt D

He does spend the next few paragraphs going over "Well, what makes a draw? is it interviews? is it workrate? is it looks?" etc. but it all rings sort of hollow after the opening which basically states that Flair, Hogan, and Sting would be much bigger draws if they weren't in WCW, basically.

We had to get this out of the joshi note. I've decided to move it here. 1.) Does this hurt Casas' case to you? You basically just said that he ate up the match and hurt both the match and the feud because of it. 2.) From what I've understood, CMLL doesn't need to take risks. It doesn't need to be booked well. It doesn't need much of anything because of their revenue structure. There's no real benefit to them having agents to keep matches aimed the way they're supposed to be. 3.) I think this match bothered you because you've seen a lot of matches where the story is there and where they do build towards the payoff match. Like you said. "We all know how hot trios matches can be in the lead up to a singles match..." I think that means that lucha isn't necessarily a poor medium for great storytelling. Quite the opposite. It's a great medium. It's just that the execution rarely lives up to the inherent potential due to laziness and non-committal booking. On the other hand, there's just so much out there that you do find it and when you do, it's really enjoyable?

Meltzer on drawing in January 1995 (following a list of cards that drew over 10K):

Generally, context and selling over time. Pro wrestling is like any sort of fiction. It doesn't need to be real. It just needs to be consistent within its own universe. It has to follow its own rules. Obviously, when we're comparing wrestlers across styles, this may become a broader issue, but Cena's offense is presented a certain way, sold a certain way, and ultimately symbolic. The fans generally buy into it, even the jaded ones, because in the moment, they know it means something. Look at a match like Night of Champions 2012 - Cena vs Punk. Punk's whole gameplan is to do anything in the world to avoid Cena's offense. It worked for me because the offense has been so protected and built up over time, and because Punk was giving it so much reverence (while Cena was bringing a certain level of intensity and confidence in believing in it himself). In the end, it's going to be up to you. How something looks matters so much less than how it's used and what it means to me. I don't care how believable the special effects are in a movie that has a great plot and good acting. Other people feel differently. If you feel the way you do, that's fine. If you're just trying to understand how people can feel differently, that's fine too.

I wasn't watching and only saw people exploding. Did Rock put Rusev over?

My main take away was that he wasn't really main eventing B Shows that year but I think the tag titles might have been something of a draw on them.

Yeah, I looked through that for a few minutes and didn't get a really good opinion one way or the other. They went on last on some shows where the real main event was in the middle and were second to the last on a lot of cards where the real main event seemed at the end. Then I bowed out by halfway through the year and posted here.

It's not totally relevant to this but since New York was brought up, I'd be curious to see an examination of his card placement in 84.

I really loathe 88 Bulldogs. Dynamite was fairly good at garnering sympathy because he was so broken down but despite that they had a really bad year of taking way too much of their matches and playing against their strengths.

This is one hell of a match. I got a bit thrown by the rudo/tecnico designation, but I think ultimately, it doesn't matter. Casas was the first one to really get aggressive with his running leap across the ring onto the leg, but Santo not having to be fit within a formula of overcoming adversity was somewhat freeing to him. He was able to bring a lot more intensity instead of sitting up out of moves and what not. The one fall structure was used very well; I don't even think they go for a pin for the first fifteen minutes. Loss is completely right on how this screwed with the conventions, but it did so in some really smart ways. The sequence of Casas hitting the corner dropkick to Santo in the tree of woe, going for La Casita, getting pushed away, going for another corner dropkick only for Santo to move and then Santo hitting the plancha was amazing. My one problem with the match was that Casas didn't sell more after Santo's super arm-breaker rocker dropper of doom thing, which was so impressive looking that they even replayed it. It didn't have to be long term selling (and he did sell the arm after the first cross arm breaker and the stuff in the ropes) but since the finish followed directly from it, it would have been nice. The rest of the selling was really great, both Santo's leg selling early on and then Casas' full body selling late in the match, including his arms draping away on the Camel Clutch attempt. Great stuff.

Did he get anything more than 2-3 minutes long? He certainly was good at inspiring crowd support in those matches and getting them behind him as they're usually based on him trying to break out of a hold. (I may or may not be serious: I don't even know anymore).

He's as good at timing cutoffs as anyone I've ever seen.

Sometime about a year from now I'll have a big post.

How much of them in the 70s do we actually have, Kevin?

What do you think of his 90-91 WWF run? The performance at Survivor Series 90, the Desert Storm matches, etc.

It's good of you to go and back up your nomination. I'm not nearly as harsh on your choice as some people. That said, if, as a community, we haven't put 100 better wrestlers in front of you (Even by some of the criteria that you laud Warrior upon) by the time the voting happens, then I'll be a little surprised.

I don't think this is a conversation worth having, to be honest. Whoever nominated him should probably say something, though.

He'd probably make my 500. He could follow direction. He had a lot of energy. He believed in what he was doing which came through in his work (much like Sid). He was insanely fun to watch on the apron in a tag match. Yep, he'd make my 500.

Patterns.

OJ, should I follow the order you present here or what? I want to start watching some WoS and I don't necessarily want to watch the best matches before I can appreciate the style. What's the best way to get my feet wet and build up to what I should be seeing? I'm okay making this a long-term investment if it means doing it the best way.

I think emoting is a better way to put it.

I don't use any sort of rating for matches nor do I keep any sort of master list. I do comment a lot and write things up and can search here and DVDVR but in general I either remember something or I don't. I tried to start using the blog function here to keep track of matches for the GOAT but that hasn't gone so well so far.

I'm sold. Not that it does anyone much good.

Mike Jackson? I'm gathering matches.

You're talking medium-long term storytelling, not within a single match itself, right?