Insider terms

[Loss]

Quote from alkeiper about Foley/HBK:

 

Everything clicks, and you can enjoy the match even without appreciating the psychology involved.

Could you clarify what you mean by the word "psychology"? Not to say this is the case with you, but I've seen many people who seem to think that psychology is something that focuses on the unimportant stuff instead of the important stuff. Psychology is simply "why" -- not much else to it besides that. All matches are going to have psychology, it's just that some matches are going to have good psychology and some matches are going to have bad psychology. In short, a match that has good psychology is a match that makes sense.

 

It's something that's often taken in the wrong direction -- some seem to think psychology is nothing more than not forgetting to sell a body part all the way to the finish, or thinking that psychology means nothing more than working a body part to build to a finish. While that's part of it, it's not all of it. If a babyface is in a chinlock and pumps his fist and shakes his body to rally the crowd, that's psychology, because it's emphasizing his role as the babyface fighting from underneath. Good psychology doesn't necessarily involve taking apart a body part to set up a submission hold, although that's one way to get there. Problems start when a wrestler stops selling the hold, switches to the wrong arm, shrugs off all the work put into destroying him when making his comeback, and the work not leading anywhere. That only serves to remind the viewer that wrestling is fake and makes it hard to continue getting into the match. The body part stuff is less about playing into the finish and more about making it clear to the viewer what the wrestler's strategy is -- good psychology will have the viewer having a clear idea from beginning to end of the role of each wrestler and the strategy of each wrestler.

 

I think the term sometimes gets mislabeled as an "overanalyzing smark" thing or whatever, when that has nothing to do with it. All psychology is about is giving a reason why the wrestlers are doing what they are doing. I see the word misused quite often. I also wanted to point out that it puzzles me when I see a wrestler described as "having great psychology". Wrestlers don't "have" great psychology -- matches have psychology. You can say most of their matches have it, but saying the wrestler has it is not accurate.

 

The other word I see misused often is workrate. I find the term to be useless quite honestly. It's never been accurately defined, and it implies that the only way to be a good wrestler is to have lots of moves and wrestle hard and fast, when sometimes, taking one's time and slowing things down is the right path to take. I prefer a Harley Race match over a Sabu match, and Sabu is nowhere near Harley Race as a worker, but based on the way the term is normally used, Sabu would have the higher workrate because he works faster and has more moves. So, when the debate between Hulk Hogan and Chris Benoit was ongoing in the WWF tournament, I noticed that a few people asked if the tournament was about "workrate", which was weird to me. I'm not even entirely sure what workrate is supposed to mean, or how it's supposed to be considered an applicable term. I'd rather look at the number of good-great matches someone has had and talk about the specifics.

 

Anyway, this has all been said far more eloquently many times before, but I wanted to say it here. There's some other stuff I would link that I think has nailed the subject quite nicely, actually, but I can't seem to find it.

[goodhelmet]

Loss, do me a favor, and clarify the term stooging, I was watching a Mid-South match and thought Gino Hernandez was stooging but I am not sure if I am using the right phrase.

[Al]

Could you clarify what you mean by the word "psychology"? Not to say this is the case with you, but I've seen many people who seem to think that psychology is something that focuses on the unimportant stuff instead of the important stuff. Psychology is simply "why" -- not much else to it besides that. All matches are going to have psychology, it's just that some matches are going to have good psychology and some matches are going to have bad psychology. In short, a match that has good psychology is a match that makes sense.

Most casual fans have no idea of the concepts of workrate and psychology. They know wrestling is predetermined, but they have no idea how it is done. Before a couple years ago, the idea that wrestlers would tell a story and not simply perform a wrestling exhibition was foreign to me. Yet I could still enjoy an exciting wrestling match. I liked this match long before I could explain why. I guess that's what I'm trying to express there.

[Loss]

Loss, do me a favor, and clarify the term stooging, I was watching a Mid-South match and thought Gino Hernandez was stooging but I am not sure if I am using the right phrase.

Stooging is begging off, bumping theatrically, cheating and working comedy spots to show up the heels. Ric Flair and Terry Funk are probably the best "stoogers" I've seen, although Flair has a tendency to do it too much and in cases where he probably shouldn't.

[goodhelmet]

Do you mean to show up the faces?

[Mad Dog]

The other word I see misused often is workrate. I find the term to be useless quite honestly.

I agree with that. I came to realize this when people constantly shit on Hulk Hogan as a worker. Sure his moveset was weak but the guy worked the crowd better than anyone and could tell a good story in the ring. The problem with workrate is it comes from indy snobs who are ultimately idiots and think spotfests are workrate.

[Loss]

Do you mean to show up the faces?

No, to show up the heels. A comedy spot is usually going to end up with the heel looking inept, outsmarted or outwrestled. Even if the heel is doing the work, he's doing it to put the shine on the babyface.

[goodhelmet]

OK, so stooging is when the heel does those things to make himself look inept. If you re-read the way you phrased it, I think you could see how I would be confused.