Dave on Sayama and watching old footage

[Loss]

This really deserves its own thread.

 

Someone started a thread at the F4W board called "Wrestling from the 80's really isn't very good". Their point of evidence was that the Flair/Funk I Quit match was slow and boring.

 

There's a lot of interesting stuff in that thread, but I want to focus on one key topic.

 

Dave says, about Hamada being better:

 

  Quote

Acting like you get something or figured something about about a time frame when you don't know the context, the standards of the time or the time frame is kind of funny.

 

Again, when Sayama was putting the jr. heavyweight division on the map and doing those matches, was he thinking about people who 15 years later would set all-time video sale records watching them (which did happen) or people who don't know the time, culture or standards 29 years later looking at them.

 

He was probably thinking, I'm over like crazy blending this European, Mexican and Japanese style now, and Gran Hamada can't get over unless he's my opponent and won't get over to the public for another 15 years after somebody else came in and popularized Lucha style, but in 29 years these geeks will look back and diss me because I'm not wrestling as good in their minds with their idea of psychology and high spots as Gran Hamada.

 

When he was inventing things and not always hitting them was he thinking, I can't try anything new because everything new is wrong and 29 years ago a bunch of people will say I actually sucked even though I was the only small guy in history ever to get over to the level I did in Japan.

 

Yep, that's exactly what he was thinking.

 

It's always amusing to hear these stories about guys who got over during their time based on their ring work, who their opponents call the greatest workers they've been in with, who had incredible understanding of what they were doing, and then hear about Joe Blow in the second match was actually a better worker based on styles changing or not understanding how uniqueness at a certain time is good thing, not a bad thing.

He seems to be missing the point. I've never heard anyone criticize Sayama for being different.

[El-P]

This is going to be ugly...

[Loss]

I understand why Sayama got over. Precisely because of what Dave said -- he was different. There are many examples you can point to of something different getting over in wrestling that isn't necessarily good.

 

But "getting over" and "being good" are two completely different things. Not everyone who is good is over, and not everyone who is over is good.

[MJH]

I'm kind of on the fence about the whole Sayama/Dynamite debate. Of course they don't hold up. BUT... it's junior spotFU. It was never going to hold up. They were worked as exhibitions of what they could do athletically. They were about the excitement rather than drama/story. There was always going to be someone who came along and either did it quicker/faster/with more spins or guys who harnessed it better. Or both. I don't see what the big deal is; they're still the most important run of matches in the development of junior-heavyweight wrestling.

[goodhelmet]

It is not true that they don't hold up because it is junior spot-fu. They don't hold up because they are poorly executed.

[Childs]

It also seems like Dave fails to understand that looking back at old art using standards which have evolved over time is something that we do constantly as thinking humans. Yes, it's helpful to understand how various works were viewed in the context of their times. But in other fields, it's generally accepted that as modern consumers, we're still allowed to judge them.

 

And I'm not saying Dave is dumb. This is just a real analytical blind spot for him.

[goodhelmet]

I think it is also important to point out that we aren't judging these matches by modern standards. We are comparing 80s matches to other 80s matches.

[Resident Evil]

  goodhelmet said:

It is not true that they don't hold up because it is junior spot-fu. They don't hold up because they are poorly executed.

WRONG and Meltzer is totally right.

 

A) They do hold up. 4/21/83 is still one of the best matches of all times and has the privelege of being a match that can't be duplicated

 

While on a rant, a lot of Sayama's backlash and DK's too for that matter is that people always tear down what is obviously the best out there. People always tear down people who are better at something so they can feel and cheat themselves up higher in the totem pole of life. The scary thing is that people don't even conciously know when or why they're doing this. Than they embrace mediocrity or something not quite as good as the best as a way to justify not getting their self esteem by actually going out and doing something .... I have to go but I continue on this rant if i have time.

 

 

  Quote

think it is also important to point out that we aren't judging these matches by modern standards. We are comparing 80s matches to other 80s matches.

 

 

You are comparing 80s matches to other 80s matches from a 2011 brain. I am one of the few who can actually put myself in the 80s. Also, you are comparing 80s to s80s in what you think is good wrestling from your perspective, not what was actually great wrestling than and what is actually great wrestling now.

[Bix]

What people have been saying is that they don't get why US smarks went so gaga over Tiger Mask but not Gran Hamada when Hamada's spots were as or more impressive and hit cleaner while he was also the better overall/more psychologically worker, not why Tiger Mask got over huge and Hamada didn't.

[Resident Evil]

  Bix said:

What people have been saying is that we don't get why US smarks went so gaga over Tiger Mask but not Gran Hamada when Hamada's spots were as or more impressive and hit cleaner while he was also the better overall/more psychologically worker, not why Tiger Mask got over huge and Hamada didn't.

Still in a rush but I want to say I am a fan of Hamada. Much respect for the man and his wrestling. I have much respect for his athletic feats in the ring but becoming comepletly objective here and I have no reason to be bias toward eitehr guy --

 

Hamanda's spots were not on the level of Sayama's spots from a WOW/physical standpoint. In fact, Sayamawas considerably ahead which is saying something since Hamada was awesome in this department too. Plus Sayama had the gimmick and the presence that worked with his atheltic ability to make him stand out even more. Props to both guys but Sayama was ahead in this deaprtment.

[Bix]

Even if one were to concede that, Sayama wasn't THAT much more athletically impressive than Hamada that it's pretty weird that Hamada not being anything close to a pimped guy until Michinoku Pro over a decade later (was anyone other than Asai and rookie Sasuke pimped individually by American fans at the time?).

[MJH]

Surely it's just a case of visibility, Bix? Did Hamada have anywhere near the TV exposure that Sayama did?

 

Was Hamada ever the kind of worker to reach out, grab you and call attention to himself either? I've never been particularly struck by much "star quality" in the guy... maybe that's me, I don't know.

[Dylan Waco]

  Resident Evil said:

  Bix said:

What people have been saying is that we don't get why US smarks went so gaga over Tiger Mask but not Gran Hamada when Hamada's spots were as or more impressive and hit cleaner while he was also the better overall/more psychologically worker, not why Tiger Mask got over huge and Hamada didn't.

Still in a rush but I want to say I am a fan of Hamada. Much respect for the man and his wrestling. I have much respect for his athletic feats in the ring but becoming comepletly objective here and I have no reason to be bias toward eitehr guy --

 

Hamanda's spots were not on the level of Sayama's spots from a WOW/physical standpoint. In fact, Sayamawas considerably ahead which is saying something since Hamada was awesome in this department too. Plus Sayama had the gimmick and the presence that worked with his atheltic ability to make him stand out even more. Props to both guys but Sayama was ahead in this deaprtment.

 

I'm going to ignore your utterly insane rant above for the time being but it simply isn't true that Hamada's spots weren't on the level of Sayama's. Hell in their match together Hamada had the better, flashier, faster and better executed spots. That's not even disputable.

[Childs]

  Resident Evil said:

  goodhelmet said:

It is not true that they don't hold up because it is junior spot-fu. They don't hold up because they are poorly executed.

WRONG and Meltzer is totally right.

 

A) They do hold up. 4/21/83 is still one of the best matches of all times and has the privelege of being a match that can't be duplicated

 

While on a rant, a lot of Sayama's backlash and DK's too for that matter is that people always tear down what is obviously the best out there. People always tear down people who are better at something so they can feel and cheat themselves up higher in the totem pole of life. The scary thing is that people don't even conciously know when or why they're doing this. Than they embrace mediocrity or something not quite as good as the best as a way to justify not getting their self esteem by actually going out and doing something .... I have to go but I continue on this rant if i have time.

 

 

  Quote

think it is also important to point out that we aren't judging these matches by modern standards. We are comparing 80s matches to other 80s matches.

 

 

You are comparing 80s matches to other 80s matches from a 2011 brain. I am one of the few who can actually put myself in the 80s. Also, you are comparing 80s to s80s in what you think is good wrestling from your perspective, not what was actually great wrestling than and what is actually great wrestling now.

 

Yeah Will, your mental time travel skills are for shit.

[goodhelmet]

We read his essay at DVDVR and it made no impact. It landed at #165. At the very best , it is the 165th best NJ match of the 80s. Most people who aren't blinded by fandom will admit the same thing... Syaama may have been revolutionary but the matches don't stand the test of time. Hey wildpegasus, why don't you repost your review of the match over here and re-establish the greatness of the match?

[Log]

  MJH said:

Surely it's just a case of visibility, Bix? Did Hamada have anywhere near the TV exposure that Sayama did?

I'd say this has a lot to do with it. I don't know about tv exposure, but I'd be willing to bet that a bunch more TM matches were floating around with tape traders than Hamada matches. Speaking for myself (and maybe others here), I was introduced to Japanese wrestling through guys I had seen in the states. A bunch of people started checking out puro because of some heavily-pimped Steiners matches in the early 90's. I may be talking out of my ass, but I'm sure the TM/Dynamite matches got some extra play from featuring a dude that people were already familiar with from WWF.

[Wahoos Leg]

  goodhelmet said:

Syaama may have been revolutionary but the matches don't stand the test of time.

I feel that way when I watch a lot of ECW now. It was trail-blazing stuff that changed the business forever but a lot of those matches now are just bad.

[goodhelmet]

And rewatching a ton of ECW with Dylan, a lot of matches actually stand the test of time and are still really good.

[Loss]

Calling something dated isn't always the insult it's cracked up to be. Plenty of music and film was great at the time that isn't with the benefit of hindsight either. Saying something doesn't look good now isn't necessarily saying it shouldn't have looked good then, which I think is a bit of the perception problem with this point of view. Sayama was liked at the time because he was pushed, had a cool mask and did cool moves. His matches were praised because they were different. No one is disagreeing with Dave on those points. Saying they don't look so good now is not always a claim that people should never have liked them in the first place.

[smkelly]

While I don't remember the positioning I gave the match, here is what I wrote about it at DVDVR.

 

(I was quoting a post by Will)

  Quote

I had similar feelings with the Dyno/TM series. As a kid, I loved them. I thought they were fantastic, otherworldly in fact. But, I was like 15 or 16 (about a decade ago). When I sat down to watch them again, after a long stretch of not seeing them (three years probably), I was not impressed.

 

I noticed all of the finer details of the match, like little shots of hate and revenge, which I am a mark for. I love stiff wrestling, which Dyno provides, but I also love crisp execution, delivery, selling, pacing, psychology, and workrate. The Dyno/TM series fails in many of those categories for me, especially selling and execution.

Some might make the excuse for TM's sloppiness, but it is fundamentally unprofessional to have never practiced a maneuver but try it in a match anyway. It is risky, unprofessional, and not cool. Peeps could get hurt, man.

 

Will is right though WP: "Most people who aren't blinded by fandom will admit the same thing"

 

Let go man, let go.

[rovert]

Im so said that the Strikefore news broke after I had a chance to respond Dave's reply to me.

[Resident Evil]

  goodhelmet said:

We read his essay at DVDVR and it made no impact. It landed at #165. At the very best , it is the 165th best NJ match of the 80s. Most people who aren't blinded by fandom will admit the same thing... Syaama may have been revolutionary but the matches don't stand the test of time. Hey wildpegasus, why don't you repost your review of the match over here and re-establish the greatness of the match?

I've written better things about that match. That was only a partial review. Basically, it never fails to bring out emotional response for me (and it's not only what they do but when they did it all mixed up in the context of time)

at a higher level than most other matches and I'm one who doesn't care for some of DK's antics outside of the ring. And also like I said I do have an ability to shut other things put myself back in time and appreciate a match in that time frame. Of course it's not pure as watching a million matches changes how wrestling effects you but I'm good at it.

 

But it's just not DK and Tiger that are effected by people not seeing it properly. Even stuff like the almost always praised 90s AJPW or lesser work for that matter doesn't get appreciated as much by some of the newer fans who saw (when in comparison to the older fans) great moves, fighting spirit, innovation by others before seeing it by the masters. Interestingly, on the flip side of the coin, the older fans don't appreciate the newer stuff as much as they should.because they've already seen epic and have emotion invested with their favs. Their is a signifigant difference in the overall rating system of matches by these two sets of fans for the same matches which I find intriguing.

[smkelly]

The problem with newer material is the "head drop + no selling + risky spot + no selling + head drop + no selling in thirty seconds" mentality.

[Matt D]

All of this stuff is well and good and important in understanding the context of the match, but when I'm watching something in 2011, what matters to me is how I feel about it in 2011. I could see how there could be an issue if there wasn''t a litany of 80s matches that I absolutely love when watching them today. But there are. Yes, sure the wrestlers weren't intending the matches to be watched on a computer 25 years later on a little portable HAL. I get that.

 

Who the hell cares? It's an exercise in pointless delusion to try to pretend it's 1985 again when watching something. Honestly, considering that using the same criteria a lot of people around here judge a lot of 80s matches above the matches of today (perhaps just not some of the ones that people went crazy for at the time), I'm not even sure why this is an argument. Actually, considering the initial issue was "all 80s matches are terrible," then yeah, I get it there, but with this board?

[El-P]

Johnny Cash didn't write and recorded songs to be judged by French guys in 2011 listening to it on an iPod while cycling through Paris. Yet, Johnny Cash's songs still sound awesome.