The Historiography of the Greatest Match Of All Time

[JerryvonKramer]

Guys, I've been through this argument so many times, inside and out, backwards and forwards over the space of the past 4 years. A lot of words, 1000s of words, a lot of frustration, tantrums, bannings, people leaving, people calling each other names.

 

I've devised concepts, aesthetic systems, "basic cultural knowledge" lists, and a whole lot more.

 

And all of that has told me that there's no end game to it. None at all. No one ever changes their view on this topic and it's one of those things where the two sides only end up getting to each other. Been there so many times.

[Dylan Waco]

Guys, I've been through this argument so many times, inside and out, backwards and forwards over the space of the past 4 years. A lot of words, 1000s of words, a lot of frustration, tantrums, bannings, people leaving, people calling each other names.

 

I've devised concepts, aesthetic systems, "basic cultural knowledge" lists, and a whole lot more.

 

And all of that has told me that there's no end game to it. None at all. No one ever changes their view on this topic and it's one of those things where the two sides only end up getting ot each other. Been there so many times.

 

That is actually my point.

 

It's a massive waste of time and space and kills threads. IIRC we have had a post specifically to debate subjectivity/objectivity issues in this forum before. By all means bump it if need be. But there is no reason for this to constantly keep coming up all the time. It's a discussion killer.

[Jingus]

you are a fucking moron.

Classy!

 

But there is no reason for this to constantly keep coming up all the time. It's a discussion killer.

We filled up over a page talking about this, in less than three hours, on a board which rarely sees that much concentrated activity. So exactly how much discussion were we killing? The original point of this thread was left behind way back on page two. Then it turned into a Shawn Michaels discussion, but you yourself opened up a new thread to handle that. And then you started the name-calling. What exactly have I derailed here?

[goodhelmet]

you are a fucking moron.

Classy!

 

But there is no reason for this to constantly keep coming up all the time. It's a discussion killer.

We filled up over a page talking about this, in less than three hours, on a board which rarely sees that much concentrated activity. So exactly how much discussion were we killing? The original point of this thread was left behind way back on page two. Then it turned into a Shawn Michaels discussion, but you yourself opened up a new thread to handle that. And then you started the name-calling. What exactly have I derailed here?

 

The point is that if you are tired of the the subjective/objective nature of pro wrestling... you can choose not to post and derail the thread even further. When someone posts a "greatest ____ of all time" post then people expect to discuss the merits of the argument. It is an exercise. If you come in with the "It is all subjective. Go Sid!" argument, it kills the discussion and exercise.

[Jingus]

So bringing up a subject for discussion which has been discussed before (and doing so in a thread where no other discussion was happening anyway, since the previous page was all HBK talk which has now moved to its own thread) is bad, but calling someone a fucking moron is just fine? Gotcha. I'll never mention it again!

[Dylan Waco]

Feel free to mention it again in another thread. I'll start one for it if you like

[goodhelmet]

So bringing up a subject for discussion which has been discussed before (and doing so in a thread where no other discussion was happening anyway, since the previous page was all HBK talk which has now moved to its own thread) is bad, but calling someone a fucking moron is just fine? Gotcha. I'll never mention it again!

No, I don't condone the name-calling but we have never enforced a name-calling ban on the board. The idea that nothing can be proven because it is all subjective is counter-productive to a meaningless discussion when this board exists and has multiple sub-forums that promote the idea of discussing the merits of good / bad wrestling. If the thread was dead then let it remain dead. Post a new thread about subjective/objective viewpoints and I don't have to read about it.

 

You can start it off like this...

 

I was reading the "The Historiography of the Greatest Match Of All Time" thread.

 

*post link*

 

I want to revisit the idea that there is objective/subjective blah blah blah blah wrestling. blah blah blah Sid is better than Bret blah blah blah.

[goodhelmet]

Also I am going to let this stand for about 24 hours then I am deleting the last 2 pages. If you disagree with the decision, create a new thread in the feedback folder you lazy fucking bastards.

[NintendoLogic]

When I bring up subjectivity, I'm not saying we should throw up our hands and declare the critical enterprise pointless. I'm just trying to unpack everyone's assumptions about what constitutes quality. Like, I can watch something like Dandy/Llanes and recognize that it's clearly great on a certain level, but it doesn't impact me emotionally the way a high-end American match does. A big part of it is that I'm mainly interested in the narrative/storytelling aspect of wrestling, and the WWE main event style is generally good about providing a clear progression to point A to B to C. In lucha, on the other hand, transitions are much more abrupt.

[goodhelmet]

That's fine. Someone else can come in and say that is your loss and continue the conversation. Saying that this is a pointless exercise becuase it is all completely subjective defeats the purpose of this board, creating "Who was better" topics and other similar threads. It is an exercise in debate and in wrestling exposure. If you don't want to debate or argue those things then stay the fuck out of a thread.

[Jingus]

I never said it was pointless to debate and discuss. Quite the opposite, it's hella fun to do that shit. Just also saying that there can never be any true conclusion or closure to the debate because of the nature of the subject. It's like trimming a bonsai tree: you can keep doing it forever, and it'll always be changing and never be truly complete, but that doesn't make the activity inherently worthless. It even kinda links into some existentialist philosophy; I'm woefully under-read in this department, but some of it can be boiled down to the paraphrase "if nothing that we do really matters, then the only thing that matters is what we choose to do".

[goodhelmet]

Your posts indicate otherwise. Start discussing the Greatest Match of All Time.

[Jingus]

Your posts indicate otherwise.

I never once said it was pointless, Will. Anyone who thought I did is inferring things I never posted, nor would have ever posted because that's not what I believe. Just because you'll never know the definitive answer to a question doesn't mean that the question shouldn't be asked.

 

Start discussing the Greatest Match of All Time.

What, 6/3/94? Haven't seen it in forever. Probably need to catch it again sometime, probably immediately after rewatching 6/8/90 to put it in the proper historical perspective. (Though I've seen it claimed that the match's psychology reaches all the way back to Choshu's invasion; however, nobody ever specifies exactly how. If anyone has the info, please dish.) But I don't think it's the greatest match ever; hell, it's not even my favorite match involving these two wrestlers, I think 6/9/95 smokes it like a Jamaican.

[NintendoLogic]

From what I've seen on Japanese sites, it seems that Japanese fans don't regard 6/3/94 as the definitive Misawa match the way American wrestling nerds do. To them, the 6/8/90 Jumbo match is a much bigger deal.

[Jingus]

It's not even really my favorite Misawa singles match, mostly cuz I like Kobashi more than Kawada. The part of 1/20/97 where an out-of-gas Kobashi is on his knees, trying and failing to throw these half-assed lariats that aren't even fazing Misawa, that bit haunts me more than anything that happened in 6/3/94. Although I like the definitive murder-death-kill finish of 94 better; I'm still not quite onboard with the "I will drop you on your head a hundred times, you'll always kick out, then I'll elbow you and pin you" weird AJPW psychology of finishers. Kinda reminds me of those ROH matches where they'll do a buncha big spots and stiff strikes and headdrops and then the finisher will be a freakin' roll-up. To steal a Cornette-ism, you're following a shooting with a stabbing.

 

EDIT: and reading through the first couple pages, it seems like we never did get around to unearthing exactly how and when this one match became hailed the GOAT.

 

DOUBLE EDIT: does anyone else occasionally look at that acronym "GOAT", suppress either a giggle or a sigh, and wish those initials spelled out something else? Best Of All Time wouldn't be any better either.

[NintendoLogic]

I think 6/3/94 and 1/20/97 are roughly equal with the slight edge going to the former, but I've had it the other way around in the past and may again in the future. I don't have a problem with 1/97's finish since Kobashi barely kicks out but is so spent that basically just breathing on him will finish him. Far worse is something like 10/31/98 where Kobashi kicks out of the TD91 and the match keeps going for like five more minutes.

[JerryvonKramer]

Where does the Jumbo vs. Tenryu match from 89 rank as far as GOAT conversations go? Like how does it compare to the highly rated early 90s matches?

[jdw]

Now before we go to "It's an opinion and can't be wrong" meme, we all need to admit that's utter bullshit. All of us... every single one of us judges the opinions of others in life on a wide variety of topics and dismiss them as utter shite. Politics? Sports? Movies? Books? Musics? Food? The looks of Women / Men? Stuff your father said to you that you thought was shit?

No, it's not bullshit at all. Can you prove an opinion right, either? How? Every single form of proof offered so far basically boils down to something which is still judged in a subjective manner, somewhere down the line.

 

I can dislike or disagree with someone's opinions, sure. Often and strongly. But the very definition of "opinion" means "not a fact".

 

It's bullshit to reach for the meme. Just an utter cop out. Which was my point in the examples above.

 

If your dad is of the opinion that blacks should be shipped to Africa and all non-Christians should be shot on the spot, then you and the rest of us would think his opinions on the matter are utter shite. Setting aside that it's no legal... just the holding of those "opinions" is utter batshit crazy nonsense.

 

Sid > Bret is an utter batshit crazy nonsense "opinion". Pulling out the "It's an opinion and can't be wrong" meme doesn't keep it from being utter batshit crazy nonsense, just makes using the meme to defend the opinion little more than jerking off.

 

John

[jdw]

And I apologize to will for that post. Was reading through the thread from the point I last left off.

 

John

[jdw]

EDIT: and reading through the first couple pages, it seems like we never did get around to unearthing exactly how and when this one match became hailed the GOAT.

It never did. That was the point I made several times over in the early part of the thread.

 

There is no GOAT.

 

There are lots of GOATS.

 

Christ... baseball fans couldn't agree on Cobb vs Ruth for decades. Does any of us really think a bunch of idiot wrestling fans would ever agree on a GOAT?

 

John

[Loss]

Agreed with John. I've found too often that with topics I see started, there seems to be an end goal of building a consensus, or coming to a definitive answer. We don't have to do that, and I actually prefer that we don't. Over time, if something does get answered definitively, that opinion becomes so enshrined that people forget why they even have it, and it becomes a sacred cow. Flair is the perfect example. I don't disagree that he's the best wrestler ever, but most people who think that are just thinking that because they've always thought that -- the end.

 

It's why I prefer topics that don't aim to pin down a specific answer to a question. Not being able to agree on the answer doesn't make the conversation pointless. In fact, it makes it even more worth having.

 

As for minds not changing at the end of a debate, that's just not true. I've seen it happen multiple times. It's happened to me. I'm sure it's happened to others. The key is that people are willing to hear other people out when they're making a good case.

[JerryvonKramer]

Just to clarify Loss, I was talking about the specific subjectivity-objectivity debate Dylan and Jingus were having, not any debate.

[Loss]

Of course. And I do agree with what you said. I realize it seems like I was responding to you re-reading the thread.

[Jingus]

It never did. That was the point I made several times over in the early part of the thread.

 

There is no GOAT.

 

There are lots of GOATS.

You know what I mean. When did this match go from "one great AJPW main event... among many" to "THE great AJPW main event"? Why is it so strongly pimped above so many others, when it didn't generate that reaction back when it first happened? Who first started championing it as a GOAT, and where and when?

[NintendoLogic]

6/3/94 may never have been the consensus greatest match ever, but if you look at any list of 90s All Japan matches, the top three will almost always be 6/3/94, 6/9/95, and 12/6/96 in some order. I'm curious as to when that consensus came about. Also, 1/20/97 usually comes in fourth, but it didn't even get ***** from Dave at the time. Was it because the initial TV broadcast only showed like half the match?