1980s Wrestling Party #12

[goodhelmet]

Alright, Johnny Sorrow is getting the podcast itch and Kris Z doesn't work tomorrow so we are trudging through with another Wrestling Party. We'll start in about an hour so feel free to join in and share your thoughts.

 

These are the matches on tap for tonight...

 

Col. DeBeers, Buddy Rose & Doug Somers vs. Nick Bockwinkel, Steve Pardee & Brad Rheingans (5/31/86)

Stan Hansen vs. Curt Hennig (5/31/86)

Stan Hansen vs. Crusher Blackwell (6/28/86)

Alexis Smirnoff, Buddy Rose & Doug Somers vs. Midnight Rockers & Curt Hennig (6/28/86)

Col. DeBeers, Larry Zbyszko & Doug Somers vs. Greg Gagne, Curt Hennig, & Jimmy Snuka (7/26/86)

Sherri Martel vs. Debbie the Killer Tomato (7/26/86)

Buddy Rose & Doug Somers vs. Midnight Rockers (8/30/86)

Nick Bockwinkel vs. Boris Zuhkov (8/30/86)

 

 

http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkC...6382&cmd=tc

[Johnny Sorrow]

It's my night off, and I'm in a drinking mood. So I'm gonna do a shot every time Buddy Rose takes a crazy bump. Tune in!

[Dylan Waco]

The top two matches are on the dock here

[Johnny Sorrow]

The top two matches are on the dock here

Yeah, I can't decide who's #1, Col. DeBeers, Larry Zbyszko & Doug Somers vs. Greg Gagne, Curt Hennig, & Jimmy Snuka or

Sherri Martel vs. Debbie the Killer Tomato.

[Dylan Waco]

You jest but I like both of those matches a lot.

[goodhelmet]

Had fun once again with a really strong disc with two Top Ten contenders and only one real stinker.

 

Buddy Rose & Doug Somers vs. Midnight Rockers (8/30/86)

Stan Hansen vs. Crusher Blackwell (6/28/86)

- These are in my Top 5 now and may stay there depending on the strength of the next 4 discs. It’s strange in that the Rockers match is basically the tag version of the Hansen-Blackwell match. I have them back to back for that very reason.

 

 

Stan Hansen vs. Nick Bockwinkel (4/20/86)

Rick Martel vs. Harley Race (4/20/86)

I thought these were really great but with such strong competition, I don’t know where they will fall in the final ballot.

 

Stan Hansen vs. Curt Hennig (5/31/86)

Mike Rotundo vs. Doug Somers (5/1/86)

Nick Bockwinkel vs. Boris Zuhkov (8/30/86)

Buddy Rose & Doug Somers vs. Midnight Rockers (4/20/86)

Col. DeBeers, Buddy Rose & Doug Somers vs. Nick Bockwinkel, Steve Pardee & Brad Rheingans (5/31/86)

Alexis Smirnoff, Buddy Rose & Doug Somers vs. Midnight Rockers & Curt Hennig (6/28/86)

- I enjoyed all of these a lot so they will end up somewhere in the top half or middle of the pack with a shot at the top half.

 

Buddy Rose & Doug Somers vs. Scott Hall & Curt Hennig (5/17/86)

Mike Rotundo & Curt Hennig vs. Mr. Go & Larry Zbyszko (5/1/86)

Col. DeBeers, Larry Zbyszko & Doug Somers vs. Greg Gagne, Curt Hennig, & Jimmy Snuka (7/26/86)

- These were ok and perfectly acceptable but nothing I would call Best of the 80s. I was really annoyed by Gagne in the 6-man I didn’t like the finish to the tag title change at all.

 

Buddy Rose & Doug Somers vs. Jesse Hernandez & Leon White (5/1/86)

- I didn’t hate this but we have better Leon White and Rockers stuff here and Hernandez’s sole purpose was to eat the fall. Fine TV match but nothing exceptional at all.

 

Sherri Martel vs. Debbie the Killer Tomato (7/26/86)

- I thought this sucked. The difference between this and the Regal-Zumhofe match is that this lasted 5 minutes, not 20. Currently my #149 but there would have to be another really shitty Regal match to raise it.

[Dylan Waco]

That Rockers v. Buddy/Doug match is my number one. I really have grown to love that Blackwell v. Hansen match, but I thought the Hennig v. Hansen match from this disc was better and that is my easy number two. After two my ballot is still pretty wide open.

[Johnny Sorrow]

My rankings

1.Buddy Rose & Doug Somers vs. Midnight Rockers (8/30/86) Dude, just the tits. Fucking awesome.

2.Stan Hansen vs. Crusher Blackwell (6/28/86) I was worried this was gonna be one of those "awesome on paper, not good actually" matches. Holy Fuck was I wrong. This fucking ruled. The only thing bad here is knowing that this feud never got to happen besides this introductory part. I'd imagine that Jerry eventually beating Hansen for the belt would have been an amazing moment for the fans of the AWA who'd stuck with the promotion.

3.Stan Hansen vs. Curt Hennig (5/31/86) Hot Fuck, was Hennig laying it in to Stan here. Killer match that established Curt.

4.Col. DeBeers, Buddy Rose & Doug Somers vs. Nick Bockwinkel, Steve Pardee & Brad Rheingans (5/31/86) This was fine. Buddy, Doug, and DeBeers ruled.

5.Alexis Smirnoff, Buddy Rose & Doug Somers vs. Midnight Rockers & Curt Hennig (6/28/86) Nothing bad. Just a fun little 6 man.

6. Col. DeBeers, Larry Zbyszko & Doug Somers vs. Greg Gagne, Curt Hennig, & Jimmy Snuka (7/26/86) Greg looks like he'd rather be anywhere else. Not awful, but not great.

7. Nick Bockwinkel vs. Boris Zuhkov (8/30/86) Bored the fuck out of me. Granted, we'd just watched The Rockers and Rose/ Somers completely fucking destroy it, so maybe I was just underwhelmed because of that. But I've liked some Boris matches, and I worship at the alter of The Bock....but this just left me flat.

8. Sherri Martel vs. Debbie the Killer Tomato (7/26/86) So who jerked off to this when they were 14 and held onto some weird fond memory?

[Dylan Waco]

No doubt Zhukov v. BOck suffers horribly from placement. Couldn't possibly have a worse slot on any disc really.

 

Martel v. Debbie was a KrisZ personal. To be honest I was really iffy about it going onto the set, but so far in working my ballot (I'm insane an start from the bottom) i haven't placed it yet and I've got a bottom twenty set. I could see someone completely hating it, because it's basically Finlay v. Lorenzo with women involved, but I enjoy it anyhow.

 

Also I LOVE that Battle of The Bay six-man. No clue where I will have it, but I see it as a top ten contender

[Dylan Waco]

2.Stan Hansen vs. Crusher Blackwell (6/28/86) I was worried this was gonna be one of those "awesome on paper, not good actually" matches. Holy Fuck was I wrong. This fucking ruled. The only thing bad here is knowing that this feud never got to happen besides this introductory part. I'd imagine that Jerry eventually beating Hansen for the belt would have been an amazing moment for the fans of the AWA who'd stuck with the promotion.

On paper I really wish Blackwell over Hansen was an end game. Blackwell was actually Hansen's best drawing opponent, though that doesn't mean a ton by this point in the AWA. But another part of me thinks the physical decline of Blackwell - which was obvious by that point - meant there was no way Blackwell was really going to get the title.

[KrisZ]

Yeah I thought it was a personal pick just couldn't remember if it was me or not. We all thought that a Sherri match belonged somewhere

[Matt D]

From comments, I'm expecting this one to be pretty frustrating for me. Let's find out.

 

I love that Kris has an answer for Condrey's nickname. Kris, what the hell are you saying about Bock not changing his style when he became a face? He changed his style on almost every match on the set. His Hansen match is totally different than his Larry matches which are totally different than the Hennig matches. Will's dedication to wrestling over childrearing is refreshing. I need to rewatch Hansen vs Hennig. I have it as my working #22.

 

Oh hey, my passive aggressive talking point. I need to put the other headphone in to make sure I catch all this. Ok, it's not necessarily the brawling that is akin to a highspot match but the way you guys RESPOND to the brawling and (probably 2/3 legit) punches and blood and violence is akin to how ROH fans respond to the highspots. I think if there's steady violence and blood, you're going to respond no matter whether the story is compelling. What I hear when listening to these podcasts at least with Will and Johnny is that violence is enough, no matter whether or not it creates a narrative. It is an end to you and not a means to an end. It's "enough." That reminds me a lot of the action/high spot mentality. It's all about execution and intensity to you. Not always, of course, but when it comes up, that's enough. A match is great if it makes you go "OHHHHHHHHHHHH!" a lot. It just so happens that punches and blood make you do that instead of headdropping (or someone getting hit by a lightfixture). It's okay, though! I mean that's fine. People like different things. It's just the feeling I get and it's why that sometimes, on some matches, we can find common ground, and other times, we really can't. Kris (and I don't necessarily include him in this) goes at one point. "Hansen is covered in blood!" with massive excitement, and for me, that's not enough to get me excited. At that point, I think "Alright, so what does it mean?" And if I look at the match and it works and it's part of the means to the end that they were going for, great. I'm all for it. If not, that by itself isn't going to move me any more than any other well-executed dangling "means" would. To me, going "OOHHHHH" because you see an amazing high spot and "OHHHHHH" because you see some great punches are in the same category. That's what I'm trying to say. I do go "OHHHHHHH!" sometimes, but it's usually for a great bit of selling or a smart embedded transition that builds on something, or a call-back that I wasn't expecting that was used really well, or some really strong bit of character work in the match. If that makes sense. I think that's a different category.

 

Let me know if that doesn't make sense. I could be wrong. I'm just going off what I'm hearing and your comments and the matches you like relative to the matches I like.

 

I feel like that might not have done the trick, so a little more. I feel like you guys can watch a match and go "That was extremely violent." At that point, I will say. "Great, but was it good match?" and then you'll look at me like I'm crazy. Someone can have an amazing punch, but it's how they use that punch to serve the narrative that matters to me. Obviously, if someone has a good punch it will be a more effective tool in serving the narrative than if they have a shitty punch, but someone can have a shitty punch and use it in a way that it means more than someone else's really good, but poorly utilized great punch.

 

I'll stop and keep listening, but let me know if that doesn't make sense. Wahoo vs Bock and Hansen vs Blackwell, to me, on the criteria that i judge wrestling which is very much "Narrative and the Tools Used to Serve the Narrative," were well-executed and exciting, but they weren't nearly as good as a lot of other matches.

 

If you guys feel differently, that's ok. I'm just trying to explain myself and in a project like this, I think different viewpoints are important anyway. It's more important to me that you understand where I come from and why I feel like I do about what I perceive to be your biases, than me trying to convince you of anything.

[goodhelmet]

I had a feeling that is what you meant. That isn't how I view wrestling. When someone gets busted open, it should happen in a logical spot... head rammed into a ring post, thrown against the cage, hit with an object, old wound exposed. When someone is bleeding, the best thing ever in wrestling is someone attacking the cut, usually through punching but also by raking the head across the cage, biting, pounding the head with a weapon. All good shit. It's the simplest, most logical thing to do to inflict damage. It's not the equivalent of a head drop, it is the equivalent of attacking Kobashi's wrapped up leg or DDP's wrapped up ribs. It is the right thing to do. The fact that it is violent is just bonus points. If it were just a matter of blood and violence, I should be content with CZW and IWA:MS. I don't know of any all time great matches from those companies. I don't seek it out. I don't get off on light tubes and weed whackers.

 

As for your Hansen reference, he should have been covered in blood because nearly every Hansen-Slaughter Match and the Balckwell match were wars and the blood is a tool to illustrate violence. It works and it is simple.

 

Loss and I were talking about what types of matches we prefer. He prefers long 30 minute matches that start off on the mat and build to the end. I prefer Southern brawls where two dudes are punching each other in the face. I like blood in my southern brawls. It is a matter of bonus points, not mandatory criteria.you have listened to enough of these shows to know that we have heaped tons of praise on mat game matches, spotfests, slow building main events, monster brawls, and even the good old fashioned bloody brawl. We can also mark out for a neat spot in a bad match. Sometimes, you can have more fun watching Bock beat the shit out of Larry Z for 3 minutes than watching Regal and Zumhofe for 20 minutes. There is no set way wrestling should be performed all the time.

[Johnny Sorrow]

And as far as Blackwell/ Hansen goes, it makes perfect sense for these two giant rednecks to just beat the fuck out of each other. Hansen had attacked Jerry previously, Jerry wanted to fuck him up and Stan backs down from no man. The only disappointing thing is that there was no follow up because Stan left the AWA.

 

And Will just wrote what I was gonna. If blood and violence was all I liked, I'd like CZW, etc, and I generally hate that light tube shit.

 

"There is no set way wrestling should be performed all the time." Exactly. I mean, Pulp Fiction took normal structure and threw it out the window. It's still a great movie.

[Dylan Waco]

I don't think Matt is arguing there is a set way for wrestling to be performed all the time, but I could be reading him wrong

[Cross Face Chicken Wing]

"Serving the narrative" can mean different things to different people. What I think serves the narrative might make absolutely no sense in your view. It all kind of depends what we view a match narrative to be in the first place.

[Johnny Sorrow]

I just want to again say how awesome that Hennig/ Hansen match is. I love that when Curt was trying backdrops and shit like that, it looked good, but when he was brawling he was fucking hardcore. Like, "You kicked my ass last time, this time I'm gonna give it right back to ya." And normally draws kinda blow, but not here. Going the time limit and hanging with Hansen fucking made Curt. Super fun match.

[Dylan Waco]

It's my number two. To me it's the match that made Curt. He went from a guy teaming with Scott Hall (as the worker who was there to help Hall become a top star), to being a guy you could really believe going toe-to-toe with World Champion and king of the bad asses Stan Hansen in a span of twelve minutes.

[Matt D]

I had a feeling that is what you meant. That isn't how I view wrestling. When someone gets busted open, it should happen in a logical spot... head rammed into a ring post, thrown against the cage, hit with an object, old wound exposed. When someone is bleeding, the best thing ever in wrestling is someone attacking the cut, usually through punching but also by raking the head across the cage, biting, pounding the head with a weapon. All good shit. It's the simplest, most logical thing to do to inflict damage. It's not the equivalent of a head drop, it is the equivalent of attacking Kobashi's wrapped up leg or DDP's wrapped up ribs. It is the right thing to do. The fact that it is violent is just bonus points. If it were just a matter of blood and violence, I should be content with CZW and IWA:MS. I don't know of any all time great matches from those companies. I don't seek it out. I don't get off on light tubes and weed whackers.

 

As for your Hansen reference, he should have been covered in blood because nearly every Hansen-Slaughter Match and the Balckwell match were wars and the blood is a tool to illustrate violence. It works and it is simple.

 

Loss and I were talking about what types of matches we prefer. He prefers long 30 minute matches that start off on the mat and build to the end. I prefer Southern brawls where two dudes are punching each other in the face. I like blood in my southern brawls. It is a matter of bonus points, not mandatory criteria.you have listened to enough of these shows to know that we have heaped tons of praise on mat game matches, spotfests, slow building main events, monster brawls, and even the good old fashioned bloody brawl. We can also mark out for a neat spot in a bad match. Sometimes, you can have more fun watching Bock beat the shit out of Larry Z for 3 minutes than watching Regal and Zumhofe for 20 minutes. There is no set way wrestling should be performed all the time.

Sorry for the delay in response. as I said, my work filter was upset with you mentioning Regal and Buck and seemed to think it was objectionable content. I am at home and away from HAL now, so I can respond.

 

I don't REALLY think that you guys just want lighttube matches. And yes, serving the narrative is subjective, but everything in wrestling is. It's art. Also, hitting someone hard if you hate them is logical and it does make sense, but there are matches on the set with a bigger, broader story that's both compelling and interesting with the execution of said story done well, and I see you guys repeatedly placing higher things that are often times straightforward so long as the violence is there and it isn't completely absurd. To be fair, the selling on the set is, in general, good, so that helps.

 

I think I'm just expressing my frustration in a certain trend having listened to a lot of these now, and it's a trend that isn't wrong by any means. It just is a minor factor in what I care about.

 

I see that you said blood is a tool to illustrate violence, but I was arguing that the violence itself is a tool for a greater end, and sometimes I think due to the format of this you guys are a little too into the trees and miss the forest. A lot of times you don't. And maybe, matches are meant to be watched in that way and I take note of way too much stuff, sometimes literally.

 

Now I think we're late enough in the process that a lot of people have already seen the set. Personally, I'm using these as a) entertainment while at work and a way to figure out if there's anything I should rewatch. So I don't think this is going to move the needle too much one way or another, but I think the format might not be the most analytic way of watching this stuff.

[Johnny Sorrow]

but I think the format might not be the most analytic way of watching this stuff.

Well, duh. Who wants to analyze pro wrestling matches? (There's a reason why the word starts with "anal") That's crazy. I think that watching wrestling with friends and having fun doing so is a far more productive way to come to conclusions. And all pro wrestling is about violence in one way or another. Guys are pretending to be violent towards each other.

 

And no love for our Revenge of the Nerds stuff? Kris had me laughing so hard I was crying.

[Dylan Waco]

but I think the format might not be the most analytic way of watching this stuff.

Well, duh. Who wants to analyze pro wrestling matches? (There's a reason why the word starts with "anal") That's crazy. I think that watching wrestling with friends and having fun doing so is a far more productive way to come to conclusions. And all pro wrestling is about violence in one way or another. Guys are pretending to be violent towards each other.

 

 

If you write or talk about wrestling at all you are analyzing it on some level. If you choose to do that with a group of friends via phone call and find that to be "far more productive" that is fine, but let's not pretend you aren't analyzing things when you are.

[Johnny Sorrow]

but I think the format might not be the most analytic way of watching this stuff.

Well, duh. Who wants to analyze pro wrestling matches? (There's a reason why the word starts with "anal") That's crazy. I think that watching wrestling with friends and having fun doing so is a far more productive way to come to conclusions. And all pro wrestling is about violence in one way or another. Guys are pretending to be violent towards each other.

 

 

If you write or talk about wrestling at all you are analyzing it on some level. If you choose to do that with a group of friends via phone call and find that to be "far more productive" that is fine, but let's not pretend you aren't analyzing things when you are.

 

Oh totally. I was just coming back to edit that post to say that. And to say that I wasn't trying to come off as a dick, and I'm sorry if I did.

I guess what I really meant to say was that wrestling is meant to elicit emotion from the crowd/ viewers. And sometimes being super analytical about anything, let alone wrestling, can blind you to that. But if that's how you dig watching wrestling, then hey, whatever floats yer boat. There's no "right" or "wrong".

[Happ Hazzard]

Any plans for episode 13? You seemed to do loads all at once then it;s been fairly sparse. I guess the later discs aren't as appealing as the earlier ones when AWA still had their big stars.

[Johnny Sorrow]

Actually, we went nuts and did a shitload in one week. We'll be doing a new one post haste, I'd imagine.

[goodhelmet]

Any plans for episode 13? You seemed to do loads all at once then it;s been fairly sparse. I guess the later discs aren't as appealing as the earlier ones when AWA still had their big stars.

Hey bud, it has really been about time. I had an incredibly slow week where we knocked out 4 episodes. Then, I have had some insanely busy weeks lately. We are almost at the finish line so no way we are going to stop now.