1980s Wrestling Party #12

[soup23]

Sort of a mixed bad here as my current #1 and sure fire bottom three match happened in succession. I also must say that of all the major venues of the 80's the Showboat is my least favorite in general and a part of my heart breaks every time I see those empty front row chairs.

 

 

Col. DeBeers, Buddy Rose & Doug Somers vs. Nick Bockwinkel, Steve Pardee & Brad Rheingans (5/31/86) - Another good 6 man with fun interaction with Bock vs. Rose. I again was not that impressed with Debeers and Rheingans. I am real excited about Pardee as he has been good on both of his appearances and has breakout potential on the Portland set. Mid range match.

Stan Hansen vs. Curt Hennig (5/31/86) - Top 25 contender. I loved the February match but can see how it felt like a squash. This served to show how much growth Curt had really made in such a short time. It pains me that Hansens run is coming to a close.

Stan Hansen vs. Crusher Blackwell (6/28/86) - Two beefy motherfuckers laying into each other. I still prefer the Slaughter/Hansen and Vader/Hansen as my favorite AWA Hansen stuff but this match combined with the Curt match and Bock match is a pretty damn good 5 matches to hang your hat on. Hansen certainly added to his resume with this set in my eyes and is a serious #1 GOAT contender for me.

Alexis Smirnoff, Buddy Rose & Doug Somers vs. Midnight Rockers & Curt Hennig (6/28/86) - I really liked the 6 man and the Rockers vs. Somers/Rose feud keeps building. Top 50 potential.

Col. DeBeers, Larry Zbyszko & Doug Somers vs. Greg Gagne, Curt Hennig, & Jimmy Snuka (7/26/86) - Wasn't not too ecstatic with this and agree with Wills criticisms of Gagne in the match. Bottom 50 lock.

Sherri Martel vs. Debbie the Killer Tomato (7/26/86) - Competing with Snuka/Steamboat as worst 80's match I have seen on the two sets I have participated in. I understand you wanted to showcase a Sherri singles buy oy.

Buddy Rose & Doug Somers vs. Midnight Rockers (8/30/86) - Transcendent match that I thought for sure would be my #1 (it has since been eclipsed). I have really found a new love for tag wrestling the past year between this set, the yearbooks, and the podcast and this storyline match felt like the culmination of all that. Best hot tag I have seen.

Nick Bockwinkel vs. Boris Zuhkov (8/30/86) - Awful Placement but a pretty fun match with Bock working more straight babyface than we have seen. Mid Range

[JerryvonKramer]

Eager to get through more and DVDR seems to be in perpetual limbo.

 

I like that KrisZ is a regular on these podcasts by this stage, he's like the Spock to Johnny Sorrow's Bones.

 

Col. DeBeers, Buddy Rose & Doug Somers vs. Nick Bockwinkel, Steve Pardee & Brad Rheingans

 

I seriously object to the awesomeness of Bock tagging up with a total chump like Rheingans.

 

DeBeers with Rose and Somers I can get behind though.

 

Prospect of Rose and Bock going head to head is exciting.

 

This seems to take FOREVER to start.

 

Rose gets nailed with beer from a fan!

 

The wristlocks on DeBeers by Jobber Brad are actually pretty neat here. Pardee continues decent armwork on Rose in a cool sequence. Now it's Bock's turn on Somers with the armwork.

 

Bock is doing heel tactics here! That's pretty good continuity.

 

Pardee is pretty good, both on offense and taking punishment.

 

This is all a little slow for my tastes. I want a bit more action out of a 6-man.

 

The FIP sequence focusing on Pardee's leg is not bad at all though.

 

Nothing offensive here, but not much more than that.

 

C

[JerryvonKramer]

Johnny Sorrow: "The crucifey"

 

I laughed.

 

Stan Hansen vs. Curt Hennig

 

Where has Jerry Blackwell been all this time? Out injured the whole time?

 

Wow, Hennig's offense at the start of this is pretty firey and effective. Hansen quickly takes over, but not for long.

 

Hennig's punching is really good in this match.

 

Back suplex. Piledriver. Devastating kneedrop. Hansen's offense always looks like it is so painful.

 

Very back and forth stuff this match, not a lot of structure. When you compare it to something like Race / Martel, I don't think the bombs were on that level or the levels of fire or really the selling.

 

It was good, but lacked focus and the cool shit wasn't that cool so ...

 

B

[JerryvonKramer]

I will weigh in on the Matt D punches / high spot stuff later. It's an interesting debate.

 

Stan Hansen vs. Crusher Blackwell

 

I am so looking forward to this. Hansen immediately hammers on Blackwell. MASSIVE headbutt from Blackwell to come back.

 

This match starts with a level of intensity and brutality that I hope they can keep up. Hansen is just BEATING THE SHIT out of Blackwell here. Awesome awesome awesome so far.

 

Hansen has colour. Blackwell is bringing it.

 

Hansen punching Blackwell is awesome. Slam attempt, of course Hansen gets squashed by Blackwell.

 

Hansen's face covered with blood is a great image.

 

This bearhug inevitably slows things down. BIG SPLASH.

 

Hansen has the boot. Ouch.

 

Now Blackwell's face is lacerated.

 

This was great, everything I hoped it would be.

 

A-

[JerryvonKramer]

Alexis Smirnoff, Buddy Rose & Doug Somers vs. Midnight Rockers & Curt Hennig

 

Smirnoff looks like the nephew of Mad Dog Vachon.

 

This 6-man is being worked at a faster pace than the last one. I like that.

 

Awesome rib breaker on Hennig by Somers.

 

Hennig's selling is great during the FIP sequence.

 

Wow, big kick by Smirnoff in Hennig's face. Another rib breaker! Rose's knee lifts are great!

 

Loving this FIP sequence.

 

Jannetty gets the hot tag. Great powerslam on Somers.

 

Really enjoyed this.

 

B+

[Dylan Waco]

At this point I'm beating a dead horse, but strongly, strongly, strongly disagree on Hennig v. Hansen II. It's my number 2 and one of the only two matches on the set that I could conceivably see as a number one

[JerryvonKramer]

I'm really disappointed DVDR is still down Dylan because I enjoy seeing how my views compare.

 

I'll be honest but I'm not really seeing this great worker in young face Curt Hennig on this set.

 

I didn't think there was any real focus in Hansen vs. Hennig II, and if you take Race vs. Martel as a basis of comparison (another bomb-heavy not particularly focused match), Martel outworks Hennig in practically every way in terms of offense, fire, and selling.

[JerryvonKramer]

Col. DeBeers, Larry Zbyszko & Doug Somers vs. Greg Gagne, Curt Hennig, & Jimmy Snuka

 

Two interesting teams here. Unusual match-up.

 

Rare appearance on this set from Greg post-Brunzell here. Looking more like The Riddler than ever. If Christopher Nolan ever does another Batman, he should cast 1986 era Greg Gagne in that role.

 

I really like De Beers. Something of a revelation for me.

 

Hennig's offense during the hot tag is pretty cool. Not quite as good as the 6-man with Pardee, Bock and Brad.

 

C-

[JerryvonKramer]

Sherri vs. The Killer Tomato

 

What on earth is Sherri wearing?

 

What on earth is The Killer Tomato's hair? What's with her name?

 

Some armwork to start. Sherri sells it pretty well. Headscissors.

 

Couple of airplane spins from the Tomato.

 

Legdrop from Sherri.

 

Oh, she just kicked Sherri in the face after a legsplit.

 

Clothesline. Crowd are into it.

 

Big splash to finish!

 

Not really understanding Chad's utter hatred for this match. Come on, it wasn't THAT bad. This was ***** compared to Regal vs. Zumhof.

 

D-

[JerryvonKramer]

Rose/ Somers vs. Midnight Rockers (2)

 

Some great shots of 80s fans here.

 

Man Michaels has colour early. After criticising Somers's punching before, it is really good here.

 

Rose is laying it in now.

 

Crowd is absolutely electric.

 

Somers is a great dick heel here laughing at Jannetty. Shawn is bleeding profusely.

 

Michaels's comeback attempts during the hope spots are great. HOT TAG.

 

Jannetty unloads, crowd is insane. Somers gets his face smashed on the ringpost. Rose is in. We transition to another FIP sequence now.

 

Jannetty has colour now. Somers has colour.

 

There is a lot of blood here.

 

Jannetty is wildly swinging covered in crimson. Rose in. Jannetty bites him. Tag to Shawn whose punches here are great.

 

Some huge bumps to the outside.

 

Rose drops Jannetty on the chair.

 

Crowd is electric.

 

Ref has lost control of this one.

 

I don't think I love this as much as pretty much everyone else. I think, in general, there is a lot of marking out for the amount of blood, but it is still awesome.

 

A

 

NB. A* is my highest rating as in *****, so this is a ****3/4

[JerryvonKramer]

Bock vs. Zukhov

 

Zukhov with a ridiculous ponytail potruding from his massive bald head. Possibly the worst look of all time.

 

More great shots of 80s fans.

 

I've never taken heroin, but this must be what "coming down" feels like.

 

There is another sleazebag wifebeater-vest wearing fan with a moustache I can focus on.

 

Zukhov's control segment is not all that bad here in fairness. He's working the leg pretty well and Bock is selling it.

 

Without having seen them all, I can safely predict that this is better than every single Zukhov WWF match ever.

 

Figure-four!!! An unnamed leg-submission hold!

 

Bock starts his comeback with a kneelift.

 

Not bad at all considing this was a Boris fucking Zukhov match. Got to be his best match ever right?

 

B-

[JerryvonKramer]

Disc 7 rankings

 

This was a very strong disc all-in-all, as strong as most of the high-end discs on the All Japan set.

 

A

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

 

A-

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

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

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

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

 

B+

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

 

B

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

 

B-

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

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

 

C+

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

 

C

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

 

C-

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

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

 

D

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

 

D-

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

[Dylan Waco]

I'm really disappointed DVDR is still down Dylan because I enjoy seeing how my views compare.

 

I'll be honest but I'm not really seeing this great worker in young face Curt Hennig on this set.

 

I didn't think there was any real focus in Hansen vs. Hennig II, and if you take Race vs. Martel as a basis of comparison (another bomb-heavy not particularly focused match), Martel outworks Hennig in practically every way in terms of offense, fire, and selling.

I like Portland babyface Curt, better than AWA Curt aside from the period you are currently in the middle of watching.

 

I think this set really illustrates to me how radically different my views on wrestling are from a lot of others. That's not to say there isn't a ton of agreement, because there is. But I think Henning/Hansen absolutely murders Race/Martel as a match and that's a match I enjoyed a whole hell of a lot.

 

To me the Hennig/Hansen is what made Hennig. Before that he was an underdog babyface. Almost Greg Gagneish in that he was skilled, but sort of gangly in a way and almost the geeky son of the badass legendary dad. Then he comes into this match, saves the poor old fat diabetic getting his ass beat by the toughest guy on earth and on top of that he takes the war right to the badder than fuck world champion and goes toe-to-toe with him. It's a match fought on Hansen's terms and this greenhorn kid answers the call to the point where the champ can't get it done.

 

In my eyes it's a tremendous, star making match. Watching for the set I was completely blown away with it and it lost nothing at all on subsequent viewings. In fact watching it in order I though it was even better than I originally gave it credit for being

[Johnny Sorrow]

Dylan and I disagree on a lot, but not here. He's exactly on the money about that match and I love it for all the same reasons.

[JerryvonKramer]

I will say that on reflection my rating might be a little low for it. I do think it's the best Curt performance so far by some distance. And he did really fucking bring it in that match. His punches are great.

 

For me though, context while important, doesn't add to a match's rating. I've said it before: Flair vs. Sting, Clash 1, doesn't matter what it did for Sting's career, it's an average match by Flair standards. For me, the fact that it made Sting doesn't add anything to the rating. Race vs. Flair, Starrcade 83. Again, I think it's not much more than above-average for a Flair match. The context doesn't do much to the rating. (The reverse is true also, Garvin vs. Flair, DESPITE the context is ***** or near enough - both the title win and Starrcade)

 

So let's say I'll watch this match again, I can see myself bumping it up to a B+ based on Hennig's great performance and the brutality of Hansen. But even after that, I don't think it's particularly focused.

 

I get the narrative: Hansen murdered Hennig first time around, now it's much more back and forth and a real coming of age for Curt. But even taking that context into account, I've seen LOADS of "young upstart takes veteran big name by surprise and takes them to a draw" type matches. I'm not sure what this one is doing that's so compelling that some other ones I can think of aren't.

 

------

 

A word on Race/Martel. This is a match, like Hansen/Blackwell without a lot of "structure". As in, it's action-packed, back and forth and all over the place. But I would refer readers back to Matt D's post on page 1 of this thread.

 

What's the difference between something like Hansen vs. Blackwell and Race vs. Martel? One has a load of cool, violent punches and slugfests, the other one has a load of cool suplexes, piledrivers and awesome firey comebacks from Martel.

 

If you're not going to complain about structure with Hansen/Blackwell, I don't see any real reason to for Race/Martel. If you're going to mark for the action in Hansen/Blackwell, I don't see any reason not to mark for the action in Race/Martel.

 

I honestly think Martel puts in a GREAT babyface performance in that match and Race does what Race does best: crazy bumping and cool offense. It might not be fashionable to like a match like that, but I honestly thought it was great.

 

I totally get that Race/Martel was a match more or less in a vacuum by two guys not even with the promotion, and Hansen/Hennig had a much more interesting story around it, but I don't think it particularly matters.

 

--------

 

This might all seem odd coming from a guy who has argued that "the match" is just one part of the grammar of pro wrestling in which angles, character, storyline etc. are just as important. But I think you can rate each of those things on their own terms. Ergo, with your typical Dusty or Hogan feud you might get some great promos, a really compelling story, but just an average match at the end of it. The story can't really bail out the match if the match isn't that good on its own terms.

[JerryvonKramer]

I need to think on this a bit more, because I'm thinking about Jumbo vs. Tenryu and whether my ***** rating there genuinely didn't take context into account. A little conflicted on this.

 

In good faith, I know I did take it into account. But I guess the question is whether that match is ***** regardless of context. I want to say something like, with the best matches, all the story is told from bell to bell. That the differences in philosophy between Jumbo and Tenryu would be obvious even if you watched it in a vacuum.

 

Hmmm

 

Edit: this is definitely the case with something like Magnum/Tully, but with Jumbo/Tenryu, I'm honestly not sure and frustratingly can't really "check" it because I have no way of watching it now without the context.

[Dylan Waco]

I"m not going to argue against Race/Martel because for your workrateish, go, go, go, style matches it's better than anything ROH/PWG/et does and is a very good match.

 

Also I am confused about the Hansen/Blackwell and Hansen/Henning stuff in your post. Are you confusing the two in the post?

 

In any case the difference to me between something like Race/Martel and Hansen/Hennig is that A. Hansen/Hennig has a real story to it and a real purpose and Race/Martel really doesn't and B. Hansen/Hennig is more of brawl, where as Race/Martel is a bomb throwing match of a different sort.

 

On context, I get your point, but the reason it matters to me in this match is because everything about the match seemed designed to achieve a certain end and the work in the match directly reflected that.

 

Also context absolutely matters to me at times in wrestling, because some matches are better in context and others are better out of context (which to me is a weakness of sorts).

[JerryvonKramer]

We can talk more on this tomorrow because the context question is very interesting to me.

 

I have to sleep, but I didn't confuse Hansen/Hennig and Hansen/Blackwell but can see how it looks that way in the post. I jumped from one to the other, because I think Hansen/Blackwell as a straight unstructured brawl makes for a better comparison with an unstructured bombfest like Race/Martel. And because I've rated the two matches the same. Sorry, it was one of my 3-posts-in-1 specials. Three different and not necessarily related points.

[Jimmy Redman]

But I guess the question is whether that match is ***** regardless of context. I want to say something like, with the best matches, all the story is told from bell to bell. That the differences in philosophy between Jumbo and Tenryu would be obvious even if you watched it in a vacuum.

 

Hmmm

The problem with this is that you (personally) can't watch it in a vacuum. If you know the context it is pretty hard to try to un-know it. I don't think you can help bringing that into the match as a viewer, and I don't think that is a bad thing, or that it affects the quality of a match at all.

 

To me if a match is great, it doesn't really matter why it is great. Well not that it doesn't matter, but that no reason is better or worse than another. A match that is great because of the context surrounding it isn't any less great in and of itself than a match that is great because of bell-to-bell action, which isn't any less great in and of itself than a match that is great because of the colour of the ropes. All that matters is which one I thought was better.

 

If you're interested though, I watched Jumbo vs Tenryu in a vacuum, context-wise, and this was my legit reaction:

I am sketchy on the actual story going in, but they did a fantastic job telling a story during the match. I was hooked.

[Matt D]

I've rewatched Hansen vs Hennig. I haven't rewatched Martel vs Race.

 

I want to talk about context first. I think context is 100% important because every match in the history of wrestling has a purpose. The wrestlers go out to accomplish something. Sometimes, it's just "have a good match." Sometimes it's not. Some things are harder than others. Sometimes they accomplish something without intending it. Sometimes you get a very good match that fails to accomplish what it's supposed to. There's a really fun go-go-go Jannety vs Johnny Polo match from late 93-early 94 Raw and it's supposed to be Levy being underhanded and cowardly. He went out and controlled a lot of the match and did dives and what not. From most standpoints it's probably a better match than a Jannety vs Chickenshit Manager match would have been, but it was absolutely the wrong match for the situation. JJ Dillon talks about a similar match that he had like that where he wanted to really impress the boys (Levy was frustrated from not being used). To me that matters. I can understand why it wouldn't for someone else. I think you need to try to understand as match as best you can if you're really analyzing it on the level of trying to work out what the best 20 matches of the decade are, or what not. I'm going to have a little more about this to talk about when I talk about Buddy Rose in 1979 in the next few days (sorry).

 

Ok, that out of the way, I actually think the emotional story of Martel vs Race is better without context. If you showed someone who hasn't seen a ton of Martel in AWA that match, you see this kid standing up to Harley fucking Race and holding his own and Race selling huge for him and both guys really presented as equals and the story in your head that you come up with in that situation will be better than the supermatch story of the match itself.

 

I think the Hennig match actually tells a better straight up narrative, and it does it within the confines of the back-and-forth structure, which to me, is very hard. It's a lot harder to tell a good story in a back-and-forth match than to tell one in a match where you have shine/heat/comeback or whatever. There are narratives that work with that structure, escalation being one, one guy resorting to underhanded tactics first is another, etc. I still think it's trickier. Granted, there's a lot of all japan I haven't seen, or whatever.

 

In the Hennig-Hansen match, I think there's more a great narrative of Hennig, either to prove himself or to avenge Blackwell or just because he thinks it's the only chance he has, going all out against Hansen every chance he gets and Hansen, who doesn't take him seriously at first (See the attack on Blackwell after Hennig's first offensive flurry gets cut off) quickly realizing what he's up against. From what I remember, Race-Martel was a lot more of a 50-50 match and in a lot of ways, it's what makes the match work. Both guys are treated as superstars and equals. With Hansen-Hennig, it's much more like 65-35 for Hansen. Because of that, there's sort of a deconstructed heat that is layered throughout the match and what Hennig does aren't comebacks so much as they're him dominating for a stretch. They're not presented as equals and they shouldn't be. Hansen is a force. Hennig is a guy coming out of a team where he was second banana to Scott Hall. If it was a little more even then it would be hard to take seriously; it would seem artificial. If it was a little less even, then it'd a good Hansen vs Young Lion match but it wouldn't elevate Hennig in the way this does.

 

I have some problems with it. I don't like Hennig's late match monkey flip. I get that it smartly sets up a reversal shortly thereafter and a much more important small package, but I think they could have accomplished that with something that felt more in place like a roll up off the ropes or a corner splash or something. I don't love the kneelift at the finish. I wish that Hennig had already had the Axe in his arsenal at this point because that would be a great tease. That said, it could contradict what I wrote above. Maybe that would make things too 50-50, while Hennig just having the advantage at that point even if he didn't have anything close to a surefire pin could actually be more effective in the big picture.

 

In general, it's not my #2, but it's still a great match that effectively tells a very tricky story and I like it way more than either Bock vs Wahoo or Hansen vs Blackwell.

 

I do think there's a difference between Race vs Martel and this match from a storytelling perspective. People are free to disagree with me though.

[JerryvonKramer]

I'm going to have to take another look at Hennig vs. Hansen now. My take was that it was "just another heated back and forth brawl" with a young lion element that pales slightly against some of the other brawls around it (Hansen vs. Slaughter, vs. Blackwell, Rose/Somers vs. Rockers)

 

My B rating is essentially a ***3/4. That's not at all bad, but need to see again with what you and Dylan have said in mind.

 

-----

 

My point with Race/ Martel was mainly that if everyone is marking out for stuff like Hansen/Blackwell (myself included), there is no real reason not to mark out for an extremely well worked back-and-forth stadium match like that. There's nothing intrinsically better about a heated slugfest than a go go go bombfest.

 

----

 

The context stuff is interesting. My main concern with it is that it could lead to a kind of relativism. "This match was only meant to be this and look how good it is." I found myself going nuts for some of the NWA TV matches Chad and I watched recently and a constant question I was asking myself was: "would I still be as high on this if it was a PPV main event?" It's a difficult question, because the context does change things even if you don't want it to.

 

Will and Johnny Sorrow have an exchange on this very podcast about what the "main event" of the card would have been, they agreed Blackwell vs. Hansen, with Rose/Somers vs. Rockers semi-main, even though both of them and mostly everyone agrees that the latter is the better match. But does that mean it is in danger of losing something if you put it as a main event?

 

Is the rating for a match absolute or relative to its card positioning? Let's say you move Owen/Bret from Mania X and put it as the main event, does that affect how good the match is?

[Jimmy Redman]

My point with Race/ Martel was mainly that if everyone is marking out for stuff like Hansen/Blackwell (myself included), there is no real reason not to mark out for an extremely well worked back-and-forth stadium match like that. There's nothing intrinsically better about a heated slugfest than a go go go bombfest.

 

----

 

The context stuff is interesting. My main concern with it is that it could lead to a kind of relativism. "This match was only meant to be this and look how good it is." I found myself going nuts for some of the NWA TV matches Chad and I watched recently and a constant question I was asking myself was: "would I still be as high on this if it was a PPV main event?" It's a difficult question, because the context does change things even if you don't want it to.

 

Will and Johnny Sorrow have an exchange on this very podcast about what the "main event" of the card would have been, they agreed Blackwell vs. Hansen, with Rose/Somers vs. Rockers semi-main, even though both of them and mostly everyone agrees that the latter is the better match. But does that mean it is in danger of losing something if you put it as a main event?

 

Is the rating for a match absolute or relative to its card positioning? Let's say you move Owen/Bret from Mania X and put it as the main event, does that affect how good the match is?

The bit about Race/Martel reminds me of something I said about Demolition/Brainbusters a while back, the gist of it being that if they had been doing such entertaining and intricate work in the form of high-spots and movez instead of in the form of simple tag team spots, it was something Meltzer would rain snowflakes onto. But it wasn't, because someone like Meltzer sees snowflake value in action over role-playing. I don't think I'm explaining myself very well, but it was the same kind of idea: Why is one style of match better than another?

 

The answer to which is, I guess, it just is. People will inevitably like what they like and see value in some things over others. There may be nothing technically, fundamentally, objectively different between a heated slugfest and a heated spotfest of comparable "quality". But if you put them both in front of someone who likes violence and blood and punches, he will probably prefer the brawl. Similarly, if you put them both in front of someone who likes movez and action and bombs being thrown, he will probably prefer the spotfest. Why wouldn't they? If both matches had structural problems, the violence-loving guy might excuse that if he at least gets some violence out of it, where he would find it harder to overlook it in a match who's style is less appealing. Same thing with the spot-loving guy watching the brawl.

 

And there's nothing wrong with any of this either. People aren't robots, they can't watch the matches in a vacuum. There's nothing that says just because two matches are kind of the same structurally that they should therefore be judged the same, when they are completely different styles and telling two different stories.

[Johnny Sorrow]

Here's my deal put simply. If the crowd is going nuts, then the "structure" is correct.

[JerryvonKramer]

Here's my deal put simply. If the crowd is going nuts, then the "structure" is correct.

I might have agreed with this 7 or 8 months ago, but I've come round more to the idea now that the crowd -- while it can enhance a match -- is not necessarily indicative of anything.

 

Examples:

 

1. Magnum vs. Flair - the AWA crowd just shat on that match, does that mean the structure was wrong? Put that match on at the Omni with exactly the same structure and you get a hot crowd.

 

2. Road Warriors - why are crowds cheering for them? Is it because of the excellent structure of their matches or because they are two roided up dudes with spikes coming out of their shoulders and cool music?

[khawk20]

Examples:

 

1. Magnum vs. Flair - the AWA crowd just shat on that match, does that mean the structure was wrong? Put that match on at the Omni with exactly the same structure and you get a hot crowd.

I'd find another example, JVK, the whole Super Clash show is mic'ed very badly and you can't really get a good indicator of crowd reaction from any match on that show. Short of being there I have no idea if the crowd was into it or not. the crowd could have been hot for the whole show, or not, but what we're hearing is not any kind of indicator either way.