WON HOF 2013 discussion

[Dylan Waco]

I like Joe. Hell I like just about everyone posting in this thread. But as you can guess I have a few things to say about this stuff.

 

One I HATE the niche fetishism argument. I mean I fucking hate it. I especially hate it because we aren't talking about my love for Bobby Bass here, we are talking about a guy like Buddy Rose who was universally loved by wrestlers and other workers (something Dave ALWAYS puts stock in in HoF talk), was universally thought of as a great wrestler during his prime (in case the old "how things age shouldn't matter" bullshit gets trotted out) and has been praised heavily by people watching his work in recent years with wildly different tastes. The sin Buddy committed was twofold.

 

1. His best stuff wasn't available for years so he was a guy who was argued as being a "well he was great, but we just don't have the footage to prove it." John, myself, Kris and others who have been around this scene for a million years (sadly) can attest to the fact that that was the common refrain on Buddy forever. He wasn't a guy that was "discovered." He was a guy everyone knew was great, but we all sat around whining about lack of footage making it impossible to say how great. Now we have the footage, but there are certain people who will remain nameless who tell us that watching old footage is a waste of time when trying to evaluate wrestlers. So he's stuck in a bind on both ends.

 

2. He dared to do most of his great stuff in Portland a "small time" promotion, out in bum fuck, that is easy to label "niche."

 

But here is the thing about "niche" Buddy Rose and "small time" Portland - that promotion probably drew no worse than what NJPW is drawing now under Tanahashi. That's not a cheap shot at Tanahashi -it's just a fact. Have the best Tanahashi topped shows drawn more? Yes (excluding the Rose match in NY and Toronto and San Fran). Was Tanahashi drawing 3k/3500 sellouts twice a week around the horn for huge chunks of his prime? Well that's certainly debatable at most in terms of raw numbers, but he absolutely hasn't been selling everything out. In fact John undersold the befuddlement at Tanahashi as a draw earlier in the thread because here is a guy being touted for the resurrection of a company who has NEVER sold out Sumo Hall for a non-G1 show. I mean people shit all over Akiyama and Sasaki and others for falling on their faces in various ways at various points in the post Inokism/AJPW split era, but you can point to shit like Akiyama v. Sasaki doing a near sellout at Budakon. Tanahashi has last years Dome show, which I agree he deserves credit for and then....? Well the fact is the "biggest" match in the company in terms of star power was supposedly Tanahashi v. Okada and that did the same number's as Okada v. Ibushi (run by the smaller, less "hot" promotion DDT) and Okada v. fucking Kojima of all people. The more I look at it, the more I think Tanahashi as some miracle working turnaround artist is wildly overstated. It's not that he deserves no credit. It's that people are cherry picking (biggest Ippv draw of all time as this point, is a stretch for a variety of reasons, not the least is which we have no clue what that means at this point, which even Dave hinted at) and deliberately ignoring his less than great moments by evading big picture discussion. Hell if Dave and many fans of modern NJPW weren't so high on the matches, I am 100 percent positive we would have heard much more criticism about Okada v. Tanahashi's failure to sell out the big building twice this year than we did. Is that niche fetishism or something else?

 

I also think it is a huge assumption to argue that the people likely to vote in the HoF see Tanahashi as some sort of ideal. Joe, in this thread the people who have been arguing your points the hardest are voters (Bix, Keith, clown, jdw, Kris). Will is just asking for an explanation on what you like about the guy. I can see not wanting to bother because you are in enemy territory, (though I think Nintendo Logic is completely full of shit in saying the anti-Tanahashi people never state their case) but in the sample of voters in this thread you are the minority. I actually know a fuck ton of voters at this point, and there is nothing close to a consensus with these people on Tanahashi as a worker. Is it possible there is selection bias because I'm more likely to converse with people who agree with me? I guess, but then there is you, and Alan and Musgrave and other voters who are high on Tanahashi to one degree or another who I am friendly with on some level (I just tolerate Musgrave). In the case of a lot of "insiders" who will vote, I'd imagine - actually I know - a lot of them have probably watched little to no Tanahashi and are heavily influenced by Dave's coverage of New Japan. That's not me shitting on Dave either, it's just a fact.

 

On the more general level are the people who are anti-Tanahashi out on the far fringes of fandom? No, because most fans have no clue who the fuck he is. But even within people who watch the guy, I don't think he's near the consensus favorite that others are. I'll admit I'm an outlier on Shawn Michaels. On Tanahashi, in terms of American hardcore fans who have actually seen a decent sample of his work, I think I'm in the minority, but I have run into way too many fans even off these boards who just think the guy is "okay" or have asked me about him because they "don't get the hype," for me to think I am off in another universe.

 

Having said all of this, none of that is specific to Rose. The more I think about it, the more I think that Dundee is actually a very viable candidate. He was also considered a great worker by people who watched the product at the time (though I admit he has probably been inflated more over the years, than Rose who had a sterling rep forever) and he was a number two in a promotion that was around a did solid business forever. Dundee is only "niche" in the sense that he's not a "national" candidate. El Dandy is an even worse one to argue because he was a national star, was in the main of many shows that did better than any show Tanahashi has been on that didn't take place on Jan 4, was considered a tremendous worker at the time and is considered even better by those watching now. Dandy is "niche" because Lucha has been covered far less than Japan in general. It will be interesting to see what happens when Mistico hits the ballot because Dave pimped and talked him up to a degree, but in his case he wasn't eligible at the height of his "incredible" run of big matches. He also decimates Tanahashi as a drawing card.

 

Believe it or not, none of this is said to shit on, or dismiss Tanahashi as a candidate. If you think he's an all time great worker, great, but he illustrates why I would never vote anyone in on work (assuming I ever got a ballot, which posts like this probably don't help my case) as I don't think that sort of thing can ever have anything approaching the sort of consensus I'm comfortable with their needed to be to put someone in an HoF. If you disagree that's fine, but don't go with the niche argument, because that's not an argument that makes Tanahashi look all the strong given his actual, non-mythical record as a drawing card, especially in a direct comparison to allegedly "niche" guys who absolutely destroy him if you start looking at metrics like number of main events that sold out, number of shows that did over 10k, stardom during a period when a promotion was hot (Tanahashi has two, maybe three years in that record, v. a guy like Dundee who has a decade or longer). Just make the case for him. If you think people are being dismissive, or assholes, or underselling his talents then just say so, god knows I have done it with John, Will, Phil and others over the years, sometimes in ways that are far nastier than anything in this thread. I can understand not wanting to be drawn into an argument about shit, but this is a board that is all about arguing the details of opinions - it's what we do.

 

I will say this for Tanahashi - I think he has HoF potential. If we can look back and see him as a guy who kickstarted an IPPV boom that lasted years and drastically changed the shape of wrestling in Japan it would help him. If he can finally get some sellouts in the Sumo, and NJPW is able to kickstart this seemingly crazed Dome show circuit they have been threatening in the near future, with some decent success, that would help him. If NJPW continues to trend upward, it will help him, if he's still on top. But that's a big if, because I think there are signs pointing toward Okada being the new ace. In any case he's someone I don't mind on the ballot, someone I think is going to get in this year or next year no matter what, but I can't really see any case for him that's not almost entirely built on work.

[Dylan Waco]

Would just add here that I was typing this as W2BTD was posting up his more specific thoughts on Tanahashi as a worker (which I am pleased he did), so it may seem like I'm asking him to do something he's already done.

[jdw]

When I say niche fetishism, i'm knocking this idea of bringing up people like Buddy Rose & Bill Dundee in the context of discussing great workers getting into the WON HOF on work & work alone, which is what people have done here.

 

There is a total lack of self awareness around here when people do that, because this is like the only corner in the universe where people pimp that hard for guys like that. Which is fine, but you have to understand who votes, who they vote for, and what the voting patterns are.

I think you have us confused with other people.

 

We do know who votes. We do know voting patterns. Some of us were voting before there actually was voting.

 

In turn, we've also spent year discussing the flaws in the voters, the voting process and the voting patterns. We've also questions the candidacies of guys like Shawn, Taker and Angle when they were on the ballot, all the while saying that of course they'll eventually go it. I suspect one of the posters here said Danielsen was a lock years before just about anyone else.

 

We're vastly more self aware than folks like you think, specifically because we live outside the bubble and echo chamber. When someone like Dylan advocates Ken Patera, it's not because he thinks Ken has a good chance of getting in, but instead to try to understand Ken's candidacy himself and then share the "argument" with others. And what do you know: he's had some success getting people to think more about it, to the degree that a year ago Dave was completely dismissive of Ken and now says Ken has more positives than he thought.

 

In turn, a decade ago when people were discussing Shawn, the people "critical" of his candidacy weren't expecting to keep him out. Of course he would go in. But the goal was to get people to think deeper and longer about him, and to marshal their arguments. In the end, it took a few years for Shawn to get in, and he was given a hell of a lot more thought than 90% of the people who've gone in.

 

Tanahashi is no different. Those voting for him see him as a dunker, which really isn't a thoughtful HOF candidacy... but WTF. Inside the bubble, it's a dunk and that's that.

 

Of course this wrestling nonsense is all one big niche. No shit. But nobody can't tell me that Buddy Rose would be a first ballot HOF'er based on work & work alone (something that was really posted here in a non ironic way, which is mind blowing), when not only did he not get in on his first try (when others did), but he's off the ballot entirely and will never get in.

Who knows if he'll never get in. People have dropped off the ballot, and then gotten back on it and in. Good lord, I don't even want to think of the number of folks we completely screwed up on in the Class of 1996 who should have been first ballot and didn't get in. I mean for fucks sake, exactly when were any of the Matsunaga Brothers going to get in if I didn't didn't get gobsmacked about our long ago fuck up, and mention it to Dave. It's embarrassing that it took 15+ years for me to notice we missed him, for Dave not to have noticed it, and for 100% of the "experts" who have been handed out ballots over the years to not have had a clue to say something. But, hey... those are the voters you want to pimp to me as knowing shit all about pro wrestling. Seriously, you're pimping to me the historic nature of Tanahashi... so why in the fuck is it me, some one totally lacking in self awareness of past WON HOF Screw Ups who has to clean up one of the currently biggest two screw ups of the WON HOF rather then a new age puroresu expert like you?

 

 

Then you have Bix saying Rose as a working genius is not an outlier opinion. Again, I call bullshit. At least in the context of WON HOF voters, which is what this thread is about. Otherwise, if he was a true working genius he would have been voted in a long time ago, or at minimum on the ballot floating in purgatory with Sting & Curt Hennig.

The WON HOF voters are a narrow band of people in the business and fans. I remember a funny thread where Dave and another poster made a serious claim that if Maeda were on the ballot at that time (roughly 2006ish), he wouldn't get voted in. Dave didn't take to kindly when I pointed out that a reflection of how many idiots he's passed out ballots to if Maeda didn't hit 60%, and a reflection on Dave for giving ballots to them. So that WON voters don't know that Rose could go doesn't mean Rose couldn't go. The majority of WON voters know little about Dick Beyers other than being a name on a list, and even less about his work. That doesn't mean Dick wasn't a great worker. It means that voters don't care to educate themselves.

 

 

So you guys can keep driving the focus to the perceived insult of the niche fetishism comment,

Insult? We weren't insulted. We thought you were being ironically hypocritical, and not self aware about it.

 

but it's absolutely true when describing the opinions of certain wrestlers here, and there is a lack of self awareness attached to that.

Again: you assume that someone like Bix thinks Rose is going in this year, or the next. That's not what Bix is saying. He's saying that Rose is a great worker, and that most people who are either aware of his work or take the time to delve deeply into it in the context of Rose's time come away with the same opinion. If people chose not to educate themselves or put the effort into studying something like that, it's not a poor reflect on Bix: it's on the voter.

 

 

What i'm saying here, which nobody seems to be picking up on, is that my opinions on Tanahashi happen to fall more in line with a typical voter. Something you didn't even bother trying to rebut, because honestly you can't unless Tanahashi gets 8% or something, and we know that isn't happening.

And the typical voters can be wrong.

 

There were less than two handfuls of "voters" in 1996, and probably all of four of us who really mattered on 95% of the guys who got in... in the sense that I could look at that list and come up with maybe 5% who weren't already "yes" guys before Dave flew back to the US. But in turn... I could look at that list, and guys who came later, and find plenty of people who we completely fucked up on. We screwed up on Bob Backlund. That was 100% on Dave and me, and something we realized by the MSG book at which point it was too late to simply put him in: a larger group of people had to vote him in, and that was a motherfucker to convince them to get in. We screwed up on Carpentier, were embarrassed by that and fixed it fast. We screwed up on Longson, and I cringe looking at how long it took for that to get fixed. Jack Curley embarrassed the shit out of me for how long it took.

 

Point: the voters are wrong. A lot. Typical ones. Even the non-typical ones like Dave himself, or cranky old bastard ones like me who were there from the start. We fuck up. You fuck up. There are people who are in who shouldn't be, and still people who are out who should be in.

 

So while you want to wrap yourself in the sacred flag of the typical voters:

 

1. We far more aware of the voters tastes than you think

2. We far less myopic on the infallibility of the voters (including ourselves) than you think

 

 

There are segments of people who don't like Misawa matches, too. Too many head drops. There are pockets of people who think Flair is repetitive and overrated. And people who don't get Tanahashi. The last group happens to reside here. That's fine. But have some semblance of self awareness. This is all i'm saying. I don't particularly like Jumbo matches and I think Barry Windham is incredibly average, but I also recognize that i'm the oddball

I don't think that self awareness word means what you think it means, at least in trying to apply it to people here just as the fetish nonsense.

 

We've been involved in HOF discussions long before you were. We were voting before you were. We get it far more than you think, and were candidates we think critically about (both positively and negatively) fit into the path to the Hall.

 

John

[jdw]

RE: Tanahashi I just stick to my argument that nobody that young and in the prime of their career should ever even be a candidate. It's stupid. And if Tanahashi gets in in 2013 it just continues the horrible precedent st when Angle, HHH, Cena were voted in. None of them belonged on the ballot when they did. That doesn't mean they aren't HOF talent, it was just way too soon to nominate them. I could never vote for Tanahashi today above other candidates, and if he gets voted in it's sad and an indictment of the whole process really

Completely agree with this. Said above: there was a chance to fix this after Angle, it was a known problem since the original reasoning was moot at that point (Joshi retirements at 25 years of age), and it wouldn't have impacted anyone on the ballot yet... and frankly would have allowed focus on clearing some people off the ballot.

[W2BTD]

For the record I voted for Don Owen, and didn't even debate myself on it, so that should cover where I stand on Portland as a whole.

 

Two, there is still alight misunderstanding of the way I used niche fetishism, but at this point i'd rather not argue about it anymore. It was taken the wrong way, and I guess i'm not conveying myself well enough. Saying Rose would get in based on work alone is rooted in niche fetishism. Or else he would have gotten in. Because others have. That's what I meant by it. The idea that he was SO GOOD that it can hardly be disputed to the point that it's HOF worthy on it's own merit is clearly false. At least for this group of voters for this HOF, where he failed to even remain on the ballot.

 

I don't think anybody is being dismissive or assholes, I accept that there will always be differences in tastes, which is why I come to this site to begin with, because I am open to what I see as alternate perspectives on things.

 

One of my main points, is that if he gets in, it isn't going to be primarily due to his drawing record. So what will the reason be? Obviously his work and his (not here, but mostly everywhere else) string of fantastic matches, particularly with Okada. The fact New Japan has turned around is a feather in his cap to voters, no doubt, but I think we are absolutely looking at a workrate inductee if it happens.

 

And I agree that Okada is going to be the new ace, in fact i've said in many places including I believe in this thread that I think he has already inched past Tanahashi in many ways and does certain things better even at the age of 25.

[Jimmy Redman]

Cheers for the write up on the previous page W2BTD. Like I said I'm really interested in the other perspective on Tanahashi, given it's something I really don't see myself.

[Dylan Waco]

RE: Tanahashi I just stick to my argument that nobody that young and in the prime of their career should ever even be a candidate. It's stupid. And if Tanahashi gets in in 2013 it just continues the horrible precedent st when Angle, HHH, Cena were voted in. None of them belonged on the ballot when they did. That doesn't mean they aren't HOF talent, it was just way too soon to nominate them. I could never vote for Tanahashi today above other candidates, and if he gets voted in it's sad and an indictment of the whole process really

Completely agree with this. Said above: there was a chance to fix this after Angle, it was a known problem since the original reasoning was moot at that point (Joshi retirements at 25 years of age), and it wouldn't have impacted anyone on the ballot yet... and frankly would have allowed focus on clearing some people off the ballot.

 

 

To me the strong comparison here is Tanahashi and Mistico.

 

Mistico was a rare Luchadore who was covered fairly well and in better than average detail by Dave. He was treated as a major star and he was one. Dave was higher on his matches than me (as with Tanahashi), though not at the level of Tanahashi praise. On the other hand, there were some who touted Mistico very highly as a worker, much higher than any other Luchadore of the period in terms of the your non-hardcore Lucha fans. My understanding is that the success of Mistico was huge for CMLL and "turned things around." On top of that, he was clearly a bigger draw than Tanahashi. But Mistico was not eligible for the ballot during his prime. He was signed by WWE, which in a strange way almost is another form of HoF validation for some (the fact that the WWE saw it as a huge signing and actually promoted him the way they did at first speaks to their perception of him, which is a huge part of Dave's argument for Lesnar) and has basically fallen on his face there.

 

Mistico will end up on the ballot and may eventually end up back in CMLL. But I cannot imagine him being touted as a no brainer, where there is no real argument against him at all. And it's largely because he wasn't eligible during his peak as a star.

[Dylan Waco]

For the record I voted for Don Owen, and didn't even debate myself on it, so that should cover where I stand on Portland as a whole.

 

Two, there is still alight misunderstanding of the way I used niche fetishism, but at this point i'd rather not argue about it anymore. It was taken the wrong way, and I guess i'm not conveying myself well enough. Saying Rose would get in based on work alone is rooted in niche fetishism. Or else he would have gotten in. Because others have. That's what I meant by it. The idea that he was SO GOOD that it can hardly be disputed to the point that it's HOF worthy on it's own merit is clearly false. At least for this group of voters for this HOF, where he failed to even remain on the ballot.

Rose didn't get in because of where he worked and the fact that the footage of his best years was not widely available until recently. Actually that's not why he didn't get in - that's why he fell off the ballot without a thought. There's a good chance he would have never gotten in. In fact I would almost guarantee that John didn't and wouldn't vote for him, but I know John at minimum sees Rose as a very good worker. In any case the issue with Rose was where he worked, more than it was how he worked. How do I know this? Because a dozen people that didn't vote for him and thought he was tremendous told me so.

 

One of my main points, is that if he gets in, it isn't going to be primarily due to his drawing record. So what will the reason be? Obviously his work and his (not here, but mostly everywhere else) string of fantastic matches, particularly with Okada. The fact New Japan has turned around is a feather in his cap to voters, no doubt, but I think we are absolutely looking at a workrate inductee if it happens.

 

And I agree that Okada is going to be the new ace, in fact i've said in many places including I believe in this thread that I think he has already inched past Tanahashi in many ways and does certain things better even at the age of 25.

I basically agree with this, but I think there is a tendency to try and find other arguments for him on the margins, because despite repeated talk about the alleged percentages of fans that think Tanahashi is a Misawa/Flair/Kobashi level worker, at the end of the day, the people arguing Tanahashi on work know this isn't the old days. Twenty years ago - hell for the most part ten years ago - the WON rubber stamp on a worker was pretty much gold. There weren't pockets of dissidence anywhere near the size and organization of this board or other boards. If Dave said "this guy was great" you took his word for it, and ordered the tapes. A lot of the time you watched the tapes and agreed. Sometimes you watched the tapes and disagreed, but even then you very rarely went to the wall over it unless you were someone like me or John who just like to argue. I remember arguing that Fujinami v. DK from 1980 was vastly better than any of the DK v. TM matches close to fifteen years ago and it was seen as completely heretical by a lot of people, the sort of thing only a lunatic who didn't "understand" wrestling would think. There was a small pocket where you could make those arguments and not get trolled to death, but it was a small, small, place. Nothing near the size of PWO or DVDVR (which existed then, but outside of the reviews themself, was nowhere near as "off the reservation" as it would become) or any other place you want to point to. Now you can watch the matches in real time, or on short delay, and post your thoughts online and say "eh I think Dave is crazy wrong here" or "fucking Dylan Waco is clueless about what makes New Japan" great if you prefer. Whatever the case, the consensus is nowhere near as hard as it used to be (which again is why I would NEVER vote for work alone candidates if I had a ballot).

[jdw]

Rose didn't get in because of where he worked and the fact that the footage of his best years was not widely available until recently. Actually that's not why he didn't get in - that's why he fell off the ballot without a thought. There's a good chance he would have never gotten in. In fact I would almost guarantee that John didn't and wouldn't vote for him, but I know John at minimum sees Rose as a very good worker. In any case the issue with Rose was where he worked, more than it was how he worked. How do I know this? Because a dozen people that didn't vote for him and thought he was tremendous told me so.

Didn't vote for him. Not at all against voting for him, but I haven't done a submersion in his Portland work. The chunks that I've seen, I like and think he's a damn good worker. But his case for being an all time great worker isn't a Hokuto-Kandori match standing out on the Mt Rushmore of matches, but a load of strong matches fitting into storylines. In a sense a bit like Dandy and Santito: they're not way up there due to singlular epic matches (though they have them), but for the weight of match after match bearing down on you that, "Damn... he's having another good one" or "Damn he's really solid in there."

 

At some point I'll get to Portland in depth. It's not like the HOF is shutting down next week, so there's time to watch and advocate. I think you know that if I dig him remotely close to how high you place him, I'll advocate the shit out of him.

 

On the flip side, I did vote for a pair of guys you advocated strongly. It's possible that those votes will positively impact their candidacies though they are likely at the board of the two extremes of the % cutoffs. So... your efforts probably will be more positive than you think.

[cm funk]

RE: Tanahashi I just stick to my argument that nobody that young and in the prime of their career should ever even be a candidate. It's stupid. And if Tanahashi gets in in 2013 it just continues the horrible precedent st when Angle, HHH, Cena were voted in. None of them belonged on the ballot when they did. That doesn't mean they aren't HOF talent, it was just way too soon to nominate them. I could never vote for Tanahashi today above other candidates, and if he gets voted in it's sad and an indictment of the whole process really

Completely agree with this. Said above: there was a chance to fix this after Angle, it was a known problem since the original reasoning was moot at that point (Joshi retirements at 25 years of age), and it wouldn't have impacted anyone on the ballot yet... and frankly would have allowed focus on clearing some people off the ballot.

 

 

To me the strong comparison here is Tanahashi and Mistico.

 

Mistico was a rare Luchadore who was covered fairly well and in better than average detail by Dave. He was treated as a major star and he was one. Dave was higher on his matches than me (as with Tanahashi), though not at the level of Tanahashi praise. On the other hand, there were some who touted Mistico very highly as a worker, much higher than any other Luchadore of the period in terms of the your non-hardcore Lucha fans. My understanding is that the success of Mistico was huge for CMLL and "turned things around." On top of that, he was clearly a bigger draw than Tanahashi. But Mistico was not eligible for the ballot during his prime. He was signed by WWE, which in a strange way almost is another form of HoF validation for some (the fact that the WWE saw it as a huge signing and actually promoted him the way they did at first speaks to their perception of him, which is a huge part of Dave's argument for Lesnar) and has basically fallen on his face there.

 

Mistico will end up on the ballot and may eventually end up back in CMLL. But I cannot imagine him being touted as a no brainer, where there is no real argument against him at all. And it's largely because he wasn't eligible during his peak as a star.

 

Good comparison

 

Dave pimped Mistico really hard when he was at his peak as a draw in Mexico, and if he'd hit the ballot at his peak he would have gotten a ton of support. In 2013 Mistico is nowhere close to a "slam dunk" candidate. Is Mistico today a stronger candidate than Pedro Morales, who will never get that sort of Meltzer inspired popular support

[Matt D]

\Didn't vote for him. Not at all against voting for him, but I haven't done a submersion in his Portland work. The chunks that I've seen, I like and think he's a damn good worker. But his case for being an all time great worker isn't a Hokuto-Kandori match standing out on the Mt Rushmore of matches, but a load of strong matches fitting into storylines. In a sense a bit like Dandy and Santito: they're not way up there due to singlular epic matches (though they have them), but for the weight of match after match bearing down on you that, "Damn... he's having another good one" or "Damn he's really solid in there."

That's put really well, actually, though he does have epic matches in there too. I'm only quoting because that consistency and ability to do his job to sell tickets and draw eyes week after week is endlessly more important to me, personally, than "great matches." Little things and the right things, consistently, over time matter way more to me than being in the right place at the right time for a great match. If you watch dozens and dozens of matches of a wrestler, you can figure out how good or not they were, even if they weren't headlining for 30+ minutes or whatever (which Buddy was). But I know I'm a big minority on that.

[evilclown]

That may be hard to swallow, but hey, it is what it is. This isn't even some "who is better" circular argument anymore. It's now about what the voters actually do.

 

Somebody like Regal is not going to sniff the HOF. Neither will Rose. Tanahashi is getting in, bank on it, and based on the passive aggressive bashing of his drawing ability, you tell me why it's going to happen. I'll give you one guess.

With respect, I think you've completely misread this board. There's no issue with "self awareness" or a lack of understanding about the mechanisms that lead to a wrestler being elected to the WON Hall of Fame. Many of us have been having these conversations for a decade.

 

I don't think there's a single one of us who doesn't know Tanahashi is going to go in. Just like we knew Angle would go in before him. For my part, I'm curious about why.

 

What makes the breed of voter Dave has stacked the deck with so certain this is a Hall of Fame level wrestler? I don't think it's wrong to ask you to explain your decision to vote for him. Just as it's not wrong to ask me why I voted for Ricky Morton. I'd be glad to tell you.

[Phil Schneider]

I wonder what percentage of the people voting for Tanahashi on work have actually watched 5 Tanahashi matches. I am pretty sure that all the old wrestlers with ballots aren't going on dailymotion to watch NJ, same with a lot of historians. I bet a ton of them just read Meltzer drop five stars on all of those matches and nod their heads and write him down

[W2BTD]

That may be hard to swallow, but hey, it is what it is. This isn't even some "who is better" circular argument anymore. It's now about what the voters actually do.

 

Somebody like Regal is not going to sniff the HOF. Neither will Rose. Tanahashi is getting in, bank on it, and based on the passive aggressive bashing of his drawing ability, you tell me why it's going to happen. I'll give you one guess.

With respect, I think you've completely misread this board. There's no issue with "self awareness" or a lack of understanding about the mechanisms that lead to a wrestler being elected to the WON Hall of Fame. Many of us have been having these conversations for a decade.

 

I don't think there's a single one of us who doesn't know Tanahashi is going to go in. Just like we knew Angle would go in before him. For my part, I'm curious about why.

 

What makes the breed of voter Dave has stacked the deck with so certain this is a Hall of Fame level wrestler? I don't think it's wrong to ask you to explain your decision to vote for him. Just as it's not wrong to ask me why I voted for Ricky Morton. I'd be glad to tell you.

 

To the bold, there are people in this thread (maybe not you) saying that "if workrate alone could get you in, then Rose, Dundee, Dandy, Regal would be first ballot", which is where I am coming from with the lack of self awareness comment. That is clearly bullshit, because none of those men have gotten in, while others have strictly on workrate. That is a PWO bubble statement. Somebody like Rose or Dundee has a much better reputation here than at large. The proof is in the voting. If these men were widely regarded as elite workers, they'd have been voted in like the other men that are widely regarded as elite workers. What you don't seem to understand, is i'm not even arguing whether they are elite/HOF level workers or not. I'm not interested in that in the context of this discussion, and it's all subjective. But I know for a fact that in the eyes of the voters they aren't, because I have the data to back that up. These guys can't even stay on the ballot, let alone get enough votes to get in.

 

I also find it interesting that you would even make a statement like "the breed of voter that Dave has stacked the deck with". It 's very telling that you would even say something like that. That comes off so condescending and honestly, whiny. "Why don't the masses think like I do?!"

 

And for the record, I voted for Ricky Morton also.

[concrete1992]

Why do you keep mentioning voting for a wrestler that falls a little bit outside of the fans of say a Tanahashi or Shawn Michaels?

[goc]

To the bold, there are people in this thread (maybe not you) saying that "if workrate alone could get you in, then Rose, Dundee, Dandy, Regal would be first ballot", which is where I am coming from with the lack of self awareness comment. That is clearly bullshit, because none of those men have gotten in, while others have strictly on workrate. That is a PWO bubble statement.

Just as a personal opinion, do YOU feel like everyone that should be in the WON HOF based on "workrate alone" is already in?

[goodhelmet]

With all due respect, the reason Rose, Dandy, Dundee etc. have a better reputation here than at large is because we have people who actually watched large amounts of footage of these guys at their peak in the settings n which they would be considered Hall of Fame caliber workers. We have also watched large amounts of Brody, Inoki, Muraco. It's watching large amounts of footage that allows us to form these opinions and compare those wrestlers with other wrestlers from different time periods. You call it retarded. I think if you are doing a Hall of Fame that guys from today be held to the same criteria as workers, draws, etc. from other time periods. You make direct comparisons. Instead you flippantly reject this approach as retarded. If that is living In a Bubble because we actually EXPANDED our wrestling viewing then I am happy to be in that bubble that continuously examines different wrestlers to an insane degree including wrestlers you like. This bubble also has a pretty wide range of diverse opinions.

[W2BTD]

To the bold, there are people in this thread (maybe not you) saying that "if workrate alone could get you in, then Rose, Dundee, Dandy, Regal would be first ballot", which is where I am coming from with the lack of self awareness comment. That is clearly bullshit, because none of those men have gotten in, while others have strictly on workrate. That is a PWO bubble statement.

Just as a personal opinion, do YOU feel like everyone that should be in the WON HOF based on "workrate alone" is already in?

 

Very hard to say. Of people on the ballot currently or no longer on it? Probably yes, at least off the top of my head. I think you have to be exceptional, as in all time exceptional, to get in mostly on workrate or workrate alone. Because like Dylan says, it's hard to reach a mass consensus on things. So it has to be someone who is at least close to universal, as there will always be pockets of dissidents. Obviously I feel Tanahashi fits that bill, although I also think his drawing record is a resume enhancer at worst. But drawing record aside, because i'm more than willing to back down on that aspect, I think his work alone is good enough to get him in.

 

Off the top of my head, Jun Akiyama is a guy who I would probably strongly consider voting for if he were on the ballot, and obviously that would be largely predicated on work. There are people coming up the next few years who I would vote for without hesitation based almost solely on work, but I won't even bother bringing the names up yet because if Tanahashi is causing such an uproar, I can't even imagine what those conversations will look like.

[W2BTD]

With all due respect, the reason Rose, Dandy, Dundee etc. have a better reputation here than at large is because we have people who actually watched large amounts of footage of these guys at their peak in the settings n which they would be considered Hall of Fame caliber workers. We have also watched large amounts of Brody, Inoki, Muraco. It's watching large amounts of footage that allows us to form these opinions and compare those wrestlers with other wrestlers from different time periods. You call it retarded. I think if you are doing a Hall of Fame that guys from today be held to the same criteria as workers, draws, etc. from other time periods. You make direct comparisons. Instead you flippantly reject this approach as retarded. If that is living In a Bubble because we actually EXPANDED our wrestling viewing then I am happy to be in that bubble that continuously examines different wrestlers to an insane degree including wrestlers you like. This bubble also has a pretty wide range of diverse opinions.

Stop.

 

It's as if you aren't even reading what i'm typing, so I think it's time to bow out again.

[Bix]

I wonder what percentage of the people voting for Tanahashi on work have actually watched 5 Tanahashi matches. I am pretty sure that all the old wrestlers with ballots aren't going on dailymotion to watch NJ, same with a lot of historians. I bet a ton of them just read Meltzer drop five stars on all of those matches and nod their heads and write him down

On top of that: While obviously plenty of candidates have in-ring work factored in, of those got in with work as a considerable/primary/sole criteria, how many weren't go-go-go workrate guys?

 

Those who were voted in (not the '96-'97 fiat classes) who I'd say went in almost completely on in-ring work:

 

Jushin Liger

Akira Hokuto

Kenta Kobashi

Manami Toyota

Chris Benoit

Shawn Michaels

Kurt Angle

Ultimo Dragon

Chris Jericho

 

Those who went in mostly based on work but have a little more to their candidacies than the first group:

 

Bull Nakano

Eddy Guerrero (Yeah, he had just died but I always got the impression that his increasing drawing ability still helped him)

Hiroshi Hase

Aja Kong

 

While if he stays on the right track, Tanahashi is going to be a more well-rounded candidate in a few years, and I would absolutely vote for him if he keeps this up for another, I dunno, 3-5 years, right now he's glorified workrate candidate. The wrestlers who went in as workrate candidates were mainly historical newsletter reader favorites and who were go-go-go types in their primes.

 

Nobody's getting in the HOF for work based on being a great worker. They're getting in based on the perception of being a great worker. Loss has talked about this before. The WON HOF is theoretically, according to Dave, set apart by the number of active and retired wrestlers voting, but Buddy Rose was universally considered a uniquely brilliant worker and couldn't stay on the ballot.

 

WWE wrestlers consider Kane one of the best workers in the world for like 15 years running and he couldn't stay on the ballot.

 

Hell, even on the newsletter reader fan side, Bill Dundee has never been on the ballot, but he's a guy who didn't have much easy to find footage in the '80s and still landed a few spots on the Flair and Japan-dominated Jeff Bowdren top matches of the '80s list, but it's not like Memphis brawling got any kind of continuous push over the years so he's not seen as a guy who can get in based on work.

 

Since the Japanese wrestlers are Japanese and that's the land of snowflakes and workrate and robot dogs and used schoolgirl panty vending machines, Tanahashi has quickly picked up the uberworker rep and thus has a clear path to the HOF. If Buddy Rose was having the same exact matches on NJPW TV in the early '80s he'd be in the HOF right now.

 

Also, I'll note that if Tanahashi gets 60% of the votes actually coming from Japan I have no problem with him being voted in since, like I said weeks ago in this thread, what actual Japanese people see as HOF-worthy for Japanese stars is so different from what we see as HOF-worthy for Japanese stars. It's at the point where I'd prefer nobody outside of Japan votes on Japan since they have unique standards. As culturally different as Lucha Libre is, there aren't the same disparities.

[Bix]

I also find it interesting that you would even make a statement like "the breed of voter that Dave has stacked the deck with". It 's very telling that you would even say something like that. That comes off so condescending and honestly, whiny. "Why don't the masses think like I do?!"

No, that's not it at all.

 

As noted earlier, several years ago Dave stated that he felt Maeda would, at that point, have never been voted in if he hadn't been inducted in the initial class. As JDW and others pointed out, this is ridiculous, and if he truly believed/believes that, it's an indictment of the voters more than it is of Maeda.

 

In 2013 I have no problem with Todd Martin having a ballot but ten years ago he was a guy arguing Sting should go in solely because he felt '90s American wrestling was under-represented, to the point of messaging Dylan at Wrestling Classics and asking him to start "an affirmative action campaign"" to get him in. He absolutely did not deserve a ballot then but got one because he sent stuff in to the Observer site.

 

I have no idea what Dan Wahlers is doing nowadays or if he ever learned anything, but he got a ballot within months of sending "columns" to the Observer site. He never watched WCW and actively eschewed it because of his childhood WWF loyalty. During that period, he told a reader who emailed him that the reason he voted for IWA Mid-South (during their rise to prominence in the early aughts), which he had never seen a match from, as the worst promotion in the WON Awards because rival Louisville promoter Jim Cornette was always bashing them. He absolutely didn't deserve a ballot then, either.

 

This was the year where Michaels went in. That year there was, no exaggeration, something like 50 to 100 new "writer/journalist" voters that year after the voter pool had been stagnant for several years (not like it is now where Dave is much more open to new voters). Plenty of people noted it was weird at the time.

 

The idea that Dave had stacked the pool of voters with people who shouldn't be voting is not just an insult with nothing of substance behind it.

[kjh]

I might be wrong, but "glorified workrate candidate" may be seeing Tanahashi through Western eyes. It's inevitable that Tanahashi will break the record for both no. of reigns and no of days with the IWGP title. He's been the biggest new star in the industry of the last decade. He's headlined six January 4th Tokyo Domes and about 20 Sumo Hall shows. Who with those list of credentials wouldn't get plenty of votes for the WON HOF by insiders?

[kjh]

This was the year where Michaels went in. That year there was, no exaggeration, something like 50 to 100 new "writer/journalist" voters that year after the voter pool had been stagnant for several years (not like it is now where Dave is much more open to new voters). Plenty of people noted it was weird at the time.

Wasn't the big increase across all buckets of voters?

[jdw]

I also find it interesting that you would even make a statement like "the breed of voter that Dave has stacked the deck with". It 's very telling that you would even say something like that. That comes off so condescending and honestly, whiny. "Why don't the masses think like I do?!"

WON HOF voters aren't the "masses". They never have been, nor will they ever be. There are less than 400 of them, a large chunk of them in the business on some level. They are so far removed from the masses that it's not even funny. We sure as hell weren't the "masses" back in 1996 when we were putting the thing together.

 

Hell, the "masses" of pro wrestling fans don't know who Tanahashi is. Pretty much just an increasingly smaller fanbase in Japan, along with some hardcores around the world.

 

You're pretty consistently pushing a viewpoint of WON HOF Voters as being this:

 

 

When in reality they, along with us, are this:

 

 

We're a bunch of nutty pagans, from Dave on down to the rest of us.

 

So skip the notion that there is any kind of "consensus" on all this. 58 people voted for Sasaki last year, and that was 1 vote short of getting in. No one really believes that 59 freaking voters represents a consensus of thought on Japanese wrestlers worthy of going into the HOF. Good lord, 183 folks voted for Cena. If that many people watched him on TV, he wouldn't be on TV.

 

Masses...

[W2BTD]

I might be wrong, but "glorified workrate candidate" may be seeing Tanahashi through Western eyes. It's inevitable that Tanahashi will break the record for both no. of reigns and no of days with the IWGP title. He's been the biggest new star in the industry of the last decade. He's headlined six January 4th Tokyo Domes and about 20 Sumo Hall shows. Who with those list of credentials wouldn't get plenty of votes for the WON HOF by insiders?

If you go back a few pages, his drawing record and time as an ace is being used as a negative, because it doesn't stack up to others in the past. Arguments such as, only TWO Sumo Hall G1 shows per year now? Pffft, back in the day they were doing five! Of course this ignores where New Japan was previous to this run.

 

For me, while I have never trumpeted him as an elite HOF level draw, he is clearly enough of a star and a good enough draw for that to be part of his overall resume as a positive. I think the level the company was at before his rise and where they are now needs to be considered. Who else is drawing besides Tanahashi these days? The list is short. I'm not trying to make a tallest midget argument, but business isn't exactly booming, especially in Japan, and this is a guy who does move the needle. It's fascinating that people go to great lengths to discredit that aspect of his resume. If you are a exceptionally hard marker on the stardom front, fine. I'm willing to see layers.