Pat Patterson and Ray Stevens Fightin' Words

[jdw]

Hard to tell how much Stevens & Patterson ruled the roost as a tag team in SF. Stevens spent twice as much time as the dominant US champ, along with some time out on the shelf with injuries. Shibuya held the tag title longer with a couple of partners bookending the long stretch Stevens & Patterson had with the belt.

 

As far as Patterson as a worker, I think most people would bet their houses that if you asked Pat who the better worker was, he'd point to Stevens. We're still on the eternal quest for Stevens looking terrific in a match... but since Stevens was something of a mentor to Pat, he's likely not blowing smoke.

 

On Pat as a top 3 worker in the 70s, or even the WWF's MVP in 1979-80, not sure on either. Patera was the MVP in 1980 if we're looking at work. 1979 feels like Backlund, with the weaker matches between Backlund and Patterson very much feeling like Patterson was the one being lazy holding them back. Pat was 38 in 1979, 39 in 1980. The Destroyer was 39 for his 1969 match with Baba, and 43 in his 1973 match with Mil... both of which are better than anything we have of Pat on tape (unless we count Slaughter bumping and blading his ass off to make the boot camp match). Hard to imagine Pat was a better worker in the 60s than Beyers.

 

John

[shoe]

As far as Patterson as a worker, I think most people would bet their houses that if you asked Pat who the better worker was, he'd point to Stevens. We're still on the eternal quest for Stevens looking terrific in a match... but since Stevens was something of a mentor to Pat, he's likely not blowing smoke.

 

We don't have the footage to actually do the research ourselves so it's not something we can draw conclusions on except from other people from the era. With that said even if Stevens was better than Pat it doesn't take away that Pat was a great worker. From the footage that is out there Patterson is the better worker, and has a great mind at working a match. It's like Montana and Young. Both are great QB's. Both are in the HOF . Both are on the same team. Both are great.

[shoe]

On Pat as a top 3 worker in the 70s, or even the WWF's MVP in 1979-80, not sure on either. Patera was the MVP in 1980 if we're looking at work. 1979 feels like Backlund, with the weaker matches between Backlund and Patterson very much feeling like Patterson was the one being lazy holding them back. Pat was 38 in 1979, 39 in 1980. The Destroyer was 39 for his 1969 match with Baba, and 43 in his 1973 match with Mil... both of which are better than anything we have of Pat on tape (unless we count Slaughter bumping and blading his ass off to make the boot camp match). Hard to imagine Pat was a better worker in the 60s than Beyers.

 

John

 

I will say John since I've watched a good bit of WWF in 79. Pat is in the running for MVP. I feel he was the best promo as a wrestler in the company in 79. Miles ahead of Bob. Pat had 3 really strong matches against Dibiase, and one that was solid, but was hurt due to time. He had a good feud with Bob. One of those matches I thought was the 2nd best match in 79 in WWF. Sill I have it pegged as Backlund as MVP followed by Patterson and Valentine.

[BrickHithouse]

As far as Patterson as a worker, I think most people would bet their houses that if you asked Pat who the better worker was, he'd point to Stevens. We're still on the eternal quest for Stevens looking terrific in a match... but since Stevens was something of a mentor to Pat, he's likely not blowing smoke.

I don't debate people that haven't watched the stuff in >3500 days, but for a fun show where people talk about the matches within 1-3 days of the record date, check out http://placetobenation.com/titans-of-wrestling/

[jdw]

On Pat as a top 3 worker in the 70s, or even the WWF's MVP in 1979-80, not sure on either. Patera was the MVP in 1980 if we're looking at work. 1979 feels like Backlund, with the weaker matches between Backlund and Patterson very much feeling like Patterson was the one being lazy holding them back. Pat was 38 in 1979, 39 in 1980. The Destroyer was 39 for his 1969 match with Baba, and 43 in his 1973 match with Mil... both of which are better than anything we have of Pat on tape (unless we count Slaughter bumping and blading his ass off to make the boot camp match). Hard to imagine Pat was a better worker in the 60s than Beyers.

 

John

We don't have the footage to actually do the research ourselves so it's not something we can draw conclusions on except from other people from the era. With that said even if Stevens was better than Pat it doesn't take away that Pat was a great worker. From the footage that is out there Patterson is the better worker, and has a great mind at working a match. It's like Montana and Young. Both are great QB's. Both are in the HOF . Both are on the same team. Both are great.

 

[...]

 

I will say John since I've watched a good bit of WWF in 79. Pat is in the running for MVP. I feel he was the best promo as a wrestler in the company in 79. Miles ahead of Bob. Pat had 3 really strong matches against Dibiase, and one that was solid, but was hurt due to time. He had a good feud with Bob. One of those matches I thought was the 2nd best match in 79 in WWF. Sill I have it pegged as Backlund as MVP followed by Patterson and Valentine.

 

I found the DiBiase series pretty uninteresting, though as much for Ted as Pat. I thought the series with Bob ranged from awful (the two Philly matches that exist) to subpar (the overrated cage match) to very good (the 07/30/79 MSG match). The suckage of the Philly matches was entirely Pat.

 

I haven't seen Pat "great" on tape. I've seen solid performances, like the good MSG match with Backlund, against Patera, and against Slaughter. But I thought the other guy was the better worker in all of them, and they all had better matches against other opponents. He was solid against Inoki, but not really dynamic or overly interesting in the match. That Patera and Inoki all had better matches with Backlund... vastly better matches... doesn't really reflect on Pat being great~! in those matches. On the flip, Slaughter-Patterson really is an off the charts performance by Slaughter rather than Pat being exceptional.

 

His AWA work never really blew me away either. "Solid" and "good" rather than him jumping out as "great". I never got the same feel out of him that I did for Billy Robinson in those tags against Bockwinkel & Stevens and Stevens & Patterson where Billy felt flat out terrific in just about everything he did.

 

I don't doubt Pat was a very good / really good worker. Top 2-3 in the world? No.

[jdw]

As far as Patterson as a worker, I think most people would bet their houses that if you asked Pat who the better worker was, he'd point to Stevens. We're still on the eternal quest for Stevens looking terrific in a match... but since Stevens was something of a mentor to Pat, he's likely not blowing smoke.

I don't debate people that haven't watched the stuff in >3500 days, but for a fun show where people talk about the matches within 1-3 days of the record date, check out http://placetobenation.com/titans-of-wrestling/

 

Since we're talking about matches from the 70s and early 80s, no one is talking about then within 1-3 days of the record date. As far as talking about Patterson matches within a few days of watching them... I did. A lot, in overkill length.

 

The 3500 day thing is kind of funny since most of what I've bought and watched over the past 2-3 years is WWF 70s and 80s stuff, including Pat. It's all the mass All Japan discs from the 70s and 80s and 90s that I've bought in that period that hasn't been watching, most of it still in the boxes / packages / spindles that they were shipped in.

 

But nice try...

 

John

[BrickHithouse]

fuck all of you cunts

[shoe]

Then we are going to disagree on these points. At this point Pat is past his athletic prime , but still had enough in his tank. Though his mind was sharp as a whip. He really brought the structure and the match layout in the matches like Patera, Slaughter, Backlund , and Dibiase. I think you're really underselling Pat. Meltzer on the Austin pod rattled off 15 names of great workers and Pat was on it. To me on the match ups you mention Pat was step to step with those guys. In the matches that you didn't like with Bob to me it was the time constraints that kept them from reaching their potential . Not Pat Patterson.Then again I reccomended people watch the footage and draw their own conclusions. That is what this board is about.

[BrickHithouse]

fuck all of you cunts

[jdw]

No one is ever correct when debating the narcissistic miniature troll.

Lots of people are correct. I admitted as much in one recent thread.

 

 

Fun debates can be found here, where we record shows within 1-3 days of watching the matches,

Lots of us talk about matches we watched within the past 1-3 days. Lots of us also talk about matches we've watched 10-20 times over the past 20 years. Does anyone really expect any of us, when talking about the 12/03/93 Misawa & Kobashi vs Kawada & Taue, to pop in the tape/dvd or pull up the youtube clip after we've already watched it a dozen times?

 

 

and don't pretend that we know all there is to know about every single possible subject ever written:

Who here pretends they know everything about every single subject ever written? Take me for example since you're clearly obsessing about me at the moment. Do I write much about European wrestling? Do I write much about PR wrestling? Memphis? Portland?

 

When I'm asked about someone like Buddy Rose, I'm pretty open on copping to not watching his Portland stuff, and it's on my list to eventually get to... which is likely a decade away.

 

But what they hey, keep obsessing and shilling your podcast in this thread rather than in the podcast shill zone.

 

Oh... and to the original on topic element: just how much Stevens & Patterson in San Francisco in the 60s do you think was watched in the past 1-3 days to come up with them being a HOF tag team in the 60s? Or was that based on something else?

 

John

[jdw]

Meltzer on the Austin pod rattled off 15 names of great workers and Pat was on it.

Dave likes Pat, and saw him in SF closer to Pat's prime. It's a reasonable opinion based on Dave seeing more than pretty much all us here. On the other hand, we all have things we disagree with Dave about when it comes to judging workers. I don't think a lot of people agree with him on how he judges the work of Brody, nor Sayama. So while not an unreasonable opinion, I don't think many of us take Dave's thoughts on work as the Gospel anymore.

 

 

Then we are going to disagree on these points. At this point Pat is past his athletic prime , but still had enough in his tank.

I think he was a good worker in that era. The past his prime thing only goes so far with me: Beyes was the same age and older while having better performances.

 

Though his mind was sharp as a whip.

His mind still is. Even after his career was over, he was smart when it came to work. We all agree on that.

 

 

He really brought the structure and the match layout in the matches like Patera, Slaughter, Backlund , and Dibiase.

Here's the thing: we all have seen excellent structure and layout in matches involving Patera, Slaughter, Backlund and DiBiase when Pat wasn't involved. We've seen it in promotions when Pat wasn't even in the promotion. So structure in their matches isn't a Pat-thing. Those are some pretty decent workers in laying out matches.

 

 

I think you're really underselling Pat.

I think he was a really good worker.

 

Top 2-3 in the world? I think that's nuts. I'm not underselling him: he's being oversold at that level.

 

 

To me on the match ups you mention Pat was step to step with those guys.

In the good ones with Patera and Bob, sure. In the Slaughter one? No, that was Slaughter being off the charts and Pat being good and holding up his end well. Ted? I don't think either were that great.

 

In the matches that you didn't like with Bob to me it was the time constraints that kept them from reaching their potential.

I don't think time has anything to do with it. The mediocre Philly matches were 18 minutes long. We've seen both Pat and Bob in good matches at that length.

 

The were bad matches because Pat laid around in hold. In contrast, he worked the holds in the strong MSG match.

 

 

Then again I reccomended people watch the footage and draw their own conclusions. That is what this board is about.

It's actually about talking about wrestling. We all can watch footage in a vacuum. That's what we did before we came online. This is a place to talk about your conclusions.

 

John

[shoe]

1. I agree. I used Meltzer as a reference as opposed to you who spoke for Pat. Though I agree Pat probably does think Stevens is better than him.

 

2. I agree the Destroyer is better, but Pat isn't far off the mark.

 

3. We agree he has a great wrestling mind.

 

4. I wasn't talking about those matches, but clearly the matches Pat was in he had his fingertips all over the match.

 

5. Top 2 or 3 might be overstating it. I can see him in the top 10 70 's style worker .

 

6. I think Bob's great matches usually go in the 20-30 minutes. Shocking the great Patterson / Backlund match goes 28.

[BrickHithouse]

fuck all of you cunts

 

Happy Thanksgiving!

[JerryvonKramer]

I can only speak for myself and what I like in my wrestling. Patterson has been the only blow-away great worker I've seen in the WWF 79-80 footage so far. And, for me, it came completely out of left field. I wasn't expecting anything much from Patterson and wasn't looking for him to be great or anything. I'd seen the 81 Alley Fight with Slaughter before, but that was about it -- but I never figured Patterson as any sort of super worker. True revelation in my view.

 

But he knocked me out with how good he was. As people who have read my stuff on here will know, I never see "great matches" as the only metric when judging a guy, I want to look at performances and what he's doing in each and every match, even the middling stuff. Patterson for me is an incredibly expressive performer. The guy sitting in row Z at the back of MSG in the cheap seats would always know exactly what was happening in one of his matches. But that's not all: he was a tremendous bump taker and very good at selling, terrific at stooging, great at telling a compelling story from A to B, great at brawling, and he could throw a suplex or two if the situation needed it. And he could talk.

 

As an all-round performer, I've not seen anyone close to that so far in this period. Backlund has probably had the greater number of good to very good matches, but he's also had a far greater number of really shitty ones. For me, Backlund only has one gear. He's very one dimensional as a wrestler, and in every match he'll give you ... Backlund. He's solid, he can have a good match. But who is the more interesting and compelling performer? For me, Patterson is streets ahead. We've seen Patterson work as a sniveling and conniving heel and as a dirty fighting babyface now -- he can work from on top, from underneath, technical match, brawl, you name it. He kind of reminds me a little bit of Bockwinkel, but with even more of a bump-heavy style. The first match with DiBiase was great. The first match with Backlund was great. The match with Patera was great. Hell, I even liked him tagging with Andre.

 

I guess people look for different things. I was bored rigid by long stretches of the famous Backlund vs. Valentine match. It was two guys lying around on the mat in one of the most boring headlock spots ever seen for 30 fucking minutes before anything happened. Other people call that match a ***** classic. I'd take the Patterson-DiBiase match over that any day of the week and twice on Sundays. Patterson, if nothing else, is just more FUN than Backlund or Valentine or anyone else from WWF in this period. That's why he's my MVP for 79 at the very least.

 

For 80, I can see Patera being in strong contention already. But Patterson was just as good as him as the fired up fighting face in that IC match from April 21st.

 

At this point in my wrestling life, I don't really care about winning people over to my point of view. I like what I like. You like what you like. For me, Patterson is awesome in 79 and almost as good in 80 so far. I imagine he was even better when he was younger. Disagree? Ok, fine. Nothing more to say.

[jdw]

Just in case people don't know... Shoe and I have been talking about WWF matches, workers and work from this era for ages. Like seven years, Shoe? We agree on a hell of a lot more than we disagree on, and have as far as I recall always gotten along. Just because we disagree a bit on Pat doesn't mean either of us is reaching for the barbed wire baseball bat.

 

Anyway...

 

1. I agree. I used Meltzer as a reference as opposed to you who spoke for Pat. Though I agree Pat probably does think Stevens is better than him.

Yep.

 

Also given how Dave talks about workers, I'm not sure if he'd come up with the same list of The Best 15 Workers I've Ever Seen everytime he's asked to make it... or if with the slightest poking he wouldn't change it:

 

Q: "You didn't mention Jaguar."

DM: "Oh, right... Jaguar needs to be on there."

 

That's likely the case for all of us. I wouldn't have a clue who my Top 15 would be as worker. Hell, I didn't participate in that Yohe Project (overall, not work) because I couldn't come up with #3 All Time after Londos and Hogan... let alone a Top 100 list.

 

 

2. I agree the Destroyer is better, but Pat isn't far off the mark.

Okay. I just need more to put him up there.

 

 

3. We agree he has a great wrestling mind.

For sure someone that you'd want to sit down with to talk about stuff, especially if he was totally candid and was in the mood to explain stuff.

 

 

4. I wasn't talking about those matches, but clearly the matches Pat was in he had his fingertips all over the match.

I think some do, more than others. The best Pat-Patera has a smart, low tech layout that hits some nice payoffs. Patera had good matches with pretty much everyone that year (well... don't recall with Pedro), and pretty good layouts as well (like against Bruno). But that one did feel more of being Pat's.

 

Others... not as much. Beyond the sense that all workers being a bit of their own stuff to matches.

 

 

5. Top 2 or 3 might be overstating it. I can see him in the top 10 70 's style worker .

Don't know. I'm not sure we have a great survey of stuff of 70s style workers when it comes to available stuff.

 

 

6. I think Bob's great matches usually go in the 20-30 minutes. Shocking the great Patterson / Backlund match goes 28.

Never really put Bob in a box on match length. There are things like the second 60:00 draw with Inoki that I thought is as good of a match as he ever had. Enjoy the Bob-Greg draw, and like the Bob-Muraco draw more than most. On the flip, things like the 9/80 and 2/81 matches with Hansen that were 16-17 minutes long like the Bob-Patterson Philly matches that I thought were very good to excellent. I think the cage match with Sarge was terrific, and that was 16. The "title held up" match with Valentine in 11/81 was very entertaining, and that was like a 15 minute sprint for the two of them. Adonis lumberjack match was 16. 5/83 match with Sarge was 16, and nice evidence that Bob was still over and having good matches after he allegedly wasn't over anymore. Then there are a lot of matches in the 20-30 range that are good to really good to great.

 

He also had mediocre ones of various lengths. The ones that stick in mind as "damn, this was way too short and I want more" were the Hansen cage match (just damn odd since it ended quick and almost out of nowhere), and the 5/82 Backlund-Orton in Philly (which needed about 5-8 minutes added on of Orton on top taking it too Backlund). Those Pat-Bob matches in Philly didn't seem time constrained, because another 5-8 minutes of them would have just been another 5-8 minutes of Pat laying around. In the MSG match it wasn't the time: it was Pat being engaged in working. :/

 

John

[shoe]

Just in case people don't know... Shoe and I have been talking about WWF matches, workers and work from this era for ages. Like seven years, Shoe? We agree on a hell of a lot more than we disagree on, and have as far as I recall always gotten along. Just because we disagree a bit on Pat doesn't mean either of us is reaching for the barbed wire baseball bat.

 

Anyway...

 

John and I have been talking wrestling for years. He was kind of enough to slum with me in the WWF starting about 7 years ago. JDW was an All-Japan guy.Though I'm not pegging him as that. He's seen a lot of good/bad/shitty wrestling over the years. We do agree on a lot of stuff in wrestling and enjoy real sports. Though now we will disagree on stuff from time to time. I have said to him recently that I wish you'd watch the footage more recently than 3 years ago. Opinions change, evolve etc.

[shoe]

Yep.

 

Also given how Dave talks about workers, I'm not sure if he'd come up with the same list of The Best 15 Workers I've Ever Seen everytime he's asked to make it... or if with the slightest poking he wouldn't change it:

 

Q: "You didn't mention Jaguar."

DM: "Oh, right... Jaguar needs to be on there."

 

That's likely the case for all of us. I wouldn't have a clue who my Top 15 would be as worker. Hell, I didn't participate in that Yohe Project (overall, not work) because I couldn't come up with #3 All Time after Londos and Hogan... let alone a Top 100 list. smile.gif

 

 

Here again John you're making up quotes to suit your needs. Maybe Dave, You and the fly on the wall had this discussion, but it's not out there to collaboarate.

[shoe]

2. I agree the Destroyer is better, but Pat isn't far off the mark.

Okay. I just need more to put him up there.

 

 

 

 

 

I like these matches from 79.

 

1. 06-23 TED DIBIASE vs PAT PATTERSON NORTH AMERICAN TITLE

 

2. 07-21 PAT PATTERSON vs TED DIBIASE NORTH AMERICAN TITLE

 

3. 07-30 BOB BACKLUND vs PAT PATTERSON WWF TITLE

 

All of these are really strong matches. Though we are going to disagree here. I do challenge you to revisit the Dibiase series though for some current thoughts.

 

Plus we do agree on point 3.

[shoe]

4. I wasn't talking about those matches, but clearly the matches Pat was in he had his fingertips all over the match.

I think some do, more than others. The best Pat-Patera has a smart, low tech layout that hits some nice payoffs. Patera had good matches with pretty much everyone that year (well... don't recall with Pedro), and pretty good layouts as well (like against Bruno). But that one did feel more of being Pat's.

 

Others... not as much. Beyond the sense that all workers being a bit of their own stuff to matches.

 

 

 

 

I don't disagree. Patera in 80 is a stud. I thought we are talking Pat in 1979. The matches with Pat and Ted is clearly Pat's show and Ted would ape a lot of this throughout his career. Loaded glove= knuckle duster. Figure 4 = Million Dollar Dream. Both were bumping heels who you could believe could be on top. Also with Patera in 1980 his first big matches are with Bob, and Pat. Both Bob and Pat had great psycholgy. I think Patera took a lot from their matches and put it into his own. A smart worker would. I'd classify Patera as a smart worker.

[shoe]

5. Top 2 or 3 might be overstating it. I can see him in the top 10 70 's style worker .

Don't know. I'm not sure we have a great survey of stuff of 70s style workers when it comes to available stuff.

 

 

 

 

Agreed their isn't enough out there. I'd say Destroyer, Brisco, T. Funk,Jumbo, Robinson,Bock, Rose, Murdoch, Patterson, O'Connor, Lawler. Plus the luchadores that people short shrift all the time. Plenty of guys on the tail end of the 70's . It's an argument that could be on a loop.

[shoe]

6. I think Bob's great matches usually go in the 20-30 minutes. Shocking the great Patterson / Backlund match goes 28.

Never really put Bob in a box on match length. There are things like the second 60:00 draw with Inoki that I thought is as good of a match as he ever had. Enjoy the Bob-Greg draw, and like the Bob-Muraco draw more than most. On the flip, things like the 9/80 and 2/81 matches with Hansen that were 16-17 minutes long like the Bob-Patterson Philly matches that I thought were very good to excellent. I think the cage match with Sarge was terrific, and that was 16. The "title held up" match with Valentine in 11/81 was very entertaining, and that was like a 15 minute sprint for the two of them. Adonis lumberjack match was 16. 5/83 match with Sarge was 16, and nice evidence that Bob was still over and having good matches after he allegedly wasn't over anymore. Then there are a lot of matches in the 20-30 range that are good to really good to great.

 

He also had mediocre ones of various lengths. The ones that stick in mind as "damn, this was way too short and I want more" were the Hansen cage match (just damn odd since it ended quick and almost out of nowhere), and the 5/82 Backlund-Orton in Philly (which needed about 5-8 minutes added on of Orton on top taking it too Backlund). Those Pat-Bob matches in Philly didn't seem time constrained, because another 5-8 minutes of them would have just been another 5-8 minutes of Pat laying around. In the MSG match it wasn't the time: it was Pat being engaged in working. :/

 

John

 

 

I bet though if we put Bob's best 10 matches up there they go 20+. Be honest and try it. I'm going to. His style of wrestling was better long.

 

1.10-19/ 81 BOB BACKLUND vs GREG VALENTINE WWF TITLE

 

2.02-19-79 BOB BACKLUND vs GREG VALENTINE WWF TITLE

 

3. 01-18-82 BOB BACKLUND vs ADRIAN ADONIS WWF TITLE

 

4.05-19-80 BOB BACKLUND vs KEN PATERA WWF TITLE

 

5.Bob Backlund vs. Antonio Inoki (NJ 12/6/79) an awesome hr draw.

 

6. 07-30-79 BOB BACKLUND vs PAT PATTERSON WWF TITLE

 

7.01-21-80 BOB BACKLUND vs KEN PATERA WWF TITLE

 

8. Greg Valentine vs. Bob Backlund 12/12/81

 

9. Sgt. Slaughter vs. Bob Backlund Sicilian Stretcher Match 10/24/83

 

10.Buddy Rose vs. Bob Backlund (Philly 11/25/82

 

I believe 8 or 9 of these go 20+.

[JerryvonKramer]

I just listened to the first half of Austin's interview with Meltzer. Great stuff so far, and Patterson got a mention as a "tremendous worker". But they've just said a lot of things about scripted promos that I think a lot of us agree with and it reminded me of that one Patterson promo that blew me away:

 

Patterson is a great promo mainly because he comes across as absolutely meaning what he says.

 

 

When you look into his eyes, no aspect of the performance is bullshit. It's totally authentic. Even when, as a heel, he's bullshitting, he does it in a way where you believe that he believes his own lies. Even back then, there weren't that many guys who could do promos with that level of believability and intensity. I couldn't love Patterson more.

[jdw]

I bet though if we put Bob's best 10 matches up there they go 20+. Be honest and try it. I'm going to. His style of wrestling was better long.

20+ is different from 20-30 that you mentioned earlier. I think his best match is the 07/27/78 draw with Inoki. It goes 60, so I don't think of it as a 20-30 match.

 

That was kind of my point: "Never really put Bob in a box on match length."

 

He has a lot of good matches that are in that 20-30 length. He has some that go quite a bit longer, like the second draw with Inoki and the draw with Valentine. Some shorter, like the last two on your list that are 13 minute matches. The Bob-Sarge would be in my Top 10, and that's 16 as I mentioned. Dittos the two best Hansen matches.

 

I don't think length was the problem with the two poor Bob-Pat matches in Philly. It was largely that Pat didn't seem to want to work very much. He did in the best available MSG match. Maybe Pat throught, "I've got 10 less minuted here in Philly, might as well do less in this one." But that doesn't really make a lot of sense.

[jdw]

Yep.

 

Also given how Dave talks about workers, I'm not sure if he'd come up with the same list of The Best 15 Workers I've Ever Seen everytime he's asked to make it... or if with the slightest poking he wouldn't change it:

 

Q: "You didn't mention Jaguar."

DM: "Oh, right... Jaguar needs to be on there."

 

That's likely the case for all of us. I wouldn't have a clue who my Top 15 would be as worker. Hell, I didn't participate in that Yohe Project (overall, not work) because I couldn't come up with #3 All Time after Londos and Hogan... let alone a Top 100 list. smile.gif

 

Here again John you're making up quotes to suit your needs. Maybe Dave, You and the fly on the wall had this discussion, but it's not out there to collaboarate.

 

What I'm saying is that we all make up "lists" and then someone points out that we've forgotten someone (or several someones). If someone wants to point to the 15 Greatest Workers List that Dave dropped on Austin, then I'm willing to bet we can all come up with a few people that Dave probably would go, "Oh right..." if we mentioned them to him.

 

John

[jdw]

4. I wasn't talking about those matches, but clearly the matches Pat was in he had his fingertips all over the match.

I think some do, more than others. The best Pat-Patera has a smart, low tech layout that hits some nice payoffs. Patera had good matches with pretty much everyone that year (well... don't recall with Pedro), and pretty good layouts as well (like against Bruno). But that one did feel more of being Pat's.

 

Others... not as much. Beyond the sense that all workers being a bit of their own stuff to matches.

 

 

I don't disagree. Patera in 80 is a stud. I thought we are talking Pat in 1979. The matches with Pat and Ted is clearly Pat's show and Ted would ape a lot of this throughout his career. Loaded glove= knuckle duster. Figure 4 = Million Dollar Dream. Both were bumping heels who you could believe could be on top. Also with Patera in 1980 his first big matches are with Bob, and Pat. Both Bob and Pat had great psycholgy. I think Patera took a lot from their matches and put it into his own. A smart worker would. I'd classify Patera as a smart worker.

 

I'd agree with Patera being a smart worker. Not sure how much of it was lifted from those two, or stuff he had from his prior travels. There are things with his bumping and selling that have a Mid Atlantic heel feel to them. The power guy stuff is pretty standard stuff for power guys, though he nicely added to them by bumping & selling more like a Mid Atlantic heel than a power guy.

 

I mentioned 1980 because that was what was in the starting point: 1979-80 WWF MVP.