Loss Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 Working smart and doing little things is so, so, so much more impressive to me at the age I am now, to the point where I sort of look down on people who value athleticism and innovative moves and stiffness and bumping and fighting spirit or what not more. I feel bad about that, but it seems like something that we're sort of supposed to grow out of as fans in favor of storytelling and nuance and selling. Granted, a lot of those earlier things can be tools in a broader storytelling, but they're blunt tools and feel really empty to me without the rest. It's all subjective but some of it is more flashy candy and some of it is more studied and learned craftsmanship of intent. Yeah, I'm kind of a jerk. Sorry. I don't think these things are necessarily in competition with each other. I value all of it. There are so many ways to do pro wrestling, and I hesitate to say I agree with this because I don't think it applies to every style. RINGS is perhaps the most athletic promotion in history and that is the focus of what they do, yet it is done exceptionally well and they deserve credit for what they accomplished. We all have values, but I don't think being a zealot does anyone any good. There is more than one way to do pro wrestling well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W2BTD Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 Working smart and doing little things is so, so, so much more impressive to me at the age I am now, to the point where I sort of look down on people who value athleticism and innovative moves and stiffness and bumping and fighting spirit or what not more. I feel bad about that, but it seems like something that we're sort of supposed to grow out of as fans in favor of storytelling and nuance and selling. Granted, a lot of those earlier things can be tools in a broader storytelling, but they're blunt tools and feel really empty to me without the rest. It's all subjective but some of it is more flashy candy and some of it is more studied and learned craftsmanship of intent. Yeah, I'm kind of a jerk. Sorry. I think you can do "a lot of stuff", whether it's innovative moves, stiff blows, big bumps, etc, and still have a well structured, compelling, & logical match. I'm not advocating for spot fests. Bryan didn't work that way. And most of the time, neither did Generico. And personally for me, there is nothing that pops me more when watching a match than a well placed fighting spirit spot. To each his own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted January 29, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 There are other things to factor in, like wrestling the right match for the right crowd. Moreover, obviously the best matches are ones which have a number of great elements, but I know what I value more. It's really more my preference, but it's also sort of like a magic eye. I can let go and enjoy just about anything now and again, but I can't unsee what I've seen, you know? The genie doesn't go back into the bottle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 Also, I think the idea that wrestling that can't be done regardless of the physical condition and age of the performers is somehow dumber is ludicrous. It's a myopic point of view that assumes that all wrestling is performed for an audience of one. Of course wrestlers throwing out innovation and athleticism without thought put into it sucks, but it's really short-sighed to dismiss any tool that a wrestler has at his disposal that makes his matches more interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted January 29, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 For what it's worth, my usual talking point isn't that but more along the lines that you really learn how good a wrestler is understanding why he was doing what he was doing when you take away some of the tools. That's in a gimmick match, or in situation where he has to work in a limited amount of time, or yeah, when he's old. It's not just age though, but different circumstances, and age is one of the more interesting ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimmas Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 The main factor that makes indies guys look better in the WWE is the road agents. Working hundreds of matches is one thing, working hundreds of matches with Arn Anderson, Barry Windham and Ricky Steamboat giving you notes after each match and having them help you with coming up with the matches is a completely different thing altogether. You kind of have to improve in the current environment for no other reason than the quality of the road agents. I can't imagine Gabe is giving as good advice as The Enforcer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted January 29, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 The main factor that makes indies guys look better in the WWE is the road agents. Working hundreds of matches is one thing, working hundreds of matches with Arn Anderson, Barry Windham and Ricky Steamboat giving you notes after each match and having them help you with coming up with the matches is a completely different thing altogether. You kind of have to improve in the current environment for no other reason than the quality of the road agents. I can't imagine Gabe is giving as good advice as The Enforcer. My other favorite talking point is that Arn Anderson doesn't get enough credit for John Cena's matches. I have no idea what happens when he has those video game, finsiher stealing ones though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 I totally disagree with that. To say that you learn how good wrestlers are when tools are taken away implies that a wrestler should be able to do something with nothing. And those who don't have much probably should be able to do something with nothing. But I would consider a wrestler who had natural athletic gifts and didn't use them pretty dumb. It's right there as an option. Look at it this way. I'm sure the most important thing to your wife is that you love her. That doesn't mean you should never buy her jewelry. And if you normally hand make your Valentine's Day cards for her, then you have your arms amputated and can no longer do this, you're not a bad husband because you can no longer show your love in this way. (Holy morbid scenario.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted January 29, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 BUT if I can find some way to still do it without arms because I understand the craft of making valentines that damn well, then I'm awesome! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 Sure. But if you can't, that doesn't mean that you aren't. It just means that you have no arms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimmas Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 Look at it this way. I'm sure the most important thing to your wife is that you love her. That doesn't mean you should never buy her jewelry. And if you normally hand make your Valentine's Day cards for her, then you have your arms amputated and can no longer do this, you're not a bad husband because you can no longer show your love in this way. (Holy morbid scenario.) Awesome! I agree with your point, but that comparison. Awesome! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted January 29, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 It means I'm not as good at it as no arms guy #1. That goes back to a lot of high end guy vs high end guy stuff, though. In general, I think you can learn something by seeing wrestlers in different situation, especially ones where they have a tool taken away to see if they understand pro wrestling enough to adapt to that situation. I'm not saying it's the most important thing, but it's worth paying attention to. The greatest wrestlers understand what they're doing well enough that it doesn't matter. It's all in how they use whatever tools they have in any situation. That's what I'm saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 I think both Loss and Matt are right. There is a reason that we are impressed when a guy has a good match with a manager or a much less talented guy and it is all based around building heat and psychology because the usual stuff can't or won't work in that situation. On the other hand having more abilities and physical skills allows you more range as a wrestler. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 Or perhaps having no arms had a domino effect on other parts of the guy's approach to life and romance. Maybe guy with no arms number one lost them rescuing a drowning baby from the bite of a shark, while guy with no arms number two lost them in a stupid sewing machine accident, which led to embarrassment and depression. Guy with no arms number one is a hero, while guy with no arms number two is a laughing stock. No two scenarios are exactly the same and there are mental changes associated with physical loss that impact different people in different ways. Guy number one lost his arms. Guy number two lost a lot more than that. I have a feeling if we were assessing his worth as a spouse, he'd really want us to just remember him when he had two working arms. And the last thing on his mind would be drawing a Valentine's Day card. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cm funk Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 I don't know what to think about CM Punk in WWE. He almost seems overexposed to me - and I don't even get PPVs. Sometimes he looks like someone who has it all as a WWE performer. Sometimes he looks like that guy from 2003 IWA-MS only in front of a large paying audience instead of a few rows of empty chairs with scattered diehard fans amongst some beefy looking girls or old smoking gentlemen. Punk is definitely better than he was when he first got to WWE TV. I'm saying this as a huge Punk fan (check the name)......I haven't been a fan of his work overall the last year or so. I think his offense has gotten to the point of being sloppy and unbelievable.....and often lazy....and he's ridiculously skinny at this point. He looks like he's about 6-1 and 185......like he hasn't lifted a weight in the last year....it's ridiculous. I thought the match with Taker at WM was good, I thought the match with Brock was good....the Heyman program turned very self indulgent and boring after they tried running with it month after month....and the blowoff at HIAC was really lame. Punk feels extremely played out and overexposed to me right now. I really think he needs to take that vacation he's been talking about for years now, but obviously WWE feels they need him around and they keep sweetening the pot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 I wonder what else they can offer him at this point. He already has a bus. Would they build him high speed rail? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted January 29, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 Or perhaps having no arms had a domino effect on other parts of the guy's approach to life and romance. Maybe guy with no arms number one lost them rescuing a drowning baby from the bite of a shark, while guy with no arms number two lost them in a stupid sewing machine accident, which led to embarrassment and depression. Guy with no arms number one is a hero, while guy with no arms number two is a laughing stock. No two scenarios are exactly the same and there are mental changes associated with physical loss that impact different people in different ways. Guy number one lost his arms. Guy number two lost a lot more than that. I have a feeling if we were assessing his worth as a spouse, he'd really want us to just remember him when he had two working arms. And the last thing on his mind would be drawing a Valentine's Day card. I think that's true of any two guys in any situation though. How do you ever judge two different wrestlers when their situations are never the same? Is it all just futile and ... I don't know if I can seriously finish that. Can we just go back to where Dylan said we were both right and cut it off there before he comes back with some sort of Marxist Structure/Agency argument? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 Sure. I was just having so much fun with the analogy that I carried on for a few posts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goc Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 I almost feel like CM Punk is a victim of his own success. He is a much better character as a heel but he's too popular as a heel and ends up being more over than his opponents so they have to turn him babyface where his promos usually feel weak and pandering and he quickly becomes stale. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mini Bennett Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Anyone have an opinion on Low Ki/Kaval? Having not seen a lot of his Indy/TNA/pre-WWE stuff I don't feel at liberty to divulge in depth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Redman Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 I don't think Ki was in WWE long enough to either improve or give an impression of being different in some way. He was just exactly what you'd imagine Low Ki being on WWE TV in 2010 would look like. He was clearly better outside of WWE, but that's just by default really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Migs Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 I don't think Ki was in WWE long enough to either improve or give an impression of being different in some way. He was just exactly what you'd imagine Low Ki being on WWE TV in 2010 would look like. He was clearly better outside of WWE, but that's just by default really. It's a shame he never found a way to do some extended work there, though, because I feel like he could have had a poor man's Bryan-type appeal. I saw him live many times in 01-02, and the guy had an aura and a very natural connection with a crowd. Of course, I also think the most likely scenario would have been him ending up the way Taz did as a wrestler there, because WWE was just not going to let him use his natural character at his size. They were not going to let his little guy kick the shit out of and put holds on, say, Kane. Actually, the Taz comparison makes me think Low Ki was really just a couple years too late to be an amazing ECW guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W2BTD Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 I don't think Ki was in WWE long enough to either improve or give an impression of being different in some way. He was just exactly what you'd imagine Low Ki being on WWE TV in 2010 would look like. He was clearly better outside of WWE, but that's just by default really. It's a shame he never found a way to do some extended work there, though, because I feel like he could have had a poor man's Bryan-type appeal. I saw him live many times in 01-02, and the guy had an aura and a very natural connection with a crowd. Of course, I also think the most likely scenario would have been him ending up the way Taz did as a wrestler there, because WWE was just not going to let him use his natural character at his size. They were not going to let his little guy kick the shit out of and put holds on, say, Kane. Actually, the Taz comparison makes me think Low Ki was really just a couple years too late to be an amazing ECW guy. I think in an alternate universe, most if not all of the guys who ended up making a name in ROH would have ended up in ECW. In fact, I think ECW would have for the most part evolved into something very similar to what ROH came to be. "Workrate" was the next thing to sweep that level of the business, almost immediately after ECW closed up shop. Heyman would have followed that trend and evolved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rzombie1988 Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 I didn't think Ki did enough or had enough to work with to show any signs or improvement or regression. He got a Daniel Bryan style push from NXT where he was clearly the best but WWE felt they had to make a joke of him. Only, because of his backstage persona, he became a joke. I thought Ki's Rottweiler's heel turn era was probably his best stuff. I'm one of the biggest Low-Ki fans but I don't blame anyone but him for how his career turned out. He just seemed intent on blowing as many bridges as possible and now he's pretty much blackballed from every promotion in the world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted January 30, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Ki did have a fairly long run in FCW, but a lot of that he was out with an injury I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.