JerryvonKramer Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 I love jdw so much Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 And Bix, in that context I was referring to traditional pro wrestling style highspots. Traditional pro wrestling style highspots can still be anything. I'm still not quite sure what you're saying. That. "Modern" highspots aren't the same as what highspots were in the 70s... or the 60s... or the 50s... or the 40s... etc. On a certain level, UWF-style highspots are closer to "traditional" highspots than the shit that Richards and Edwards are doing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 I love jdw so much It's kind of hard to suspend disbelief in pro wrestling. Take Flair going to the top after failing 95%+ times in his career, and getting tossed off the same way all the freaking time. Or putting on the Figure Four when it fails 95%+ of the time, with him getting reversed more than 50% of the time and damaging himself. I'm suppose to "believe" any of that stuff? Almost everything in every pro wrestling match shatters belief. I can't pretend / believe / make believe otherwise it away. The same thing goes for Films or TV or Lit for me. I just finished watching the Cardfael series. Did I believe any of it? No, even though a fair amount of it is wrapped in historical events / real people. Same goes for I Claudius and Claudius The God, which I just finished a re-read of. Suspend my disbelief to enjoy it? No. It's just a really cool pair of books by Graves, entertaining, funny and sad in stretches. Justified? It's about as believable as the Tooth Fairy... So... yeah... that one doesn't work well for me, or I'd hate all pro wrestling if it was needed. That said, I not a huge fan of sloppiness in pro wrestling any more than in some TV program I'm watching. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 It must be so sad to be you. I'm not saying that as a snark, but genuinely. I can't imagine being unable to suspend disbelief when watching movies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marrklarr Posted February 19, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 Almost everything in every pro wrestling match shatters belief. I can't pretend / believe / make believe otherwise it away. I get what you're saying, but I also think that suspending disbelief doesn't mean that we really believe that what we're seeing is geniune; it just means that it's convincing enough that we can be drawn into the action without the awareness that it is staged being front and center in our mind. Yeah, it is totally illogical for Flair to go to the top rope, if you think about it. Fortunately, in most Flair matches you are so entertained and engrossed that you don't think about it. In bad matches, the unreality of everything is inescable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Crackers Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 Almost everything in every pro wrestling match shatters belief. I can't pretend / believe / make believe otherwise it away. I get what you're saying, but I also think that suspending disbelief doesn't mean that we really believe that what we're seeing is geniune; it just means that it's convincing enough that we can be drawn into the action without the awareness that it is staged being front and center in our mind. Yeah, it is totally illogical for Flair to go to the top rope, if you think about it. Fortunately, in most Flair matches you are so entertained and engrossed that you don't think about it. In bad matches, the unreality of everything is inescable. Yeah, the "willing suspension of disbelief" is about being able to accept that a work of fiction is plausible within the parameters of it's fictional universe. It's not about straight forward realism. Another pro wrestling example would be accepting that holds that probably couldn't be applied in a shoot can win a match. If the wrestlers, sell, act out their struggle and the announcers put over the move I can suspend my disbelief and accept that it can end a match. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Death From Above Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 When Alberto Del Rio throws Stoker Ichikawa kicks but they aren't supposed to be comedy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WingedEagle Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 I don't remember the last time I was able to suspend disbelief such that any point I actually believed what I was watching was real. The closest may be in a match where the finish is in question and you pop for the underdog's near falls. But there is no way to pregame enough to get me thinking this stuff is real, no matter how much I love it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 You can relate to and have an emotional attachment to fiction even without suspending your disbelief. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WingedEagle Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 Speaking of bad wrestling, what is up with the spot when a wrestler whips his opponent into the ropes and then lies down in the middle of the ring? In what world is the velocity associated with being whipped into and coming off of the ropes so incredible that it prevents someone from noticing their opponent is lying face down and defenseless? Just one of those things I can't even fathom an explanation for that drives me mad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 They're trying to drop down and trip their opponent. The opponent usually jumps over to dodge the trip and keeps going to increase velocity for their eventual attack. Sometimes they do drop an elbow or something but the idea is that the drop down is a trap and to try to do something would be walking into the trap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yo-Yo's Roomie Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 I never thought the drop down was to try to trip their opponent. Do other people think that? Seems it would be quite easy to trip an opponent who is coming off the ropes, and the drop down is about the least effective way to do it. I think it's just a tactical thing, to keep the opponent guessing, or maybe to make them second guess themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 I'm having trouble visualizing what spot you're talking about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 Think he's talking about a drop toehold from an Irish Whip. Stan Lane does this spot a lot. Usually followed by an elbow drop from Eaton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 Or, he could be talking about the criss-cross rope-running spot. There are good examples in the DiBiase vs. Bret matches. One guy drops to the floor and the other guy skips over him. I don't think the aim is to trip in that spot though, but to evade getting clotheslined or whatever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 Loss, it is one of the most common spots in a wrestling match. Irish whip to the ropes... Ricky Morton drops, Stan Lane leaps over and bounces off the rope, Ricky Morton leapfrog, when Lane bounces off the rope, Morton catches him with an arm drag or head scissors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 The dropdown thing is definitely supposed to be a trip. I've even seen it used as such in a match and I got really excited about it (like in the Demos vs Brainbusters match when Tully hits a double axe handle on a prone opponent who doesn't get his foot up). Now I'm not sure how many wrestlers even know that. EDIT: One cool thing about watching old wrestling from the 70s and back is that sometimes the announcers will matter-of-factly explain something that you've always just taken for granted, something that's become part of the natural physical language of wrestling over the years without really being understood anymore why it's done, when at some point it had a logical reason behind it. One of the most important things in wrestling to me is that a wrestler never does a move without realizing why he's doing it, without having some sort of meaning behind it. "Because it works" isn't enough. I want a wrestler to figure out why and how it works and how it might work better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WingedEagle Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 So X lies down flat on his stomach to trip Y? Has this ever worked? Why not just stand in the middle of the ring with your eyes closed and offer a free shot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteF3 Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 The best use of the drop-down spot is in tag matches--the guy running the ropes has the option of either getting tripped or committing to jumping, leaving himself defenseless for a dropkick/elbow/clothesline from the dropper's partner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 It must be so sad to be you. I'm not saying that as a snark, but genuinely. I can't imagine being unable to suspend disbelief when watching movies. That you can't imagine other people seeing and enjoying things differently than yourself isn't something sad about me, but sad about you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WingedEagle Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 The best use of the drop-down spot is in tag matches--the guy running the ropes has the option of either getting tripped or committing to jumping, leaving himself defenseless for a dropkick/elbow/clothesline from the dropper's partner. Fair point. Not sure where I saw it recently that I got so hung up on it. How often does the guy running the ropes get tripped? I can't recall an instance but there must be examples. What about in singles matches -- what's the logic there? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 Almost everything in every pro wrestling match shatters belief. I can't pretend / believe / make believe otherwise it away. I get what you're saying, but I also think that suspending disbelief doesn't mean that we really believe that what we're seeing is geniune; it just means that it's convincing enough that we can be drawn into the action without the awareness that it is staged being front and center in our mind. I don't find pro wrestling "convincing". I mean seriously... I've seen Flair go up to the top 100 times. I'm suppose to *not* see what I'm watching is staged? It's always in the brain. Flip to the movies. I've seen Bruce Willis in dozens of things. When I first saw him as John McClain, you think I could really be unaware that this is the dude that I'd been watching play David Addison in Moonlight? It doesn't mean that I don't love Die Hard. Probably the best action movie that I've ever seen, and has been the gold standard against which I judge all other action movies over the past 25 years. But suspend disblief? No. Yeah, it is totally illogical for Flair to go to the top rope, if you think about it. Fortunately, in most Flair matches you are so entertained and engrossed that you don't think about it. In bad matches, the unreality of everything is inescable. I've been "thinking" about Flair's work for close to 30 years. He, along with Jim Cornette and the MX, are the reason I became a hardcore wrestling fan. But being entertained by them doesn't make me stop "thinking" about it. In fact, it made me think *more* about the elements of his work: what's he doing, why is it working with the crowd, what's the stuff that I like, what stuff is silly, etc. Honestly... I "think" less with bad matches than stuff that's good. Sid vs Nightstalker is a dogshit match. What's really the point of thinking much about it beyond, "Good God that was total shit." In contrast, 12/03/93 Misawa & Kobashi vs Kawada & Taue is a terrific match that I've given 20+ years of thought to. The 11/26/92 Toyota & Yamada vs Kansai & Ozaki isn't a match that I've given a lot of thought about in the past decade, but I did spend a lot of time in the 90s pondering why, when first watching it not long after it happened, I thought it was the best match I'd ever seen... and whether it still held that spot for me as the decade went on. What elements worked for me, what were the flaws/sloppiness, how they impacted the match for me, how the crowd reacted, the differences of the individual performances and how the combined, etc. Anyway... John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 Almost everything in every pro wrestling match shatters belief. I can't pretend / believe / make believe otherwise it away. I get what you're saying, but I also think that suspending disbelief doesn't mean that we really believe that what we're seeing is geniune; it just means that it's convincing enough that we can be drawn into the action without the awareness that it is staged being front and center in our mind. Yeah, it is totally illogical for Flair to go to the top rope, if you think about it. Fortunately, in most Flair matches you are so entertained and engrossed that you don't think about it. In bad matches, the unreality of everything is inescable. Yeah, the "willing suspension of disbelief" is about being able to accept that a work of fiction is plausible within the parameters of it's fictional universe. It's not about straight forward realism. I'm well aware of the term from Coleridge on down, and various other people given their twist to it. Hell, even the side tangent of "plausibility" within the fictional universe is largely bullshit to give people the out of why they "believe". I tend to think that one doesn't need to "believe" on any level to "like" and "enjoy" something fictional. You just have to like and enjoy it. Also that if one wants to be reflective, they likely can figure out why they liked something... of which "I believed it!" really isn't a factor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 You can relate to and have an emotional attachment to fiction even without suspending your disbelief. This. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cross Face Chicken Wing Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 I definitely suspend disbelief on some level when watching wrestling. I think we all do, even if we refuse to admit it or don't recognize that we're doing it. 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.