BillThompson Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 Something along the lines of a wrestling glossary would be a great tool/resource for the likes of the PWO community to have at their fingertips. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
funkdoc Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 i had never, ever heard the term "shine" until i got on here. one of my friends told me it came from an al snow video breaking down the standard WWE match structure, but i have no idea how true that is. +1 on "the product", that's probably the one i hate the most. just say "the show" or what have you, no need to sound like you had your soul sucked out of you. similarly, i hated when wrestling fans started calling EVERYTHING "brands" after the raw/smackdown split and am real glad that's dead. to add further thoughts on "IWC", the discussion here reminds me a lot of my involvement with competitive fighting games (i.e. street fighter, mortal kombat). ever since that scene blew up with the release of street fighter 4, "FGC" has become the catch-all term for it. i never liked it from day 1 because i felt it sounded too self-important (just like "IWC"), but over time i realized another big problem with it that also applies to "IWC". specifically, the fighting-game tournament scene isn't really one unified community. rather, it's a bunch of smaller communities for the different games that happen to get together at the major tournaments. street fighter players are almost a completely different crowd from tekken players, who are a completely different crowd from mortal kombat players, who are a completely different crowd from super smash bros. players...you get the picture. the end result is that as most people use it, "FGC" just means "the capcom community" since capcom's fighting games (street fighter & marvel vs. capcom) have the biggest tournament numbers and their players are the main "stars" within this subculture. it has the effect of erasing a majority of the overall tournament scene, which bugs me the most out of all of these issues. i strongly suspect something similar has happened with "IWC" where it's only used to refer to the CENA CAN'T WRESTLE fans and completely ignores this site, though i'm not positive... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peachchaos Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 All the WWE-centric jargon they've fabricated, like "the WWE Universe" or "Sports Entertainment" is just the pits. IWC, smark, wrestling nerds, etc.are all pretty out-dated terms. I identify myself as a wrestling fan, as mentioned elsewhere in the thread. I generally don't mind any of the "work" terminology as they help define the format of a match for means of critical analysis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karl Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 As do I with "control segment". I use this in a very specific context. It's for a section where the babyface is on top that isn't the shine. Shine Heat Comeback Control is just neater than "babyface on top for no reason". I think this is my issue with it. It's a phrase that appeared out of thin air about 10 years ago and was never properly defined, so reading multiple match reviews, you're going to have conflicting takeaways over what it means. I would never think that's what a control segment is. I think in some ways it also boxes in the way people think about match layouts. Does every match have a control segment? I don't mean that sarcastically, by the way, I'm just asking. This is exactly it! Between around 2000 and last year, I had pretty much fallen completely away from wrestling, not going on forums, listening to podcasts etc. So imagine my total confusion upon my return to terms like 'shine', control' face in peril' etc.....terms I had never come across before.....I was totally flummoxed. These terms are so totally alien to me as a fan. Its like there is some desperate need to define everything...like there is some exact formula as to how a match should be structured. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter-Enlightenment#The_Romantic_revolt_against_the_eighteenth_century Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Faulconer Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 Nip Up and stuff piledriver/stuff powerbomb always sounded like misheard names for what is a kip up and a spike piledriver/spike powerbomb. They were called those names almost unanimously until sometime during the Monday Night Wars. The fact that it probably started (definitely did but not sure when) during commentary on a WWF or WCW show allows it to share the blame with the internet on that one The "E" What is that supposed to mean? I know what it means but it literally makes no sense at all. Nobody called it the "F" before the name change. Maybe some people called it the "Fed". Nobody ever ever ever called it "The Entertainment". "I'm so sick of how the "E" pushes SuperCena down our throats". Okay "SuperCena" is another one I didn't think about until just now. That internet catchphase is just as bad as DDP's Hollywood "Scum" Hogan. I think if the internet wrestling fans can do one thing right - we should be able to display more wit in our conversations than DDP. Am I right? It is different on a podcast where a podcaster's tone and inflection can help fill in the blanks that the awkward wrestling dictionary gives them. The use of a lot of buzzwords really makes it hard to tell what someone's opinion is really trying to say - in written form. It just ends up sounding like a play-by-play rundown. I've been on the internet reading about wrestling since 1997 and never heard the term "shine" until I listened to an episode of Where the Big Boys Play in the last ten months or so. I'm not complaining but it just seemed to pop up out of nowwhere overnight. The use of "control segment" wasn't used much ten years ago. Now it is everywhere. I have read people call the backwards rolling pin many things over the years. The worst was someone calling it the Ocana Roll. I'm guessing that during the this fifteen or so years of the internet's popular existence English teachers/professors must take turns laughing their heads off and pulling their hair out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteF3 Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 That's supposed to be an O'CONNOR Roll, and that goes way back, since it was a Pat O'Connor move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 I want to say that I first heard the terms shine, heat and so on from Jake Roberts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karl Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 Its like Rio Ferdinand talking about 'tekkers....doesn't make it right :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cross Face Chicken Wing Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 After scrolling through this thread, it appears that everybody is annoyed with every wrestling term ever invented. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 Its like Rio Ferdinand talking about 'tekkers....doesn't make it right :-) I think they have real applications and are very useful shorthand. It's not rocket science really. Shine is the bit when the babyface gets some offense in at the start of the match to pop the crowd. 96% of WWF matches ever worked on TV start this way. Some people like Vader or Hansen "jump" the shine and accelerate the match. Heat is when the heel takes over and generates sympathy for the babyface and puts heat on himself. Comeback is the comeback which everyone knows. I don't understand the objections to these perfectly descriptive terms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 Chad, Parv, Kelly, Martin, and I (and maybe one of the many Petes) will work together on a lexicon in 2015. It'll be like Ray's old Big, Big Book of Wrestling Moves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karl Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 They dont bother me...I just find them odd. Im too old to get bent out of shape by words. Just a culture shock to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Sorrow Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 I love that most wrestlers will most likely plan out a match backstage by just saying "Ok so then you do your bullshit, I'll do my bullshit, yada yada, then we'll go home." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 Johnny, I think that's probably one of the things that has changed most in wrestling. Flair, Steamboat, etc. they'd all call it in the ring with just an idea of the finish in mind. The one exception they always mention is Savage who'd want to plan everything. I'd imagine the wrestlers now have road agents tightly going through whole sequences. Anyone know the score on that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 But it's totally irrelevant even if that's the case. The terms shouldn't necessarily come from the wrestlers, anyway, because they're not doing what we're doing when we try to analyze matches. Creator intent is important in understanding art, just like context is, but, when you're pulling patterns and trying to analyze the text itself, you shouldn't be beholden to it. Going "Hoo hoo, you're thinking about this way more than they ever did, you nerd!" which is my impression of that nasally voice Johnny makes sometimes when he's ridiculing something, if you didn't pick up on that, is actually probably true. That doesn't change that there's something out there to think about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 Matt D is the Roland Barthes of wrestling criticism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hollinger. Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 I love that most wrestlers will most likely plan out a match backstage by just saying "Ok so then you do your bullshit, I'll do my bullshit, yada yada, then we'll go home." Most often it's: Bullshit, Bullshit Shine Heat Comeback Finish Throw some extra bullshits in there, maybe work double shine/heat, whatever, but that's generally how it goes down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
funkdoc Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 SuperCena is kinda outdated now tbh the new term all the cool kids use is CENAWINSLOL, just fyi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawho5 Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 I'm a guy who likes match structure, I'll admit that. I don't, however, think that any match has to carry a certain kind of structure to be good. I think it's a great idea to have terms to define parts of said structure, because it simplifies the discussion of it. It only becomes problematic when you demand a certain structure. For instance, in the 2000s project, the Nishimura vs. Fujinami match has this incredible structure that is really, really tight and not one wrestling move or transition seems wasted. There's no waste at all, everything has a purpose. I love that match. But then, I love the Akiyama vs. Shibata match from WrestleOne too. The structure of that seems to be pretty simple. Akiyama gets busted open hardway by a stiff Shibata kick to the forehead and gets royally pissed. The rest of the match they just beat the everloving shit out of each other and throw in some nearfalls to make it look like a wrestling match. Still entertaining, but it doesn't exactly have what you would call a classic match structure. Then you could go to the really good AKIRA vs. Kanemoto match from 03 I think where they do the juniors opening, then the athletic juniors stuff back and forth, then one or the other decides to go after the leg dickishly. And the other figures it's better to fight fire with fire and they have this incredible battle of trying to get a leg submission to take on the other guy with little else happening during the finishing run. It's got a structure, but it's certainly not a common one. It is still good ring psychology and highly entertaining to watch. That's a bit off topic there, just trying to illustrate that it's not necessarily becoming dogmatic by having terms to describe certain parts of a match. And yeah, that WWE jargon really turned me off a lot. I know it's important to put your promotion over so people buy into your brand, but I think they take it way too far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southofheavy Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 Vintage. I want to cave Michael Cole's teeth in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Casebolt Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 Mostly the WWE-created lingo - fans are not a "Universe", "divas" sounds like you think all your female competitors are uppity bitches (apologies to whoever from twitter I stole that from; it's true), Hillbilly Jim is not a "legend" (ditto), and not every wrestler is a "superstar". "Sports entertainment" I've learned to live with; "sports entertainer" is a fucking abomination. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted July 9, 2014 Report Share Posted July 9, 2014 That was my Twitter! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohtani's jacket Posted July 10, 2014 Report Share Posted July 10, 2014 Its like Rio Ferdinand talking about 'tekkers....doesn't make it right :-) I think they have real applications and are very useful shorthand. It's not rocket science really. Shine is the bit when the babyface gets some offense in at the start of the match to pop the crowd. 96% of WWF matches ever worked on TV start this way. Some people like Vader or Hansen "jump" the shine and accelerate the match. Heat is when the heel takes over and generates sympathy for the babyface and puts heat on himself. Comeback is the comeback which everyone knows. I don't understand the objections to these perfectly descriptive terms. Explaining what it is just makes it worse. The first ten minutes of any film are crucial, but you don't see film reviewers talking about beats, turning points, negatively and positively charged scenes, entering and exiting early or late, and the placement of the first act hook. Surely, the performance of the babyface is more important than the fact they're doing a shine segment. What do you need that word for? They went too long/short on the shine? Stan Frazier sure was great in the shine? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted July 10, 2014 Report Share Posted July 10, 2014 How many movies go fifteen minutes? 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.