Your personal most Overrated and Underrated

[JerryvonKramer]

Also, as much as you can argue that Flair did have a set formula vs. big men of limited ability, that formula worked. The Clash 1 match made Sting into a star. The 88 matches with Luger helped get him over as a main eventer. The 1985 matches with Nikita helped give Crockett another creditable main eventer from someone who was both inexperienced and limited. The 87 match with Road Warrior Hawk gave Crockett another main event people could buy into and that match is highly rated by some people (not me, I HATE Hawk in that match, if you want to talk about "disrespect", look at him there).

 

So as much as Flair did "go to" that against those sorts of opponents, he did it because it helped to get them over. I doubt Sting is going to be too worried about being led by the nose for 30-odd minutes; he wasn't' complaining about it when he was earning $750k.

[Matt D]

To me, you can do the same things as long as you do them differently for different situations and aren't just working the same match over and over. They're tools. That's one reason I really like 2009 Christian. He uses the same stuff but he always does it differently and teases it for different effects, etc. Bret from 92 also does this a lot.

 

Now what I will say is that I would really like to see Flair back when he was working for mid-atlantic in front of the same crowds every week. That would be the real evidence of whether or not he switched things up to that extent or if he just did his shit, because as a travelling champion, it makes sense for him to just do his routines. It makes him an unimaginative wrestler, but you can't hold it against him, you know?.

[JerryvonKramer]

You can't get away with that post Matt because you make it sound like Flair's matches as traveling champ were all the same, but they weren't at all. Watch his matches vs. Jumbo, Martel, Carlos Colon, Kerry Von Erich, Dusty Rhodes, Ted DiBiase and Jerry Lawler as a completely random scattershot and then tell me that they are all the same. They aren't, it can scarcely be argued.

 

Flair's "formula" match is against limited opponents who worked a big-man "power wrestler" style: Hawk, Nikita, Sting, Luger in 88. I simply won't let it be said that Flair was unimaginative and worked the same match against all those different opponents in different places because it's just not true. I'm not giving anyone a free pass on it until they watch the matches and break them down.

 

[Matt D]

Can I watch some WWWF Dibiase instead?Oh hey, I watched that Dory/Terry vs Sheik/Abdullah match! And i started this Dory/Murdoch tag match from Japan in 71.

[Badlittlekitten]

 

And Flair DOES give you the same match Parv, with totally different opponents. There's no story to most of Flair's stuff it's just Ric has stuff to do because insane alcoholic Flair is so hung over that all he can remember is a stock match.

 

 

Flair is my favourite wrestler of all time but this line cracked me up anyway.

 

I have no problem with people saying Flair's formula is too formulaic. I can see it. That's why I love him.

[Loss]

I think Ric Flair is really great.

[dawho5]

That there is a shock. I need to go sit down now.

[Shining Wiz]

I don't think any criticism of Flair winds me up more than this. Watch three matches of ANY guy in the history of wrestling in a row and you'll find repeated spots. It's just the grammar of pro-wrestling.

 

I've watched Dory Funk Jr. and Terry Funk matches back-to-back and there's shit both of them do in EVERY match. I don't see guys ragging on Terry Funk because he always does that 360 bump over the top rope. Jumbo Tsurta will always go for the running knee. Arn Anderson will always go for the second rope move that never hits as will DiBiase. Watch enough Ivan Koloff matches and you can predict exactly when he's going to feed the opponent his spot to comeback.

 

Every wrestler ever has signature moves and signature bumps they do in every single match.

 

This criticism is a fucking nonsense, it really is. It's literally like saying, "I've watched three Ryu (from Street Fighter 2) matches in a row and do you know what, he did a ha-do-ken in every single one of them". Well no shit, that's what Ryu does.

 

But the reason this pisses me off is that Flair is the one guy who really doesn't give you the same match twice, not even against different opponents. Watch three of the Luger matches back-to-back. Watch three Garvin matches back-to-back. Watch three Savage matches back-to-back. Or the Steamboat matches. None of them are the same, structurally, or in Flair's performance. "Oh but he does a Flair flip in every single one of them" Oh fuck off.

 

Sorry, but this is one thing guaranteed to get a rise out of me. And I've dealt with it as a criticism again and again and again, pointing to specific matches, and specific runs of matches where it is clearly and definitively not true. Flair wrestles very different matches even within a short time frame. I've talked about how he has at least four different personalities, and how sometimes you'll see all four of them in one match. "Oh but he does a Flair flip and a Flair flop".

Personally, I just find those spots so melodramatic and nonsensical that they boer the shit out of me. I still wonder, when Flair runs up the ropes before getting press slammed off.....what move is he going for? I don't think I have ever seen Flair come off the top and hit something.

[Loss]

He usually does an admittedly weird looking punch thing. Sort of like Steamboat's, but not quite a chop. He's hit it quite a few times, actually, but rarely as a heel.

[JerryvonKramer]

Ric Flair beat Race at Starrcade 83 coming off the top rope.

[Shining Wiz]

Exceptions that prove the rule.

 

I'm not saying I hate Flair by any means, but those two spots always annoyed me and knock me out of my enjoyment of the match for a bit.

 

That being said, the Flair/Steamboat series from 89 are at the top of my desert island matches, flop and all.

[Shining Wiz]

 

Every wrestler ever has signature moves and signature bumps they do in every single match.

 

Yes...but they aren't all rated the best of all time and most of them aren't so annoyingly silly.

This criticism is a fucking nonsense, it really is. It's literally like saying, "I've watched three Ryu (from Street Fighter 2) matches in a row and do you know what, he did a ha-do-ken in every single one of them". Well no shit, that's what Ryu does.

 

Yeah, but when Ryu does it, it makes sense.

 

 

But the reason this pisses me off is that Flair is the one guy who really doesn't give you the same match twice, not even against different opponents. Watch three of the Luger matches back-to-back. Watch three Garvin matches back-to-back. Watch three Savage matches back-to-back. Or the Steamboat matches. None of them are the same, structurally, or in Flair's performance. "Oh but he does a Flair flip in every single one of them" Oh fuck off.

Never said anything about him giving the same match, just two really silly moves I don't like. So you fuck off, because the fact he does the flop and gets slammed off the top in almost every match no matter what was my entire point. I say this with all due respect.

[Shining Wiz]

Quote fail

 

Fail fixed

[JerryvonKramer]

So the fact he does two spots that you don't like is enough for you to say that Flair isn't the GOAT and to argue that those who do are overrating him? Is this what you're saying?

[Shining Wiz]

Well, if everyone thinks he's the GOAT, and there are several wrestlers I enjoy more and think are better, then by definition that is enough for me to consider him overrated, yes.

[JerryvonKramer]

Who are they? Just wondering.

[Badlittlekitten]

He strikes me as more of a horse than a goat.

[Shining Wiz]

Well, let's see. I prefer Steamboat, Funk, Danielson, DiBiase, Eaton, Nakamura, Misawa, Kobashi, Benoit, Malenko, Savage, Roberts......you get the point.

 

And save yourself the time - I freely admit each guy has a spot the reuse endlessly, but none of them bug me like the flop and the slam.

[thebrainfollower]

So what is it? If he's pinballing and calling it in the ring he's being "disrespectful" (to guys by that point who really had no right to clean his boots let alone work with him), if he changes up and works a more dominant style he's "burying" the opponent.

 

Okay let me take this one Parv and explain it. No wrestler has "no right to clean his boots". Every wrestler who steps between the ropes is putting their health and their lives on the line and deserves respect for that. Period. End of discussion. If I were a promoter I would fire any prima donna with that approach and that's exactly what I HAVE done in 16 years of directing theater. Every actor I've ever worked with knows to leave their ego at the door and work as a part of a team.

 

And every match is a team effort of both guys. That's why I'd drop some moron like 1996 Shawn Michaels in a heartbeat because no matter how good they are guys who are "only about them" do more harm than good. As great as Hogan was for wrestling, I'm not sure he hasn't done more harm than good in the end.

 

Anyway back to the main point. Flair gives depending on who the guy is. He has no problem giving someone like Hawk or Lex Luger tons of offense because they are zero threat to him. Hawk is a tag guy and Luger is green and hated by the boys, who will sabotage every effort to give Luger the run Sting had, and that I truly believe (and I think you agree with me Parv) he would have been more successful at than Sting. It's why Flair politicked to keep Luger from the title but Sting...no problem?

 

Flair for six years in 91 played a heel so wimpy that jobbers gave him a fight. That was his character, the wimpy braggart who got his ass kicked for 80% of the match and escaped on a fluke again and again and again. What worked in the pre-cable territories darn near killed southern wrestling in the late 80's. but if there's any match where Flair SHOULD have done that it's against Scott Steiner. It's very hard to separate today's Scott Steiner from then. In 1991 he was the MAN. He was the new upcoming guy everyone liked that seemed to have it all and was going to be the next big thing. So Flair goes out there and does everything POSSIBLE to prevent Steiner from getting over. It was awful and inexcusable looking at it THEN and why did he do it? Cause he was genuinely scared of being replaced. Now I don't think Steiner had any chance of achieving that or being the GOAT but Flair did then and did what he did.

[soup23]

Shining Wiz: I dont wan't to pick a fight just want a clarifying point. I have Flair, Misawa, and Kobashi all around the top of my list as the GOAT's. However, you criticize Flair for going to the top in EVERY match. Both Misawa and Kobashi have special moves that get busted out in rare occasions (TD 91 and Burning Hammer respectively). In fact, the Burning Hammer may not have definitively ended a match as important as Flair winning at Starrcade 83 with the flying body press. I'm just curious why Misawa and Kobashi get a pass for actively going for their special moves, but Flair gets criticized?

[NintendoLogic]

How did I know this would turn into a Flair thread?

[dawho5]

As to soup23's point, I'd have to agree. After a certain point the moonsault was just a nearfall in big matches. As was Misawa's frog splash (way earlier). So to pretend like them getting caught going up top for those was somehow better than Flair getting caught going up top is really off to me. Admittedly, Flair did that more often, but at the same time heavyweights going up top in America usually had a lot more impact to it at the time he was doing it. If whatever they were doing hit, it was going to be something really momentous in a match. And given Flair's predilection towards taking a lot of offense in a match, it stands to reason that he might try something big to get back in it. As well as the fact that he varied successful/unsuccessful flips according to situation. I will admit that at a certain point it became too overdone, but that came more towards his second WWE run for me rather than his first.

[Matt D]

The one spot that makes me mark out most in the world is someone hitting a double axe handle of the second rope onto a prone opponent without getting kicked in the face.

[Loss]

I do think a big part of the Flair criticism over signature spots is that he has signature defense just as much as he has signature offense. Bret has his sternum-first turnbuckle bump and Shawn has his flip, but Flair is mostly unique in that he has so much signature defense.

[Shining Wiz]

Shining Wiz: I dont wan't to pick a fight just want a clarifying point. I have Flair, Misawa, and Kobashi all around the top of my list as the GOAT's. However, you criticize Flair for going to the top in EVERY match. Both Misawa and Kobashi have special moves that get busted out in rare occasions (TD 91 and Burning Hammer respectively). In fact, the Burning Hammer may not have definitively ended a match as important as Flair winning at Starrcade 83 with the flying body press. I'm just curious why Misawa and Kobashi get a pass for actively going for their special moves, but Flair gets criticized?

 

It's not the repetitiveness of the moves (or set up for moves in Flair's case), it's the repetitiveness of spots I find silly. Just a matter of personal taste.

 

 

 

Edit - Reading this back, this is horribly unclear. I have no problems with repetitive moves/taking moves. What I have a problem with are repeated situations which only occur to one particular individual and are clearly sandwiched into whatever match for the sole purpose of them occurrring, so much so that it becomes obvious they only reason they occur is so that they can occur.