Things Wrestlers Value that we don't

[ohtani's jacket]

Rey Mysterio Jr and Eddie Guerrero weren't put in a position to have a big important match and they still managed it at Halloween Havoc. I agree that Regal never had an opportunity to have a match like Steamboat/Savage, but I think the argument should centre around whether he was capable.

[Shining Wiz]

Rey Mysterio Jr and Eddie Guerrero weren't put in a position to have a big important match and they still managed it at Halloween Havoc. I agree that Regal never had an opportunity to have a match like Steamboat/Savage, but I think the argument should centre around whether he was capable.

 

I'd argue they had a great match, but that it wasn't big. But that's beside the point.

 

As for whether Regal was capable, since he was never in the position to do so, who knows. He never had a chance to, and that's about all you can say really.

[Loss]

I have no idea how having big or influential matches has anything to do with how good a wrestler is.

 

Influence can be positive or negative, but I do generally speaking see wrestlers who impacted the working style enough that others thought enough of it to try to emulate them as good at their craft. It doesn't always reflect well on those copying, but it reflects well on the person being copied more often than it doesn't. I see it as a huge positive much of the time. It's wrestling and there are exceptions to everything. Tiger Mask clones like Liger and Sasuke are probably guys most of us would see as superior to the original. Indy guys doing third rate Misawa-Kobashi matches? Probably not so much.

 

I define "big" as the ability to make me think something is at stake in a match other than pride. Wrestlers who can convey that winning their match is important and that they care deeply about it are usually wrestlers I like. While much of that is booking, it's also something that can be conveyed through heel cheating, desperation and particularly dramatic babyface comebacks. Midcarders making unexpectedly great showings in world title matches is another example. A wrestler digging deeper than normal from their offensive repertoire to pull off an upset falls in this category too.

 

There's nothing wrong with being a strong TV match worker. In fact, there's plenty right about it. But there is a difference between wrestling a technically good match that fills TV time in a fun way and stops there, and wrestling a match that feels like it actually matters, whether it really does or not. It's an intangible quality that's hard to talk about in specific terms, although I'm trying. Booking makes the difference there much of the time, but bad booking can often be overcome by great workers.

[Matt D]

What about Finlay at Uncensored? That was the rare sort of mid-card match that the TV Announcers were talking about the next night, maybe even for weeks, even if it wasn't central to any plot. How does that compare in "Big match" standing to Rey vs Eddie?

 

Charles, as for what you said about big matches, I think Regal had that in spades with his Christian feud. During parts of it, the frustration and desire was palpable, even if it was just over the WWECW title. I think it's trickier with Lord Steven, since he his character was supposed to be part comedy and part above everyone, snooty. I do think some of the other examples listed above are at least worth looking at.

[Loss]

I'd consider that a big match myself.

[Shining Wiz]

What about Finlay at Uncensored? That was the rare sort of mid-card match that the TV Announcers were talking about the next night, maybe even for weeks, even if it wasn't central to any plot. How does that compare in "Big match" standing to Rey vs Eddie?

I'd consider that a big match myself.

I think we define big matches differently. To me, it has to be a big match going in. You could very well have a great match that people talk about after the fact, but if it was an undercard match that was just really good, then that is completely different than delivering a great match on a big card in a position where your match is a focal point.

[Loss]

I think big matches are simply matches that are worked like they're big. A match can be anything going in, which rarely is entirely because the wrestlers involved did everything right or everything wrong.

[shoe]

 

- Steamboat/Savage. Austin brought it up and Regal said he liked it right until he spoke to Steamboat and then they sort of moved on without going into detail but it has to be the script right?

I adore Regal, but has he EVER had a match as good as Savage/Steamboat?

 

Steamboat himself was down on the match for years because it was pre-planned, which really comes across as one of those dumb things wrestlers value that don't actually enhance the product in any way. Might explain why Savage drew a boatload of money and Steamer never really did.

To say Steamer never really drew big money is pretty off base. In the late. 70's and early 80's he drew money vs Flair, Ivan Koloff, Paul Jones, Wahoo and others with Jay Youngblood against a variety of teams. They drew huge against Slaughter and Kernodle. Look at the Mark James books or History of WWE. Savage drew more but to say Steamboat wasn't 't a draw is wrong .

[C.S.]

I'm not sure on your first point. You can already see Regal's influence in the young talent in the WWE today. Did any of those matches have the same reach or impact as Steamboat/Savage, no, they didn't. But, the matches I listed have shown to be influential to the current crop of young WWE talent, and at the end of the day they are examples of great in-ring wrestling and that's all that really matters to me.

 

Your second point doesn't merit much of a response as it's a complete strawman. Especially directed towards me, a guy who is usually very critical of RoH and most of their big names. But, great wrestling is great wrestling, doesn't matter where it comes from or who is involved. Then there's your unmotivated comment, watch two minutes of that match and I can't see anyone coming away saying Ohno was unmotivated.

 

1. Regal's influence is a completely different argument, and he's influential in different ways for different reasons. People already in the system are influenced by Regal, which is great - don't get me wrong - but very few people grew up being inspired by him like they did with Savage/Steamboat. That doesn't make Regal horrible or inferior - I love him - but he doesn't have a match on his resume that had the same effect on so many people. I can't even buy that he wasn't put in a position to, because Savage/Steamboat was a midcard feud for a midcard belt (which meant a lot more back then, granted, but it wasn't the World Title match and it wasn't the main event). Regal and Steamboat are both shortsighted about the Savage match.

 

2. As for your feelings on ROH, if you took my comment as some sort of personal jab at your preferences...no, just no. Do you honestly expect me to memorize the likes and dislikes of everyone here on the board? I realize this is a really tight, close-knit community, which I love, but I can't say I know the ins and outs of everyone's tastes here. (I know Dylan adores Triple H though.)

 

3. Great wrestling is great wrestling, sure, but there's something to be said about matches with historical influence, that make kids want to become wrestlers, that those wrestlers emulate. Regal and Ohno have never been in such a match. And I say that while having much love for Regal.

 

4. I'll have to find a way to watch the Ohno match. I believe you when you say it was good. But the fact is, Ohno's no longer around for a reason. How do we know the match wasn't a total carry-job by Regal? Honest question.

 

I like both workers, but I would take Steamboat's body of work over Savages because of Dangerous Alliance era WCW. The fact that people have to come up with smallish Regal bouts kind of proves the point that he never had a match like Savage/Steamboat. He was essentially a TV worker. A great one, but a TV worker nonetheless. I think my favourite bout of his was the Larry Z one.

 

Can't argue with the awesomeness of Steamboat during the Dangerous Alliance era, and I think the Larry Z match was my favorite of Regal's too. Actually made me cheer the balding, obnoxious, lame old man golfer type that Larry was at the time, which is nothing short of miraculous. I credit that to Regal, who I liked even then, and he still made he cheer for Larry. Regal was a tremendous heel, if nothing else.

[C.S.]

To say Steamer never really drew big money is pretty off base. In the late. 70's and early 80's he drew money vs Flair, Ivan Koloff, Paul Jones, Wahoo and others with Jay Youngblood against a variety of teams. They drew huge against Slaughter and Kernodle. Look at the Mark James books or History of WWE. Savage drew more but to say Steamboat wasn't 't a draw is wrong .

 

Didn't mean to imply that Steamboat wasn't a draw, but late-70s/early-80s money is not the same as mid/late-80s or Nitro-era money. My point was, Savage was a bigger draw, and there's a reason for that.

[Johnny Sorrow]

 

To say Steamer never really drew big money is pretty off base. In the late. 70's and early 80's he drew money vs Flair, Ivan Koloff, Paul Jones, Wahoo and others with Jay Youngblood against a variety of teams. They drew huge against Slaughter and Kernodle. Look at the Mark James books or History of WWE. Savage drew more but to say Steamboat wasn't 't a draw is wrong .

Didn't mean to imply that Steamboat wasn't a draw, but late-70s/early-80s money is not the same as mid/late-80s or Nitro-era money. My point was, Savage was a bigger draw, and there's a reason for that.

Savage was a bigger draw because of his character. He was an amazing over the top character and he exploded off of the TV screen.

[Karl]

I was watching some Savage last night and I forgot how much charisma that man had. One of those guys who would be a superstar in any era.

[NintendoLogic]

I think that to be a big match worker, you need to be able to craft a satisfying narrative arc, which requires a strong grasp of things like psychology and structure. Regal never really demonstrated that-at least, not until recently.

[Blazer]

 

I kind of touched on the same thing above. WM3 was a "big moment" because the WWE Machine knows how to create those better than any other company in the world (wrestling or not). However, was the greatness of Savage/Steamboat hyped after the fact, or did that sort of build in reputation over the years?

 

 

Was the greatness of Savage/Steamboat hyped after the fact? Everyone who saw it knew immediately that is was one of the greatest, if not THE greatest, in US history at that point.

 

I knew it as I watched it live on Closed Circuit that I was seeing something I had never seen before in my life.

[Blazer]

 

 

- Steamboat/Savage. Austin brought it up and Regal said he liked it right until he spoke to Steamboat and then they sort of moved on without going into detail but it has to be the script right?

I adore Regal, but has he EVER had a match as good as Savage/Steamboat?

Regal-Arn at SuperBrawl and Regal-Finlay at Uncensored are damn close if not there.

 

 

 

[Blazer]

I prefer all 4 of his matches with Ambrose, Hero and Cesaro to Savage /Steamboat but that's probably just me.

 

Yeah, it is.

[Matt D]

I think we need a note to compare Steamboat/Savage and Regsl's greatest hits. I'm not discarding the possibility out of hand.

[Jimmy Redman]

I'd have to rewatch the Ambrose matches, but I'd definitely take Regal/Ohno over Steamboat/Savage. Cesaro match is a toss up. Not everybody is old enough to have watched WMIII live and get blown away in real time.

 

Nothing against Steamer/Savage either. It's a great match.

[C.S.]

 

 

I kind of touched on the same thing above. WM3 was a "big moment" because the WWE Machine knows how to create those better than any other company in the world (wrestling or not). However, was the greatness of Savage/Steamboat hyped after the fact, or did that sort of build in reputation over the years?

 

 

Was the greatness of Savage/Steamboat hyped after the fact? Everyone who saw it knew immediately that is was one of the greatest, if not THE greatest, in US history at that point.

 

I knew it as I watched it live on Closed Circuit that I was seeing something I had never seen before in my life.

 

 

Right, but I mean hyped by the WWF. Did they promote it as one of the greatest matches ever right after it happened or did that come later?

[ohtani's jacket]

I would take a lot of things over Steamboat/Savage too, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're better than Savage/Steamboat. I can't see how anyone would think Regal/Ohno was a better match than Steamboat/Savage all things considered.

[Goodear]

I would think one could prefer Regal-Ohno on a couple of levels if they were so inclined. Its certainly an economical match where there are a minimum of bumps (if I recall correctly there is one belly-to-back suplex) and a whole lot of limb work and brawling. It certainly feels more gritty than Steamboat-Savage with the finger work especially lending to that sensation. I guess if I'm trying to boil it down, the matches are so stylistically different that what matters to you as a watcher is going to make a huge difference in how you rank them.

[pantherwagner]

Is that Regal match in the WWE network?

[Goodear]

I don't have the network so I don't know. Its on Hulu however and I found it on Youtube.

 

 

 

[anarchistxx]

Bit of an odd comparison. Regal is a talented but off kilter, difficult, deliberately dissonant jazz musician. Steamboat is the brass on Dark Side Of The Moon or something, easier to understand, reaches more people but still got that critical cred. Hogan is saxaphone on a Phil Collins album.

[Blazer]

 

 

 

I kind of touched on the same thing above. WM3 was a "big moment" because the WWE Machine knows how to create those better than any other company in the world (wrestling or not). However, was the greatness of Savage/Steamboat hyped after the fact, or did that sort of build in reputation over the years?

 

 

Was the greatness of Savage/Steamboat hyped after the fact? Everyone who saw it knew immediately that is was one of the greatest, if not THE greatest, in US history at that point.

 

I knew it as I watched it live on Closed Circuit that I was seeing something I had never seen before in my life.

 

 

Right, but I mean hyped by the WWF. Did they promote it as one of the greatest matches ever right after it happened or did that come later?

 

 

Hell, DURING THE MATCH, Jesse said, "this is the greatest match I have ever seen."

 

 

Yes.