Jumbo Tsuruta

[jdw]

I'd disagree. Rusher is probably the best example of "variety" for Jumbo since it got him out of his normal set of opponents.

 

I think Mil's 1977 singles match is a great example of variety for Jumbo. Again, it's not one of the guys he worked with regularly. On the other hand... Mil and Jumbo had been opposite each other 40+ times by that point, had several singles matches, including a few 30:00 time limit draws. They were pretty familiar with each other.

 

Nick and Jumbo had worked far fewer times together, but they did have the 30:00 draw the year before the Hawaii.

 

With Rusher, this was a guy who was the #1 star of a rival promotion who he'd spent all of 9 minutes in the ring with. Interpromotional headaches to deal with, in the big drawing match on a big IWE vs AJPW card that Baba sits out. Shitloads of pressure.

 

A match can both be "lesser worker" and "variety". The first Kawada-Albright checked off both boxes.

[JerryvonKramer]

I can see the argument. And even though I am extremely lukewarm on the match, I said I would let Kawada have Albright. This is why I have Kumura as a borderline for inclusion and why I mentioned that match on the show.

 

I will go through the Jumbo variety picks now, for you to see. 20 is the mark for him to get to the perfect 10 ...

 

1. Dory Funk Jr, 2. Brisco, 3. Terry Funk, 4. Race, 5. Baba, 6. Kimura, 7. Billy Robinson, 8. Bockwinkel, 9. Slater, 10. Flair, 11. Kerry von Erich, 12. Martel, 13. Choshu / Yatsu, 14. Hansen / DiBiase, 15. Hamaguchi, 16. Williams / Gordy, 17. Tenryu, 18. Kawada, 19. Misawa (+ Kobashi / Kikuchi).

 

Kimura OR Mil would give him the 20+ he needs. Having good stuff with "lower" guys is not actually any part of my criteria and so not something I have put great stock in. It just needs to be 20 different opponents of any calibre.

 

So you see, not only is it a "borerline" case, it could be the real difference between #1 and #2 or #2 and #3 on my final list.

 

The threshhold for what counts as "memorable" in that variety category has been tricky.

 

PS. What about that Hamaguchi match I've put in there from 86?

[Childs]

My two cents--I'd include Kimura because the match was a significant accomplishment for Jumbo at that stage of his career and because it carried the big fight feel. Hamaguchi's more just a case of him having a very good match with a capable, lower ranked worker. But I wouldn't describe it as hugely "memorable" or important. I'd be more inclined to include Kobashi, who matched up with Jumbo in so many memorable tags and six-mans and also had a really good (albeit clipped for TV) singles match with him.

 

It depends on your goal I suppose.

 

For me, the distinction between 19 and 20 would be irrelevant. The point is Jumbo clearly established his ability to have great and memorable matches with a wide variety of workers over a long period of time.

[JerryvonKramer]

If you take a look through the others I've provided lists for so far, you can see the sort of benchmarks I'm using and whether that match would be considered equivalent.

 

The distinction between 19 and 20 is only significant insomuch as with Flair and Funk you can get there with EASE without even thinking, whereas with Jumbo it feels like more of a struggle.

 

Or in other words, the equivalent of Flair's Kimura would finish about 30+ deep.

 

But I have to put the cut off somewhere, and that is currently counting for just 1 point. If everyone is held to Flair's standard on "variety" very few people would be getting many points in that category at all, so 20 is the mark.

[Childs]

Right, I get what you're doing. I just feel like you reach a point where you have to say, Jumbo's resume of opponents was deep and varied, but I'm going to give Flair an extra nod in that category. And if that's really one of the most important factors for you, then maybe Flair is your guy after all.

[ohtani's jacket]

I think he's comfortably in top 10 70s workers WE HAVE ON TAPE.

 

That's what I'm watching to find out. It should jump off the screen if that's the case. When I watch his 70s work, I keep thinking about him in regard to Tatsumi Fujinami and Jaguar Yokota who also made their starts in the 70s, or even a comparison with Misawa & Co. in the early 90s. I can't shake the fact that he's still an up and comer.

[JerryvonKramer]

 

I think he's comfortably in top 10 70s workers WE HAVE ON TAPE.

 

That's what I'm watching to find out. It should jump off the screen if that's the case. When I watch his 70s work, I keep thinking about him in regard to Tatsumi Fujinami and Jaguar Yokota who also made their starts in the 70s, or even a comparison with Misawa & Co. in the early 90s. I can't shake the fact that he's still an up and comer.

 

 

The question I would put to you is this: were the others having ****+ matches against world-class opponents as up and comers?

 

Does Fujinami have a match from the 70s you'd put against Jumbo vs. Terry Funk or Jumbo vs. Billy Robinson or any of the Jumbo-Baba vs. Funks tags or Jumbo vs. Brisco?

 

Does Misawa as Tiger Mask II have anything you'd put against that stuff?

[Jetlag]

As someone who has seen every 70s Jumbo match there is too find... what exactly are the performances that make him a top 10 worker for the period? He is in some good to great matches, some of which I'm a big fan of (the Bockwinkel match springs to mind), but I don't recall him doing a single thing that really pushed him being head and shoulders above a majority of the talent pool of 70s wrestlers... I think the word that describes him best is "good in his role" during that period. While a top 10 tier worker would be described as "sensational in his role".

 

Re Fujinami, I guess argueing whether it's "better" is a matter of taste, but he displayed more mat skill in his LA match vs. Mando Guerrero than I've ever seen from Jumbo. Wouldn't say it makes me rank Fujinami above Jumbo but it def. adds more to Fujinami's resume for me than Jumbo being handlead from one hold to another by Funk and Robinson. If you wanna go by sheer volume of great matches, sure, Jumbo beats them all by footage KO.

 

EDIT: Where does Antonio Inoki rank for you, considering he was in some damn good matches against Brisco, Destroyer, and Backlund?

[JerryvonKramer]

For a guy who had no standout performances, he had an awful lot of good matches to his name in that period. It's all I'm saying.

 

You can say he was hand-fed, you can say he was put in a spot to succeed. My point is only that, well, it was him and none of these other guys. And the matches are good and he's in all of them.

[JerryvonKramer]

Re: Inoki, I really have a problem with him.

 

I am lower on his matches with Dory, Brisco, Baba, Destroyer, etc. than a lot of people. I think he is the ultimate boring fuck. I hate the Backlund matches.

 

And yet he probably has more than 10 matches I've given ****+ to and when all is said and done, when I put him through the metrics, will likely make the list.

 

I appreciate that putting a guy I completely loathe on my list seems counter-intutive but that's how I'm doing my list.

 

Inoki will score high in the intangibles, he'll be high on the variety, he'll do well for great matches compared to lots of people. Could easily finish above 80.

 

Probably my least fave guy ever though.

[jdw]

 

I think he's comfortably in top 10 70s workers WE HAVE ON TAPE.

 

That's what I'm watching to find out. It should jump off the screen if that's the case. When I watch his 70s work, I keep thinking about him in regard to Tatsumi Fujinami and Jaguar Yokota who also made their starts in the 70s, or even a comparison with Misawa & Co. in the early 90s. I can't shake the fact that he's still an up and comer.

 

 

Here are some debuts:

 

1971 Fujinami

1973 Tsuruta

1976 Tenryu

 

1981 Misawa

1982 Kawada

1988 Taue

1988 Kobashi

 

If one is comping Jumbo's 70s period, we'd be looking at this:

 

1971-77 Fujinami

1973-79 Tsuruta

1976-82 Tenryu

 

1981-87 Misawa

1982-88 Kawada

1988-94 Taue

1988-94 Kobashi

 

I think it's safe to say that Jumbo's "first seven years" leaves all the rest in the dust, with the exception of Kobashi. None of the rest are even close.

 

Fujinami didn't get his Jr's push until 1978, and had all of 8 television matches in New Japan prior to 1978. Tenryu wasn't a "good" wrestler by 1982. Misawa wasn't at the level in 1987 that Jumbo was in 1976, left alone with another three years under his belt. I like 1988 Kawada, but I don't think anyone can point to a strong quality singles match that he'd had up to that point. His high point came in his last match in that period, and as much as I love his performance in it, I'm not going to over pimp it. Taue in 1994 wasn't Jumbo, and at no point prior to that can one really draw a line between the two either.

 

Kobashi is a different beast, though everyone knew it at the time, and has since. He does have the advantage of a much more "closed promotion" where by 1990 he was working with largely the same people over and over again, a fair number of them were quite good workers. Even those who might annoy is in the 1990-93 time frame (say Doc & Gordy), I suspect most would say that they were easier for Kobashi to work with than Jumbo having to work with Oki & Duk or Abdullah. It wasn't like he worked with the Funks as much in a year on TV as Kobashi got to be opposite of Jumbo & Co in 1990-92 or Kawada & Taue in 1993. There are benefits to a closed promotion, and there are set backs.

 

It's kind of interesting that there are 35 matches from television featuring Jumbo in 1978 that are available, which is pretty close to the 39 television matches for Kobashi in 1993. There are a number of tapings that aren't complete in 1978, so there's more out there to bubble up. Though doing some research into the likely tapings, there's a limited amount that might be out there that looks super interesting with respect for Jumbo. There are only so many Ohki & Duk vs Baba & Tsuruta matches one wants to watch.

 

Anyway, if one is doing a comp of where Jumbo was at the time, he's quite far ahead of the rest with the exception of Kobashi, which probably is a matter of taste for some.

 

Misawa and Kawada in the early 90s were a decade into their careers. One would need to compare them with 1983-84 Jumbo.

[jdw]

I can see the argument. And even though I am extremely lukewarm on the match, I said I would let Kawada have Albright. This is why I have Kumura as a borderline for inclusion and why I mentioned that match on the show.

 

I will go through the Jumbo variety picks now, for you to see. 20 is the mark for him to get to the perfect 10 ...

 

1. Dory Funk Jr, 2. Brisco, 3. Terry Funk, 4. Race, 5. Baba, 6. Kimura, 7. Billy Robinson, 8. Bockwinkel, 9. Slater, 10. Flair, 11. Kerry von Erich, 12. Martel, 13. Choshu / Yatsu, 14. Hansen / DiBiase, 15. Hamaguchi, 16. Williams / Gordy, 17. Tenryu, 18. Kawada, 19. Misawa (+ Kobashi / Kikuchi).

 

Kimura OR Mil would give him the 20+ he needs. Having good stuff with "lower" guys is not actually any part of my criteria and so not something I have put great stock in. It just needs to be 20 different opponents of any calibre.

 

 

I think it's a matter of what you're trying to say with the variety. The first three guys include a pair of brothers and the other basic NWA style champ of the era. Two trained Jumbo, and the other was there for him to cut his teeth on. It's kind of limited variety there. Slater was pretty much Terry Jr., so not much variety there.

 

Rusher isn't really like anyone else on that list. Perhaps Choshu & Yatsu as outsiders, but most of what folks would point to with respect to high end matches with Jumbo opposite them happened after they had worked together for a year. Rusher was a true outsider when they had their match, which is quite different from most of what one would find from Jumbo in the 70s. Even "brawls" or "juice matches" with Abby weren't really like the "fight" vibe that Jumbo and Rusher gave off.

 

Variety of guys working similar styles is limited variety. Flair's list including 5 guys like Nikita Koloff... who really gives a fuck. We get that Flair figured out how to work with a muscle head with Nikita, so there's no need to list Hawk and Animial and the like. If how he worked with Lex and Sting was different than Nikita (which one could argue if they want), go ahead and list them. But if one is trying to list 20 where the list can go past 20, it's more worthwhile to list a variety of wrestlers rather than similar guys.

 

 

PS. What about that Hamaguchi match I've put in there from 86?

 

 

I like the match, which I've pimped for a decade or so and had fun poking at a lazy review of Dave's on the match.

 

I'm not sure I'd list Animal rather than Rusher. There's value in seeing him work against a smaller and lower ranked wrestler, and how they make it "competitive". On the flip side, they have the comfort zone of having worked together for a year before that, and also their matches back in the 70s. One could bundle him in with the other Ishin Gundan guys.

[Childs]

John, did you find that Jumbo got a little stale in the early '80s (allowing for brilliant exceptions such as the Kerry match)?

[jdw]

I think a lot of the "stale" aspect was either uninteresting opponents or working with some of the same gaijin over and over again.

 

I liked the Race matches in 1982 and 1983 as being perfectly solid, but he'd been facing Race in big matches since 1977. Dittos Billy. Same with Brisco. The Funks were guys he'd been facing since 1973. Same with the Funks. Same with Mil.

 

He also had a load of chum to work with. I could list his title matches in the 80s before 1986. You come across some interesting ones on paper that aren't in circulation, but then you'll pause to remember that he's been facing those guys for years.

 

Get him in something interesting, and he's interesting.The Martel match was two months after dropping the title to Rick, and two months after the Kerry match. They've got their shit together, and it's fun as hell.

 

His Bockwinkel match in the Twin Cities in 1980 was fun. It's still a fresh match up, they haven't run it into the ground, they're not working for a long draw, so they get to move things along and get the crowd going. By the time of the title change, they had worked together a ton. It's sold, it's good... but it's something they've been working on for six years. It's a bit like Misawa and Kawada facing each other forever.

 

Put him in something "new" like Destroyer & Jimmy Snuka vs Jumbo Tsuruta & Ricky Steamboat where he's opposite his mentor, and it's a load of fun.

 

The problem is that the same old same old is largely what's available. Some of the more potentially more interesting stuff got left off Classics and on comes out in trickles, liek the tag match above or the two Murdoch matches. You watch him with Murdoch and it's fresh because we haven't seen them together, nor with the title on the line, or it bouncing around. On the other hand, these guys had been working together since the mid-70s. There's likely more good tag matches sitting out there. Perhaps we would have been bored of it by 1980 rather than all hyper to see it.

[Jetlag]

For a guy who had no standout performances, he had an awful lot of good matches to his name in that period. It's all I'm saying.

 

You can say he was hand-fed, you can say he was put in a spot to succeed. My point is only that, well, it was him and none of these other guys. And the matches are good and he's in all of them.

 

So what makes him so different from Robert Gibson? You can say he was carried by his partner, but he was in a bunch of good matches. Why does Jumbo being in good matches add to his resume while Gibson's are comfortably ignored?

 

I just looked at your list of +**** ranked 70s Jumbo and I would be curious about what your measure for a "great" match by 70s standards is. I like those Funk tags but in no way are they +**** material.

 

The guys that jdw posted are interesting. Are there any 1971, 1972, 1973 Fujinami matches on tape? The earliest Fujinami I can find on Ditch's site is 1977. That's not a real comparison. If you keep it fair and include Fujinami's stuff until 1979 it's much more even. He was doing really phenomenal stuff by that time.

 

Taue: if Jumbo gets points for being in those Funk tags what does Taue get for being in the 1993 MOTY tag, the best long AJPW tag in a while with Jumbo, and the best 6 man ever? If you ask me he is much closer. Really excellent match series against Kawada, a few real good long singles matches, actively great in tags.

 

How about these guys:

 

Marty Jones 1972 - 1978 - I think only matches from 1976-78 are available, but what is there is a damn great match against Rudge and a super impressive, state of the art match series against Mark Rocco.

 

Jun Akiyama: 1992-1998 - has those HDA tags in 1996.

 

Bryan Danielson: 1999-2005 - while not his best work, he got good as early as 2001 and continued to do some of the best work on the scene for years.

 

Yuki Ishikawa 1992 - 1998/ Daisuke Ikeda 1993-1999/Alexander Otsuka 1995-2001 - these guys are interesting because much of their case rests on that early period. They all look good almost from the get go and have a bunch of good/great matches under their resume despite limited footage situation.

 

Throw in a couple other guys like Low Ki (1998-2004), Masa Funaki (1985-1991), Kiyoshi Tamura (1989-1995), Yujiro Yamamoto (2008-2011), Ken Shamrock in PWFG and Jumbo's resume as a young worker doesn't seem super special anymore. EDIT: Naoya Ogawa (1997-2003) would also be an easy inclusion. I think "Best Rookie" would be an interesting discussion.

 

 

Also: JvK, what is your Top 10 for 70s workers? I've thought about it a little and from the top of my head I would rank these guys above Jumbo:

 

Jack Brisco, Destroyer, Billy Robinson, Buddy Rose, Jim Breaks, Alan Sarjeant, Steve Grey, Mick McManus, Tibor Szakacs, Terry Funk.

[JerryvonKramer]

So what makes him so different from Robert Gibson? You can say he was carried by his partner, but he was in a bunch of good matches. Why does Jumbo being in good matches add to his resume while Gibson's are comfortably ignored?

I would not ignore those things for Gibson. My way of ranking stuff is pretty transparent.

 

Gibson will score in the great matches column and in the variety stakes, where he's going to suffer badly is in the other four categoires where I legit can't see him getting more than 3 or 4 in any of them, and possibly will get 0s for at least two of them. But I don't ignore the fact that Gibson was a part of a lot of great matches and it is to his credit.

 

I just looked at your list of +**** ranked 70s Jumbo and I would be curious about what your measure for a "great" match by 70s standards is. I like those Funk tags but in no way are they +**** material.

Well, I disagree, obviously. To me that series of matches contains several near-masterpieces.

 

If you want my reasoning and long form reviews, they are almost all in my Dory thread: http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?/topic/27872-learning-to-love-dory/

 

It would be fair to say that I am higher than the average on Funks tags. For me, Funks are GOAT tag team, and I absolutely love many of their matches. This is where some (or a lots of) "subjectivity" creeps in. But that's the nature of rating things.

 

In my view, those matches are ****+ affairs, and feeature great work, top notch psychology and basically encapsulate the AJ tag style. I think the period 73-79 is better than the 80-85 pre-Choshu period of AJ in general.

 

Taue: if Jumbo gets points for being in those Funk tags what does Taue get for being in the 1993 MOTY tag, the best long AJPW tag in a while with Jumbo, and the best 6 man ever? If you ask me he is much closer. Really excellent match series against Kawada, a few real good long singles matches, actively great in tags.

Taue is going to rank for me big time. He will score massive in great matches category and if I had to guess will finish in the top 20 of my list.

 

Throw in a couple other guys like Low Ki (1998-2004)

I did start reviewing Low Ki matches here: http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?/topic/29461-low-ki/

 

I gave up after really hating a match of his vs. Eddie from 2001, because I didn't think he was going to make my list. But go figure, I'm higher on 70s AJ than I am on 00s indy scene. No big secret.

 

Jack Brisco, Destroyer, Billy Robinson, Buddy Rose, Jim Breaks, Alan Sarjeant, Steve Grey, Mick McManus, Tibor Szakacs, Terry Funk.

 

It's a good question. I've not scene all of the WoS guys in any sustained sort of way.

 

Breaks, Brisco, Dory, Robinson, Terry, Baba are all above Jumbo for 70s, possibly also Johnny Saint who is awesome vs. Breaks.

 

Jumbo vs. Race would be something I'd have to think about. I think it would be close. Based on footage available, I'd have Jumbo over Bock for 70s.

 

I'd (controversially) have Jumbo above Destroyer, because I am not the biggest fan of the 60s mat-based style. I do like Destroyer, but have found some of his stuff a bit boring too. "But Parv you love Dory!", yeah, but Dory does butterfly suplexes, piledrivers, and fucks guys up with European uppercuts -- that is, it's a bit of a myth that he just lays there in a headlock. That said, I have given at least two Destroyer matches five stars.

 

Beyond that it's about footage and gaps. Buddy Rose has been on my "to do" list forever.

 

McManus is someone I'm prone to love, but have only seen a handful of matches.

[JerryvonKramer]

I think it's a matter of what you're trying to say with the variety. The first three guys include a pair of brothers and the other basic NWA style champ of the era. Two trained Jumbo, and the other was there for him to cut his teeth on. It's kind of limited variety there. Slater was pretty much Terry Jr., so not much variety there.

 

... Variety of guys working similar styles is limited variety. Flair's list including 5 guys like Nikita Koloff... who really gives a fuck. We get that Flair figured out how to work with a muscle head with Nikita, so there's no need to list Hawk and Animial and the like. If how he worked with Lex and Sting was different than Nikita (which one could argue if they want), go ahead and list them. But if one is trying to list 20 where the list can go past 20, it's more worthwhile to list a variety of wrestlers rather than similar guys.

Yeah, I see what you're getting at. I guess this is a level of nuance that I'm kinda gliding over with my variety metric. I just need *any 20* different guys and am not looking at how similar or different any of them are.

 

That said, I think a lot of people would disagree with the glib idea that Dory and Terry are "similar" workers even if they did have the same last name. Although I do think, if you look past character work, that their basic movesets are essentially the same, which has always been Terry's point about why the brother vs. brother match was disappointing.

 

But I do get the idea, you want to look across that list of opponents and see a veritable rogue's gallery. Fat guys, thin guys, big guys, small guys, brawlers, technical workers, etc. etc.

 

It's just a level of nuance my metric can't get to.

 

You have convinced me, however, that Kimura should be included and I'm happy because it gives Jumbo a perfect 10 in that category, which I would have said before trying to list it out.

[JerryvonKramer]

^ jdw, on the "stale" point, I largely agree, but would you also agree that he slowed down some in the early 80s? When he transitioned more into the Ace role, I think he became a bit more stoical and some might say "stodgy" in his working style.

 

If you look at him in 1980 when he was allied with Terry Funk (who was at the peak of his stardom), he's still that spunky, firey young babyface.

 

Fast-forward to those matches with Race you reference, and he seems to have less of the spunk about him, but hasn't yet got the aura of being "the man" that would define his late 80s, or indeed his much loved "grumpiness".

 

I mean I dislike Phil Schneider's "Terry Taylor" comparison, but you could call 81-4 his "Terry Taylor" years. He's transitioning out of one role into another, and hasn't quite "found himself" in the new role.

 

It's "a knock", but he's still having great matches through that period (i.e. better than any Terry Taylor would ever have) so to an extent I'm like "well who cares".

 

tl;dr version:

 

* "Baby Jumbo" (73-5)

* Young, spunky, firey Jumbo (76-80)

* The "Terry Taylor years" (81-4)

* "The Man" (85-89)

* Grumpy Jumbo (90-92)

 

You'll get some bleeding between these, but roughly speaking I think that's a fair summation.

[ohtani's jacket]

 

 

I think he's comfortably in top 10 70s workers WE HAVE ON TAPE.

 

That's what I'm watching to find out. It should jump off the screen if that's the case. When I watch his 70s work, I keep thinking about him in regard to Tatsumi Fujinami and Jaguar Yokota who also made their starts in the 70s, or even a comparison with Misawa & Co. in the early 90s. I can't shake the fact that he's still an up and comer. K

 

The question I would put to you is this: were the others having ****+ matches against world-class opponents as up and comers?

 

Does Fujinami have a match from the 70s you'd put against Jumbo vs. Terry Funk or Jumbo vs. Billy Robinson or any of the Jumbo-Baba vs. Funks tags or Jumbo vs. Brisco?

 

Does Misawa as Tiger Mask II have anything you'd put against that stuff?

 

 

The first thing I'd say to that is that I don't think Jumbo was having ****+ matches against world-class opponents as an up and comer. I don't think either the '75 Funks tag or the Kimura match is a **** star match. And even if I did, my focus would be on whether I thought it was a **** match because of Jumbo and not what the star rating was.

 

Secondly, I'd say if you don't know whether Fujinami was having matches as good as Jumbo then how can you say Jumbo was one of the best in the world? Seems hyperbolic to me. I generally loathe when people say such and such is the "best in the world" unless they can make a definitive claim about that sort of statement (i.e. after they've watched enough.) I can't tell you whether I think Fujinami had as many **** matches as Jumbo until I work out how many **** I think Jumbo had since it's probably a sixth of the number that made your list. What matters to me is how they compare as workers not their output. Jumbo being led about by the nose by the biggest stars of the 70s isn't illuminating in regard to his work. I watched that 1980 Jumbo/Funk match not that long ago and I don't think Jumbo looked "great" there and that was the next decade.

 

As far as Misawa and Co. go, I don't think they were put in a position to have significant singles matches until 1990. Their growth period as singles workers occurred from that point and is more comparable w/ 70s Jumbo than any of their 80s work. I don't think a straight fifth year Jumbo vs. fifth year Misawa comparison tells us anything. When I watch 70s Jumbo, I'm comparing it to 1992 Kawada vs. Hansen and not Kawada's Footloose work. That seems reasonable to me.

 

But you can ignore Misawa and Co. Marty Jones is a good 70s example that was brought up. Rocco and Steve Grey as well.

[JerryvonKramer]

What this seems to be driving towards OJ, is that you seem to be lower on 70s Jumbo than either myself or jdw, which is fine. I think the 75 Funks tag is a masterpiece. Different strokes.

 

All claims made by anyone is subject to "based on what I've seen", which goes without saying. But "generally loathing" the idea of someone saying anything without really being in a position to comment on X (e.g. 70s Fujinami) seems weird from the guy who ignored 60s rock in favour of obscure jazz albums and who was then ready to declare those jazz albums as his top 10 of all time, or whatever. In an ideal world we would all have seen absolutely everything. We haven't seen absolutely everything. From what I understand, Fujinami has great performances in 79 but they are scarcer before that time. I am still working through 80s Fujinami and cannot yet provide metrics for him.

 

In any case, I do not think there is anything remotely controversial about claiming Jumbo was "one of the best workers in the world" during the 70s. Top 10 might be a stretch, but top 30 -- which if you recall is my nominal criteria -- is pretty easy to demonstrate.

[JerryvonKramer]

As a follow up, the question "what did this guy do in each of these matches?" is -- like the distinction between different styles of workers -- a level of nuance that I'm not getting into with my metrics. And, yes, this does give Robert Gibson an outside bet of making 90-100 sort of range. I understand this is a limitation, but it's also something I can't realistically assess across 100 guys, the scope is too huge and I have just over 4 months. I want to ensure everyone on my list is subjected to the same level of scrutiny. I can't really do that if I'm asking "what did he do in each of these matches?", it's a level of detail that doesn't scale easily for 100. At least not for me, it might be for you. The "Base skills" thing is getting towards that, and as you can see for me Jumbo is a 10 in that from where I'm sitting [basic (offense, selling, psychology) 3/3 3/3 3/3 (+1 for hitting ever move like a finisher) = 10]. You could argue well he wasn't a 10 at all stages of his career, only from 85-92. And again, that's a level of nuance my thing can't deal with. Rating stuff is complicated and those sorts of critical questions demonstrate why. But I'm making a top 100 wrestler list, not writing a book on aesthetics.

[ohtani's jacket]

I don't know if I've ever made a list that I would consider definitive. I will say that I watch/listen to more than just about anybody else during voting periods since I tend to focus my viewing or listening solely on the project during the polling time, but ultimately the list I produce is my own. I will say, as an aside, that if you're making a list of the best 60s albums and don't include a significant amount of jazz albums that you have no claims to a definitive list given how far ahead of other genres jazz was in the first few years of full lps (and that's after listening to a fair whack of the acclaimed non-jazz 60s albums.) None of the jazz albums that made my top 10 for the 60s were obscure. The 70s list I made was more eclectic.

 

I don't think I'm down on Jumbo. I like 70s Jumbo. To me it's a matter of being realistic. Take the 1977 Mil match. If you ask me that match was all Mil. There's no way Jumbo was calling the shots. You could argue that Mil never had matches that good usually and certainly not with anyone outside of the Destroyer, but I'd argue he didn't get that many opportunities in Japan and that all touring workers knew what side their bread was buttered on when it came to working Baba's boy. Jumbo is patently good in the bout, but is he the guy calling the shots and carrying the action? I don't think so. Is he doing anything that sets the match apart (i.e. selling from underneath)? Not really. The match is cool because Mil busts out a bunch of choice offence. I suspect Jumbo came into his prime some time in the early to mid 80s and had a prime that was no more than 10 years just like most wrestlers. That still makes him a great worker, possibly the greatest of all time, but it's a hell of a lot more realistic to me than over-inflated claims of twenty year primes.

 

I will watch some 70s Fujinami soon. I might well be wrong comparing them, but I think it's better to compare workers with the least degrees of separation than to claim Jumbo wasn't as good as non-70s Japanese talent.

[JerryvonKramer]

Mil actually had good matches in the 70s with a few other people that I've seen, including Harley and the Funks (79 one). And given experience levels, you'd expect Mil to be the one calling the match.

 

But, y'know, I've been in debates before on this site where my attempts to demonstrate that Ted DiBiase was a "better worker" than Big Bossman, even in his WWF days, on the basis that he was a ring general and leading matches tended to be sidelined in favour of "who has the better matches?". And it seemed to me then that most people did not seem to particularly care for "who was leading the match" as a metric or something to take into consideration. Why is this important now but wasn't when we were doing Ted vs. Bossman, a couple of years back?

[ohtani's jacket]

Ted was a good worker, but regardless of his credentials. his WWF matches weren't as good as Boss Man's. I agreed with Matt on that point categorically after watching their matches, and since Boss Man wasn't being carried I don't see how the metric is skewered.

 

I'm sure there is a point where Jumbo no longer defers to his more experienced opponent and begins asserting himself as a worker. When he reaches the point where he deserves the majority of the credit for how good his matches are is the point where his prime begins, IMO.

[JerryvonKramer]

Was Jumbo being carried? It's one thing to say the opponent was leading the match, it's another to suggest he was being carried.

 

What are you saying with this? Is it that because he was the junior guy in those matches they doen't "count" in some way? Or that I can't really start him in 1973 with the Longevity rating?

 

My criteria for that, as I've told you, is "Top 30 in the world", if you can demonstrate for every year 73, 74, 75, 76, etc. 30 guys who have better matches in the same sort of volume on the available footage we have from that era, I'd consider shortening it. I don't think there are 30 guys though who were having better matches than that in the period. At least not from the 70s stuff I've watched, which is quite a lot.

 

I am not really sure about this "portioning credit" business. I recall a very lengthy response from jdw once when I suggested Rick Rude was carrying Ultimate Warrior. He pointed out blow-by-blow why it was a "nonsense" to suggest Rude was carrying that match. And I got the impression that most people were on his side in that one. Jumbo Tsuruta was not the Ultimate Warrior, he was an Olympic-level amatuer wrestler who Dory Funk Jr described as the fastest learner he'd ever trained and who Giant Baba hand-picked from all of the available young boys to be "his man". By which I mean -- steady-on a bit with this idea that he was being led by the nose.

 

Ric Flair called all the matches with Steamboat, was Steamer being carried?