Toshiaki Kawada

[Childs]

Rod Stewart was definitely better than Flair in the early '70s.

[ohtani's jacket]

OJ, two things:

 

1. If it's just you listening to Rod Stewart on your own cool. If it's you having to rank your top 100 artists of all time, that's where the comparison factor comes in. It is kind of forced by the terms of the project. Although why Flair is the only barometer I don't know, I prefer multiple barometers.

 

I'm just not sure I think like that. I mean if you gave me 10 wrestlers to rank I'd probably compare them against one another, but if you asked me who the 100 best workers are it's an open slather. Mind you, when I've done these sort of polls before I usually get hung up with whether X wrestler fits right at 23 and whether 23, 24, 25, 26 flows well. I probably care more about how it looks on the page than the rankings themselves.

[jdw]

Doing stuff that pops the crowd is pretty smart. At the very least, it's smarter than doing stuff that doesn't.

 

I don't disagree with it.

 

However, there's a long standing debate / disagreement about Hogan with respect to that. Hogan popped crowds more than Flair. Stuff we all hated like the Hulking Up and the Posing Routine and the Ripping Off The Shirt all popped the crowd.

 

I've spent years trying to say that Hogan was an effective, smart worker.

 

But none of that makes him a candidate for #1 in this poll, even through he did these things better than anyone that we have a good deal of footage on.

 

So doing stuff that pops and entertains the crowd is smart, and we all have limits to how much we credit it when ranking folks. I mean... Sabu going through tables.

[GOTNW]

 

Another thing I thought about was that, for example, Flair vs. steamboat seems like a 5-star affair every single time out, especially 89 series, not just trilogy but the others too. Misawa vs. Kawada is not five stars every time out. It might be an unreasonable demand, but we're right at the top end talking fine margins here, and things like that should be considered I think.

I can't believe no one's challenged this yet it's complete bollocks. You have exactly two Flair-Steamboat matches at *****. You don't even have Wrestlewar at ***** let alone their matches from 83 or the 90s. Misawa and Kawada have had 16 matches on tape out of which only one didn't take place between 1992 and 2000. All of them are badass. I can't even begin to describe how toxic it is for wrestling watching to come into matches expecting a ***** match but you're attacking an all time great feud based on nothing. At least form a consistent opinion before making claims this ridiculous.

 

Although why Flair is the only barometer I don't know, I prefer multiple barometers.

You brought him up like five times in your original post. Come on.

[Timbo Slice]

Yeah, the difference Loss is talking about is a truly huge fundamental issue in deciding what's "smart" wrestling. Do you work within you and your opponent or work to pop the crowd?

 

I think that's actually what's going to separate a lot of lists here.

[El McKell]

What do you mean exactly by working within you and your opponent? Is this mutually exclusive to working to pop the crowd? Isn't basically the whole point of working to elicit a particular response from the crowd?

[Timbo Slice]

The great divide in wrestling psychology is workers trying to tell a story by doing moves because they're the ones organically popping the crowd and pandering to the fans. Main reason people aren't big fans of 2.999 wrestling is because the majority of it is pandering to the fans desire to see big moves, which is a lot of what the modern style is based on.

 

For a long time, the onus was on the fans to react to what was being done in the ring as opposed to the guys in the ring reacting to the fans (although there are definitely exceptions). There's a lot of balance in the two ideas because they're not mutually exclusive, but at the same time, it's a train of thought that is what makes people don't like NXT or PWG and so on.

[jdw]

 

 

Another thing I thought about was that, for example, Flair vs. steamboat seems like a 5-star affair every single time out, especially 89 series, not just trilogy but the others too. Misawa vs. Kawada is not five stars every time out. It might be an unreasonable demand, but we're right at the top end talking fine margins here, and things like that should be considered I think.

 

I can't believe no one's challenged this yet it's complete bollocks. You have exactly two Flair-Steamboat matches at *****. You don't even have Wrestlewar at ***** let alone their matches from 83 or the 90s. Misawa and Kawada have had 16 matches on tape out of which only one didn't take place between 1992 and 2000. All of them are badass. I can't even begin to describe how toxic it is for wrestling watching to come into matches expecting a ***** match but you're attacking an all time great feud based on nothing. At least form a consistent opinion before making claims this ridiculous.

 

 

 

Glad someone asked that, as I was wondering the same thing, though from two directions:

 

* are all Flair-Steamboats ***** affairs every single time

 

I don't think that even Dave Meltzer and Bruce Mitchell believe that. Doubt any poster here does, as many think some of their matches were subpar / mediocre.

 

For example, I don't think many people who watch stuff at the variety that we do rates the 1994 Flair-Steamboat matches above a certain 1994 Misawa-Kawada.

 

 

* Did Flair hit it out of the park in all of his 60:00 matches?

 

I mentioned the Boogie Jam match was being a chore. I like the Flair-Jumbo draw quite a bit less than most people.

 

Flair-Hart gets some mixed views. Loss liked it a good deal, but rated it lower than Kawada's two 60:00 singles matches in the 90s in terms of both stars and yearly ranking. That's not a knock on Flair-Hart: he had it at ****1/4 and #43 in 1993. But that's still a level below the two Kawada singles.

 

There are people who like the draw with Taylor, and others who find it painful to watch.

 

There are fans of Flair-Reed, but is there a consensus that it's a ***** affair? It seems to have finished a little low on the Mid-South set to be considered a consensus ***** classic.

 

A fair number of us laugh at the "classic" tag being put on the Flair-Brody.

 

So just what batting average did Flair have in his available 60:00 that were high end ***** classics?

 

Note of course that the New Orleans match isn't a 60:00 match.

[soup23]

I do think Kawada vs. Misawa as an overall series being less than Kobashi vs. Misawa is a reason why I do rank Kobashi ahead of Kawada by a decent margin. This can be dismayed as me just utilizing great match theory and layering that but I have made no qualms that is a criteria I will be using to rank. The rankings for my 90's matches speak for themselves I believe.

 

Misawa vs. Kawada has one all timer (6/3/94). I havent gotten to it yet but I do really enjoy the 7/24/95 match (around ****3/4 when I watched 5+ years ago), 3/93, 5/1/98, 1/22/99 I have all at ****1/2. 10/92, 7/93, 4/97 would all be around ****1/4. Carny 95, Carny 98, 7/99, and 7/18/05 at ****.

 

Misawa vs. Kobashi has one all timer (1/20/97), but also two other ***** matches IMO (10/31/98 and 3/1/03). 10/97 is right behind at ****3/4 and I think it is comparable to 7/24/95. Then you have 6/99 at ****1/4 which is a flawed match I admit. 3/31/96, 10/95 and Carny 95 at ****. 4/97 is ***3/4 but I would have it higher than Misawa/Kawad from carny 94 for example. The rest is either from 1990 which was fun stuff or too incomplete for me to accurately judge. Of the matches we have on tape, at almost every level I prefer Misawa vs. Kobashi. Even as flawed as 6/99 can be at points, it never stepped over the line in the ways 6/97 did which left a sour taste in my mouth.

[dawho5]

I think the comparison between Kawada and Kobashi is very much a stylistic one. They have very different approaches to pro wrestling and both are exceptional at what they do. It just comes down to which one you prefer.

[jdw]

Kawada vs. Akiyama, 2/9/93 is probably the best japanese rookie/vet match I've seen.

 

This match is actually 1/26/93. The other date is it's air date.

 

I like their 7/9/93 match more. Kawada is heel at that point and gets to be more of a dick.

[Benbeeach]

This all stemming from Kawada's seeming inability to work interesting meaningful 60 minute draws and why this isn't brought up enough as a discredit (or just plain old critique if we're being fair), in which he

a ) was never really booked to work, and b ) actually performed extremely well in given the small clip he was shooting from
is ludicrous and extremely laughable. It's just not a real criticism. If the idea was that Flair did it better (or at least had better practice at it), I don't think anyone would argue against it, but it's not an argument in the other direction anyone was making to begin with. Using the 60 minute draw barometer for a worker who peaked in the mid 90's seems really asinine and digging for diggings sake. Why doesn't anyone bring up and denigrate Bret's 60 minute draws in the 90s when discussing his candidacy, oh yeah, because they didn't happen (often enough to the point we'd make a sticking point out of them).

Same for Kawada's lack of Waylon Mercy's and George Souths. They didn't really exist, but when they did, he excelled. Not much more you can ask for. (well he did work spivey, but that's not the point)
The fact that JDW's gotten 3 pages out of it despite all of that is amazing.

I think a more productive argument would have been how well Kawada compares to other GOAT candidates going LONG in general. There is actual meat to that argument rather than some arbitrary old carny egg timer match. "Misawa/Kawada wasn't always a hit (news to me) like Flair/Steamboat was (also breaking f'n news to me)" is a good wild conversation starter, but not one I'm sure is based in some sort of concrete reality.

There are real things that we can keen on in regards to Kawada and dissect like ppl have mentioned. Best tag worker ever, psychology, cut offs, aura, etc. Time better spent on things such as these I'd reckon. With life being so short and all.


...also am I the rare member who sees some merit in the Brody/Flair broadway? If for nothing else, a pro in the Brody wasn't exactly a worthless toolbag in the ring and there was a good worker beneath all the extrinsic gimmick protecting column.

[MJH]

Whilst I agree with the gist of JvK's comments about there's no point debating Dylan with someone in the "he can't sing" camp, there's a big difference between that and not debating Clash 6 vs. 6/3/94 unless both agree they're 'undisputedly *****'; nobody is saying the former sucked, and I'm certain if we tallied up every poster on this board's star-rating for Clash 6 there'd be none lower than **** which means we can all agree it's 'great'.

 

At the same time, I think it's pretty much unquestionable that the AJ guys were working a significantly more evolved style, laying their big matches out ahead of time, and they were as structurally-tight as they were offensively-advanced (or certainly the usual suspects were). Flair/Steamboat is scarcely more involved than face/heel. One can watch 6/3/94 as a straight forward face/heel "hero overcomes the odds" match but, and whilst it's much more commonly described from Kawada's POV it basically is, that's being somewhat simplistic. Ultimately the debate on the two matches would come down to the value we individually place on that "complexity".

[JerryvonKramer]

I'd have to disagree with "scarcely more involved than heel / face". We did a very long review of the match before and there are layers in Clash 6 you aren't crediting there. I also have to dispute the idea that laying out matches ahead of time is a "more evolved" process than calling it in the ring. Any one who has either match less than ***** is not really having the debate on the even keel I'd want.

 

Anyway, people are discussing kawada in more depth and with greater levels of scrutiny which is all I wanted. Nice to see some passion on display.

[soup23]

Whilst I agree with the gist of JvK's comments about there's no point debating Dylan with someone in the "he can't sing" camp, there's a big difference between that and not debating Clash 6 vs. 6/3/94 unless both agree they're 'undisputedly *****'; nobody is saying the former sucked, and I'm certain if we tallied up every poster on this board's star-rating for Clash 6 there'd be none lower than **** which means we can all agree it's 'great'.

 

 

I do think this is a valid critieria and I think gets around to Parv's main crux for more analysis of some of the holy grail comments. He DOES believe that Clash 6 is a match that transcends wrestling and has multiple layers of storytelling and development. I happen to agree with him as well as someone like Shoe who said he would put that match as the GOAT. We really haven't found that naysayer for 6/3/94, 6/9/95 etc.

[jdw]

 

Whilst I agree with the gist of JvK's comments about there's no point debating Dylan with someone in the "he can't sing" camp, there's a big difference between that and not debating Clash 6 vs. 6/3/94 unless both agree they're 'undisputedly *****'; nobody is saying the former sucked, and I'm certain if we tallied up every poster on this board's star-rating for Clash 6 there'd be none lower than **** which means we can all agree it's 'great'.

 

 

I do think this is a valid critieria and I think gets around to Parv's main crux for more analysis of some of the holy grail comments. He DOES believe that Clash 6 is a match that transcends wrestling and has multiple layers of storytelling and development. I happen to agree with him as well as someone like Shoe who said he would put that match as the GOAT. We really haven't found that naysayer for 6/3/94, 6/9/95 etc.

 

 

In the threads in the Yearbook section, Tim Evans felt flat about 6/95 and Matt was critical of it. I suspect there are a number of other posters such as Daniel and/or Dylan who are ambivalent to either or both.

 

Not everyone who watches them thinks they're the GoaT. Not everyone who watches them thinks they're a MOTYC.

[jdw]

The fact that JDW's gotten 3 pages out of it despite all of that is amazing.

 

I'm not sure that prior to this week that I even had 3 pages out of anything this year.

[jdw]

At the same time, I think it's pretty much unquestionable that the AJ guys were working a significantly more evolved style, laying their big matches out ahead of time, and they were as structurally-tight as they were offensively-advanced (or certainly the usual suspects were).

 

 

I also have to dispute the idea that laying out matches ahead of time is a "more evolved" process than calling it in the ring.

 

There isn't any evidence that the All Japan guys laid things out ahead of time anymore than Flair and Steamboat.

 

Nor is the notion that Flair and Steamboat just completely winged it in the ring and laid nothing out before hand ties at all to reality. The two clearly laid out the finishing ideas of the second and third falls of the New Orleans match. Not just the good old boy bullshit of "You beat me with X" nosense. There clearly was thought there. And it wasn't just something they made up in the locker room five minutes before going out. Ross was clued in as well.

 

How much of El Clasico was laid out by Misawa and Kawada? My guess is that it's considerably less than the storylines that *we* draw from it.

[JerryvonKramer]

George Scott was a big finish guy.

[Timbo Slice]

 

How much of El Clasico was laid out by Misawa and Kawada? My guess is that it's considerably less than the storylines that *we* draw from it.

 

 

This is actually something I think about a lot with Kandori/Hokuto, because there's so much inference from the previous injuries that Hokuto has had that a lot of people just assumed that was the story (although I think it might have been confirmed later on about the specific moves Hokuto sold big stemming from past injuries), but I wonder just how much is what we infer as opposed to what was actually presented. That can also be the difference between really getting into a match or not, I feel.

[jdw]

Hokuto-Kandori is a bit different since it's interpromotional. My guess is quite a bit more was worked out ahead of time on that due to lack of familiarity in the ring and the politics of work interpromotional matches, especially with a customer as tough/difficult as Kandori. Not in the sense that they got all DDP in laying out all the details (allegedly) in advance. But that they, and their handlers on each side, worker through more than a pair of guys who'd worked together for more than a decade and opposite of each other for the past year.

[fxnj]

 

 

 

How much of El Clasico was laid out by Misawa and Kawada? My guess is that it's considerably less than the storylines that *we* draw from it.

 

This is actually something I think about a lot with Kandori/Hokuto, because there's so much inference from the previous injuries that Hokuto has had that a lot of people just assumed that was the story (although I think it might have been confirmed later on about the specific moves Hokuto sold big stemming from past injuries), but I wonder just how much is what we infer as opposed to what was actually presented. That can also be the difference between really getting into a match or not, I feel.

I think any interpretation of a match's story is valid if it's supported by what's going on in the ring or the match's context. The distinction between what's inferred and what's presented seems like a false dichotomy as there's no definitive authority on what a match set out to do. Even the workers themselves could easily be bullshitting on what was planned and what was improvised.

[Timbo Slice]

My point is that people use that more as a crutch to the argument they'd rather get across, which takes away from the match itself in a lot of ways.

[JerryvonKramer]

 

 

How much of El Clasico was laid out by Misawa and Kawada? My guess is that it's considerably less than the storylines that *we* draw from it.

This is actually something I think about a lot with Kandori/Hokuto, because there's so much inference from the previous injuries that Hokuto has had that a lot of people just assumed that was the story (although I think it might have been confirmed later on about the specific moves Hokuto sold big stemming from past injuries), but I wonder just how much is what we infer as opposed to what was actually presented. That can also be the difference between really getting into a match or not, I feel.

 

I think any interpretation of a match's story is valid if it's supported by what's going on in the ring or the match's context. The distinction between what's inferred and what's presented seems like a false dichotomy as there's no definitive authority on what a match set out to do. Even the workers themselves could easily be bullshitting on what was planned and what was improvised.

 

Right, which is why I'm against the idea of "intention" being a real criticism of anyone. Intention can't really matter because we never really know, and even if we did, I'm not sure it matters anyway. See also: Barthes, Roland, 'Death of the Author' (1967).*

 

 

* Not being faciecious here, but anyone who hasn't read his essay on wrestling should do so, it's a classic: http://web.mit.edu/21l.432/www/readings/Barthes_WorldOfWrestling.pdf

[El-P]

Funny, I actually red Barthes' Mythologies the other week. And what he says about pro-wrestling is great and also underlines why post-modern pro-wrestling really can't work (and it doesn't)