JerryvonKramer Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 I am okay with this argument in one specific way. Inclusive consideration. If someone is generally considered critically over time a greatest of all time, then he should be looked at. Once looked at, he can be placed or dismissed. It shouldn't necessarily be used to exclude people however. Right. And to be clear, I'm not saying that every such "important" act must make everyone's list, it's an argument for consideration. I'll go back to the music analogy. I don't care for The Who. I really don't think they were very good and are my number one example of "average act who lucked out: right place, right time". But that's a view I've come to after spending hours listening to their records over a number of years and then comparing them with other bands from that era. I'd advocate every single person checking out The Who and making their own minds up. I'm also fine with being in a minority view on it. Now a "less important" act in a niche genre ... let's say Slint ... "well, lower prioroty ... will check out if I've got time". Volk Han is like a Slint in my book. I think you're kidding yourself if you think shootstyle has little or no importance/influence on the rest of wrestling. So much of that style has found its way into every type of wrestling, even as high up as the WWF/E. Sure, the argument could be made that a lot of that is due to MMA, but I don't buy that as shootsyle in pro wrestling has always been its own thing within the medium. Like I said tell me why my conclusions are wrong. I'm open to the arguments. It's possible that I just don't know enough about this. So educate me. Same arguments Parv used above have been applied to hogan era WWF, Lucha, et for years Hogan and Bruno are both making my list based on what they did well. I'd also argue that both are benchmarks for babyface comebacks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Childs Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 Shoot style had an impact on the development of modern Japanese wrestling, whether it's directly represented in the present day or not. A lot of people think New Japan is the best wrestling promotion in the world right now. Some of its biggest stars were obviously influenced by the Maeda-Fujiwara-Takada generation. And that's not even touching on Suzuki and Sakuraba, who came directly from shoot style. I don't have a problem with people rejecting certain styles. I do it myself. But I don't buy the canon argument as a reason for ignoring shoot style. It's fine if you just think it's boring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 Parv, I respect your decision to at least give shoot style a chance. It truly is not for everyone. You have tried it and you didn't like it. More power to you. I hope at some point (unless I've missed it), you will expand on what you see as the major differences between shoot style and the 70s matwork-based matches, as I think that's an interesting conversation. I see obvious differences, but I also see something like UWFI as an extension of that. I'm not sure my take on that is right, or that there even is a right take. So I think it's a discussion worth having, especially involving someone who doesn't really get into it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 I have to go soon but ... The risk of being too open with your biases/positions on something as sweeping as a style is that it could lead to people saying "eh fuck Jack Brisco and Dibiase. While I'm at it, Flair is a Parv favorite, I'm dropping him to 94 to offset Parv being Parv." It's one of the reasons I try not to completely reject any style or era out of hand when thinking about a project like this, even if I know there is no way I'll vote for certain people on those grounds. This would be really sad if there was anyone actually voting like that. I guess I'll have to have a look at a few more shoot-style matches if it really does warrant looking at. I have been thinking that I could try to come at it with the mindset that it's no different from WoS or early 70s US/ Japanese work, we'll see. If someone can put together 10 matches in the shoot style that are thought of as ***** classics, I will watch them. That's the equivalent of giving Miles Davis or John Coltrane a fair shake I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Crackers Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 On the importance of shoot style wrestling: Boxing is a popular sport and many people who watch wrestling have seen a boxing match. That means that people know how a real punch looks. When promoters still cared about the suspension of disbelief it was important for workers to be able to throw realistic punches. Yes, we do have footage of vintage wrestlers like Haystacks Calhoun throwing shitty punches but there is a tradition of wrestlers throwing great punches. Most of the classic NWA champs I've seen have good punches. In territories that put more of a focus on brawling we have lots of wrestlers whose engage in even more technical boxing. Look at the variety of punches thrown by Lawler and Dundee. Look at the way Ronnie Garvin or Greg Valentine used boxing head movements. As American wrestling became more theatrical less emphasis was placed on striking but that doesn't mean that suspension of disbelief became less important. WWE may not have a lot of guys who throw good punches but there are dangerous high flying moves, weapons, and moves that while occasionally cooperative looking require bumps of varying degrees of danger. Basically what I'm trying to establish is that there is a baseline for plausible wrestling offense. That doesn't mean it has to be realistic but fans need to see someone take a bump or get hit (whether it is a safe/worked strike or a stiff one) to accept that someone is getting hurt. In Japan that baseline for plausible wrestling offense developed differently. It's important to bear in mind that the first notable match between two native Japanese wrestlers turned into a shoot that ended with a legitimate knockout. I think it's also important to keep in mind that one of the competitors in that match is one of the most important judoka in history. When Antonio Inoki rose to fame there was already a precedent for realistic offense in Japanese wrestling and he was smart enough to seize it and make it part of his mystique. That's why he brought in martial artists and boxers to fight him. That's why he chose to have Karl Gotch train in his dojo. When the UWF wrestlers left New Japan in the 80s they saw that blurred line between shoot and work as something else they could take advantage of the same way that Inoki had in the previous decade. UWF didn't invent shoot style overnight but they slowly developed it. Fujiwara pushed the development of matwork into more realistic territory than had previously been seen although he was still concerned with using that matwork to tell traditional pro wrestling stories. Sayama pushed for more realistic striking based upon his martial arts background. Maeda was the charismatic heavyweight who represented both new ideas. The influence of shoot style on the development of MMA is well know but I'm going to focus on how it shaped good old worked pro wrestling. If I'm remembering correctly, the original UWF never claimed that "New Japan was fake" but with their more realistic style the implication was there. Shoot style matwork had already been an ingredient in New Japan's strong style but when the UWF invasion angle began in 1986 it was given even more emphasis. As shoot style promotions developed so did pro wrestling offense in New Japan and even All Japan. When you see armbars, chokes, judo throws, deadlift suplexes, KO spots, or kickboxing style kneelifts in a pro wrestling match then you are seeing the influence of shoot style. All matwork in post 1984 Japanese wrestling has shoot elements. Shoot style also put more emphasis on clean victories. UWF matches almost always ended with a victor or possibly a time limit draw. New Japan slowly introduced that principle during the NJPW vs UWF feud and in a couple years Baba was forced to follow suit. Eventually the Japanese influence on independent wrestling combined with former All Japan employee Johnny Ace's management position in WWE made that same concept the norm in American pro wrestling. That same influence rubbed off in Mexico, probably due to a combination of talent trades and wrestlers watching Japanese tapes (there are still low blows though). Back to the development of American wrestling offense, I think you can argue that shoot style has had an influence on some developments in American wrestling rings, though it's not as strong as the influence it has had on American booking. This also brings us back to the boxing example I gave earlier as it ties in MMA and it's influence on pro wrestling. I know that not everyone is in the same boat as me but I can't unsee MMA grappling when I see traditional pro style matwork. It may not bother every wrestling fan but when I see someone trapped in a hold for a long time without tapping out it strains my willing suspension of disbelief because I know that you'd never see someone in an armbar or a choke for that long because they'd get injured. I suspect that more people see that than we realize. On top of that, MMA shows us that you don't need a limb worn down to get a submission. An armbar can break your arm no matter what has happened to your arm before that point. So how does that change American pro wrestling? The obvious answer is the changing number of shoot holds that wrestlers use, particularly on the indies but that's not all. I'm not suggesting that "injured limb" stories are leaving pro wrestling or even that they should but I think they are becoming less common than they were. Think of a match like Cena vs CM Punk. Those are long main events by WWE standards and more matwork centric than most WWE matches as well but they don't really have the "limb attack" strategies associated with classic American matches either. Instead the grappling consists of headlocks to maintain control and attempts at locking in submission finishers. Rather than setting up submissions the drama comes from wrestlers trying to apply a hold that can win a match at any time while the other wrestler blocks it or escapes it. Modern WWE fans haven't been trained to accept every hold as a potential match ender but the psychology behind most WWE submission finishers is similar to how shoot holds might be treated in New Japan, even if those WWE finishers aren't particularly realistic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
funkdoc Posted November 20, 2014 Report Share Posted November 20, 2014 i am about the most strongly anti-canon person on this board, probably, for reasons that intersect greatly with my views on power & privilege. canons are inevitably created by the dominant group(s) and will inevitably reflect their values on some level. whether it's racism (see: australian education official saying "aboriginal literature is non-existent") or US-centric rockism, it's almost certainly going to be something that i don't respect and that doesn't hold up if you examine the evidence in further detail. i see canons as extensions of established power structures, basically. study what's important? i ask: who gets to define "importance"? on what merits did they earn that right? who or what is being erased by their definition, and is that deserved? i could go on and on but no need! frankly, one of my main issues with pro wrestling criticism is that it has yet to move beyond the "importance" imbued upon things by old wrestlers and dave meltzer. i'm much more likely to find music critics who can make a real case for the beatles not belonging in a top 100 than wrestling critics who can make a real case for flair not belonging in a top 100, and i consider that a negative for the wrestling side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted November 21, 2014 Report Share Posted November 21, 2014 Unrelated, but you might enjoy the discussion of JYD, Bearcat Wright and race, Dave and I had on the latest Wrestling Culture Podcast funkdoc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benbeeach Posted November 21, 2014 Report Share Posted November 21, 2014 The idea that maeda, fujiwara, takada, han and tamura (maybe) don't matter is laughable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WingedEagle Posted November 21, 2014 Report Share Posted November 21, 2014 If someone checks out a few shoot style and says its not for them and finds it completely boring and unwatchable, that's cool. I'd hope they wouldn't avoid it solely because they don't think there's any relevance to it in the course of wrestling history around the world, but if you check out a few and absolutely nothing resonates there's no reason to search for some connection there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benbeeach Posted November 21, 2014 Report Share Posted November 21, 2014 I'd hope they wouldn't avoid it solely because they don't think there's any relevance to it in the course of wrestling history around the world Yes, because that wouldn't be true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Childs Posted November 21, 2014 Report Share Posted November 21, 2014 I have to go soon but ... The risk of being too open with your biases/positions on something as sweeping as a style is that it could lead to people saying "eh fuck Jack Brisco and Dibiase. While I'm at it, Flair is a Parv favorite, I'm dropping him to 94 to offset Parv being Parv." It's one of the reasons I try not to completely reject any style or era out of hand when thinking about a project like this, even if I know there is no way I'll vote for certain people on those grounds. This would be really sad if there was anyone actually voting like that. I guess I'll have to have a look at a few more shoot-style matches if it really does warrant looking at. I have been thinking that I could try to come at it with the mindset that it's no different from WoS or early 70s US/ Japanese work, we'll see. If someone can put together 10 matches in the shoot style that are thought of as ***** classics, I will watch them. That's the equivalent of giving Miles Davis or John Coltrane a fair shake I think. Here's 15, Parv, not necessarily all the best of the best but a good cross section with some pure fun: Fujiwara vs. Super Tiger, UWF 12/5/84 Takada vs. Maeda, UWF 11/10/88 Takada vs. Backlund, UWF 12/22/88 Funaki vs. Nakano, UWF 7/24/89 Fujiwara vs. Yamazaki, UWF 7/24/89 Shamrock vs. Sano, PWFG 5/19/91 Han vs. Vrij, RINGS 8/21/92 Sano vs. Anjoh, UWFI 8/13/93 Albright & Severn vs. Hashimikov & Berkovich, UWFI 12/5/93 (not a 5-star classic but it's a super-heated match w. evil Russians!) Takada vs. Vader, UWFI 8/18/94 Han vs. Tamura, RINGS 1/22/97 Ishikawa vs. Ikeda, BattlARTS 4/15/97 Tamura vs. Kohsaka, RINGS 6/27/98 Tamura vs. Yammamoto, RINGS 9/21/98 Yuki Ishikawa & Alexander Otsuka vs Daisuke Ikeda & Mohammed Yone, BattlARTS 1/12/99 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohtani's jacket Posted November 21, 2014 Report Share Posted November 21, 2014 Parv is going to hate most of those matches. Getting him to watch Tamura vs. Kohsaka is like trying to convince him that A Love Supreme is one of the greatest lps ever recorded. Take my advice, Parv. Watch this match -- http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xb8085_volk-han-vs-yoshihisa-yamamoto-ring_sport If that does nothing for you, nothing will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Childs Posted November 21, 2014 Report Share Posted November 21, 2014 But if he watches those matches and doesn't like any of them, he can safely write off shootstyle. There's a little bit of everything in that mix. Han-Yamamoto is a good pick as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted November 21, 2014 Report Share Posted November 21, 2014 Getting him to watch Tamura vs. Kohsaka is like trying to convince him that A Love Supreme is one of the greatest lps ever recorded. Funny. The other day I was thinking about how for all the talk of "pro-wrestlers used to be like jazz musicians, improvising together" which sounds pretty fishy to me as far as US wrestling goes, the analogy was actually pretty much spot on for shoot-style in its purest form. I said it many times in he past and although I haven't watch this match back in more than ten years, but if I had to take only one match on a desert island, it probably would be Tamura vs Kohsaka (along with a Mariko Yoshida classic too). Shoot style was the greatest form of pro-wrestling ever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badlittlekitten Posted November 21, 2014 Report Share Posted November 21, 2014 I didn't come into this thread (or, well . . any thread) expecting to see a Volk Han/Slint comparison, but there it is! Never change Parv. (Spiderland is awesome.) 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.