Crowd Chants

[W2BTD]

 

 

When did Gulak and Busick work each other in PWG? It looks like they were both in the BOLA but not against each other

 

Tonight.

 

 

It looks like Busick worked Ciampa not Gulak

 

 

Yeah, I saw that later when results came in.

 

During the show, somebody tweeted that "Busick & Gulak were booed in PWG", and that's where myself, BillThompson, and others figured it was against each other.

[BillThompson]

 

 

 

Well, obviously they didn't think it was great. Thatcher got booed at CZW, too. That style is a hard sell, especially at a PWG show.

The BOLA reaction was an anti-CZW thing. The past page and a bit are biased people criticising other people for being biased. Fact of the matter is Thatcher isn't the most charismatic wrestler in the World and you can't control a crowd (with reason) you are a poor professional. If the promotion and person were different people would be talking about how he was EXPOSED.

Like how Tanahashi was exposed v. Mike Bennett?

 

 

Tanahashi didn't get booed out of the building, so I don't understand the comparison.

 

He worked a Mike Bennett match vs Mike Bennett. Everybody groaned when the match was announced because Bennett stinks, and I think we all got the match we thought we would, which was a typical 3-star Mike Bennett nothing match.

 

There is a clear pattern of Thatcher, Gulak, & Busick not doing well in front of certain crowds. It isn't an easy style to adjust to. Many people (myself being one of them) find it extremely boring. It takes a while for new shit to get over sometimes. Maybe this eventually will. Gabe Sapolsky seems think it will. Who knows? Right now, it's over in Beyond Wrestling, which is mostly other wrestlers (I still don't really completely understand what Beyond is, with shows with no fans, "secret" shows, etc or how they make money). It sort of got over at EVOLVE in Florida, but the crowds were more polite than super into what was happening.

 

I think for the style to work, the psychology has to be better. As it is, these guys sort of just chain wrestle, then work holds, and then somebody taps out of nowhere 20 minutes in. If they are working towards these submissions, then it's been lost on me and a lot of other people. Then again, i'm usually so bored that I zone out, so maybe i'm not paying close enough attention, which is entirely possible.

 

 

They don't really need to work towards a definitive finishing hold/move/submission, though they often do. The style those guys are using is based very much on the catch-as-catch can approach of working over your opponents entire body as hard as possible until they are physically worn out and can't answer a three count. I can see why others need/want them to work towards a specific finish, submission, or whatever, but I don't think it's essential and if they did that all the time it would take away from the immediacy of their style.

[Shining Wiz]

 

 

 

Well, obviously they didn't think it was great. Thatcher got booed at CZW, too. That style is a hard sell, especially at a PWG show.

 

The BOLA reaction was an anti-CZW thing. The past page and a bit are biased people criticising other people for being biased. Fact of the matter is Thatcher isn't the most charismatic wrestler in the World and you can't control a crowd (with reason) you are a poor professional. If the promotion and person were different people would be talking about how he was EXPOSED.

Like how Tanahashi was exposed v. Mike Bennett?

Tanahashi didn't get booed out of the building, so I don't understand the comparison.

 

He worked a Mike Bennett match vs Mike Bennett. Everybody groaned when the match was announced because Bennett stinks, and I think we all got the match we thought we would, which was a typical 3-star Mike Bennett nothing match.

 

There is a clear pattern of Thatcher, Gulak, & Busick not doing well in front of certain crowds. It isn't an easy style to adjust to. Many people (myself being one of them) find it extremely boring. It takes a while for new shit to get over sometimes. Maybe this eventually will. Gabe Sapolsky seems think it will. Who knows? Right now, it's over in Beyond Wrestling, which is mostly other wrestlers (I still don't really completely understand what Beyond is, with shows with no fans, "secret" shows, etc or how they make money). It sort of got over at EVOLVE in Florida, but the crowds were more polite than super into what was happening.

 

I think for the style to work, the psychology has to be better. As it is, these guys sort of just chain wrestle, then work holds, and then somebody taps out of nowhere 20 minutes in. If they are working towards these submissions, then it's been lost on me and a lot of other people. Then again, i'm usually so bored that I zone out, so maybe i'm not paying close enough attention, which is entirely possible.

They seem to be making the mistake of thinking that when people say that they want their wrestling to 'realistic', they actually mean really realistic, not "realistic within the bounds of pro wrestling which in order to be good kind of needs some not really real drama thrown in". That's why subs out of nowhere - which happen all the time in grappling- are kind of a dumb thing to do all the time in pro wrestling matches.

 

Though, they fail on their "realistic" attempts on any scale, since they end up doing 3/4 speed flow roles with some European uppercuts thrown in for flavour.

[W2BTD]

 

 

 

 

Well, obviously they didn't think it was great. Thatcher got booed at CZW, too. That style is a hard sell, especially at a PWG show.

The BOLA reaction was an anti-CZW thing. The past page and a bit are biased people criticising other people for being biased. Fact of the matter is Thatcher isn't the most charismatic wrestler in the World and you can't control a crowd (with reason) you are a poor professional. If the promotion and person were different people would be talking about how he was EXPOSED.

Like how Tanahashi was exposed v. Mike Bennett?

Tanahashi didn't get booed out of the building, so I don't understand the comparison.

 

He worked a Mike Bennett match vs Mike Bennett. Everybody groaned when the match was announced because Bennett stinks, and I think we all got the match we thought we would, which was a typical 3-star Mike Bennett nothing match.

 

There is a clear pattern of Thatcher, Gulak, & Busick not doing well in front of certain crowds. It isn't an easy style to adjust to. Many people (myself being one of them) find it extremely boring. It takes a while for new shit to get over sometimes. Maybe this eventually will. Gabe Sapolsky seems think it will. Who knows? Right now, it's over in Beyond Wrestling, which is mostly other wrestlers (I still don't really completely understand what Beyond is, with shows with no fans, "secret" shows, etc or how they make money). It sort of got over at EVOLVE in Florida, but the crowds were more polite than super into what was happening.

 

I think for the style to work, the psychology has to be better. As it is, these guys sort of just chain wrestle, then work holds, and then somebody taps out of nowhere 20 minutes in. If they are working towards these submissions, then it's been lost on me and a lot of other people. Then again, i'm usually so bored that I zone out, so maybe i'm not paying close enough attention, which is entirely possible.

They seem to be making the mistake of thinking that when people say that they want their wrestling to 'realistic', they actually mean really realistic, not "realistic within the bounds of pro wrestling which in order to be good kind of needs some not really real drama thrown in". That's why subs out of nowhere - which happen all the time in grappling- are kind of a dumb thing to do all the time in pro wrestling matches.

 

Though, they fail on their "realistic" attempts on any scale, since they end up doing 3/4 speed flow roles with some European uppercuts thrown in for flavour.

 

 

These are good points. Personally, I don't get the appeal of simulated grappling, and find it dry. I'm not saying it can't get eventually get over, but i'm someone who has put in a genuine effort and it just doesn't work for me.

 

The other problem is there seems to be a limited amount of people who can do it. It's always the same three guys. We've seen Sabre, Hero, & James Raideen in the mix, but Raideen got mostly bad reviews for the EVOLVE matches (I actually like his the best, which makes sense since they contained the least amount of grappling and were the furthest from the style), and I've seen tons of Zack Sabre Jr and I just don't see how he's like somebody like Thatcher at all. Maybe i'm watching the wrong ZSJ matches, idk.

 

I'm sure other people will come out of the woodwork, but how many times can people watch the same three guys wrestle each other? Who else is doing this style beneath the radar that i'm not aware of?

[BillThompson]

 

 

 

 

 

Well, obviously they didn't think it was great. Thatcher got booed at CZW, too. That style is a hard sell, especially at a PWG show.

The BOLA reaction was an anti-CZW thing. The past page and a bit are biased people criticising other people for being biased. Fact of the matter is Thatcher isn't the most charismatic wrestler in the World and you can't control a crowd (with reason) you are a poor professional. If the promotion and person were different people would be talking about how he was EXPOSED.

Like how Tanahashi was exposed v. Mike Bennett?

Tanahashi didn't get booed out of the building, so I don't understand the comparison.

 

He worked a Mike Bennett match vs Mike Bennett. Everybody groaned when the match was announced because Bennett stinks, and I think we all got the match we thought we would, which was a typical 3-star Mike Bennett nothing match.

 

There is a clear pattern of Thatcher, Gulak, & Busick not doing well in front of certain crowds. It isn't an easy style to adjust to. Many people (myself being one of them) find it extremely boring. It takes a while for new shit to get over sometimes. Maybe this eventually will. Gabe Sapolsky seems think it will. Who knows? Right now, it's over in Beyond Wrestling, which is mostly other wrestlers (I still don't really completely understand what Beyond is, with shows with no fans, "secret" shows, etc or how they make money). It sort of got over at EVOLVE in Florida, but the crowds were more polite than super into what was happening.

 

I think for the style to work, the psychology has to be better. As it is, these guys sort of just chain wrestle, then work holds, and then somebody taps out of nowhere 20 minutes in. If they are working towards these submissions, then it's been lost on me and a lot of other people. Then again, i'm usually so bored that I zone out, so maybe i'm not paying close enough attention, which is entirely possible.

They seem to be making the mistake of thinking that when people say that they want their wrestling to 'realistic', they actually mean really realistic, not "realistic within the bounds of pro wrestling which in order to be good kind of needs some not really real drama thrown in". That's why subs out of nowhere - which happen all the time in grappling- are kind of a dumb thing to do all the time in pro wrestling matches.

 

Though, they fail on their "realistic" attempts on any scale, since they end up doing 3/4 speed flow roles with some European uppercuts thrown in for flavour.

 

 

These are good points. Personally, I don't get the appeal of simulated grappling, and find it dry. I'm not saying it can't get eventually get over, but i'm someone who has put in a genuine effort and it just doesn't work for me.

 

The other problem is there seems to be a limited amount of people who can do it. It's always the same three guys. We've seen Sabre, Hero, & James Raideen in the mix, but Raideen got mostly bad reviews for the EVOLVE matches (I actually like his the best, which makes sense since they contained the least amount of grappling and were the furthest from the style), and I've seen tons of Zack Sabre Jr and I just don't see how he's like somebody like Thatcher at all. Maybe i'm watching the wrong ZSJ matches, idk.

 

I'm sure other people will come out of the woodwork, but how many times can people watch the same three guys wrestle each other? Who else is doing this style beneath the radar that i'm not aware of?

 

There are a few other European guys, one I've heard a lot about is Jack Gallagher. I'm okay with others not liking their style, that's part of the subjective nature of wrestling. Can't say I agree with your points though Wiz, as I highly enjoy realistic wrestling and have greatly enjoyed what Thatcher/Busick/Gulak/a few others have been doing with a more realistic style. For my money Thatcher is the best wrestler in the world right now, and it's not even close. Obviously not everyone will agree with that, and that's fine. But for what I look for in pro wrestling those guys deliver it match after match and it makes me very happy.

[Shining Wiz]

More power to you if you've found something to enjoy.

 

My problem stems from their 'realism' only accentuating how unreal what they are doing is. We all know real fights don't look much like a pro wrestling match, so when you attempt to bring in more realistic combat sport aspects into pro wrestling, it often only serves to further point out that a pro wrestling match isn't a real fight. Ergo, realism isn't realistic.

[BillThompson]

More power to you if you've found something to enjoy.

 

My problem stems from their 'realism' only accentuating how unreal what they are doing is. We all know real fights don't look much like a pro wrestling match, so when you attempt to bring in more realistic combat sport aspects into pro wrestling, it often only serves to further point out that a pro wrestling match isn't a real fight. Ergo, realism isn't realistic.

 

I disagree, as I think pro wrestling can be made to look very real. Pro wrestling involves an inherent suspension of disbelief, and part of that is understanding that what the guys are doing is a cooperative wrestling match. That doesn't mean however that they can't make the match look real, or at least real within the context of a pro wrestling match. I've spent most of life in "real" fighting, and I've never much understood the aversion some people have to pro wrestling that is more realistic. I mean, I get the subjective nature of something not being for someone, but most of the complaints levied against a more realistic style don't ring true to me.

[Shining Wiz]

When I watch a Thatcher match, they make it so painfully obvious when they are avoiding putting actual pressure on a hold, or are opening up a reversal, that it takes all enjoyment out of watching them.

 

To me, your key words are 'in the context of a pro wrestling match' . I couldn't agree more....if they do it in that context. Taking a flow rolll from a blue belt open mat and putting it in a wrestling ring doesn't add that context for me.

 

Someone like Bryan Danielson was able to work aspects of bjj and catch wrestling seamlessly into the pro wrestling context. I find someone like him, or Cesaro, Sheamus, Samoa Joe, and any number of others more 'realistic' than I do a Thatcher, et al.

[BillThompson]

When I watch a Thatcher match, they make it so painfully obvious when they are avoiding putting actual pressure on a hold, or are opening up a reversal, that it takes all enjoyment out of watching them.

 

This is where we mainly disagree, because I don't see this at all. I see them, and mainly Thatcher, applying as much pressure as possible and really wrenching in their holds. Everything is snug as can be and they make their opponent visually work for reversals and counters.

[PhilTLL]

Sorry if I'm retreading here, but:

 

I've seen some people cite rock concerts and sporting events as having similar chants. With very little exception, the chants I've heard at sports and concerts are for the people and teams involved, not the action itself or the activity as a concept. It would turn me off immensely if the chants at Springsteen concerts went from "BRUUUUUUUUUUCE!" to "GREAT GUITAR RIFF! (five-clap)". Likewise at, say, baseball games, even the Yankee Bleacher Creatures mostly limit themselves to player names, and not "BASEBALL'S AWESOME (five-clap)" or "THANKS FOR HITTING (five-clap)". It's symptomatic of the audience thinking that the performers and fellow viewers want to hear their ongoing commentary instead of their adoration and encouragement. That sort of chanting is the only kind I really hate, the constant and verbose nonsense. And that's not an old fart thing, territory crowds chanted for guys all the time. They just didn't chant for much else.

 

What makes "This is awesome" different from simply cheering for a great performance is that added element of "We are discriminating fans and extend our recognition to you." It's just...douchey. On a similar note, maybe I unfairly associate the constant and verbose chanting with how my high school used to act at basketball games, where the only people who didn't hate us were us, ha.

[ohtani's jacket]

They're trying to have as reaistic a pro-wrestling match as possible not as realistic a fight as possible.

[Sean Liska]

When a UFC crowd doesn't come into a fight emotionally invested in the outcome, but give two guys a standing ovation at the end of a round because the action was so exciting, is there something wrong with them as an audience? That's the best comparison I can come up with for a real sports "this is awesome" chant. They're cheering for the action but don't care who wins.

[Shining Wiz]

They're trying to have as reaistic a pro-wrestling match as possible not as realistic a fight as possible.

 

I find Daniel Bryan or any number of others to produce more realistic looking pro wrestling matches than they do. I find a punch from Goldust more realistic looking than Thatcher's grappling.

 

I literally just spent two hours on the mats watching far more realistic grappling.

[goc]

When a UFC crowd doesn't come into a fight emotionally invested in the outcome, but give two guys a standing ovation at the end of a round because the action was so exciting, is there something wrong with them as an audience? That's the best comparison I can come up with for a real sports "this is awesome" chant. They're cheering for the action but don't care who wins.

There's no reason a wrestling crowd can't give a standing ovation instead of a "This is Awesome" chant except giving the standing ovation might make them marks whereas the chant let's everyone know how smart & discerning they are.

[jackwebb]

I remember going to Nitros live where the ring announcer would hype up the crowd by telling them they could be on TV. We could probably trace a lot of this back to the time when promoters stopped dimming the house lights.

I complain about this one a lot. I just hate how fans are a part of the show now. Plus you have the obvious plants in the audience for reaction shots. Signs everywhere which is no fun for people sitting behind them. Don't think it adds anything. Wish they would dim those lights and start turning down the volume when the chants start. Might be past the point of no return now considering how often people complain now if the crowd isn't lively enough for their taste when watching the show.

[Sean Liska]

 

When a UFC crowd doesn't come into a fight emotionally invested in the outcome, but give two guys a standing ovation at the end of a round because the action was so exciting, is there something wrong with them as an audience? That's the best comparison I can come up with for a real sports "this is awesome" chant. They're cheering for the action but don't care who wins.

There's no reason a wrestling crowd can't give a standing ovation instead of a "This is Awesome" chant except giving the standing ovation might make them marks whereas the chant let's everyone know how smart & discerning they are.

 

It's not really uncommon to see a standing ovation accompanying a "This is Awesome" chant.

[ohtani's jacket]

 

They're trying to have as reaistic a pro-wrestling match as possible not as realistic a fight as possible.

 

I find Daniel Bryan or any number of others to produce more realistic looking pro wrestling matches than they do. I find a punch from Goldust more realistic looking than Thatcher's grappling.

 

I literally just spent two hours on the mats watching far more realistic grappling.

The most realistic looking pro-wrestling bouts historically have been catch-as-catch bouts. No matter what sport you train in that remains true.

[Shining Wiz]

 

 

They're trying to have as reaistic a pro-wrestling match as possible not as realistic a fight as possible.

I find Daniel Bryan or any number of others to produce more realistic looking pro wrestling matches than they do. I find a punch from Goldust more realistic looking than Thatcher's grappling.

I literally just spent two hours on the mats watching far more realistic grappling.

The most realistic looking pro-wrestling bouts historically have been catch-as-catch bouts. No matter what sport you train in that remains true.

The problem with taking real submissions and actual grappling and applying them to a pro wrestling match is that you can't really put on the move with any sort of conviction......because if you did, that would be the end the match. So while you might find those more realistic, I find them more obviously not.

 

It's why I hate moves like arm bars in pro wrestling. If you lock in an armbar properly, the other guy taps. In pro wrestling though, a guy can survive an armbar for two minutes and make a comeback. It makes a match look silly and (more) noticeably a work.

 

When I watch Thatcher or the others in these 'realistic' matches, I see bad positioning and misapplied subs. And this is because they have to do that in order to let the other counter and survive.

 

And beyond that, those matches are the grappling version of a match filled with pointless flippitydoos. Move, move, reverse, reverse, strike, strike, move, move, random finish that wasn't built up to at all.

 

Finally, as Joe alluded to above, real grappling is boring as shit. Seriously. YouTube "most exciting jiu jitsu match" and see for yourself. That's why pro wrestling is worked in the first place....make it more exciting, not more realistic.

[BillThompson]

 

 

 

They're trying to have as reaistic a pro-wrestling match as possible not as realistic a fight as possible.

I find Daniel Bryan or any number of others to produce more realistic looking pro wrestling matches than they do. I find a punch from Goldust more realistic looking than Thatcher's grappling.

I literally just spent two hours on the mats watching far more realistic grappling.

The most realistic looking pro-wrestling bouts historically have been catch-as-catch bouts. No matter what sport you train in that remains true.

The problem with taking real submissions and actual grappling and applying them to a pro wrestling match is that you can't really put on the move with any sort of conviction......because if you did, that would be the end the match. So while you might find those more realistic, I find them more obviously not.

 

It's why I hate moves like arm bars in pro wrestling. If you lock in an armbar properly, the other guy taps. In pro wrestling though, a guy can survive an armbar for two minutes and make a comeback. It makes a match look silly and (more) noticeably a work.

 

When I watch Thatcher or the others in these 'realistic' matches, I see bad positioning and misapplied subs. And this is because they have to do that in order to let the other counter and survive.

 

And beyond that, those matches are the grappling version of a match filled with pointless flippitydoos. Move, move, reverse, reverse, strike, strike, move, move, random finish that wasn't built up to at all.

 

Finally, as Joe alluded to above, real grappling is boring as shit. Seriously. YouTube "most exciting jiu jitsu match" and see for yourself. That's why pro wrestling is worked in the first place....make it more exciting, not more realistic.

 

 

You're asking for MMA, but pro wrestling isn't MMA. Real in pro wrestling isn't the same as real in a fight. We rave about the punches of Jerry Lawler, but if one wanted to they could easily say, "the problem with Jerry Lawler's punches is that they should knock a guy out, but they are thrown the wrong way and they don't." Looking at pro wrestling through real fight/MMA eyes is a lose lose situation, because pro wrestling is about looking and feeling realistic, not being realistic.

 

As for the random finishes, that's a simple lack of understanding of the catch-as-catch style. The finish isn't random, it's a wrestling move, and thus from the beginning of the match until the end the finish can be any move because the style makes it where any move at any time could finish the match. Truth be told I enjoy that more than the "here's a bunch of moves, but don't worry none of them matter or should be taken seriously until I hit my signature finisher."

 

Lastly, grappling most certainly isn't boring as shit. I watch the nationals, world cup, NCAA championships, go to local NAGA competitions and I enjoy myself. Grappling is a wonderful and exciting thing, both in real combat sports and in pro wrestling. There can most certainly be bad grappling, and there can be grappling that isn't exciting within the context of that specific match. But, grappling as a general concept is exciting as all get out and I'd much rather watch tremendous grappling than tremendous flippy-floppy every day of the week.

[JerryvonKramer]

All this "realism" talk is entirely misplaced, because wrestling creates its own reality and and its own internal logic.

 

Who gives a shit what an armbar would do in real life? In wrestling we understand how an armbar functions and what it is meant to achieve.

[NintendoLogic]

Let's say somebody like Ric Flair or (we are on PWO after all) Jerry Lawler were confronted with a crowd reacting with something unwanted during a match during the 80s or 70s respectively. Do they play into said reaction and continually do so, allowing the crowd to condition them? Or do they find a way to get the crowd to do what they want?

 

Nick Bockwinkel had his own way of dealing with the "boring" chants that started to appear in the 80s. If he was getting them, he'd lock in a chinlock and show them what boring really looked like. He felt that if he sped up because of fan chants, he was letting the fans call the match, and that was supposed to be his job.

 

Oh, and fuck realism in wrestling. Real fights are boring. Wrestling is great precisely because it's fake.

[BillThompson]

All this "realism" talk is entirely misplaced, because wrestling creates its own reality and and its own internal logic.

 

Who gives a shit what an armbar would do in real life? In wrestling we understand how an armbar functions and what it is meant to achieve.

 

This is a more concise, and better way, of stating my point.

[Shining Wiz]

All this "realism" talk is entirely misplaced, because wrestling creates its own reality and and its own internal logic.Who gives a shit what an armbar would do in real life? In wrestling we understand how an armbar functions and what it is meant to achieve.

My point being when you start making references outside that carefully constructed world, you run into problems.

 

 

 

 

 

They're trying to have as reaistic a pro-wrestling match as possible not as realistic a fight as possible.

 

I find Daniel Bryan or any number of others to produce more realistic looking pro wrestling matches than they do. I find a punch from Goldust more realistic looking than Thatcher's grappling.

I literally just spent two hours on the mats watching far more realistic grappling.

The most realistic looking pro-wrestling bouts historically have been catch-as-catch bouts. No matter what sport you train in that remains true.

The problem with taking real submissions and actual grappling and applying them to a pro wrestling match is that you can't really put on the move with any sort of conviction......because if you did, that would be the end the match. So while you might find those more realistic, I find them more obviously not.

It's why I hate moves like arm bars in pro wrestling. If you lock in an armbar properly, the other guy taps. In pro wrestling though, a guy can survive an armbar for two minutes and make a comeback. It makes a match look silly and (more) noticeably a work.

When I watch Thatcher or the others in these 'realistic' matches, I see bad positioning and misapplied subs. And this is because they have to do that in order to let the other counter and survive.

And beyond that, those matches are the grappling version of a match filled with pointless flippitydoos. Move, move, reverse, reverse, strike, strike, move, move, random finish that wasn't built up to at all.

Finally, as Joe alluded to above, real grappling is boring as shit. Seriously. YouTube "most exciting jiu jitsu match" and see for yourself. That's why pro wrestling is worked in the first place....make it more exciting, not more realistic.

You're asking for MMA, but pro wrestling isn't MMA. Real in pro wrestling isn't the same as real in a fight. We rave about the punches of Jerry Lawler, but if one wanted to they could easily say, "the problem with Jerry Lawler's punches is that they should knock a guy out, but they are thrown the wrong way and they don't." Looking at pro wrestling through real fight/MMA eyes is a lose lose situation, because pro wrestling is about looking and feeling realistic, not being realistic.

 

As for the random finishes, that's a simple lack of understanding of the catch-as-catch style. The finish isn't random, it's a wrestling move, and thus from the beginning of the match until the end the finish can be any move because the style makes it where any move at any time could finish the match. Truth be told I enjoy that more than the "here's a bunch of moves, but don't worry none of them matter or should be taken seriously until I hit my signature finisher."

 

Lastly, grappling most certainly isn't boring as shit. I watch the nationals, world cup, NCAA championships, go to local NAGA competitions and I enjoy myself. Grappling is a wonderful and exciting thing, both in real combat sports and in pro wrestling. There can most certainly be bad grappling, and there can be grappling that isn't exciting within the context of that specific match. But, grappling as a general concept is exciting as all get out and I'd much rather watch tremendous grappling than tremendous flippy-floppy every day of the week.

I'm asking for the opposite of mma. I'm asking for pro wrestling.

 

Lawler's punches LOOK real, outcome be damned. Thatcher, Busick and the rest look like they're having a warm up roll except for the grimaces on their faces.

 

And I completely understand catch as catch can, but when your match is move, move, move, move, finish unrelated to previous moves, how is that conceptually different to flip, flip, dive, flip, finish unrelated to previous flips? I like my matches to have an internal story leading to a finish which is a satisfying conclusion to that story. I couldn't care less about someone using a 'finisher' or not, so long as the ending relates to what I watched before it.

 

We'll have to agree to disagree regarding grappling as a spectator sport. I'm a grappler, but I find it generally boring as all hell to watch.

[ohtani's jacket]

Finally, as Joe alluded to above, real grappling is boring as shit. Seriously. YouTube "most exciting jiu jitsu match" and see for yourself. That's why pro wrestling is worked in the first place....make it more exciting, not more realistic.

First you said worked grappling wasn't realistic enough then you said real grappling is boring as shit. I take that to mean that you don't like worked grappling regardless of how realistic it is. But doesn't that mean you should dislike everything from Verne Gagne vs Thesz through to this Thatcher stuff? Any time anybody works a hold in wrestling they're misapplying it.

[ohtani's jacket]

 

Oh, and fuck realism in wrestling. Real fights are boring. Wrestling is great precisely because it's fake.

Except for all those real fights that were exciting as shit.