Best Babyface Ever?

[Grimmas]

On the last Pro-Wrestling Super Show and the upcoming Excite Series we talked greatest babyface ever. I like Rick Martel, but there are others like Ricky Steamboat, Tito Santana, Rey Mysterio and Kenta Kobashi who are right there too.

 

Two questions, which is the best babyface of all-time and secondly where do they rank next to the other great babyfaces?

 

Parv made the point that Martel might be the better babyface, but Steamboat will be ranked ahead of him.

 

What do you folks think?

[Matt D]

The issue with Steamboat vs Martel is that Martel's heel work drags him down, no? On topic, I would think Hijo del Santo would have to be considered on a best babyface list.

[Grimmas]

The issue with Steamboat vs Martel is that Martel's heel work drags him down, no?

I would think more the Flair series of matches propping Steamboat.

 

Martel was just ill-fated as a heel. I'm not holding that against him, but I am not sure if others are. Rey as a heel sucked too. We never really got Steamboat or Tito as heels. I don't know if I want to use bad booking as a case against somebody.

[Matt D]

The difference with Martel, relative to Rey is that we have years of Martel's heel work on tape. It was in his mid 30s which is when most wrestlers are at their best. We have a bunch of matches against a number of opponents of all stripes, both TV and arena. We have long matches, short matches, tag matches, matches in Japan (see below), matches against great wrestlers, matches against terrible wrestlers, matches in well remembered feuds, matches in embarrassing feuds. Rey was a heel for a very short period of time. Also, it's not just the fact Martel was in the WWF because he has a number of strong matches as a babyface there.

 

I don't know. I think it's very hard to outright dismiss Martel's heel work. It's not like he didn't get the opportunities. I get dismissing late era Flair. This is much harder to me.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akHUSxbqk6s

[Grimmas]

The problem is, he is not a heel. No matter how many opportunities he got, he was not a heel. It's horrible booking. Martel was great as a babyface from the late 70's till he turned heel in 89. That is a ten year run as a great worker. Then he turns heel, is ok until he gets a second babyface run in 98 where he is awesome again until his career ending. There is no point where Martel is not awesome as a babyface. It's just shitty booking that made that part of his career just ok. I find it hard to punish Martel for that.

 

As for Flair, I'm not going to say he sucks because he was the worst wrestler in the world in 2005. He's old and broken down.

 

Now I will not use this stuff as a negative, but I am more than ok to use the fact Lawler, Funk, etc.. were great with horrible booking or being old as positives for them.

[El-P]

It's just shitty booking that made that part of his career just ok.

 

Actually, Martel said before that his heart wasn't totally into wrestling anymore at this point, as he was going into real estate and making good money at it, which is why Vince never pushed the Model gimmick really hard. So, shitty booking I wouldn't say so. FWIW, I loved Martel as the Model. No great matches, but the gimmick was gold and Martel was excellent at it.

[Matt D]

This is interesting. You're arguing reverse hypotheticals.

 

1.) We have a lot of proof that Martel, in his prime, was a mediocre heel. (I wouldn't say bad)

2.) We have no proof how Steamboat or Santana would be as heels.

3.) There are a multitude of wrestlers who were good at being heel and being face because understanding one helps in understanding the other and wrestling is wrestling and the talents are not mutually exclusive (though some are).

 

We've had points here where people argue "well, if wrestler x just had the opportunity to do y, then..." What you're saying is that we shouldn't hold what Martel did with his opportunity against him, relative to other similar workers, because they never had the opportunity to do the same thing, which is something that I think no one's argued about anyone up til this point.

[Grimmas]

This is interesting. You're arguing reverse hypotheticals.

 

1.) We have a lot of proof that Martel, in his prime, was a mediocre heel. (I wouldn't say bad)

2.) We have no proof how Steamboat or Santana would be as heels.

3.) There are a multitude of wrestlers who were good at being heel and being face because understanding one helps in understanding the other and wrestling is wrestling and the talents are not mutually exclusive (though some are).

 

We've had points here where people argue "well, if wrestler x just had the opportunity to do y, then..." What you're saying is that we shouldn't hold what Martel did with his opportunity against him, relative to other similar workers, because they never had the opportunity to do the same thing, which is something that I think no one's argued about anyone up til this point.

I'm all about innovation.

 

I don't really want to hold bad booking against anyone if i can avoid it.

[Matt D]

That is just a really, really broad way of looking at "bad booking."

 

To me bad booking is more along the lines of "you have to wrestle El Gigante for 30 seconds every night." or "you will be in a tequila bottle on a pole match with sixteen people interfering" or "you will be in a TNA main event." That's bad booking, not necessarily "You, finely skilled and very experienced wrestler, are now a heel. Go wrestle Bret Hart for twenty minutes on Prime Time Wrestling."

 

That's more on you than on the booker, no?

[Grimmas]

That is just a really, really broad way of looking at "bad booking."

 

To me bad booking is more along the lines of "you have to wrestle El Gigante for 30 seconds every night." or "you will be in a tequila bottle on a pole match with sixteen people interfering" or "you will be in a TNA main event." That's bad booking, not necessarily "You, finely skilled and very experienced wrestler, are now a heel. Go wrestle Bret Hart for twenty minutes on Prime Time Wrestling."

 

That's more on you than on the booker, no?

Not when the person is a naturally awesome babyface. Sure maybe try it, but after it didn't work sticking with it for 5 years is horrible booking.

[Matt D]

Alright, but why didn't it work? I don't think the answer is "Fans just didn't want to boo Goldberg/Austin." Fans liked booing Martel. He played his character well in promos. He came off as arrogant and haughty and did despicable things and got real heat in those settings.

 

So then, why didn't it work? And that, to me, goes back to failings that Martel had as a wrestler. Maybe. And I say that because some of it might have been stylistic WWF issues. To agree to that, though, then you'd have to sort of figure that no mid-card technical heels of his era were good at doing the things that he did not do well due to limitations imposed upon them by Vince and road agents, and that's a much bigger argument.

 

To me the big question isn't "was it good booking or not?" but "why didn't it work?" and "He was a natural babyface" doesn't cut it, because other natural babyfaces have become strong heels given similar opportunities. What was Martel lacking and what does that mean about him as a total wrestler?

[Loss]

I don't think he's the best, but Kikuchi is a good guy to think about in this discussion. Jack Brisco should also be talked about.

[El-P]

What was Martel lacking and what does that mean about him as a total wrestler?

 

Again, Rick Martel has said himself that his heart wasn't into it. That sounds like a pretty reasonnable reason to me. Actually that's why he came back in the late 90's, to end his career on a high note as he was motivated again by then.

[El-P]

And the answers to the question are : Ricky Morton & Chigusa Nagayo.

[Matt D]

 

 

What was Martel lacking and what does that mean about him as a total wrestler?

Again, Rick Martel has said himself that his heart wasn't into it. That sounds like a pretty reasonnable reason to me. Actually that's why he came back in the late 90's, to end his career on a high note as he was motivated again by then.

My impression is that was more about 92-93. But I don't like that as an argument in general.

[Grimmas]

My argument is that Martel is so great at selling, gaining sympathy, fiery comebacks, flashy offense, making everything look cool and his look that as a total package he trumps everyone else. He has the great matches to boot.

Martel is the perfect babyface. Yes he had a run where he was just ok, where he was a heel. All of those great things do not translate well as a heel.

 

Here is the thing with comparing him to Steamboat. Line for line, he was a better babyface. Since Steamboat was never a heel, by default Martel was a better heel too.

I'm really thinking I am putting Martel above Steamboat. Of course nothing is final, but at this moment Martel is the top babyface for me.

 

On the contrary to that I don't know how I could put Martel above Kobashi or Mysterio, so I may need to do some rethinking here.

[El-P]

The two things Martel had over Steamboat to me, which are more Steamboat criticims than anything else :

 

_although Steamboat is obviously an all-time great, at times, his über-registration of shots could get a little bit goofy if you're not in the right mood

_those kinda shitty looking open hands "karate" chops are the kind of things you end up accepting because they're just part of Steamboat (like you accept Tenryu's enzuigiris), but if you're truly objective, they don't look very convincing at all, nor even good, actually

 

Martel over Steamboat doesn't shock me at all at this point, unless you'e going for the… *gasp*.. Great Mat… ok, see where I'l going.

[Matt D]

My argument is that Martel is so great at selling, gaining sympathy, fiery comebacks, flashy offense, making everything look cool and his look that as a total package he trumps everyone else. He has the great matches to boot.

 

Martel is the perfect babyface. Yes he had a run where he was just ok, where he was a heel. All of those great things do not translate well as a heel.

 

Here is the thing with comparing him to Steamboat. Line for line, he was a better babyface. Since Steamboat was never a heel, by default Martel was a better heel too.

 

I'm really thinking I am putting Martel above Steamboat. Of course nothing is final, but at this moment Martel is the top babyface for me.

 

On the contrary to that I don't know how I could put Martel above Kobashi or Mysterio, so I may need to do some rethinking here.

 

There's a lot going on here.

 

Let me ask a few questions, the first of which may have been covered before.

 

What makes for a good heel then?

 

What about Tito Santana, someone who lived and breathed his shine-heat-comeback structure, who can talk about it very distinctly now and the reasons behind it, who was frustrated when facing heels who wanted to wrestle him evenly in the shine and not cheat to take the advantage to start the heat. Wouldn't he understand his role so well on the other side of the coin? Do we have reason to believe that?

 

Also, I still want to know what elements of Martel's work as a heel weren't up to snuff, the specifics? I think it's worth looking at with that in mind. That's different than saying "He did these things well. Those things were not important as a heel." I want to know what he DIDN'T do well as a heel.

 

I'm not at all against Martel being considered a better babyface than Steamboat either, btw. You've just raised general process points that are interesting to me.

[DR Ackermann]

I've seen at least one match from 1990 AJPW with Tito playing heel and I remember thinking that he was pretty good at it.

[Matt D]

Any idea what the match is? I'd want to see that. So far as weird matches go, there's the match vs Koko where Koko plays heel.

 

[Grimmas]

 

My argument is that Martel is so great at selling, gaining sympathy, fiery comebacks, flashy offense, making everything look cool and his look that as a total package he trumps everyone else. He has the great matches to boot.

 

Martel is the perfect babyface. Yes he had a run where he was just ok, where he was a heel. All of those great things do not translate well as a heel.

 

Here is the thing with comparing him to Steamboat. Line for line, he was a better babyface. Since Steamboat was never a heel, by default Martel was a better heel too.

 

I'm really thinking I am putting Martel above Steamboat. Of course nothing is final, but at this moment Martel is the top babyface for me.

 

On the contrary to that I don't know how I could put Martel above Kobashi or Mysterio, so I may need to do some rethinking here.

 

There's a lot going on here.

 

Let me ask a few questions, the first of which may have been covered before.

 

What makes for a good heel then?

 

What about Tito Santana, someone who lived and breathed his shine-heat-comeback structure, who can talk about it very distinctly now and the reasons behind it, who was frustrated when facing heels who wanted to wrestle him evenly in the shine and not cheat to take the advantage to start the heat. Wouldn't he understand his role so well on the other side of the coin? Do we have reason to believe that?

 

Also, I still want to know what elements of Martel's work as a heel weren't up to snuff, the specifics? I think it's worth looking at with that in mind. That's different than saying "He did these things well. Those things were not important as a heel." I want to know what he DIDN'T do well as a heel.

 

I'm not at all against Martel being considered a better babyface than Steamboat either, btw. You've just raised general process points that are interesting to me.

 

Tito is great for sure as a babyface. Never being a heel does not hurt or help him. He may had been a great heel, but we don't have that. We know he's a great face and he will do well on my list.

 

I haven't watched much Martel as a heel in a while. I don't remember seeing very good matches. I think part of Martel's problems as a heel stem from not having the right offense? I don't know, I would need to watch more. Has anybody watched Model era stuff in a while and can point out why he was so much worse as a heel than a face?

[DR Ackermann]

It was Masa Fuchi & Kenta Kobashi vs Santana & Snuka from the WWF/AJPW Wrestling Summit in April. I know it aired on the 4/22 episode of AJPW TV. Actually I just found it.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YC75b4P_a3g

[Loss]

Morton credits Ken Lucas for teaching him how to be a babyface. I wish we had more Ken Lucas on tape.

[Matt D]

Morton credits Ken Lucas for teaching him how to be a babyface. I wish we had more Ken Lucas on tape.

 

Something like 19 matches in Houston around 1982, so hey, we might get a few.

 

Gino/Tully vs Morton/Lucas for instance.

[Goodear]

Alright, but why didn't it work? I don't think the answer is "Fans just didn't want to boo Goldberg/Austin." Fans liked booing Martel. He played his character well in promos. He came off as arrogant and haughty and did despicable things and got real heat in those settings.

 

So then, why didn't it work? And that, to me, goes back to failings that Martel had as a wrestler. Maybe. And I say that because some of it might have been stylistic WWF issues. To agree to that, though, then you'd have to sort of figure that no mid-card technical heels of his era were good at doing the things that he did not do well due to limitations imposed upon them by Vince and road agents, and that's a much bigger argument.

 

The short, short answer is stooging or the lack thereof but it doesn't really belong in the Best Babyface discussion thread. I'll move my comments to his GWE thread.