Match Psychology

[dawho5]

I've recently gone through 6 discs of Memphis (LOVE IT!) and then popped in a mix comp to keep things fresh. Two MPro matches, a lucha match and an AJPW match later I had a thought that I felt deserved a post. I could very easily view all of these non-Memphis matches as very highspot heavy (especially if you remove the AJPW match) and overly reliant on popping the crowd big. I could also look at them as completely different styles of wrestling in different places with different wrestling philosophies, largely because they are all mid-90s matches, guiding the wrestlers involved. Interstingly enough, mid-90s Japanese style is very similar to modern WWE style if you remove the submissions, selling and seriousness (despite some of the goofy masks in MPro) or the action. And add in neck and head bumps by the truckload.

 

Something that strikes me is the idea that psychology within a wrestling match is all very dependent upon the promotion and year. If a fan had not watched one bit of wrestling between 1985 and jumped into 1995 MPro, would they think there was any kind of internal logic to the match at all? Or would they look at it as a collection of really athletic spots done to pop a crowd? Is this dissimilar to how some of us look at certain wrestling styles that we don't care for? I think there is a tendency to look at wrestling in a more narrow sense at a certain point in wrestling fandom. It's very easy to look at wrestling through the lens of your favorite style and balk at things that don't fit within said style. As you watch more though, the realization comes that there are reasons that somebody who wrestles in a style you dislike is not necessarily doing things the "wrong" way. They are working within a different system than you are used to, one that their fans (hopefully) react to the right way. Very often the fans of these styles have been conditioned to react to these things over time, but that is another discussion.

 

So I wonder if I watched, say, 1995 through 1998 Michinoku Pro in a more complete manner would I see a definite pattern emerge in how the wrestlers used their spots in a match? Would certain spots come with a predetermined meaning that I won't catch based on just one match? Would the order of moves that Taka or Sasuke used to get nearfalls be based on something that was successful in the past? Is a certain dive only used in really big matches because of it's meaning? All of these are questions I was asking myself while watching Taka in a singles match with Sasuke. As well as noting that Sasuke had a brilliant moment where he went to kick a facedown Taka and ended up skimming his back, so he spun with the momentum and went into a front facelock on the mat in one flyuid motion. And the sweet Sasuke roundhouse kick to sliding drop toe hold to single leg combo. Ultimately those things were filler, but well executed filler. Yet another question arises. We all know there is filler in wrestling matches. Each style (and every wrestler within said style) has it's own version of filler. As you watch more wrestling it becomes easier to pick out. But at the same time it becomes a question of how it is executed and how it adds to the story of the match. Which again comes down to the internal logic of the wrestling style you are watching. And those rules tend to change between singles and tag matches. So you have several versions of the internal logic within a certain promotion in any given era of it's existence.

 

My question then is this. How am I (or how is anyone else) qualified, based on the limited amount of footage we will most likely watch from a given promotion, to say that a match is a spotfest or your turn-my-turn? Or a brilliant match within the psychology of said promotion/feud/whatever?

 

I know this is a place where we have some of the most obsessive wrestling fans in the world and I would say that there are people here who have watched more than enough of some promotions to be authorities on the subject and have that understanding of what is happening to say with certainty what was going on. But the majority of us, let's face it, do not have that. Several more questions.

 

The people who are authorities on many promotions do not agree on their interpretations. Does this mean that regardless of how much we've watched, personal preference and sentiment will always blind us to some of the reality?

 

If that is the case, does it matter if we haven't seen enough of a promotion to truly understand it when we look at it? Is it enough to look at the major matches and take what you can from them?

 

Should a match both fit within the internal logic of the promotion and time it comes from and be a story in and of itself that will be understood decades later with no other viewing required?

[Superstar Sleeze]

The point you raise is a very good one I think we all have a home promotion we grew up on that and shaped who we are as wrestling fans. Upon branching out, certain promotions will come naturally to us, some will be acquired tastes and others will never get it. Each promotion, time period and wrestler needs to be treated uniquely on a case by case basis with a close eye to detail. Putting the time in will pay dividends in the long run understanding how different spots mean different thing at certain points of time, to different wrestlers in different promotions. I don't think there is no right way to work a wrestling match just like I don't think there is one right way to work a song. It does not have verses-chorus-werse-solo/breakdown-chorus or shine-heat-comeback-finish.

All that being said I think there are universal themes of good work in my opinion. I am sure there are people that will disagree, but if a wrestling match does not have these elements at a minimum I don't think it can be considered great wrestling. That is a wrestling match with a real sense of struggle. I don't want to watch an athletic exhibition, a gymnastic floor exercise and the absolute worst people that help each other into spots. The next is a real sense of urgency in your movements. That is does not mean a fast pace per se, but a total investment in winning this match and making me believe this is the most important thing in your life right now.

 

I can appreciate a good spotfest and am a mark for comedy wrestling, but struggle and urgency are the key themes are that should transcend all wrestling. These elements make matches and wrestlers timeless, they make wrestler candidates for greatest of all time and promotions red-hot.