What are we voting on?

[Grimmas]

I think I will adjust on a graded scale. So no promos forJapanese guys but everything else is worth more points.

As long as nobody is voting for people that there is no footage of, I am ok.

 

Question, does that mean that Onita is going to be number one? If he gets bonus points, plus is one of the greatest promos ever?

[JerryvonKramer]

If you include promos the question of number one becomes pretty clear cut doesn't it?

 

I've considered only in ring, criteria laid out in the BIGLAV thread.

[Grimmas]

If you include promos the question of number one becomes pretty clear cut doesn't it?

 

I've considered only in ring, criteria laid out in the BIGLAV thread.

Clear? Terry Funk and Jerry Lawler would still be in quite the battle.

[thebrainfollower]

That's a good question about Onita and worth thinking about. And no I won't vote for guys there is little to nothing of. I think putting Londos in a most famous or successful top 100 list is a lock as is top 10 but the fact that there is nothing of him makes it impossible for a list like this.

 

I don't think Flair's the best promo guy ever honestly Jerry.

[JerryvonKramer]

Fair enough

[thebrainfollower]

Top 5 though but I have never heard one that affected me as much as the best Bruno one or Hard times to be honest.

[JerryvonKramer]

I guess my point is that there's only really one guy who is in the conversation for top 5 worker, top 5 promo, etc. Who was also a top draw.

 

Like Flair is in there with Dusty, Rock, Austin, etc, he's there in the worker conversation and he's there among the draws (number 2 in US for 1980s)

 

That's what I was getting at.

 

I do rate Terry Funk on the mic, but I don't think he's top 5 level. Same with Lawler. But I'm not all that bothered about debating it. I just think including promos, in real terms, would pretty much make Flair lock for many people.

 

But I'm not bothered what anyone else does with their list.

[thebrainfollower]

See your point now more clearly. Yes I agree Flair is NOT #1 in everything but he's close enough and so highly rated in everything. He's probably my #1 pick at this point once I do more than a small lucha sampler.

 

Jumbo right now is up there with him for me.

 

IS Flair the number 2 draw in the 80's? Wonder about this as compared to say Andre or Road Warriors to be honest.

[JerryvonKramer]

That was based on research I believe Matt Farmer did. Or Meltzer. Or both.

[Matt D]

Bock on all the metrics too.

[thebrainfollower]

He is a lock for my top 5 too. Looking at Bock, Flair, Jumbo, Lawler for sure. Need to watch more lucha to see if anyone there cracks top 5

[Ricky Jackson]

Farmer did the drawing research, and yes Flair was #2, based on how many cards he main evented on shows that drew 10k + fans

[Woof]

I've been tending to use mic work as a way to balance out the booking issue that I have between Japan and the US. Most of the high-end Japanese workers benefit from being in a system that focuses on ring work, so they are put in a position to constantly be having longer, more meaningful matches. Their American counterparts are often handcuffed because they're required to do more low-end matches and angle driven stuff that may not be of the highest in-ring quality because it's goal is to put over a larger story at the expense of "action". Once the monthly PPV schedule kicked into gear there became a very set pattern of having "big" matches once a month in the US, whereas in All Japan, for instance, they could have multiple big matches in a month thanks to a tour.

For example, Randy Savage's early WWF run includes a lot of shitty matches against George Steele. I'm sure some folks will knock him for those matches because he wasn't able to elevate Steele to anything above "entertaining crap". But that's a bit unfair to Savage, because he was doing what was asked of him, and at the time, those matches were a big part of the overall WWF entertainment package. All of his stalling and shenanigans may not have done much for his workrate, but he got that angle over and whipped fans into a frenzy.

If I compared Savage to Kawada straight-up in terms of pure in-ring work, I don't think it'd be close. Kawada's 90's run is just match-after-match of greatness. But I'll have Savage higher on my list because I feel like he made up for a lack of epic matches (in comparison) by excelling at the job he was tasked with, a great deal of which is thanks to his mic work.

It's probably not going to help someone like Hogan because when he was placed in a position to have great matches, he usually didn't deliver. The best Hogan matches I generally think to myself "wow, that was really good... for a Hogan match", and that's not enough for me. So I think mic work counts to a degree, but it won't elevate a mediocre worker to greatness. It's more likely to spackle over some resume holes for an otherwise excellent worker with a patchy booking history.

[Grimmas]

Farmer did the drawing research, and yes Flair was #2, based on how many cards he main evented on shows that drew 10k + fans

I really hate that metric. Does not seem like the best way to measure how well someone drew.

[Ricky Jackson]

I've been tending to use mic work as a way to balance out the booking issue that I have between Japan and the US. Most of the high-end Japanese workers benefit from being in a system that focuses on ring work, so they are put in a position to constantly be having longer, more meaningful matches. Their American counterparts are often handcuffed because they're required to do more low-end matches and angle driven stuff that may not be of the highest in-ring quality because it's goal is to put over a larger story at the expense of "action". Once the monthly PPV schedule kicked into gear there became a very set pattern of having "big" matches once a month in the US, whereas in All Japan, for instance, they could have multiple big matches in a month thanks to a tour.

 

For example, Randy Savage's early WWF run includes a lot of shitty matches against George Steele. I'm sure some folks will knock him for those matches because he wasn't able to elevate Steele to anything above "entertaining crap". But that's a bit unfair to Savage, because he was doing what was asked of him, and at the time, those matches were a big part of the overall WWF entertainment package. All of his stalling and shenanigans may not have done much for his workrate, but he got that angle over and whipped fans into a frenzy.

 

If I compared Savage to Kawada straight-up in terms of pure in-ring work, I don't think it'd be close. Kawada's 90's run is just match-after-match of greatness. But I'll have Savage higher on my list because I feel like he made up for a lack of epic matches (in comparison) by excelling at the job he was tasked with, a great deal of which is thanks to his mic work.

 

It's probably not going to help someone like Hogan because when he was placed in a position to have great matches, he usually didn't deliver. The best Hogan matches I generally think to myself "wow, that was really good... for a Hogan match", and that's not enough for me. So I think mic work counts to a degree, but it won't elevate a mediocre worker to greatness. It's more likely to spackle over some resume holes for an otherwise excellent worker with a patchy booking history.

You just articulated that point about Savage way better than I did on Steven's Makin a Case pod a few weeks back

[Dylan Waco]

I actually think there is a sense in which mic work is relevant when discussing in ring work. For example Arn Anderson kind of looks like a high school match teacher, but he convinces you he is a badass by talking, and then can back it up in the ring. If you take the mic work away from Arn is the character he injects into his matches as clear and interesting? Probably not. That said I'm not consciously thinking "Arn is a top five mic worker, so I'm bumping him up the list." He will do well on my list because his work on the mic was backed up by his performances in the ring.

[Grimmas]

I actually think there is a sense in which mic work is relevant when discussing in ring work. For example Arn Anderson kind of looks like a high school match teacher, but he convinces you he is a badass by talking, and then can back it up in the ring. If you take the mic work away from Arn is the character he injects into his matches as clear and interesting? Probably not. That said I'm not consciously thinking "Arn is a top five mic worker, so I'm bumping him up the list." He will do well on my list because his work on the mic was backed up by his performances in the ring.

Mic work is like popularity and drawing power to me in this list. It adds a benefit indirectly, but is not something I am judging on.

[Matt D]

It's an opportunity for added narrative richness. It's just that some people can make their own opportunities.

[victory]

Originally I was going to include promos. I changed my mind eventually when I started rating the tag teams since a good portion of the teams I was watching were good in the ring and boring on the mic. It ended up not being a very fair evaluator.

 

Along with ring work, I'll rate feuds and longevity ( length of prime years).

[KrisZ]

Being a wrestler is far more than just inside the ring so I have no problem including promos but when push comes to shove the performance in the ring is what matters.

 

Dusty is a Top 5 promo guy all-time but he is far from that in the ring.

[Childs]

Do you expect to vote for Dusty, Kris? To me, he's the classic case where I'd feel compelled to include him if I was weighing promo ability and star power. But no way he makes it with my ballot focused on in-ring.

[KrisZ]

Dusty wasn't the best technically but he was always effective and when younger he was really good. I don't see why not

[shoe]

For me promos will come in affect as tie breaking measures for US workers. So they'll come into play , but as tie breakers.

[JerryvonKramer]

I actually think there is a sense in which mic work is relevant when discussing in ring work. For example Arn Anderson kind of looks like a high school match teacher, but he convinces you he is a badass by talking, and then can back it up in the ring. If you take the mic work away from Arn is the character he injects into his matches as clear and interesting? Probably not. That said I'm not consciously thinking "Arn is a top five mic worker, so I'm bumping him up the list." He will do well on my list because his work on the mic was backed up by his performances in the ring.

I call this "intangibles"

[TravJ1979]

95% of my criteria is curtain to curtain. Anything on-camera gets evaluated.

 

Backstage politics, personal life, anything a casual non-internet fan would know nothing about is not considered.