shoe Posted January 11, 2016 Report Posted January 11, 2016 https://soundcloud.com/jerryvonkramer/this-week-in-wrestling-011016 Fall 1 Pete and Johnny look at the Bob Backlund match Parv doesn't watch you to see. It destroys his take on Bob. It's the 5/20/83 match. We also take a look at the Smokey Mountain tv and ROH's current show. Fall 2 Pete and Timothy look at Wrestle Kingdom and ramifications. Fall 3 Pete and Johnny finish up with Breaking Ground and look at WWE Raw.
Luchaundead Posted January 11, 2016 Report Posted January 11, 2016 As a guy who listens to a lot of podcasts I have to say this is the most in depth review of WK 10 out there as most others have been to busy talking about the wwe signing news
RCS1988 Posted January 11, 2016 Report Posted January 11, 2016 It should say This Week In Wrestling 1/11/16 not 1/11/15.
shoe Posted January 11, 2016 Author Report Posted January 11, 2016 Fixed, too much beer with football yesterday.
JerryvonKramer Posted January 12, 2016 Report Posted January 12, 2016 There was a shot taken at me on this show, specifically as regards how a professional academic could use "selective evidence" when trying to prove or disprove a theory. Let's talk about the demands of empirical evidence. If there are a 100 primary sources pointing in one direction, and one source pointing in another one, the existence of the outlier doesn't prove anything, it's just an outlier. We have matches showing that Pedro worked from underneath and that Bruno gave a lot more to his opponents and generated a lot more sympathy during heat sequences by showing real vulnerability than Bob did. And this was in New York under the same office that presumably gave the direction for Bob to gobble up and dominanate every challenger. If you are talking about what the evidence says and which conclusions to draw, if we are to buy its something that came from Vince Sr. then it raises a further question: why did he give this direction to Bob but not to previous champions? Hogan also worked from underneath in a lot of matches. So out of four babyface champs in the babyface territory, three of them didn't work like Bob. It's more reasonable to ascertain that it's how Bob preferred to work. The office can keep a guy strong just by booking him to win pretty much every match. How he wins is a different matter. I'll also say this, whether the ultimate person to blame is Bob or Vince Sr, "heel comeback" remains ass backwards psychology, and I'll continue to criticise those matches for it.
BigBadMick Posted January 14, 2016 Report Posted January 14, 2016 As a guy who listens to a lot of podcasts I have to say this is the most in depth review of WK 10 out there as most others have been to busy talking about the wwe signing news Completely agree. Really good analysis here. Your practice of watching everything twice for reviews really pays off.
Luchaundead Posted January 14, 2016 Report Posted January 14, 2016 Completely agree. Really good analysis here. Your practice of watching everything twice for reviews really pays off. As a guy who listens to a lot of podcasts I have to say this is the most in depth review of WK 10 out there as most others have been to busy talking about the wwe signing news Thank you so much it's really important to me to get as detailed as possible even with the stupid little stuff like entrances and gear
shoe Posted January 15, 2016 Author Report Posted January 15, 2016 Thanks for the compliment Mick. Talking the shows with Timothy has been a blast. He makes it a lot easier as a host.
Luchaundead Posted January 15, 2016 Report Posted January 15, 2016 The compliment was for Tim. Hey without Pete I wouldn't be on the show to get compliments so in a round about way it's his to take.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now