4/1 - Thoughts On The Following Matches

[Marty]

* Rob Van Dam vs. Jerry Lynn - 5/16/1999 (ECW Hardcore Heaven)

* Steve Austin vs. Owen Hart - 8/3/1997 (WWF SummerSlam)

* Ric Flair vs. Harley Race - 11/24/1983 (NWA Starrcade)

* Razor Ramon vs. Shawn Michaels - 3/20/1994 (WWF WrestleMania X)

* Mitsaharu Misawa vs. Toshiaki Kawada - 6/3/1994

[Guest Bruiser Chong]

Rob Van Dam vs. Jerry Lynn - 5/16/1999 (ECW Hardcore Heaven)

 

I've only seen it twice, but I give it props for being a physically brutal contest from bell-to-bell. Their feud was overrated, but I've never been disapointed with their matches.

 

Steve Austin vs. Owen Hart - 8/3/1997 (WWF SummerSlam)

 

Most people don't remember anything but the final minute of the match, which is too bad, because I've always had fond memories of it. In retrospect, those closing moments are more significant than anything else that happened in the match. Austin was never quite the same again and Owen's fate was sealed by the accident.

 

Ric Flair vs. Harley Race - 11/24/1983 (NWA Starrcade)

 

Never liked it. Maybe it's too old school for my tastes, but I was incredibly bored by the match and the finish was an abomination. Perhaps someone could shed light on what is so great about this match.

 

Razor Ramon vs. Shawn Michaels - 3/20/1994 (WWF WrestleMania X)

 

I remember after seeing it on PPV that I had just witnessed the greatest match ever. I'd go on to see it dozens of times after that. It was one of the few matches that I went out of my way to show to people, fans and non-fans all alike. The spots seem tame by today, but it's built so perfectly and at the time, it was innovative stuff.

[Guest Some Guy]

* Rob Van Dam vs. Jerry Lynn - 5/16/1999 (ECW Hardcore Heaven) - I haven't really liked any of their matches and can't really tell one from the other. They all had some cool reversal spots but they were also filled with countless stalling spots by RVD. The matches basically went like this: Choreographed spot, crowd claps, RVD points to himself, a cool reversal spot, crowd claps, RVD points to himself... With a few dives and bumps mixed in.

 

* Steve Austin vs. Owen Hart - 8/3/1997 (WWF SummerSlam) -

I was really digging this match until the injury. This was Austin at his best with sound wrestling and his great brawling. I thought the spots where Owen would try to break Austin's middle finger were cute and Owen working the neck (and Ross selling it on commentary) made the pildedriver spot make sense and would've made Ausitn look even tougher had he kicked out as was planned.

FUN FACT: Before the match Austin was the first WWF wrestler to threaten to kick Cole's ass.

 

* Ric Flair vs. Harley Race - 11/24/1983 (NWA Starrcade) -

I've seen it but never paid enough attention to comment on it. Most of Flair's older matches moved too slowly for me to get excited about them the first time. I like Flair a lot but I prefer a more athletic style.

 

* Razor Ramon vs. Shawn Michaels - 3/20/1994 (WWF WrestleMania X) -

This match set a standard for Ladder Matches that only Shawn/Razor II, HHH/Rock, and Benoit/Jericho came close to IMO in WWE. The match had the big bumps and incorporated the ladder well, but it was still a match with a ladder in it, rather than a bunch of ladder spots and some punching. To me with Ladder Matches the gimmick should accent the match and ass to it rather than define it. The TLC matches were defined by the ladders and most of the laddre matches since have been all spots and no substance.

 

* Mitsaharu Misawa vs. Toshiaki Kawada - 6/3/1994 - Never seen it.

[MyOwnSummer]

The problem with the Flair Vs Race match was Gene Kiniski as the referee IMHO. He kept ruining the momentum of the match by forcing them apart, and every time they tried to get really phsyical he'd pull them apart. It just slowed the match down horribly for me.

[Marty]

* Rob Van Dam vs. Jerry Lynn - 5/16/1999 (ECW Hardcore Heaven): I've seen it only a couple of times, but liked what I saw, compared with RVD's other stuff. I think this is the best match of their series, although I may have to rewatch the Living Dangerously match to be sure. Very fun though.

 

* Steve Austin vs. Owen Hart - 8/3/1997 (WWF SummerSlam): Excellent, excellent match which showed what these two could've done in a main event feud had a million things related to the latter stages of this match not happened. It's a shame, too, because I thought Bret Hart was well in the downswing of his career and Owen had stepped up to become the best wrestler in the Hart Foundation stable, as well as one of the best Canadian ones too. Thinking about that makes me feel even more sadder over the ending of the match, because these two could GO in the summer of 1997.

 

*Ric Flair vs. Harley Race - 11/24/1983 (NWA Starrcade): I have to echo the same sentiments as others. The build-up is great, the heat is great, the setting is superb, but God damn, this match can sometimes be an insomnia cure. Race was very slow in this match, and was definitely in the twilight of his career. Kiniski's refereeing certainly doesn't help. It isn't horrible, and certainly has historic value, but it's not something I call "great".

 

* Razor Ramon vs. Shawn Michaels - 3/20/1994 (WWF WrestleMania X): Loved the match live and naturally, my liking has shrunk quite a bit, as it's obvious Michaels wrestled a ladder that night, with Ramon making a cameo appearance. I keep hearing that SummerSlam 1995 was far better and I need to check that out, as I've never seen it. Still fine and exciting, although it pisses me off when people call it "the first ever ladder match" or claim that Michaels is the innovator of it.

 

* Mitsaharu Misawa vs. Toshiaki Kawada - 6/3/1994: Guess what? I've never seen this match. Loss, HTQ, or anyone else whom applies, sell me on this match, why I should or shouldn't get it, and for bonus points, let me know if it's on DVD somewhere.

[Guest Some Guy]

* Razor Ramon vs. Shawn Michaels - 3/20/1994 (WWF WrestleMania X): Loved the match live and naturally, my liking has shrunk quite a bit, as it's obvious Michaels wrestled a ladder that night, with Ramon making a cameo appearance. I keep hearing that SummerSlam 1995 was far better and I need to check that out, as I've never seen it. Still fine and exciting, although it pisses me off when people call it "the first ever ladder match" or claim that Michaels is the innovator of it.

I wouldn't say the rematch is better, HBK blows the finish twice. It depends on the context in which you watch it though. If you watch 1 and 2 back to back it's clear that 1 is better, if you watch the whole show around them 2 seems better because Summerslam 95 sucked and WM 10 didn't.

2 is a little different in that Hall isolates the knee and then HBK stops selling it so he can moonsault off the ladder and stuff. Shawn also takes a nasty bump on his lower back off a suplex to the outside, that type of thing pretty much explains wy he didn't wrestle for 4 years. They do a fair amount of building off the first match which is cool. I liked that in the first match pretty much none of the ladder spots got countered because they had never been doen before and in the second match the spots that were used in the first got countered.

 

I wrote this in the "What are you Watching" thread:

Shawn/Razor: Ladder Match II. If it wasn't for the finish I think I liked this one better than the first. Shawn takes a sick bump off a suplex to the the floor, Razor works his leg over, which makes perfect sense considering one has to climb a ladder to win, unfortunately Shawn just stops selling the injury once he takes over, which he always does. Hall seemed slightly less inspired here but Shawn was getting crazier and crazier in terms of bump taking. The Moonsault off the ladder, the missed splash of the top of the ladder were great. The finish was supposed to be Shawn on one ladder superkicking Razor off his ladder (the kick barely made contact), and Shawn jumping to the other to grab the belt. The ladder was out of position so he jumped for the belt and missed completely. Then he went back up, grabbed the belt and hit slipped out of his hands. By this point he was fucking pissed and started throwing a temper tantrum in the ring before going up and finally getting the belt.

[Guest Hunter's Torn Quad]

* Rob Van Dam vs. Jerry Lynn - 5/16/1999 (ECW Hardcore Heaven)

 

Haven't seen it since first watching it back when it happened. I remember liking it, though I also remember thinking it lacked that special something. A check tells me I gave it ***1/2.

 

* Steve Austin vs. Owen Hart - 8/3/1997 (WWF SummerSlam)

 

Well on its way to ****, and maybe even would have broken that barrier, but for the accident. It was still building at the time it ended, so I gave it ***.

 

* Ric Flair vs. Harley Race - 11/24/1983 (NWA Starrcade)

 

I've watched this a couple of times over the last few years, and I gave it anything from ***1/2 to ****, depending on my mood. Gene Kiniski was undoubtedly an anchor on this match due to his annoying aforementioned habit of constantly breaking Race and Flair up for no good reason. I didn't like his slow counting either, but I don't seem to hate it as much as the rest of you seem to.

 

* Razor Ramon vs. Shawn Michaels - 3/20/1994 (WWF WrestleMania X)

 

I remember being thrilled with this when watching it live. Subsequent viewings don't thrill me as much, and I've never really been that crazy over this Ladder match, or their Summerslam rematch.

 

* Mitsaharu Misawa vs. Toshiaki Kawada - 6/3/1994

 

This is another one of those matches that everyone went nuts over, but I didn't. It was good, but I never got the vibe that it was this *****+ classic. I enjoyed their July '95 and May '98 matches a lot more than this one. I may rewatch it again, though, and see if I change my mind.

[Tim Cooke]

"* Mitsaharu Misawa vs. Toshiaki Kawada - 6/3/1994

This is another one of those matches that everyone went nuts over, but I didn't. It was good, but I never got the vibe that it was this *****+ classic. I enjoyed their July '95 and May '98 matches a lot more than this one. I may rewatch it again, though, and see if I change my mind."

 

I can see the 7/95 being liked more as it is 20 minutes of bombs - the slow build. But the 5/98 match is horrible. Misawa is so hurt and it is anti-climatic. Give 6/94 another try. I have a hard time finding a singles match that puts everything together that well.

 

Tim

[Guest Bruiser Chong]

I didn't like his slow counting either, but I don't seem to hate it as much as the rest of you seem to.

I don't necessarily hate it; I just don't see why it's so highly praised. Maybe someone can shed some light on that. I don't overanalyze matches as much as the purists do, so my impressions of the match were it was slow, plodding, and uninteresting, with a botched finish. Seemed like a special moment with Flair winning the title, but other than that, I can't piece together what's so good about the match.

[goodhelmet]

If you watch 1 and 2 back to back it's clear that 1 is better, if you watch the whole show around them 2 seems better because Summerslam 95 sucked and WM 10 didn't.  

 

Bro, WM X was an absolutely dreadful show except for the opener and the ladder match. Everything else was WM9 bad.

[Guest Bruiser Chong]

It's funny, because I always thought WM X was a completely forgettable show aside from those two matches. Everyone looks at WM X as one of the best of the crop and it's definitely because of those two matches. There are some memorable moments thrown in there, but looking back, it's an underwhelming card for what was supposed to be a huge show.

[goodhelmet]

* Mitsaharu Misawa vs. Toshiaki Kawada - 6/3/1994

 

This is another one of those matches that everyone went nuts over, but I didn't. It was good, but I never got the vibe that it was this *****+ classic. I enjoyed their July '95 and May '98 matches a lot more than this one. I may rewatch it again, though, and see if I change my mind.

I have always been of the opinion that a match can and should stand on its own. With that said, this is the one match I think you need to know the backstory and have seen the matches leading up to it to truly appreciate how great it is. The entire match is like a history lesson of the Kawada-Misawa feud. I can watch 6-9-95 and appreciate it for what it is. I can watch Jumbo-Tenryu and love it for what it is (even though there is some great payoffs and nods to former matches). 6-3-94 is the one rare case where the history is absolutely necessary to appreciate all of its worth. I think for American matches, it is easier to catch on to the story because the commentators can lead you by the hand by virtue of the fact they speak your language. You don't have that luxury with Japanese matches but after viewing the matches leading up to this, you don't need to understand a word of Japanese to appreciate it for all of its worth.

[MyOwnSummer]

Could you sum up the history GH?

[goodhelmet]

No. Watch the matches.

 

I can tell you that they were tag partners.

 

Misawa got his big break first with a huge win over Jumbo.

 

Kawada was the whipping post for the big guns while Misawa was the Triple Crown champ.

 

Misawa won both the '92 and '93 matches.

Kawada was destined to win the '94 match... but didn't.

 

And that is only the surface. This ignores the countless tag matches and six-mans, the meaning of the movesets of each wrestler, the relation to Jumbo, the comparison of matches to the same opponent.

 

go to tOA and look for jdw's letter to the Observer where he sums up the match beautifully. Tim may also be able to elaborate deeper than I could.

[Loss]

Matches aren't really worked with the intention of standing on their own, though. They're worked with the idea of being shown to an audience that has been watching the TV and knows the score. As we've talked about before, as much as I'm grateful to it, getting comps of the best matches does cheapen them in some way, and not knowing the history, even if you love the match, isn't giving it all the credit it deserves. Having a great match means next to nothing if you don't know what the standard match quality is in that company at that period of time. I could go through every match on this list, or at least the ones I've seen, and show how it's vital to know the story, the setting, the surrounding factors, the environment ... to get everything out of it that the workers want you to get out of it. You can read up on the storylines all you want, and in some cases create your own little reality, but matches are typically wrestled first and foremost for a specific audience in a specific time frame that knows specific things because they've seen them first-hand. Problem is, going to all that trouble to create a self-made match buildup is rather pointless when bookers have already done it and the workers are telling you the story on their own. Let them.

 

So, I guess I have to disagree with your basic point and say that wrestling matches, whether they can stand on their own or not, should never be expected to do so. If they can, it's happenstance and nothing more.

[goodhelmet]

Pillman vs. Badd. Two guys just thrown out there.

 

6-9-95 has a huge backstory. It is still one of the best matches i have ever seen... even though it was one of the first All Japan matches I had ever seen. I didn't even know who was who when I first saw it.

 

How many great Jrs. matches have you seen without there being much of a history between the participants?

 

You may need to know the signature moves, if a guy is a submission artist or whatever but it isn't absolutely contingent on seeing every match that came before it... esp. in America. There is no way I am going to sit through three hours of mediocre-decent tv matches to get to that one blowoff match or whatever. And to me, if a backstory is absolutely useless if the match sucks. The match must be able to stand on its own.

 

When you go watch some Destroyer matches, because of lack of footage or whatever, there is absolutely no way you can be able to know what is going on in the backstory or whatever. You only have what you heard on the net but you'll be the first person to praise those matches. Why? Because Beyer's work is so rich that the match stands as its own entity.

 

 

EDIT: Let me get to work and respond some more. We are not done I tell you!!!!! Fuck, I'm late.

[goodhelmet]

Matches aren't really worked with the intention of standing on their own, though. They're worked with the idea of being shown to an audience that has been watching the TV and knows the score.

I agree that you have to have some basic knowledge of the workings of a wrestling match, know what makes a good heel or face, etc. Not all good-great matches have a great backstory. If a wrestling fan, someone who has been exposed to large amounts of wrestling, sees a match for the first time, he should be able to pick up on the subtleties rather easily. This is absolutely necessary to enjoy a product where the announcers speak a different language since you have no idea what wuld be going on otherwise. You def. need some background in watching matches to fully understand it. On that I can agree.

 

As we've talked about before, as much as I'm grateful to it, getting comps of the best matches does cheapen them in some way, and not knowing the history, even if you love the match, isn't giving it all the credit it deserves.

Sometimes. Why would I need 24 hours of tv to get to one match. I can read about the story, see a clip job and then get into the match. Take the JBL-Eddie bloodbath from Judgment Day. I didn't sit through SD! week after week so I could understand the backstory. I saw the two-minute intro package and that was all I needed. I don't think it cheapened my experience at all. I just saved myself som time byu not watching bad TV. On the flip, a great story with a bad match payoff can do the exact opposite. It can kill your enjoyment of that emotion you invested in and I don't need that.

 

Having a great match means next to nothing if you don't know what the standard match quality is in that company at that period of time.

Bullshit. A good match is a good match. A botched move is a botched move. The styles may be diofferent but as I indicated in a previous thread, any match from any time can be compared to another. Come on, we talked about this and you agreed. Wait. I think it was Tim Cooke that agreed.

 

could go through every match on this list, or at least the ones I've seen, and show how it's vital to know the story, the setting, the surrounding factors, the environment ... to get everything out of it that the workers want you to get out of it.

I look forward to that post.

 

You can read up on the storylines all you want, and in some cases create your own little reality, but matches are typically wrestled first and foremost for a specific audience in a specific time frame that knows specific things because they've seen them first-hand.

Um... sure?

 

Problem is, going to all that trouble to create a self-made match buildup is rather pointless when bookers have already done it and the workers are telling you the story on their own. Let them.

So are you ssaying I should have to sit through evey tv show and interview to get the full impact of a match? I don't have that much time and typically, if a match is good enough, it will stand on its own as a good wrestling match.

 

Take 6-5-89 for example. In that match, ther is plenty of backstory. Tenryu and Jumbo play off the previous match-ups with each other. They are former tag partners. The powerbombattempts have more meaning. THey give a nod to the Funk-Jumbo '76 match and yo uwould have to have seen it to know it. With all that said, it was still a good match when I saw it because everything in the ring made sense and was compelling and I didn't know any of that stuff the first time I saw the match. I still knew it was a good match. AFTER seeing the match, I chose to go back and see more oftheir work and to collect the previous encounters and then saw Funk-Jumbo and it only mad eme appreciate the match more. However, I needed to appreciate the match on its own before I invested the time to go back and explore all of the other nuances that make it even greater.

 

So, I guess I have to disagree with your basic point and say that wrestling matches, whether they can stand on their own or not, should never be expected to do so. If they can, it's happenstance and nothing more.

And I am going to have to sum it up by saying if a match can't stand on its own, I have no need in investing more time to see what led the competitors to that point. That is what makes 6-3-94 so unique. It is a good match that has so much context that once you see it unfold, it becomes th best match many have ever seen. But many people who hype that match saw it cold turkey. It intrigued them enough to explore what got them to that point. If he match sucked, there would b no need to even go through the trouble of hunting down all of their previous matches except to see them stand on their own.

[Guest Some Guy]

If you watch 1 and 2 back to back it's clear that 1 is better, if you watch the whole show around them 2 seems better because Summerslam 95 sucked and WM 10 didn't. 

 

Bro, WM X was an absolutely dreadful show except for the opener and the ladder match. Everything else was WM9 bad.

Two great matches, plus Bret winning the title equals a show not sucking IMO. Summerslam 95 sucked the high hard one except for the ladder match. Summerslam had two jobber matches, Taker/Kama in a casket match, Bret/Jacobs in a borefest (Bret never seemed to work as hard when there was no finish), and Nash/Mabel with the Ladder match tacked on to save the show. WM 10 had Bret/Owen opening the show and the Ladder match in the middle. So if you are watching WM 10, by the time you get to the ladder match you have already seen a great match. If you are watching Summerslam you will have wanted to rip your eyes out before the ladder match even started. The point I was trying to make is that I think Shawn/Hall 2 gets called a better match (I liked parts of it better, it overall it was not as good) because it lucked out and was the one match on a one match show. WM 10 had another great match and a great monent with the ladder match sandwiched in between, plus the classic Doink and Dink vs. Luna and Bam Bam, how anyone could have followed that is beyond me.

[goodhelmet]

I'm not disputing the shittiness of Summerslam 95. I am implying that WM X was not a good show. Even with Bret winning the title, look at the crap you had to endure to get there. Owen-Bret and the Ladder match are good. The rest is GAB'91 bad.

[Guest Some Guy]

I'm not disputing the shittiness of Summerslam 95. I am implying that WM X was not a good show. Even with Bret winning the title, look at the crap you had to endure to get there. Owen-Bret and the Ladder match are good. The rest is GAB'91 bad.

That's what fast forwarding is for, I suppose. If you want a really shitty show, I have the "March to WM 10" on tape.

 

I've never seen GAB 91, but if it's as bad as KotR 95 then I get the point.

[goodhelmet]

Hell, I don't even own SS'95. I had the ladder match put on a comp for me some time ago.

 

And both GAB91 and KOR95 are shitty shows.

[Guest Sass]

* Rob Van Dam vs. Jerry Lynn - 5/16/1999 (ECW Hardcore Heaven)

 

3rd best in-ring feud in ECW history. Malenko/Guerrero, Mysterio/Guererra & and this feud gave the Mutants something to tout against the Big Two. Hardcore Heaven '00 match is better grounded. Less spotty.

 

* Steve Austin vs. Owen Hart - 8/3/1997 (WWF SummerSlam)

 

Best match on the card.

 

* Ric Flair vs. Harley Race - 11/24/1983 (NWA Starrcade)

 

Best match on the card. 3rd or 4th best match between each guy. Special Education student ref Gene Kiniski drags this down.

 

* Razor Ramon vs. Shawn Michaels - 3/20/1994 (WWF WrestleMania X)

 

Best match on the card. The rematch at Summerslam '95 was better, more polished.

 

* Mitsaharu Misawa vs. Toshiaki Kawada - 6/3/1994

 

One of the best, if not the best, male heavyweight matches from the last 20 years. Years of storylines and build-up finally come together. Match itself is well laid out. Kawada should have gone over here.