Why does puro get so much love? Why does lucha get so dismissed?

[JerryvonKramer]

In matters of taste, "it's not for me" and "it sucks" is a distinction without a difference.

Exactly

[NintendoLogic]

I'm quitting Japanese wrestling, because I don't really like it. The last few year's of having came from the obligation to feel unbiased by watching everything praised. That obligation is gone, because nobody else does it or it's unrealistic.

It's a complete side topic to why lucha is talked about the way it is. Them only winning match of the year, most outstanding wrestler, and wrestler of the year once in the WON awards history should be a bigger talked about subject.

 

Who in lucha should have won MOTY/WOTY/Most Oustanding Wrestler but didn't?

[El McKell]

 

I'm quitting Japanese wrestling, because I don't really like it. The last few year's of having came from the obligation to feel unbiased by watching everything praised. That obligation is gone, because nobody else does it or it's unrealistic.

It's a complete side topic to why lucha is talked about the way it is. Them only winning match of the year, most outstanding wrestler, and wrestler of the year once in the WON awards history should be a bigger talked about subject.

 

Who in lucha should have won MOTY/WOTY/Most Oustanding Wrestler but didn't?

 

lots of people would say Atlantis vs. Ultimo Guerrero as the 2014 MOTY.

You could argue for Mistico as wrestler of the year in 2005 or 2007. Maybe Hijo Del Santo in 1997.

Negro Casas for most outstanding in 1992.

 

 

[Jetlag]

 

I'm quitting Japanese wrestling, because I don't really like it. The last few year's of having came from the obligation to feel unbiased by watching everything praised. That obligation is gone, because nobody else does it or it's unrealistic.

It's a complete side topic to why lucha is talked about the way it is. Them only winning match of the year, most outstanding wrestler, and wrestler of the year once in the WON awards history should be a bigger talked about subject.

 

Who in lucha should have won MOTY/WOTY/Most Oustanding Wrestler but didn't?

 

 

Casas or Virus would've been a really good choice the last couple years. El Dandy in 1990. I think deciding these things is mostly a coin toss, though.

 

How many hardcore WoS fans even exist? It's a smaller number than lucha certainly. The WoS guys did worse than the lucha ones in GWE.

 

I guess you can consider me a hardcore WoS / euro fan considering I own more discs of that stuff than of anything else and I don't really look down on anyone except maybe Parv if he keeps making stupid posts like that.

[JerryvonKramer]

If it's easier for everyone to believe that wrestling elitism is something I've made up let's roll with that.

 

It seems like people are broadly agreed now that it's not a very big deal that a good chunk of fans don't think Lucha is for them. That seems like a decent common ground.

[Herodes]

It's not hard to believe, you've shown it repeatedly here and elsewhere in your arrogant dismissal of opinions that challenge your own perceived orthodoxy.

 

Question - if someone believes Taue is a better worker than Kobashi for example, do you believe that is an incorrect opinion and do you question the motives of anyone who holds that position?

[Matt D]

I would actually love to read Parv's academic review articles he writes professionally on other people's published articles/monographs/etc. I'm really curious if he attacks the argument or the author. I could see it going either way.

[goc]

Parv it's very cute how you've seemingly tried to turn yourself into a victim of "wrestling elitism" in this thread when you're the one who deliberately came in here to troll people by saying "lucha sucks." I don't even think you ACTUALLY think lucha sucks you just want to dismiss it and never see or hear about it again despite the fact that you've probably liked more lucha matches than you've disliked:

 

I think maybe "non-stickability" is something. I was relatively high on a lot of 80s Lucha set stuff but had very little desire to carry on, doesn't stick for some reason. It's like "that was a good match", but it feels ephemeral. Hard to put one's finger on, but I guess it really comes down to me feeling like not a lot matters.

But it's different and challenges you to think more than "oh look at Kobashi chop this guy really hard" so just say it sucks and move on.

[JerryvonKramer]

It's not hard to believe, you've shown it repeatedly here and elsewhere in your arrogant dismissal of opinions that challenge your own perceived orthodoxy.

Question - if someone believes Taue is a better worker than Kobashi for example, do you believe that is an incorrect opinion and do you question the motives of anyone who holds that position?

This is getting off topic. As I've said before opinions don't happen in a vacuum, Kobashi has a whole critical narrative around him and Taue has had another one. Whether or not people are aware of it, statements on either of them will be taken with reference to those narratives.

 

Typically on any given thing you'll get an orthodoxy that emerges, then a revisionist position and then possibly even a counter revisionist one.

 

A lot of my positions might be described as "counter-revisionist" because most of the time the push back has been too much. Flair, Dory, three pillars, many times the criticisms are pushed to an extreme.

 

Other times like on Luger, Garvin, and a whole host of others, I'm more on board with the revisionist message.

 

If you want to say I've made the three positions up, it's cool because I don't know if you haven't noticed but I've barely discussed any of these things since April.

 

None of this has anything to do with lucha either.

[JerryvonKramer]

Parv it's very cute how you've seemingly tried to turn yourself into a victim of "wrestling elitism" in this thread when you're the one who deliberately came in here to troll people by saying "lucha sucks." I don't even think you ACTUALLY think lucha sucks you just want to dismiss it and never see or hear about it again despite the fact that you've probably liked more lucha matches than you've disliked:

I think maybe "non-stickability" is something. I was relatively high on a lot of 80s Lucha set stuff but had very little desire to carry on, doesn't stick for some reason. It's like "that was a good match", but it feels ephemeral. Hard to put one's finger on, but I guess it really comes down to me feeling like not a lot matters.

But it's different and challenges you to think more than "oh look at Kobashi chop this guy really hard" so just say it sucks and move on.

I do feel victimised for not liking lucha, truth be told.

[goc]

 

Parv it's very cute how you've seemingly tried to turn yourself into a victim of "wrestling elitism" in this thread when you're the one who deliberately came in here to troll people by saying "lucha sucks." I don't even think you ACTUALLY think lucha sucks you just want to dismiss it and never see or hear about it again despite the fact that you've probably liked more lucha matches than you've disliked:

I think maybe "non-stickability" is something. I was relatively high on a lot of 80s Lucha set stuff but had very little desire to carry on, doesn't stick for some reason. It's like "that was a good match", but it feels ephemeral. Hard to put one's finger on, but I guess it really comes down to me feeling like not a lot matters.

But it's different and challenges you to think more than "oh look at Kobashi chop this guy really hard" so just say it sucks and move on.

 

I do feel victimised for not liking lucha, truth be told.

 

Well let me say that's pretty ridiculous as there are more people in this thread saying "I've never really gotten into lucha" than beating the lucha drum. If you've been "victimised" in this thread it's because you went out of your way to try and antagonize people who do like lucha by saying "it sucks" or dismissing and mocking people's posts defending it or trying to explain why it's not as popular as other forms of wrestling.

 

If you walk down the street with a kick me sign on your back, you don't get to claim you're a victim when someone kicks you.

[JerryvonKramer]

At least I didn't make ridiculous posts about cultural imperialism which absolutely deserve ridicule.

[Grimmas]

 

It's not hard to believe, you've shown it repeatedly here and elsewhere in your arrogant dismissal of opinions that challenge your own perceived orthodoxy.

Question - if someone believes Taue is a better worker than Kobashi for example, do you believe that is an incorrect opinion and do you question the motives of anyone who holds that position?

This is getting off topic. As I've said before opinions don't happen in a vacuum, Kobashi has a whole critical narrative around him and Taue has had another one. Whether or not people are aware of it, statements on either of them will be taken with reference to those narratives.

 

Typically on any given thing you'll get an orthodoxy that emerges, then a revisionist position and then possibly even a counter revisionist one.

 

A lot of my positions might be described as "counter-revisionist" because most of the time the push back has been too much. Flair, Dory, three pillars, many times the criticisms are pushed to an extreme.

 

Other times like on Luger, Garvin, and a whole host of others, I'm more on board with the revisionist message.

 

If you want to say I've made the three positions up, it's cool because I don't know if you haven't noticed but I've barely discussed any of these things since April.

 

None of this has anything to do with lucha either.

 

There in lies the problem. The narrative on lucha is completely flat out wrong. The narrative is, it's hard to get into, has no psychology and is all floaty and dives. No luchador is a great worker, except maybe Casas. That is just plain wrong.

 

It's also why it's so easily dismissed. The narrative says it sucks, so why would it get any coverage or look at?

[Herodes]

If I may, I believe that the aspiring wrestling polymath seeks to discover and master knowledge of a broad range of wrestling past and present, yet for valid reasons of personal taste wrestling from Mexico remains the elusive white whale despite repeated attempts at getting to grips with it. As one of the three global superpowers of wrestling, it's harder to disregard than a particular promotion or a territory like Puerto Rico; it's effectively an admission of defeat (as perceived by our polymath) and rather than chalk this up to personal taste or inability to grasp more unfamiliar tropes and more independent narrative relative to the US/Japan structure, then motives of those who are fans are questioned since the conclusion must be that it is "hipster posturing" rather than genuinely held opinions. The aspiring polymath had therefore justified their views by creating a binary set of correct and incorrect opinions. However our polymath does take this as a personal failure on their part which increases their animosity; despite wanting to portray Mexican wrestling as a niche, its native appeal to the average Mexican fan means that this is not an obscure, impenetrable text with limited appeal to a select few, and the polymath blames themselves and lashes out in the knowledge that Lucha is not in act wrestlings Finnegans Wake explicitly designed to lack accessibility but a popular text that they are unable to appreciate. It's easy to sideline Finnegans Wake in the literary canon, less so Borges.

[JerryvonKramer]

 

 

Parv it's very cute how you've seemingly tried to turn yourself into a victim of "wrestling elitism" in this thread when you're the one who deliberately came in here to troll people by saying "lucha sucks." I don't even think you ACTUALLY think lucha sucks you just want to dismiss it and never see or hear about it again despite the fact that you've probably liked more lucha matches than you've disliked:

 

I think maybe "non-stickability" is something. I was relatively high on a lot of 80s Lucha set stuff but had very little desire to carry on, doesn't stick for some reason. It's like "that was a good match", but it feels ephemeral. Hard to put one's finger on, but I guess it really comes down to me feeling like not a lot matters.

 

But it's different and challenges you to think more than "oh look at Kobashi chop this guy really hard" so just say it sucks and move on.

I do feel victimised for not liking lucha, truth be told.

Well let me say that's pretty ridiculous as there are more people in this thread saying "I've never really gotten into lucha" than beating the lucha drum. If you've been "victimised" in this thread it's because you went out of your way to try and antagonize people who do like lucha by saying "it sucks" or dismissing and mocking people's posts defending it or trying to explain why it's not as popular as other forms of wrestling.

 

If you walk down the street with a kick me sign on your back, you don't get to claim you're a victim when someone kicks you.

It's not at all me who needs the thicker skin, it's Lucha fans if they really see someone saying "Lucha sucks" as antagonism.

 

Got to deal with that better I think. Cos you know most people aren't actually as polite as I am online.

[El-P]

Facts are not whining.

 

So lucha is just inferior is what it boils down to? Nothing else going on?

 

The way facts are presented in the title comes off as a bit whiny to me. Very "us vs them" mentality. It sets a predecent even before the discussion begins I think. Not that it should excuse "blah, lucha just sucks" kinda answers though.

 

Did I ever say "lucha is inferior" ? I don't think I have. Plenty of people have expressed plenty of perfectly reasonnable ideas and conceptions of why they don't really get into it in this thread.

[JerryvonKramer]

If I may, I believe that the aspiring wrestling polymath seeks to discover and master knowledge of a broad range of wrestling past and present, yet for valid reasons of personal taste wrestling from Mexico remains the elusive white whale despite repeated attempts at getting to grips with it. As one of the three global superpowers of wrestling, it's harder to disregard than a particular promotion or a territory like Puerto Rico; it's effectively an admission of defeat (as perceived by our polymath) and rather than chalk this up to personal taste or inability to grasp more unfamiliar tropes and more independent narrative relative to the US/Japan structure, then motives of those who are fans are questioned since the conclusion must be that it is "hipster posturing" rather than genuinely held opinions. The aspiring polymath had therefore justified their views by creating a binary set of correct and incorrect opinions. However our polymath does take this as a personal failure on their part which increases their animosity; despite wanting to portray Mexican wrestling as a niche, its native appeal to the average Mexican fan means that this is not an obscure, impenetrable text with limited appeal to a select few, and the polymath blames themselves and lashes out in the knowledge that Lucha is not in act wrestlings Finnegans Wake explicitly designed to lack accessibility but a popular text that they are unable to appreciate. It's easy to sideline Finnegans Wake in the literary canon, less so Borges.

This is all just rubbish since I never said any of it.

 

I never said fans don't genuinely hold their views. You inferred that but I never said it.

[Grimmas]

 

Facts are not whining.

 

So lucha is just inferior is what it boils down to? Nothing else going on?

 

The way facts are presented in the title comes off as a bit whiny to me. Very "us vs them" mentality. It sets a predecent even before the discussion begins I think. Not that it should excuse "blah, lucha just sucks" kinda answers though.

 

Did I ever say "lucha is inferior" ? I don't think I have. Plenty of people have expressed plenty of perfectly reasonnable ideas and conceptions of why they don't really get into it in this thread.

 

If it's really hard to get into it, and saying lucha should be dismissed and puro is better. That means lucha is inferior.

[Grimmas]

 

 

 

Parv it's very cute how you've seemingly tried to turn yourself into a victim of "wrestling elitism" in this thread when you're the one who deliberately came in here to troll people by saying "lucha sucks." I don't even think you ACTUALLY think lucha sucks you just want to dismiss it and never see or hear about it again despite the fact that you've probably liked more lucha matches than you've disliked:

I think maybe "non-stickability" is something. I was relatively high on a lot of 80s Lucha set stuff but had very little desire to carry on, doesn't stick for some reason. It's like "that was a good match", but it feels ephemeral. Hard to put one's finger on, but I guess it really comes down to me feeling like not a lot matters.

But it's different and challenges you to think more than "oh look at Kobashi chop this guy really hard" so just say it sucks and move on.

I do feel victimised for not liking lucha, truth be told.

Well let me say that's pretty ridiculous as there are more people in this thread saying "I've never really gotten into lucha" than beating the lucha drum. If you've been "victimised" in this thread it's because you went out of your way to try and antagonize people who do like lucha by saying "it sucks" or dismissing and mocking people's posts defending it or trying to explain why it's not as popular as other forms of wrestling.

 

If you walk down the street with a kick me sign on your back, you don't get to claim you're a victim when someone kicks you.

It's not at all me who needs the thicker skin, it's Lucha fans if they really see someone saying "Lucha sucks" as antagonism.

 

Got to deal with that better I think. Cos you know most people aren't actually as polite as I am online.

 

LOL!!!!!!!

 

Let's see what happens when someone says Dory sucks or Flair isn't a top ten wrestler of all time. Do you find that antagonist?

[JerryvonKramer]

 

 

It's not hard to believe, you've shown it repeatedly here and elsewhere in your arrogant dismissal of opinions that challenge your own perceived orthodoxy.

Question - if someone believes Taue is a better worker than Kobashi for example, do you believe that is an incorrect opinion and do you question the motives of anyone who holds that position?

 

This is getting off topic. As I've said before opinions don't happen in a vacuum, Kobashi has a whole critical narrative around him and Taue has had another one. Whether or not people are aware of it, statements on either of them will be taken with reference to those narratives.

Typically on any given thing you'll get an orthodoxy that emerges, then a revisionist position and then possibly even a counter revisionist one.

A lot of my positions might be described as "counter-revisionist" because most of the time the push back has been too much. Flair, Dory, three pillars, many times the criticisms are pushed to an extreme.

Other times like on Luger, Garvin, and a whole host of others, I'm more on board with the revisionist message.

If you want to say I've made the three positions up, it's cool because I don't know if you haven't noticed but I've barely discussed any of these things since April.

None of this has anything to do with lucha either.

There in lies the problem. The narrative on lucha is completely flat out wrong. The narrative is, it's hard to get into, has no psychology and is all floaty and dives. No luchador is a great worker, except maybe Casas. That is just plain wrong.

 

It's also why it's so easily dismissed. The narrative says it sucks, so why would it get any coverage or look at?

How established is this narrative though? Who says this? Sounds like stuff I've said but in all the talk I've ever had around those views I've felt quite firmly in the minority.

[El-P]

If it's really hard to get into it, and saying lucha should be dismissed and puro is better. That means lucha is inferior.

 

I also said lucha isn't actually "hard to get into". To me it's mostly all contextual. People have made good points about it like I said.

[Grimmas]

 

 

 

It's not hard to believe, you've shown it repeatedly here and elsewhere in your arrogant dismissal of opinions that challenge your own perceived orthodoxy.

Question - if someone believes Taue is a better worker than Kobashi for example, do you believe that is an incorrect opinion and do you question the motives of anyone who holds that position?

This is getting off topic. As I've said before opinions don't happen in a vacuum, Kobashi has a whole critical narrative around him and Taue has had another one. Whether or not people are aware of it, statements on either of them will be taken with reference to those narratives.

Typically on any given thing you'll get an orthodoxy that emerges, then a revisionist position and then possibly even a counter revisionist one.

A lot of my positions might be described as "counter-revisionist" because most of the time the push back has been too much. Flair, Dory, three pillars, many times the criticisms are pushed to an extreme.

Other times like on Luger, Garvin, and a whole host of others, I'm more on board with the revisionist message.

If you want to say I've made the three positions up, it's cool because I don't know if you haven't noticed but I've barely discussed any of these things since April.

None of this has anything to do with lucha either.

There in lies the problem. The narrative on lucha is completely flat out wrong. The narrative is, it's hard to get into, has no psychology and is all floaty and dives. No luchador is a great worker, except maybe Casas. That is just plain wrong.

 

It's also why it's so easily dismissed. The narrative says it sucks, so why would it get any coverage or look at?

How established is this narrative though? Who says this? Sounds like stuff I've said but in all the talk I've ever had around those views I've felt quite firmly in the minority.

 

Minority maybe on PWO. However look at GWE, it's not even true there.

 

The overall online wrestling community's narrative is as you said. Essentially Meltzer's narrative is as you said. Yeah, Phil Schneider and Dylan Hales may challenge you, but that's not the overall narrative.

 

Thinking lucha sucks is the majority, not anywhere near the minority.

[Herodes]

It's hardly rubbish though Parv, your multi-part series on Flair serves as testament to that. I believe Lucha has become your white whale, and you can't disregard it in the same way you can disregard something like French wrestling for example which doesn't inform the overall narrative of wrestling fandom.

[supremebve]

 

In matters of taste, "it's not for me" and "it sucks" is a distinction without a difference.

Exactly

 

Not really, tone means something. If your girlfriend cooked something for you and you didn't like it, would you look at her and tell her it sucked? Or would you say something like, "It's OK, but I don't really like mushrooms?" Telling someone something they care about sucks is different than saying it's not for you. I get if you choose not to be civil, but don't pretend like you didn't make a choice not to be civil. It's like the dude from Duke last night tripping an opposing player, but then acting like he was wronged when the ref called a technical foul. You did something that you know was kind of rude, and tried to act like you were innocent when someone called you out on it.

[JerryvonKramer]

 

 

 

 

Parv it's very cute how you've seemingly tried to turn yourself into a victim of "wrestling elitism" in this thread when you're the one who deliberately came in here to troll people by saying "lucha sucks." I don't even think you ACTUALLY think lucha sucks you just want to dismiss it and never see or hear about it again despite the fact that you've probably liked more lucha matches than you've disliked:

 

I think maybe "non-stickability" is something. I was relatively high on a lot of 80s Lucha set stuff but had very little desire to carry on, doesn't stick for some reason. It's like "that was a good match", but it feels ephemeral. Hard to put one's finger on, but I guess it really comes down to me feeling like not a lot matters.

 

But it's different and challenges you to think more than "oh look at Kobashi chop this guy really hard" so just say it sucks and move on.

I do feel victimised for not liking lucha, truth be told.

Well let me say that's pretty ridiculous as there are more people in this thread saying "I've never really gotten into lucha" than beating the lucha drum. If you've been "victimised" in this thread it's because you went out of your way to try and antagonize people who do like lucha by saying "it sucks" or dismissing and mocking people's posts defending it or trying to explain why it's not as popular as other forms of wrestling.

 

If you walk down the street with a kick me sign on your back, you don't get to claim you're a victim when someone kicks you.

It's not at all me who needs the thicker skin, it's Lucha fans if they really see someone saying "Lucha sucks" as antagonism.

Got to deal with that better I think. Cos you know most people aren't actually as polite as I am online.

LOL!!!!!!!

 

Let's see what happens when someone says Dory sucks or Flair isn't a top ten wrestler of all time. Do you find that antagonist?

Outside of the context of GWE, I couldn't care less