Guest DylanWaco Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 There aren't that many. Jushin Liger Aja Kong Jumbo Tsuruta Mitsaharu Misawa Kenta Kobashi Terry Funk Ric Flair Jaguar Yokota Akira Hokuto Barry Windham Toshiaki Kawada Harley Race Eddy Guerrero Can't think of anyone else now. There are alot of guys that and gals that are probably better, but I can conceive of an argument for Slaughter (see Dick Beyer, Stan Hansen, Nick Bockwinkel), then there are alot of people that I would rate right on his level (guys like Owen, Adonis, Bret), but I really can't think of very many that are clearly better. Of course I'm probably overrating him, but am I the only one really high on Sarge? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
World's Worst Man Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 In no particular order Manami Toyota Shinjiro Otani Chris Benoit Bull Nakano Bret Hart Stan Hansen Vader Akira Taue was better at his peak, although it wasn't a long peak. Jun Akiyama Dynamite Kid The Destroyer And probably a lot more, especially guys who are better, just not better by miles. From what I've seen, he wasn't good enough to drag great matches out of guys. He had some good performances, but only enough to where he was having good matches, and then the odd very good or better match. Maybe it was because of the crummy style he had to work, but no one will ever know how he would have done wrestling a style that was more condusive to great matches. But it's hard to rate a guy high just based on "what if". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 Sarge is probably the only guy to get a watchable match out of the Iron Sheik, at least the only one I've ever seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DylanWaco Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 In no particular order Manami Toyota Shinjiro Otani Chris Benoit Bull Nakano Bret Hart Stan Hansen Vader Akira Taue was better at his peak, although it wasn't a long peak. Jun Akiyama Dynamite Kid The Destroyer And probably a lot more, especially guys who are better, just not better by miles. From what I've seen, he wasn't good enough to drag great matches out of guys. He had some good performances, but only enough to where he was having good matches, and then the odd very good or better match. Maybe it was because of the crummy style he had to work, but no one will ever know how he would have done wrestling a style that was more condusive to great matches. But it's hard to rate a guy high just based on "what if". I don't like Toyota nearly as much as most people. Her moveset is unreal, but her sloppiness really annoys me. Still she probably was better than Sarge. Ohtani was better at his peak, but his peak was basically 96. I don't know that Ohtani's career matches up favorably with Sarges, but then I haven't seen any of his recent work. I don't think Benoit is definiatively better, but then I don't like Benoit nearly as much as I used to. Nakano is probably better. No way Hart is definatley better. After watching his DVD set I'm lower on him than I have been in years. Both Hansen and Vader have good cases. Taue isn't better than Sarge. I'm a big Taue mark, and a huge, huge defender of his work, but Taue was working with great workers and still not bringing as much as Sarge. He was probably better on 12/96 than Sarge has ever been, but that's the best match of all time and he was just one component. Akiyama isn't better based on what I have seen. It's certainly possibly that Akiyama became an excellent worker from about 01 on, when I quit following his career intensely, but there is no way in hell he was better than Sarge before that. DK is probably the most overrated worker of all time, which is understandably in a way because he was hugely influential and mechanically excellent. Still I don't think he was better than Sarge. Fuck I'm probably really overrating him now, because I just recently watched some Mid-Atlantic tag stuff and was fucking shocked at how great he was, but I really feel like he's been passed over by alot of people when "great workers" get talked about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 Sarge is probably the only guy to get a watchable match out of the Iron Sheik, at least the only one I've ever seen. I don't know about that. Off the top of my head, Bob Backlund's title loss to the Sheik was at the very least watchable, and I enjoyed a couple of the WrestleMania tags Sheik was in with Volkoff, against Windham/Rotundo and the Killer Bees, even if neither match was spectacular. I'll go as far as saying that Iron Sheik is better than Kurt Angle, as far as amateur wrestlers who were able to transcend into pro wrestling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 By the way, this thread really makes me wish the WWE would make a Sgt. Slaughter DVD. There's so much material of his that they own that it's VERY doable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 Let me correct myself by saying I've never seen a good Sheik singles match. His tag work was pretty decent mainly because Volkoff was better than anyone ever gave him credit before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strummer Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 By the way, this thread really makes me wish the WWE would make a Sgt. Slaughter DVD. There's so much material of his that they own that it's VERY doable. A Slaughter DVD would probably be very profitable because the casual fans will buy it for the "All American" gimmick and the smarks will buy it for his work. I've been watching several matches from his early 80s work and he is VERY underrated. Let me correct myself by saying I've never seen a good Sheik singles match. His tag work was pretty decent mainly because Volkoff was better than anyone ever gave him credit before. I've noticed that Sheik seems very uncooperative in a lot of his matches. Like he's afraid to give too much to his opponent. It makes for very awkard looking matches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 Let me correct myself by saying I've never seen a good Sheik singles match. His tag work was pretty decent mainly because Volkoff was better than anyone ever gave him credit before. Well, then you have never seen the 6/84 Shiek-Slaughter match that Loss gave ***** to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anarchistxx Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 Well I gave the 21/05 Sheik/Slaughter match **, so this one must be a vast improvement, although it probably isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 I need to re-watch it, but Slaughter-Sheik 05/21/84 is at least ***, if not more. For continuation of a blood feud with incredible heat, this is as good as it gets on U.S. soil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Cooke Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 Fuck, does Anarchist TROLL in every thread now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 http://s3.invisionfree.com/New_Millennium_...dpost&p=3602791 For a look at Loss's thoughts, click on the link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 Well I gave the 21/05 Sheik/Slaughter match **, so this one must be a vast improvement, although it probably isn't. What is a 21/05? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 5/21/84 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 Loss, it's the match I PMed you about not long ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 Oh ok. I just didn't know what 21/05 meant. And for the record, I think Slaughter/Sheik from 06/16/84 is the greatest American wrestling match I've ever seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjh Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 Well I gave the 21/05 Sheik/Slaughter match **, so this one must be a vast improvement, although it probably isn't.What is a 21/05? You Americans and your daft idea of putting the month first and trying to force us poor trod upon Europeans to use your silly conventions. By the way, I think your analysis of that match is bang on. Best match on the 80s WWF sets by a substantial margin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anarchistxx Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 Well it was just boring to me. Perhaps it was that I hadn't seen the feud build up, but all I saw was average strike action at a tedious pace with the odd wrestling move thrown in here and there. They may have managed to get the hate over, but the fact remains I was bored for the majority of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kilgore Trout Posted January 24, 2006 Report Share Posted January 24, 2006 Well it was just boring to me. Perhaps it was that I hadn't seen the feud build up, but all I saw was average strike action at a tedious pace with the odd wrestling move thrown in here and there. They may have managed to get the hate over, but the fact remains I was bored for the majority of it. Seeing wrestling as nothing more than a collection of moves must be really horrible. Action~! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted January 26, 2006 Report Share Posted January 26, 2006 I'll take emotion and hatred over "exciting action" any day of the week. Everything in Slaughter/Sheik builds so beautifully from one sequence to the next. On one hand, it's well-structured with unbelievably awesome build and strikes that count, and on the other hand, it's a brutal, bloody, heated, emotional, epic encounter. Slaughter putting Sheik face first into his own boot gets more heat than any Canadian Destroyer I have ever seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted January 26, 2006 Report Share Posted January 26, 2006 I've only seen one Candian Destroyer but I digress. However, I can understand where anarchistxx is coming from even though I disagree with him about the match. You really have to look at those matches from a different perspective to appreciate them. This really goes back to the "different strokes for different folks" view of wrestling. Some people watch for wins and losses, some like the skits, some like fast paced action and then there are those who like the art of storytelling more than the actual types of moves used. Do I think one takes a higher degree of understanding and skill? Of course, but I can see why he would feel that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anarchistxx Posted January 26, 2006 Report Share Posted January 26, 2006 Just to clarify, I am talking about the 05/84 match Loss, not the 06/84 match. I don't watch wrestling to see move after move, I look for story, I look for emotion, and I look for hatred. In fact, these things you value so highly were found in a Triple-H/Steve Austin match from February 2001 which you don't rate too highly at all. My problem with Slaughter/Sheik was the pacing was far too slow, and whatever they were trying to put across bored me. It was monotomous, predictable and above all didn't appeal to me. But then, I have no emotional connection with either guy, and I didn't care who won or who lost. For the record, I detest the Canadian Destroyer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted January 26, 2006 Report Share Posted January 26, 2006 I don't watch wrestling to see move after move, I look for story, I look for emotion, and I look for hatred. In fact, these things you value so highly were found in a Triple-H/Steve Austin match from February 2001 which you don't rate too highly at all. That match was good, and was also 30 minutes too long and overbooked into oblivion with way too many gimmicks and the heel going over for no real reason. The cage match portion also seemed to just be two guys laying around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Cooke Posted January 26, 2006 Report Share Posted January 26, 2006 Man, I wish the DVD board didn't crash. I had a review of Trips/Austin No Way Out 2001 that I wish I could post now. Gist was first fall was pretty damn good but the second and third falls weren't. And since when is HHH great at showing hatred? Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts