AEW Dynamite - Grand Slam - September 22, 2021

[Timbo Slice]

The point is that there’s a difference between wrestlers creating a story that induces a response as opposed to more Pavlovian responses, which is what wrestling has become. This isn’t a new phenomenon, either. It’s what led AJPW to become more highspot oriented when Kobashi got his singles push, Toyota in AJW, etc. 

There is a difference between the two, and why in a world where wrestling can be viewed between the lines more than ever before, getting the fans to buy into a story as opposed to getting the big pop with big moves is something that goes by the wayside more often than not with folks like the Bucks or Omega. 

[El-P]

Omega & Page vs The Young Bucks is probably the match that had the deepest psychology ever in term of storytelling. Like, the amount of layers was just out of the world (but at the same time anyone could enjoy it, hell, I did not get all of the layers, I had to read about them later from people who paid better attention and with better memories). And that's not an exception at all in their body of work. The idea that they are just doing spots for the sake of it is a complete misunderstanding of their work. 

Also, the idea that pro-wrestling is only about the inner narrative is extremely reductionist. I've said it before, pro-wrestling stories are not exactly super interesting in themselves. Most of the times it's actually pretty mundane, when not totally dire and tired (not to mention the repetition of the exact same tropes in classic southern tag-team wrestling storytelling for instance, makes the responses just as Pavlovian as people popping for a gratuitous table spot). Excluding the form of pro-wrestling, or making it a secondary element, to concentrate on the infamous "storytelling" is simply erasing a huge part of what pro-wrestling is all about and why it can be so great. The "lol mOveZ" meme was funny for about two minutes in 2007 or something, but when it became an "argument" it has tremendously hurt the perception of pro-wrestling in some circles, including this board (not to mention it was a way to disqualify de facto people who would love a certain approach and paint them as stupid, and with poor taste basically, as the appreciation for supposedly "smart work" is also a way to gain some social capital, as a famous sociologist would say, in the little society that is the internet pro-wrestling fandom).

[Migs]

1 hour ago, NintendoLogic said:

The 1998 Kobashi/Akiyama Triple Crown match is relevant to a few of the points raised in this discussion. After working Kobashi's leg for most of the match, Akiyama slaps on a figure-four late. That's good psychology in a vacuum, but it kills the crowd because a late 90s All Japan audience doesn't buy a submission as a finisher. However, Kobashi sells so dramatically that he manages to get the crowd back into it. I bring it up because it shows that the right move in one context is the wrong one for a different audience. It also shows that the true greats can manipulate crowds into producing the desired reaction. For a more recent example, look at Brock Lesnar. In his WWE return match, he managed to get a Chicago crowd completely behind John Cena. There's obviously something to be said for giving the audience what it wants, and Omega and the Bucks are tops at that. But have they (or Bryan, for that matter) ever turned around a crowd that was indifferent or hostile to what they were trying to sell? I'm not saying they haven't, I'd just like to be pointed to some examples.

I think a lot of that happened earlier in their careers. There's a famous PWG match with the Bucks vs Bryan/Roddy Strong during a time when the Bucks were starting to lose the crowd as babyfaces, where the plan was to get sympathy from a vicious beating from Bryan/Strong and it went the other way, to the point the Bucks were beaten to pulps. And that match leads to the Bucks finding ways to lean into the idea their act might make them heels, and finding ways to work for the Reseda crowd. But because they learned on the early side, it's hard to think of them working in front of a crowd that was hostile to their match direction, because they're pretty good about at adapting (for example, they work on the heel side against the Lucha Bros at Double or Nothing 2019, or against Page/Omega at Revolution 2020, even when they are ostensibly faces, because they read that the crowd is with the other side).

[El-P]

The one case that has always fascinated me, and much more now, is the infamous Malenko vs Benoit match at HoggWild 96. First off I talked about how crowds should not be judged at all, but this is a special case as this was not a pro-wrestling fan crowd at all, but still. But the thing is, the exact same match happening in Korakuen Hall or the ECW Arena at the exact same date is probably a great match. But in this context, I have no idea what to make of it. It's a very unique case of course, but it's a fascinating one to me.

[Migs]

3 hours ago, Timbo Slice said:

The point is that there’s a difference between wrestlers creating a story that induces a response as opposed to more Pavlovian responses, which is what wrestling has become. This isn’t a new phenomenon, either. It’s what led AJPW to become more highspot oriented when Kobashi got his singles push, Toyota in AJW, etc. 

There is a difference between the two, and why in a world where wrestling can be viewed between the lines more than ever before, getting the fans to buy into a story as opposed to getting the big pop with big moves is something that goes by the wayside more often than not with folks like the Bucks or Omega. 

6 hours ago, Matt D said:

I went back and watched Darby vs Ethan Page casket match today. The finish was Darby taking an ego's edge off the top onto the stairs in the center of the ring, before recovering and getting the win. Darby is a very over, very sympathetic babyface. Page is a competent heel with fairly over the top mannerisms that do get some heat. The crowd's response to the edge wasn't sympathy or concern for Darby or anger for Page or worry that the guy they like wasn't going to win the match. It was a This is Awesome chant. Darby's really good at drawing engagement and sympathy but there's nothing you can do there. I'm not saying the crowd is wrong to have done that or that it would have been any better if Darby was more than really good and was instead good enough to convince the fans to feign concern instead so that they were playing along too or whatever (which feels like it happens in some other situations where you get a simulation of actual heat in 2021). It is what it is. The genie's out of the bottle. And wrestlers have to respond accordingly. I get that. Moreover, those that do and do well and create some sort of honest and earnest engagement from a crowd should be acknowledged for doing so. 

I do think that the modern fanbase has a really interesting push and pull with cheering and booing vs. seeing a great match. I mean, in the moment with Danielson vs. Omega, I was cheering for Bryan, but I'm also a huge fan of Omega's, even if I might boo if he'd won the match. There's a recognition that it's fun to be seeing something great right in front of you, regardless of who wins, so there might be a cheer on a big Omega move. It's a hard line to walk - I'm not really a fan of the "fight forever" or "both these guys" chants in the moment - it swings a little too meta for me, but I also totally get why somebody behind me just straight up shouted "this is the best match I've ever seen" during Danielson-Omega. There's a contextual awareness.

It's why I think Jay White's evolution has been interesting to watch, because at times it's felt like his way toward heat was to intentionally make matches "worse" - slower, less exaggerated finishing sequences. It can work to an extent if you're good, although that stuff is death in the wrong hands (EVIL appeared to have learned all the stalling and none of the match construction lessons).

I also think it's a perfectly fair criticism of some modern wrestling being fun but a bit hollow because it's built to those crowd reactions - a scramble match in GCW is literally just meant to be a string of spots to pop a crowd, and just because it works in context doesn't necessarily mean it has to be hailed as a classic. But I really don't think the matches that people would rate most highly are throwing out story for spots. The matches I'd hail as classics from this era are all about story - Omega-Okada, Bucks-Golden Lovers, Bucks-Omega/Page.

EDIT: I do think there's also a bit of storytelling that's in the eye of the beholder. I frequently watch Tanahashi matches and then see Meltzer's review and he's gotten way more story out of it than I have; not to say who's right or wrong, but I think Meltz really connects to Tanahashi in a way that I don't and he's getting more from the matches than I am. I think this may be more broadly true for modern wrestling, which tends to be a bit more aimed at long-term fans (the "nerd culture" point above) - a great match should work on many levels, but the level of storytelling ends up being a bit more in the eye of the beholder than in the past (although I'd note that stuff like 90s All Japan is filled with storytelling based on callbacks that would be completely non-obvious to a first-time viewer).

[Migs]

1 hour ago, El-P said:

The one case that has always fascinated me, and much more now, is the infamous Malenko vs Benoit match at HoggWild 96. First off I talked about how crowds should not be judged at all, but this is a special case as this was not a pro-wrestling fan crowd at all, but still. But the thing is, the exact same match happening in Korakuen Hall or the ECW Arena at the exact same date is probably a great match. But in this context, I have no idea what to make of it. It's a very unique case of course, but it's a fascinating one to me.

That one is so extreme that there was probably only one way to solve it, and it might have been out of their hands - you end the match early, either at the initial time limit or at least after the first OT period. I'm sure they initially figured hard work would win them over, but there's a point where it's just clear nothing about the match could please that crowd. 

[strobogo]

Good work for the sake of good work with nothing attached can be awesome in 5-10 minute matches. But doing that for 25 minutes falls flat almost anywhere, imo. Even in front of crowds that are predisposed to good work for the sake of good work. Malenko in general is a good example in general where WCW would just send him out to fill time and he'd go through all the motions of a match with no angle, no stakes, show no personality, and the crowds wouldn't give a shit. But then you have something like Dean vs Ultimo where it starts like that and about halfway through they kick things up a notch and show some emotion and the crowd that previously did not give a fuck at all are rocking all the way to the finish. 

 

That Hog Wild match had no stakes, a barest of barebones angle for 2 weeks before the show, and they had them doing 20 minutes of chain wrestling and shit in front of a crowd of bikers that didn't pay to see wrestling.

[Jmare007]

2 hours ago, Migs said:

I think a lot of that happened earlier in their careers. There's a famous PWG match with the Bucks vs Bryan/Roddy Strong during a time when the Bucks were starting to lose the crowd as babyfaces, where the plan was to get sympathy from a vicious beating from Bryan/Strong and it went the other way, to the point the Bucks were beaten to pulps. And that match leads to the Bucks finding ways to lean into the idea their act might make them heels, and finding ways to work for the Reseda crowd.

I could be remembering wrong but I was sure the Bucks were already heels by that DDT4 tournament or they turned before the Finals. I had to google and read that the Buck actually wrote about it and it reads waaay more dramatic than what it looked like. Then again, I wasn't the one getting chopped and kicked to oblivion.

EDIT: Watched some bits and the ending and wow, I was totally misremembering. Dragon even cut a promo to put them over on some Roman Reigns shit

[Dav'oh]

Bit late to the party, but I wanted to bring up the "Omega is a dork", "Cole is a dork", "XYZ is a dork".

There weren't 20,177 reincarnations of James Dean at Arthur Ashe the other night. It wasn't an audience full of young Marlon Brandos. It wasn't even a house full of Arthur Fonzarellis. The Elite and friends were playing to twenty thousand Potsie Webbers. 

They know and reflect their core audience, whether in-ring e.g dropping the southern tag formula as mentioned in another post, or by being, y'know...uncool. 

It's not like the beautiful people have even glanced sideways at pro-wrestling since 1984-5 (the 1950s, even?) We're a pretty dorky fandom. Always have been (except PWO posters, who are all Fonzies ).

I guess Orange Cassidy is a Fonzie, too...

[NintendoLogic]

The only pro wrestling storytelling that interests me is a match's internal narrative. I prefer matches that stand on their own and don't require an extensive knowledge of backstory to appreciate. In particular, loading matches with Easter eggs for dedicated fans to pick up on doesn't appeal to me at all. Here's an example of what I'm talking about:

How exactly does Okada scoring a pin the same way in two matches that took place on the same date "make sense"? Did something happen to him on June 9 that makes him extraordinarily skilled at pinfall reversals on that particular date? I can recognize the thought and effort it takes to construct matches that way, but it does nothing for my personal enjoyment. By the way, I'm increasingly convinced that much of the supposed long-term storytelling in 90s All Japan was simply tape traders reading too much into things and matches like 6/3/94 are perfectly accessible to first-time viewers.

Ricky Steamboat was another master of turning around crowds. At Chi-Town Rumble, he had a crowd that started out heavily divided (there was even a "Steamboat sucks" chant at one point) losing their minds for him by the end. And at Starrcade 1992, his tag title match woke up a crowd that up to that point had been dead as a doornail.

[Boss Rock]

I do agree to an extent a match doesn't need a ton of callbacks to be a great match, but long-term storytelling can absolutely make a match better or add to a narrative. Like when I first saw 6/9/95 I was already convinced it was one of the greatest matches ever. But with the added context that Misawa had a broken orbital bone (which I was not privy to before), it made even more sense and was even more effective.

[funkdoc]

re: the conversation on Omega-Danielson being so strike-based…for those who haven’t kept up, that and matwork have been making a comeback in the indies as of late.

GWE Discord had some talk about this, and i brought it up to another one of my friend groups that’s really plugged into that scene. They think a lot of the striking is from KENTA, as NOAH in general was the hot promotion among the hardcore audience when a lot of these kids would’ve started following wrestling.  Plus Punk & Danielson always shouting him out and copying stuff from him, of course.  Going back and discovering the old ROH classics is probably another factor.

tl;dr “lol flips” is an outdated stereotype of the modern style - the likes of the Bucks are better viewed as representing the generation before this one

[NintendoLogic]

I've long contended that KENTA is one of the most influential wrestlers of the 21st century. Just about every junior-sized wrestler in kick pads draws from him to a degree.

[Timbo Slice]

The King’s Road style of booking was based more on hierarchy than history, which allowed folks to pick it apart easier and have a better understanding of roles. The fan base of AJPW was also very strong and loyal, which is what allowed them to do things like Kawada’s trick knee or the orbital bone stuff with Misawa, because those were inherent traits that were learned and not explicit. But those were more decisions based on availability than making them a part of the story. 
 

One of the biggest things called out about the start of Hokuto/Kandori was whether or not it was an explicit call out to Hokuto’s previous injuries or not, and the folks who did thought it added multitudes to the match. The problem is that this isn’t known for sure, and really only became apparent due to fans looking for it and connecting the dots. There’s tons of that throughout the tape trading years that got adopted as psychology and discussions that workers are up and implemented, and wanted to pass on to observers who wanted to make the same connections there. The problem is they are more often than not shoehorned in as a reference that can take away from the match itself rather than a true callback. It’s a difference that seems like walking a tightrope, but also divides those who force the issue and those who just work the match as is instead of turning it into wrestling cum Zapruder. 

[El-P]

1 hour ago, NintendoLogic said:

I've long contended that KENTA is one of the most influential wrestlers of the 21st century. Just about every junior-sized wrestler in kick pads draws from him to a degree.

Totally agree. 

[C.S.]

18 hours ago, Dav'oh said:

Bit late to the party, but I wanted to bring up the "Omega is a dork", "Cole is a dork", "XYZ is a dork".

There weren't 20,177 reincarnations of James Dean at Arthur Ashe the other night. It wasn't an audience full of young Marlon Brandos. It wasn't even a house full of Arthur Fonzarellis. The Elite and friends were playing to twenty thousand Potsie Webbers. 

They know and reflect their core audience, whether in-ring e.g dropping the southern tag formula as mentioned in another post, or by being, y'know...uncool. 

It's not like the beautiful people have even glanced sideways at pro-wrestling since 1984-5 (the 1950s, even?) We're a pretty dorky fandom. Always have been (except PWO posters, who are all Fonzies ).

I guess Orange Cassidy is a Fonzie, too...

I have nothing against most of the wrestlers in AEW - I enjoy them, by and large - but your argument is flawed for one simple reason:

Dorks generally don't like watching other dorks (okay, Big Bang Theory is an exception). There's a reason Fonzie - to use your example - is so popular. There's a reason Jungle Boy's dad was so popular as Dylan McKay on Beverly Hills 90210.

It has nothing to do with pretending that the "beautiful people" watch pro wrestling or care about it.

Wrestlers acting like dorks to appease the dorks in the audience has never really worked. Cool is what sells.

 

[sek69]

Counterpoint: The presentation of Omega and the Bucks is what dorks think cool is like.

[C.S.]

11 minutes ago, sek69 said:

Counterpoint: The presentation of Omega and the Bucks is what dorks think cool is like.

Maybe five years ago - I'll give you that. Now? Absolutely not. (By design, to be fair.)

[gordi]

49 minutes ago, sek69 said:

Counterpoint: The presentation of Omega and the Bucks is what dorks think cool is like.

[Rah]

Bucks are pretty en vogue with their fashion sense. I don't get the argument that they aren't. Fashion these days is really rather meta/ironic. There's a pretty heavily pushed Netflix drama at the moment with the lead character sporting what looks like a helmet haircut (bowl cuts are in fashion, too!). Just pop into a Zara and check out their catalogue pictures. Louis Vuitton is embracing geek culture in a massive way, too.

[fxnj]

7 hours ago, Timbo Slice said:

The King’s Road style of booking was based more on hierarchy than history, which allowed folks to pick it apart easier and have a better understanding of roles. The fan base of AJPW was also very strong and loyal, which is what allowed them to do things like Kawada’s trick knee or the orbital bone stuff with Misawa, because those were inherent traits that were learned and not explicit. But those were more decisions based on availability than making them a part of the story. 
 

One of the biggest things called out about the start of Hokuto/Kandori was whether or not it was an explicit call out to Hokuto’s previous injuries or not, and the folks who did thought it added multitudes to the match. The problem is that this isn’t known for sure, and really only became apparent due to fans looking for it and connecting the dots. There’s tons of that throughout the tape trading years that got adopted as psychology and discussions that workers are up and implemented, and wanted to pass on to observers who wanted to make the same connections there. The problem is they are more often than not shoehorned in as a reference that can take away from the match itself rather than a true callback. It’s a difference that seems like walking a tightrope, but also divides those who force the issue and those who just work the match as is instead of turning it into wrestling cum Zapruder. 

Not sure about how AJW did things, but I agree that almost all the references people pick up in AJPW seem intentional things by the workers. For example, in Kobashi's book he talks about adapting the lariat into a finishing move because of how many times he'd taken the move when he was a younger wrestler and how he specifically wanted to beat Hansen with it in their 1996 match to make a statement. It's one thing to just reference a prior big match, but something like that shows they assume people would pick up on these deeper trends and draw connections there as well. As you say, they had a loyal audience and worked their matches in such a way that respected them.

[Dav'oh]

6 hours ago, C.S. said:

Dorks generally don't like watching other dorks

"Esports" biggest audience ever came this year, with 5 million dorks watching some other dorks play "Garena Free Fire" out of Singapore. The "League of Legends" dorks drew 3.99 million viewing dorks in 2019. 

The first eight rounds of Anand v Carlson ChessSlam! drew over 100 million every day on television. It's hip to be square, or something....

[Coffey]

1 hour ago, Dav'oh said:

The first eight rounds of Anand v Carlson Chess drew over 100 million every day on television. 

Pfft, who did they ever beat?

[Blehschmidt]

8 hours ago, C.S. said:

I have nothing against most of the wrestlers in AEW - I enjoy them, by and large - but your argument is flawed for one simple reason:

Dorks generally don't like watching other dorks (okay, Big Bang Theory is an exception). There's a reason Fonzie - to use your example - is so popular. There's a reason Jungle Boy's dad was so popular as Dylan McKay on Beverly Hills 90210.

It has nothing to do with pretending that the "beautiful people" watch pro wrestling or care about it.

Wrestlers acting like dorks to appease the dorks in the audience has never really worked. Cool is what sells.

 

I don't know any self respecting nerds, dorks, dweebs, or geeks that actually like the Big Bang Theory. That show is the epitome of what Hollywood thinks nerds, dorks, dweebs, and geeks with a sense of humor act like.

My dipshit ex-marine cousin watches that show, not my buddy who still runs Dungeons and Dragons games at age 45.

 

I'll also point out that until just a few years ago, I totally agreed with you that "Cool Sells." Guys like Ric Flair and "The Heartbreak Kid" were always going to be the most over, because those characters encapsulated everything the watcher wished they could be. But there has definitely been a cultural shift in the last several years, and those kind of characters are at the least being pushed to the back burner, if not totally frowned upon. While things like The Elite's meta-nerdiness (or however you want to phrase it) and stuff like the Orange Cassidy character are able to thrive in the environment that has emerged.

[El-P]

The old idea of "cool" looks like "toxic masculinity" to younger folks.