"He's ambitiously stupid" - Why Scott Keith's new book is scary bad

[Matt D]

And again, to me it's not that he does the same thing, but HOW he utilizes the same things.

[JerryvonKramer]

jastrau97 - name me a single wrestler that doesn't do that though.

[WingedEagle]

jastrau97 - name me a single wrestler that doesn't do that though.

Don't recall saying that other wrestlers -- good, great or GOAT -- lack any repetitive elements to their game. Your point as I read it was that Flair is not as prone to this as others. I disagree.

[JerryvonKramer]

My point was never that, it was that the argument that Flair always had the same match because of certain repeated elements is false.

[ohtani's jacket]

I think the biggest knock on Flair from a GOAT standpoint is lack of versatility. It's not that he never stepped outside the box at all, but he never reinvented himself like Funk or Jumbo did. You can cut the 90s All Japan guys a pass on that front since the style they worked is the greatest style ever created. You can't really say the same about touring NWA champ style.

 

Also, I would submit that the Just Doing Stuff critique only really applies to long Flair matches. His shorter matches like Chi-Town Rumble tend to be tighter and more structured.

All Japan is the greatet style ever created and you can't say the same about touring NWA champ style? I thought Williams told me people like you don't exist. How many singers, actors, directors, writers or artists in general are eclectic? Not very many. Creative people generally draw from the same well every time. I really don't understand your versatility argument when you have such conservative views on wrestling.

[jdw]

Did I?

 

I could swear it was *you* who claimed that people don't make Great Lists and GOATs in things other than Pro Wrestling. Then a bunch of people, including me, pointed out how silly you were being.

 

John

[NintendoLogic]

I think the biggest knock on Flair from a GOAT standpoint is lack of versatility. It's not that he never stepped outside the box at all, but he never reinvented himself like Funk or Jumbo did. You can cut the 90s All Japan guys a pass on that front since the style they worked is the greatest style ever created. You can't really say the same about touring NWA champ style.

 

Also, I would submit that the Just Doing Stuff critique only really applies to long Flair matches. His shorter matches like Chi-Town Rumble tend to be tighter and more structured.

All Japan is the greatet style ever created and you can't say the same about touring NWA champ style? I thought Williams told me people like you don't exist. How many singers, actors, directors, writers or artists in general are eclectic? Not very many. Creative people generally draw from the same well every time. I really don't understand your versatility argument when you have such conservative views on wrestling.

 

You seem to be misinterpreting what jdw and I have said. I never said that 90s All Japan is flawless or the only style worth watching. But yes, I do think it's the best. Anyway, the fact that versatility is so rare is precisely what makes it so extraordinary when someone demonstrates it. When guys are relatively equal in other respects, it's something that should be taken into account.

[ohtani's jacket]

Did I?

 

I could swear it was *you* who claimed that people don't make Great Lists and GOATs in things other than Pro Wrestling. Then a bunch of people, including me, pointed out how silly you were being.

 

John

That's not exactly what I said, but you never were very good at following someone else's argument.

[ohtani's jacket]

I think the biggest knock on Flair from a GOAT standpoint is lack of versatility. It's not that he never stepped outside the box at all, but he never reinvented himself like Funk or Jumbo did. You can cut the 90s All Japan guys a pass on that front since the style they worked is the greatest style ever created. You can't really say the same about touring NWA champ style.

 

Also, I would submit that the Just Doing Stuff critique only really applies to long Flair matches. His shorter matches like Chi-Town Rumble tend to be tighter and more structured.

All Japan is the greatet style ever created and you can't say the same about touring NWA champ style? I thought Williams told me people like you don't exist. How many singers, actors, directors, writers or artists in general are eclectic? Not very many. Creative people generally draw from the same well every time. I really don't understand your versatility argument when you have such conservative views on wrestling.

 

You seem to be misinterpreting what jdw and I have said. I never said that 90s All Japan is flawless or the only style worth watching. But yes, I do think it's the best. Anyway, the fact that versatility is so rare is precisely what makes it so extraordinary when someone demonstrates it. When guys are relatively equal in other respects, it's something that should be taken into account.

 

What happens if someone thinks the touring NWA champ style is the greatest style ever created? Who says Flair or anyone else for that matter have to reinvent themselves? And how exactly did Funk or Jumbo do it? They got older.

[NintendoLogic]

If someone thinks touring NWA style is the best style, they'll most likely rate Flair as the GOAT by a wide margin. If someone thinks lucha is the best style, they'll probably rate someone like Negro Casas as the GOAT. If someone thinks junior wrestling is the best style, they'll probably rate Liger as the GOAT. Ranking wrestlers isn't exactly a scientific endeavor. When you get right down to it, most of it boils down to personal taste. I'm just laying my cards out on the table as to where my preferences lie.

 

Also, I don't really know what you mean when you say that Funk and Jumbo reinvented themselves by getting older. Every wrestler gets older. Some of them manage to keep up, but most of them get left behind. And what about Eddy Guerrero, who got over huge everywhere he went and died before the age of 40? I wouldn't call him GOAT on that basis, but I wouldn't really argue against it either.

[ohtani's jacket]

Ok, I take your point about personal tastes.

 

I don't really see how Funk or Jumbo reinvented themselves. The changes in their personas were a natural progression over time. They evolved as they grew older. This may be a positive for them, but does that mean that the absence of reinvention is a negative for others? Why can't it be a plus for some wrestlers and a non-factor for others? Perhaps Flair had a persona that was so over there wasn't any scope to reinvent it. Perhaps what he really needed was better stories, better angles and better feuds. There aren't too many main event attractions who change their style once they're established. Perhaps Flair perfected his act so well that people still wanted to see it long after many of us were sick of it. If you think about it, it's difficult to imagine Flair doing anything different. That may be the trappings of being Ric Flair, but it's hard for me to see it as a negative that he never mixed up his act. In the case of someone like Negro Navarro I would say his transformation was a total success, but I would also temper that by saying the little footage we have of him as a younger worker is not quite as compelling as the worker he evolved into. I don't see how versatility is as important as being really, really good at what you do. Your act is everything in pro-wrestling and since the overwhelming majority of workers never change if you're going to have arguments about who was the best I think it ought to boil down to who was the absolute best at what they did not whether they versatile. If you think that being versatile is part of being the absolute best then fair enough, but like I said I don't think it's imperative that a wrestler changes.

[Dylan Waco]

I thought Flair sort of did reinvent himself for a while in the WWE as an American Onita and it led to some good matches after a period where I legitimately thought he was one of the two or three worst wrestlers on earth.

[Jingus]

Flair has changed somewhat over time. Not nearly as much as a guy like Funk or others who went through complete persona overhauls, but the evolution is there. Compare him to guys like, say, Abdullah or RVD who seem literally incapable of doing anything but the exact same stuff, decade after decade.

 

Of course, there are greats who never change at all. Some like Steamboat or Andre or Regal were pretty consistent in sticking to their particular gimmicks and style throughout the years, and I certainly don't think it hurt their work.

[blueminister]

I don't see OJ's distinction between "reinventing themselves" and "evolution." Both terms seem to represent the opposite of, say, Hacksaw Duggan finding a schtick and riding it thirty years into the sunset.

[NintendoLogic]

Flair has changed somewhat over time. Not nearly as much as a guy like Funk or others who went through complete persona overhauls, but the evolution is there. Compare him to guys like, say, Abdullah or RVD who seem literally incapable of doing anything but the exact same stuff, decade after decade.

 

Of course, there are greats who never change at all. Some like Steamboat or Andre or Regal were pretty consistent in sticking to their particular gimmicks and style throughout the years, and I certainly don't think it hurt their work.

You have to distinguish between "all-time great" and "greatest of all time," which is a much higher standard. None of the guys you mentioned are serious contenders for the latter. The closest would be Steamboat, and most everyone would put him at the next level down.

 

With regard to Flair, I can certainly see the argument that having a style and persona that translates well in any era is just as impressive, if not more so, than changing with the times. It's a question without an obvious answer, and I wouldn't fault someone for seeing it that way.

[Dylan Waco]

I think Hansen is a guy who some would consider as a GOATC (I wouldn't see him as an outlandish pick and he'd make my top ten for sure) and while I think he was more varied than people give him credit for, I would guess the general perception of Hansen is that he is less versatile than anyone mentioned so far.

 

Just throwing this out there as a guy who I would argue IS on that tip top level, but where the general consensus is that he's a tremendously great one trick pony.

[Johnny Sorrow]

I thought Flair sort of did reinvent himself for a while in the WWE as an American Onita and it led to some good matches after a period where I legitimately thought he was one of the two or three worst wrestlers on earth.

I was gonna say the same thing. His whole Foley feud was fucking great with some fun matches, and that match against Big Show in WWECW was the tits.

[MikeCampbell]

You can cut the 90s All Japan guys a pass on that front since the style they worked is the greatest style ever created.

The All Japan style absolutely changed in the 1990's. Compare Misawa/Kawada from 10/92 or 7/93 to their 6/97 or 7/99 matches. Compre Misawa/Kobashi from 10/95 or 1/97 to the 6/99 or the 3/03 NOAH match. The delayed selling and 'top this' style of head drops didn't fully take over until 1998 or so, but you can see hints of it with the Misawa/Kobashi TC match from 10/95 and their 3/96 Carny match.

[ohtani's jacket]

I don't see OJ's distinction between "reinventing themselves" and "evolution." Both terms seem to represent the opposite of, say, Hacksaw Duggan finding a schtick and riding it thirty years into the sunset.

I think reinvention is more along the lines of the transformation from Kid Tarzan Jonathan to Exotic Adrian Street and is more apparent in gimmick changes, unmaskings and character turns. In the case of Jumbo, if you were to chart his career as young challenger --> All Japan ace --> grumpy vet, I'd argue that has more to do with aging. No doubt Jumbo adapted to each stage of his career, but I don't think he necessarily reinvented himself. In Funk's case, I don't think the Funk we saw in 1989 was markedly different from the Funk that fought Lawler in the early 80s and I think many of the traits on show were evident in his Japan babyface work, but I'd agree with Dylan's argument that Funk was versatile enough to play a different role in every territory he entered. That's a plus for Funk and one of his strengths. It may be the reason that some people hold him in higher regard than Flair, however I would argue that Funk was in a different position from Flair and that while we may have seen different shades of Flair in each territory there was basically a necessity for him to play Flair just about everywhere he went.

 

But yes, ultimately they both represent the opposite of Duggan. I don't believe that you can discount a wrestler with Duggan like schtick from the GOAT arguments, however. I just got done watching the British doco where they praise career spanning schtick so perhaps that's influencing me. I don't reallly see how the 90s All Japan guys are exempt from criticism either. If you're talking about versatility then surely they failed to change in the same vain as North American examples.

[ohtani's jacket]

I think Hansen is a guy who some would consider as a GOATC (I wouldn't see him as an outlandish pick and he'd make my top ten for sure) and while I think he was more varied than people give him credit for, I would guess the general perception of Hansen is that he is less versatile than anyone mentioned so far.

 

Just throwing this out there as a guy who I would argue IS on that tip top level, but where the general consensus is that he's a tremendously great one trick pony.

A big Hansen fan would probably find him more varied than someone who's only watched his best known stuff. Personally, I think his matches, though they were almost universally brawls, were varied enough that he doesn't really seem like a one trick pony to me.

 

Again, going back to the Brit doco, McManus was portrayed as the greatest heel of all-time and he wrestled pretty much the same match in all of the footage we have. Now to be fair, the footage is from the latter part of McManus' career, but the Pallo/McManus footage wasn't remarkably different from what we know of Mick. Arguably more intense, but nothing earth shattering. But McManus was such a great performer (and I really, really rate McManus) that I could watch his schtick all day long. Regal didn't sound like much of a fun when the topic of Catweazle and McManus was brought up, so others may disagree, but I think McManus is an example of masterful schtick. Breaks would be another, although Jimmy had more match types than Mick.

[Childs]

Yeah, Hansen's my guy, and I'd say he was pretty brilliant at maintaining a core character but adapting it to fit various opponents and settings. For example, his matches against Inoki were pretty different than his matches against Baba a couple years later. His great 1983 brawl against Funk was a hell of a lot different, in the ultimate effect it created, than his 1993 stuff against Kobashi and Kawada. Most would think of him as primarily an offensive wrestler, but he was good enough to build a match around selling, as he did in the '94 carny against Taue. He evolved in the sense that he wasn't doing topes and power bombs in 1981. But I don't think anyone would say 1993 Stan Hansen was a fundamentally different performer than the guy in those Inoki matches.

 

So yeah, I basically love his act and appreciate that it was so durable and that he cared enough to tweak it over the years.

 

You could say a lot of the same things about Flair, though Ric did less to keep up with state-of-the-art offense.

[Jingus]

You have to distinguish between "all-time great" and "greatest of all time," which is a much higher standard. None of the guys you mentioned are serious contenders for the latter. The closest would be Steamboat, and most everyone would put him at the next level down.

I wasn't talking about rating them, just noting the differences in how wrestlers change or don't, over time. And yeah, I personally would definitely consider Steamboat as a top candidate, he's maybe my favorite wrestler ever. I'd rather watch his matches than just about anyone else named here, with only Funk and Hansen and Kobashi coming close.

 

Just throwing this out there as a guy who I would argue IS on that tip top level, but where the general consensus is that he's a tremendously great one trick pony.

What about Kawada? He kinda fits that paradigm. His general shtick changed less than any of the other 4.5 Gods (for purposes of comparison, I'm counting Taue and Akiyuma as both 75% of a deity). Changing from "Footloose" Kawada to "Kick Your Fucking Face Off" Kawada was much less of a transition than, say, Tiger Mask II changing into what Misawa eventually became. It's arguable that his evolution was nothing more than the sort of thing that every young rookie does when they're trying to hammer out their own style, and he didn't change much at all once he found his groove. All he did was adapt to the style that everyone else was changing (and of the Big 3, Kawada was the last guy to finally give in to the temptation of crowd-popping headdrops and counter-intuitive selling; he rarely did that stuff whenever matched against someone who wasn't well known for it). Misawa became the unflappable stoic (not to mention a promoter), Kobashi turned into Cripple McChoppy, Akiyuma went from being a punching bag to being a grumpy old veteran himself. Taue was the only guy in this class who changed as little as Kawada, and few people would argue that Taue was the greater of the two.

[El-P]

I thought Flair sort of did reinvent himself for a while in the WWE as an American Onita and it led to some good matches after a period where I legitimately thought he was one of the two or three worst wrestlers on earth.

I mentionned in another thread that I would most probably never revisit WWE 00's, but if I make one exception to this, it might be to take a look at WWECW. I'm intrigued about several things that have been pimped over the years, Flair as "The American Onita" being one (and being a big Onita fan, I'm scratching my head at this very notion to be honest).

[Loss]

I'm not sure how the 90s All Japan style is the best style in history. It has probably produced the most great matches, but it was also a dead end style that was unsustainable because the physical risks were too high. At a certain point, matches started going longer than they needed to go. There were too many kickouts, and too many head drops. I know there was never an argument that the style was perfect, but the style only lasted a few years (at least in a way where it wasn't excessive). The traveling NWA champ worked for close to 40 years, and the bar wasn't raised so ridiculously high that a future generation of guys couldn't pull it off.

[jdw]

Did I?

 

I could swear it was *you* who claimed that people don't make Great Lists and GOATs in things other than Pro Wrestling. Then a bunch of people, including me, pointed out how silly you were being.

 

John

That's not exactly what I said, but you never were very good at following someone else's argument.

 

So what did *I* say, Daniel. Point me to the post that you're putting into my mouth.

 

John