Wrestling Myth Busters

[Dylan Waco]

Every single wrestler who worked World Class has said that David, who they actually, you know, worked with, was the best worker of the Von Erichs, so I'd take what a bunch of geeks on a message forum thinks with a grain of salt.

 

I don't even remember Cena and Umaga wrestling at the Royal Rumble, so if it's a classic, no one actually remembers it outside of a circle of smarks.

GUYS TERRY FUNK SAID MASATO TANAKA WAS BETTER THAN ANY OF THE AJPW GUYS AND MIKE AWESOME AGREED SO WE HAVE A FACT

[Guest DietSoda]

That's different than Ric Flair, Harley Race (or does he not count since he gave jobbers piledrivers on the floor), Terry Gordy, Michael Hayes, Buddy Roberts, Chris Adams, Jimmy Garvin, Kevin Von Erich himself, and a list of others all basically saying the same thing. I'll listen to them before I listen to "dylan waco" from the internet. Just saying.

[Boondocks Kernoodle]

Sure it was well liked at the time, but it's not the sort of match that Dave Meltzer or Bryan Alvarez or Wade Keller would ever point to as a classic, so in that sense you could call it lost.

Them same guys call one of the Dragon Gate 6 man matches from ROH a classic.

 

So really.

 

I'm not trying to start an argument, but can I just say that I really dislike this attitude on wrestling? People like what they like. It seems that over the past few years, the "smark community" has become increasingly hostile towards anyone who enjoys highspots or "high-end offense," whatever that means. I'm aware that guys like Cena and Batista are the ones who get over with the crowd, and fans often sit on their hands during cruiserweight matches. And if I was a promoter, I'd certainly want to build around charisma and star power rather than who can do the most moves. But if I, as a dude who watches wrestling, want to say that I enjoyed the AJ/Joe/Daniels three-way more than Rock-Hogan (full disclosure: I like them both equally), what is so wrong with that? It's just personal taste.

[Indikator]

That's different than Ric Flair, Harley Race (or does he not count since he gave jobbers piledrivers on the floor), Terry Gordy, Michael Hayes, Buddy Roberts, Chris Adams, Jimmy Garvin, Kevin Von Erich himself, and a list of others all basically saying the same thing. I'll listen to them before I listen to "dylan waco" from the internet. Just saying.

So you also agree with Funks statement about Masato Tanaka?

[kjh]

That's different than Ric Flair, Harley Race (or does he not count since he gave jobbers piledrivers on the floor), Terry Gordy, Michael Hayes, Buddy Roberts, Chris Adams, Jimmy Garvin, Kevin Von Erich himself, and a list of others all basically saying the same thing.

So I should take the word of a bunch of coked out con artists when there's plenty of footage that may dispute their opinions? Not that their opinions count for nothing, but there are plenty of reasons they may put over his ability compared with Kevin and Kerry that has nothing to do with putting on more entertaining matches for the fans.

[Log]

So, how'd the whole "Japanese fans are all quiet and respectful" stuff start? I've been watching some 80's NJ and AJ, and those fans lose their collective shit. Same with some of the big stuff from the 90's. I mean, aren't they pretty much like all fans in that they'll sit on their hands for something they're just not that into?

[Loss]

That's different than Ric Flair, Harley Race (or does he not count since he gave jobbers piledrivers on the floor), Terry Gordy, Michael Hayes, Buddy Roberts, Chris Adams, Jimmy Garvin, Kevin Von Erich himself, and a list of others all basically saying the same thing. I'll listen to them before I listen to "dylan waco" from the internet. Just saying.

I'm not saying I completely disagree with you, but I will say wrestlers are likely to weigh things differently. Fans are going to remember how good the matches are and judge wrestlers by how many good matches they have and what entertaining qualities they bring to those matches. Wrestlers are going to judge other wrestlers by different criterion: how easy were they to work with, did they remember spots, listen to the crowd, not show up impaired or unmotivated, etc. I also question how objective many wrestlers can be -- no one is above saying nice things about someone they like personally.

 

When wrestlers say David Von Erich was the best, they may mean he was the best at listening to the heel calling spots, and also the one who showed up to work. I know most wrestlers look down on Kevin because he worked overly stiff, which isn't really the type of thing fans are going to hold against him.

[Bob Morris]

On the subject of "X-Pac heat," I generally try to listen to the tone of the crowd to determine whether or not the wrestler in questioning is getting "suck heat." It can be hard to tell sometimes, but if it sounds like the fans are frustrated rather than just taunting the heel.

 

I remember the Prince Iaukea cruiserweight title push in 2000 WCW. He got a lot of "you suck" chants directed at him, where I got the vibe from the crowd that they just didn't want to see him wrestle.

 

For those that point to the "you suck" chants Kurt Angle got, he got his during his entrance theme, done in time to the theme. That was a taunt.

 

With X-Pac, I think it simply goes back to the fact that, much of the time, when X-Pac had a feud, he seldom got his comeuppance. Fans get frustrated if a heel doesn't get comeuppance and thus are likely to turn on him because of that.

[Resident Evil]

People honostly don't think that fans (even the smartest, most observant ones) on an overall basis can judge wrestling better or know more about wrestling than the wrestlers themselves, do they? There's tons of stuff that the wrestlers know that the fans will never know because they're looking from an outside perspective.

[Ditch]

So, how'd the whole "Japanese fans are all quiet and respectful" stuff start? I've been watching some 80's NJ and AJ, and those fans lose their collective shit. Same with some of the big stuff from the 90's. I mean, aren't they pretty much like all fans in that they'll sit on their hands for something they're just not that into?

In certain parts of the country, especially more rural areas, they're quieter. Or in Ariake. Every wrestler I've talked to mentioned the difference. Granted you can say the same thing about the US, but here you're talking about a less homogenous population huge distances away with often dramatic cultural differences. But I digress.

 

When two Japanese wrestlers are trading holds, the crowds will usually watch quietly and offer polite applause. In the states (especially these days) you'll either get smarky applause for everything or suck heat or murmuring. Very few US crowds ever just sit in silence.

[Resident Evil]

So, how'd the whole "Japanese fans are all quiet and respectful" stuff start? I've been watching some 80's NJ and AJ, and those fans lose their collective shit. Same with some of the big stuff from the 90's. I mean, aren't they pretty much like all fans in that they'll sit on their hands for something they're just not that into?

In certain parts of the country, especially more rural areas, they're quieter. Or in Ariake. Every wrestler I've talked to mentioned the difference. Granted you can say the same thing about the US, but here you're talking about a less homogenous population huge distances away with often dramatic cultural differences. But I digress.

 

When two Japanese wrestlers are trading holds, the crowds will usually watch quietly and offer polite applause. In the states (especially these days) you'll either get smarky applause for everything or suck heat or murmuring. Very few US crowds ever just sit in silence.

 

I've watched tons of Japanese wrestling and have often seen crowds be quiet and respectful. That being said, the Japanese fans can be more noisy than anyone else out there. Still, even where they're being noisy the way they pop for stuff comes off as being more respectful to a match than say what I've seen in North America. It's also always added to the enjoyment of a match for me as it highlights the strenghts of a match making it seem even more important. On an overall basis, I love the Japanese audience and how they react to a match.

[Loss]

People honostly don't think that fans (even the smartest, most observant ones) on an overall basis can judge wrestling better or know more about wrestling than the wrestlers themselves, do they? There's tons of stuff that the wrestlers know that the fans will never know because they're looking from an outside perspective.

Anyone can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the argument has been that fans understand wrestling better than the wrestlers, as it is that wrestlers can't be trusted to talk about these types of things objectively because they're constantly working, or saying what they think will gain them favor. So putting too much stock in their opinions is a bad idea because they rarely say what they truthfully think.

[Al]

There's also a halo effect at work. People will swear up and down that Brian Piccolo was great, Nick Adenhart would have been a 20 game winner, Len Bias was an awesome basketball prospect, etc. We never found out, so people who remember them assume the best.

[Resident Evil]

People honostly don't think that fans (even the smartest, most observant ones) on an overall basis can judge wrestling better or know more about wrestling than the wrestlers themselves, do they? There's tons of stuff that the wrestlers know that the fans will never know because they're looking from an outside perspective.

Anyone can feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the argument has been that fans understand wrestling better than the wrestlers, as it is that wrestlers can't be trusted to talk about these types of things objectively because they're constantly working, or saying what they think will gain them favor. So putting too much stock in their opinions is a bad idea because they rarely say what they truthfully think.

 

Ok, that's fine and common sense but we have to remember too that a good portion of IWC posters are biased too. Especially when they get more and more behind an idea or wrestler for whaterver reasons and even start to believe it. Yesterday, I was reading about a match from one of the top respected IWC reviewer/fans so I decided to check it out. Almsot everything he said about it was inaccurate and at times the complete opposite of reality. It was a horrible match. All becasue he was biased which I had seen before in his writing. Some people do keep a level head but a good amount don't.

[MikeCampbell]

But if I, as a dude who watches wrestling, want to say that I enjoyed the AJ/Joe/Daniels three-way more than Rock-Hogan (full disclosure: I like them both equally), what is so wrong with that? It's just personal taste.

Absolutely nothing wrong with that. But your last sentence makes the point. It's your personal taste. You're not stating it as fact the way Dave, Bryan, and Wade do, nor are you using what they said as some sort of argument that you must be right and whoever disagrees is wrong. Out of all the silliness you could find on the ROH board, nothing was more funny to me than when SKeith gave Joe/Kobashi the full five snowflakes and someone posted something like "take that!" to people who think it's an overrated match.

[S.L.L.]

That's different than Ric Flair, Harley Race (or does he not count since he gave jobbers piledrivers on the floor), Terry Gordy, Michael Hayes, Buddy Roberts, Chris Adams, Jimmy Garvin, Kevin Von Erich himself, and a list of others all basically saying the same thing. I'll listen to them before I listen to "dylan waco" from the internet. Just saying.

Ummmm...why the fuck would you rely on any of those guys' opinions when you could just watch the work yourself and draw your conclusions about how good a wrestler is? I mean, just from my own experience, nobody told me Kevin was better than David. Quite the opposite, really. But I watched the stuff, and this was the opinion I came away with. What am I supposed to do about that? "Well, that David Von Erich match was 20 minutes of my life that I'll never get back...an hour, actually, because the first two times I tried to sit through this, I passed out from sheer boredom...but Ric Flair said he was the best working Von Erich, so I guess I actually enjoyed it in a really subtle, imperceptible way." It doesn't work that way. That's why I - like most people - rely on my own personal opinion of something's quality, rather than being slavishly beholden to the opinions of someone else. Try it. It's fun!

[Strummer]

That's different than Ric Flair, Harley Race (or does he not count since he gave jobbers piledrivers on the floor), Terry Gordy, Michael Hayes, Buddy Roberts, Chris Adams, Jimmy Garvin, Kevin Von Erich himself, and a list of others all basically saying the same thing. I'll listen to them before I listen to "dylan waco" from the internet. Just saying.

I'm not saying I completely disagree with you, but I will say wrestlers are likely to weigh things differently. Fans are going to remember how good the matches are and judge wrestlers by how many good matches they have and what entertaining qualities they bring to those matches. Wrestlers are going to judge other wrestlers by different criterion: how easy were they to work with, did they remember spots, listen to the crowd, not show up impaired or unmotivated, etc. I also question how objective many wrestlers can be -- no one is above saying nice things about someone they like personally.

 

When wrestlers say David Von Erich was the best, they may mean he was the best at listening to the heel calling spots, and also the one who showed up to work. I know most wrestlers look down on Kevin because he worked overly stiff, which isn't really the type of thing fans are going to hold against him.

 

Exactly. Kind of like that report years ago where all the WWE workers were saying how great Kane was to work with and the net going ballistic. BUT IT'S KANE!! NAME ME ONE GOOD KANE MATCH

[Loss]

Yes. I've heard a few WCW wrestlers from the past praise Stevie Ray and talk about how much they enjoyed working with him, because he listened and took direction well. In the same vein, wrestlers have talked for years about how much they enjoy working with the Undertaker because he works light as a feather. So, in their mind, that's what it means to be "good". I don't know that everyone thinks that way, but I do think a lot do.

[Strummer]

Yeah the same was said of Kane. The guys working him said they could barely feel his strikes but it looked lethal and that Jericho had the opposite going for him (hurt like hell, looked like shit)

[Ditch]

because he works light as a feather. So, in their mind, that's what it means to be "good".

Mike Modest absolutely GUSHED about Yoshinari Ogawa, and I'm reasonably sure it's for that reason. I can kinda understand when the alternatives include literal heart-stopping Kobashi chops, full-force slaps when wrestling Rikio, and Misawa's head-rattling elbow.

[Sean Liska]

I think the whole "Japanese crowds are usually quiet" thing comes from people who haven't watched much Japanese wrestling from before this decade. You'd get that impression if you only watched NOAH. But early 90's All Japan crowds, for example. were often crazy.

[Guest The 3H's]

Sure it was well liked at the time, but it's not the sort of match that Dave Meltzer or Bryan Alvarez or Wade Keller would ever point to as a classic, so in that sense you could call it lost.

Them same guys call one of the Dragon Gate 6 man matches from ROH a classic.

 

So really.

 

I'm not trying to start an argument, but can I just say that I really dislike this attitude on wrestling? People like what they like. It seems that over the past few years, the "smark community" has become increasingly hostile towards anyone who enjoys highspots or "high-end offense," whatever that means. I'm aware that guys like Cena and Batista are the ones who get over with the crowd, and fans often sit on their hands during cruiserweight matches. And if I was a promoter, I'd certainly want to build around charisma and star power rather than who can do the most moves. But if I, as a dude who watches wrestling, want to say that I enjoyed the AJ/Joe/Daniels three-way more than Rock-Hogan (full disclosure: I like them both equally), what is so wrong with that? It's just personal taste.

 

I don't care that Dave liked it, but Indikator basically said Umaga/Cena wasn't 5 stars because Meltzer wouldn't/didn't rate it as such.

[jdw]

Every single wrestler who worked World Class has said that David, who they actually, you know, worked with, was the best worker of the Von Erichs, so I'd take what a bunch of geeks on a message forum thinks with a grain of salt.

 

I don't even remember Cena and Umaga wrestling at the Royal Rumble, so if it's a classic, no one actually remembers it outside of a circle of smarks.

GUYS TERRY FUNK SAID MASATO TANAKA WAS BETTER THAN ANY OF THE AJPW GUYS AND MIKE AWESOME AGREED SO WE HAVE A FACT

 

Said it with a straight face to Meltzer and me.

 

Granted, Dave did laugh at Terry when he said it. So there was a time when what Guys In The Business Said was taking with a big grain of salt.

 

Anyway... Diet Pop is trolling again.

 

john

[jdw]

People honostly don't think that fans (even the smartest, most observant ones) on an overall basis can judge wrestling better or know more about wrestling than the wrestlers themselves, do they? There's tons of stuff that the wrestlers know that the fans will never know because they're looking from an outside perspective.

People "inside" baseball, and those who protected it like reporters, thought Bill James didn't know dick about baseball because there was so much "inside" stuff that he could never know.

 

In the end... those people had their heads up their asses.

 

I remember Bischoff telling Keller to his face that Beach Bash '95 was a great card because they got a lot of great visuals for the PPV. Wade laughed at him, and even Eric backed down to the ridiculousness of his point.

 

I've had Konnan tells us what a great main event there just was, when in reality it was incredibly horrid and just laid their with the fans, not even getting them worked up towards the heels as was intended. The fans came expecting one match, and when Konnan fed them an overbooked clusterfuck, they were annoyed and turned off at the *promotion* rather than at the heels as he hoped. Of course when this was pointed out to him, he changed his tune that the fans were marks, they could feed them anything and they'd be back at the next show because they were wrestling fans. It was one of those jaw dropping moments where you just shake your head at someone who lost their mind. Which is kind of funny because just a year or two before he crasped that while his own and Perro's and Cien Caras's matches weren't as "good" as the matches on the under card that he really liked, they were well booked to give the fans what they wanted, or to build to another match where the fans would get what they wanted.

 

I had other similar experiances here, in Mexico and in Japan.

 

My own observation is that wrestlers and people inside the business are as fucked up in their opinions as "fans". Sometimes they're just laughable. Sometimes they're insightful. Take them all with a grain of salt.

 

 

John

[jdw]

Ok, that's fine and common sense but we have to remember too that a good portion of IWC posters are biased too. Especially when they get more and more behind an idea or wrestler for whaterver reasons and even start to believe it. Yesterday, I was reading about a match from one of the top respected IWC reviewer/fans so I decided to check it out. Almsot everything he said about it was inaccurate and at times the complete opposite of reality. It was a horrible match. All becasue he was biased which I had seen before in his writing. Some people do keep a level head but a good amount don't.

That sounds like me talking about Backlund.

 

 

John