goc Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 If that Backlund-Race match is anything to go by, building up those matches as some kind of holy grail is going to lead to massive disappointment. That one turned out to be pretty boring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 I watched it for the first time with two other people: 3 - Loved It 0 - Found It Boring Wrestling is always a matter of taste. One doesn't have to scratch the surface very far to find people who think Brody is a great worker, while he bored the living fuck out of me and has for close to 15 years. My holy grail is likely someone else's borefeast. Which is fine - I've already been bored at times by other prior grails. And on occassion found something fantastic. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 How does Backlund/Race hold up next to the best of both guys John? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Schneider Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 I watched it for the first time with two other people: 3 - Loved It 0 - Found It Boring Wrestling is always a matter of taste. One doesn't have to scratch the surface very far to find people who think Brody is a great worker, while he bored the living fuck out of me and has for close to 15 years. My holy grail is likely someone else's borefeast. Which is fine - I've already been bored at times by other prior grails. And on occassion found something fantastic. John I am pretty shocked that you liked this match, this didn't seem like a different strokes for different folks type match, but a pile of shit with both guys blowing spots and looking like crap. I liked the headlock section, but otherwise it was a trainwreck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditch Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 BTW - is the full version on The Biz? Or do you have the old 40 minute version?Full. I didn't even know the 40 minute version existed until this thread. And do keep in mind that I don't expect it to finish tops for 80-87 when the DVDVR '80s vote comes around. It doesn't have quite the uniqueness of Jumbo vs Kerry or the action of the best Choshu tags. Part of why I love it is how great Flair makes Jumbo look. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 How does Backlund/Race hold up next to the best of both guys John? Best? It's not as good as the 07/27/78 Backlund-Inoki or the 06/11/77 Race-Tsuruta. But I'm not claiming it's a MOTYC (though Yohe and Hoback have it over ****). Tito vs Rude isn't a great match. But I love it because it was a solid bit of work by the two. I am pretty shocked that you liked this match, this didn't seem like a different strokes for different folks type match, but a pile of shit with both guys blowing spots and looking like crap. I liked the headlock section, but otherwise it was a trainwreck. Blew spots and looked like crap? I'll have to catch the blown spots when re-watching it to write up. There were 35 minutes... I didn't see 35 minutes of blown spots. Pretty far from it. I thought the 10/20/80 Backlund vs Slaughter, 04/06/81 Backlund vs Hansen and 06/04/83 Backlund vs Koloff on the DVDVR set were piles of shit, as were the 10/17/83 Backlund vs Masked Superstar and 12/26/83 Backlund vs Iron Sheik matches on Will's set. Those were trainwrecks. This struck me as touring NWA Champ Harley bitching out to the local hero. Harley was okay. The local hero kicked the living shit out of him, bringing a ton of stuff. The local fans ate it up. A better, shorter version of the Harley vs Lawler which bored me by being even more repetative. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 Ricky Morton. I will elaborate more later. As promised ... The Flair/Steamboat matches are great. I will never deny that. I'm obviously tired of them, but that's not a reflection of the matches. Technically, the Steamboat matches may very well be Flair's best. But his most enjoyable? Not really. The Flair/Windham matches are every bit as sound as the Flair/Steamboat matches, and in some ways, I think they're better, just because Windham's offense was better. The wrestling in the Flair/Morton feud is probably not quite as good as in the Flair/Steamboat feud, although it's not far behind. It also has a far better and more effective face/heel dynamic, and because Morton was such a sympathetic babyface, Flair seemed like a killer. I've never seen Flair look like a threat in the way he did in that newly released Horsemen DVD cage match match. Also, because for so much of the feud Morton was selling the broken nose and him wearing that huge noseguard, it really resembles a Liger/Sano match or a lucha match at times with all the mask ripping and blood. The brief match with Morton getting the pinfall that occurred on TBS (the one where Robert Gibson did the counting) is a really fun match worth seeing, and has a different feel than the Pro match from a few weeks later, which sees Flair do some nasty face work. The handheld that shows the last 30-35 minutes of a 60-minute draw has unreal heat and is loads of fun. The old cage match from World Pro, while not as good as the newly-released one, is still excellent. I need to watch it again to contrast the two, and see how different they are, if they are at all. I think that would fit in nicely with the theme of this thread. Even the 1990 match -- while neither guy is what they were in 1986 -- is worth seeing. The problem with the Flair/Morton feud is that most of the matches which have circulated for years are either really short, have no finish, or are joined in progress. That said, I do think in each case, we've seen enough of the match to fairly judge how good it was in comparison to other Flair matches. The cage match released on the Horsemen DVD a couple of years ago was just awesome, which I've written about before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 I look forward to getting the Flair-Jumbo with the new PWO disk. I'll save it for the next KOC, which has been home to some great one hour draws (Verne-Lou, Baba-Destroyer, Backlund-Inoki) and some boring ones (Lou-Rogers, Funk-Brisco). John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jkeats Posted May 11, 2009 Report Share Posted May 11, 2009 The brief match with Morton getting the pinfall that occurred on TBS (the one where Robert Gibson did the counting) is a really fun match worth seeing, and has a different feel than the Pro match from a few weeks later, which sees Flair do some nasty face work. I remember watching this match...I think I was around 12 or so. I was so excited, I remember being at a store the next day and going on and on about how Ricky Morton pinned Ric Flair right there on TV to my Mom. She did her best to no-sell me...but I was relentless Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted August 23, 2009 Report Share Posted August 23, 2009 I am pretty shocked that you liked this match, this didn't seem like a different strokes for different folks type match, but a pile of shit with both guys blowing spots and looking like crap. I liked the headlock section, but otherwise it was a trainwreck. Blew spots and looked like crap? I'll have to catch the blown spots when re-watching it to write up. There were 35 minutes... I didn't see 35 minutes of blown spots. Pretty far from it. I thought the 10/20/80 Backlund vs Slaughter, 04/06/81 Backlund vs Hansen and 06/04/83 Backlund vs Koloff on the DVDVR set were piles of shit, as were the 10/17/83 Backlund vs Masked Superstar and 12/26/83 Backlund vs Iron Sheik matches on Will's set. Those were trainwrecks. This struck me as touring NWA Champ Harley bitching out to the local hero. Harley was okay. The local hero kicked the living shit out of him, bringing a ton of stuff. The local fans ate it up. A better, shorter version of the Harley vs Lawler which bored me by being even more repetative. John Rewatched this tonight to write it up. I'm at a loss for the "both guys blowing spots", "looking like crap" and "trainwreck" elements of the match especially when one eliminates the headlock section since you liked that. The closest that I saw to blown/sloppy was the first headlock takeover being a little non-smooth and the ref in one pin attempt being out of position leading him to awkwardly move around to try to make the count. The second of those is on the ref, not on the workers. The first is about a 2 on the Backlund Awkward/Cringey Scale of 1-10 with 10 being worst. The first Adonis-Backlund in MSG had vastly worse cringeworthy material, and you had in the Top 20. Hell, the Adonis & Murdoch vs Briscos had several worse trainwreck spots in it, and I recall you had that Top 5. I'd be happy to watch it a third time if you want to point out the spots and give me some time stamps. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted August 23, 2009 Report Share Posted August 23, 2009 No dis to anyone involved, but watching a match multiple times in order to nail the time stamps of botched spots not only misses the point of pro wrestling but is also pretty GLF-ish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted August 23, 2009 Report Share Posted August 23, 2009 No dis to anyone involved, but watching a match multiple times in order to nail the time stamps of botched spots not only misses the point of pro wrestling but is also pretty GLF-ish. I don't think Phil or I paid much attention to the time the first time we watched it. On the other hand, I thought it was a good match in that viewing. Phil thought it was full or "both guys blowing spots", "looking like crap" and was a"trainwreck". After reading that, I scratched my head because I just didn't remember that aspect in the match. When rewatching in a second time *4* months later to walk through it in my thread, I looked for what Phil saw in the match. Didn't see it, thought it was something I made a point of paying attention to like the heat/crowd reaction in the headlocks segments and the highspot sequences breaking them up. So I'd kind like to know what specifically Phil was seeing. And not have a real hard to finding them when he lists them. But he didn't respond back in May when I said that I hadn't seen them. I don't expect that he'll respond with examples here. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted August 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 23, 2009 No dis to anyone involved, but watching a match multiple times in order to nail the time stamps of botched spots not only misses the point of pro wrestling but is also pretty GLF-ish. I couldn't disagree more. Since they are not watching the match together, and both are arguing a point, this may be the only way of effectively arguing thier point and allowing the other person to find a specific example. I use it regularly in the 80s nomination threads and all of us in that process have watched matches multiple times to confirm our like or dislike of a match. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted August 23, 2009 Report Share Posted August 23, 2009 I was more bothered by the mindreading here: They sit in the headlock for about forty seconds, largely Harley fifth of ginning the selling with Bob torquing the head once to encourage him to move along. ... They spend about 20 second down in the hold before Bob torques the headlock to signal "lets move along". Harley reads that to mean "lay on my back and pound the mat" before eventually rolling up to grab a fistful of Bob's hair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jkeats Posted August 23, 2009 Report Share Posted August 23, 2009 What was the original post, anyway? Just out of curiosity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted August 23, 2009 Report Share Posted August 23, 2009 I was more bothered by the mindreading here: They sit in the headlock for about forty seconds, largely Harley fifth of ginning the selling with Bob torquing the head once to encourage him to move along. ... They spend about 20 second down in the hold before Bob torques the headlock to signal "lets move along". Harley reads that to mean "lay on my back and pound the mat" before eventually rolling up to grab a fistful of Bob's hair. I tend to think that when you've watch around 60 matches of someone and pay attention to how they push matches along, it's not terribly hard to figure out when they're doing it. Flair is pretty obvious when he want to move along and get to more stuff. I haven't watched enough Lawler to call his spots and what small things he does that indicate what he wants to do next, but I'm sure you can. It's a bit like it's not mind reading to know that when Ric is going to the top in a certain way, he wants to get thrown off. Wrestlers are repetative in what they do, and how they signal to their opponents it's time to do something else. It's not always verbally calling spots. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted August 23, 2009 Report Share Posted August 23, 2009 No dis to anyone involved, but watching a match multiple times in order to nail the time stamps of botched spots not only misses the point of pro wrestling but is also pretty GLF-ish. I couldn't disagree more. Since they are not watching the match together, and both are arguing a point, this may be the only way of effectively arguing thier point and allowing the other person to find a specific example. I use it regularly in the 80s nomination threads and all of us in that process have watched matches multiple times to confirm our like or dislike of a match. There's a difference, you're doing it as part of a project that involves finding the best of whatever time period/promotion you're working on. If GLF was sitting ringside timing matches because he was working on awesome comps, I doubt he would have the reputation he does. If you need to watch a match multiple times and have someone provide you time stamps of alleged botched moves or sloppiness in order to determine if something sucks or not, then as the LOLcats say, you're doing it wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted August 23, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 23, 2009 You still are wrong on this point. jdw asked for specific examples of botched spots since he didn't see any... twice. If you make a contentious statement, you should be able to back it up whether you are watching wrestling, UFC, football, baseball, or anything else. If you can't back it up with more than "this match sucks" then the LOL is on you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted August 23, 2009 Report Share Posted August 23, 2009 I was more bothered by the mindreading here: They sit in the headlock for about forty seconds, largely Harley fifth of ginning the selling with Bob torquing the head once to encourage him to move along. ... They spend about 20 second down in the hold before Bob torques the headlock to signal "lets move along". Harley reads that to mean "lay on my back and pound the mat" before eventually rolling up to grab a fistful of Bob's hair. I tend to think that when you've watch around 60 matches of someone and pay attention to how they push matches along, it's not terribly hard to figure out when they're doing it. Flair is pretty obvious when he want to move along and get to more stuff. I haven't watched enough Lawler to call his spots and what small things he does that indicate what he wants to do next, but I'm sure you can. It's a bit like it's not mind reading to know that when Ric is going to the top in a certain way, he wants to get thrown off. Wrestlers are repetative in what they do, and how they signal to their opponents it's time to do something else. It's not always verbally calling spots. So you're saying that generally Backlund wrenching the headlock seems to immediately precede the next spot in his matches, correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted August 23, 2009 Report Share Posted August 23, 2009 If you need to watch a match multiple times and have someone provide you time stamps of alleged botched moves or sloppiness in order to determine if something sucks or not, then as the LOLcats say, you're doing it wrong. It seems like you're intentionally being dense here. I posted elsewhere back in April that the match was enjoyed quite a bit when I and two others watched it. In May, Phil here expressed surprise over me: I am pretty shocked that you liked this match, this didn't seem like a different strokes for different folks type match, but a pile of shit with both guys blowing spots and looking like crap. I liked the headlock section, but otherwise it was a trainwreck. At the time, I scratched my head in the thread because I hadn't noticed what Phil was talking about. Phil didn't respond to clarify. It's now August and I finally got around to watching it again to write it up in my thread. When watching it, one of the things I was on the look out was all those blow spots, looking like crap and trainwrecks that Phil saw. Didn't see them. Said as much in my write up, and posted as much here. Still think it's a good match. And asked Phil to give examples of what I'm missing in terms of those blown spots. If you're obsessing on the phrase "time stamps" because it and "stopwatch" get some kind of pavlovian gagging response in you, I'll withdraw it and instead ask: Phil: can you give the specific examples of the blown spots and trainwreck aspects of the match that caused you to hate everything about it other than the headlocks? Especially how those blown spots differ from things like the blown spots in the beloved Backlund-Adonis MSG match. I asked for the time so that it would be easy to find given it's a 35 minute match. It's a bit like if I said that the 4/89 Flair vs Steamboat has some of the greatest flying moves I've ever seen in a match. "Really? I don't recall them" -Fan P "Sure. Flair hit a moonsault and a space flying tiger drop. Did you miss it?" -jdw "Er... where?" -Fan P "It was right in there after the top rope frankensteiner." -jdw "I'm not seeing it. When exactly in the match did that happen." -Fan P "Hell, I'm not going to waste the time telling you where. They're right there on your TV and go find them." -jdw FWIW, I'm not saying Phil is doing that. I'm just not seeing what Phil did, but would be more than willing to take another look if he pointed them out to me. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted August 23, 2009 Report Share Posted August 23, 2009 So you're saying that generally Backlund wrenching the headlock seems to immediately precede the next spot in his matches, correct? No. What I'm saying is that it's a comon thing when Backlund is working a hold that if his opponent isn't active that Backlund inturn either moves it along or signals for his opponent to move it along. Torquing the hold is a regular way for him to be active or to signal, "Let's get active". Hardly the only one. Read the MSG match with Rose for more of them. Backlund isn't the only one who does things like that. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingus Posted August 24, 2009 Report Share Posted August 24, 2009 I couldn't disagree more. Since they are not watching the match together, and both are arguing a point, this may be the only way of effectively arguing thier point and allowing the other person to find a specific example. I use it regularly in the 80s nomination threads and all of us in that process have watched matches multiple times to confirm our like or dislike of a match.Yeah, there's absolutely nothing wrong with doing that to make a specific point. I did it a few weeks back at DVDVR, when some goof claimed that Candice Michelle wasn't really all that bad a worker. He supplied a Youtube link to back up his case. I watched said match, used the handy Youtube timer for stopwatch purposes, and proceeded to rip it apart for all the blown spots and incompetent bumps and general awkwardness. If you're doing this sort of nitpicking to provide evidence for your argument, I don't see the problem. Hell, I wish people would do this more often. I think one of the bigger negatives among this particular extended family of posters is a tendency towards vagueness and lack of detail in some of the debates. Way too often you'll find hazy statements like "he brings more to the table" or "this guy works smarter" or whatever, without any reasoning supplied as to why that's the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Schneider Posted August 24, 2009 Report Share Posted August 24, 2009 I am in the midst of trying to watch the 60+ nominated matches I have on my list to finish up the NJ 80's set, but after I do that I will dig up the match and rewatch it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted August 24, 2009 Report Share Posted August 24, 2009 I am in the midst of trying to watch the 60+ nominated matches I have on my list to finish up the NJ 80's set, but after I do that I will dig up the match and rewatch it. Cool. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Kenta Batista Posted August 26, 2009 Report Share Posted August 26, 2009 I'm going to weigh in with something here. I was reading the Flair book on the DART train to work today (I actually bought this one, it was 99 cents at a bargain bookstore, along with Unscripted and Austin's book). The train was nearly full, and a couple of stops before I have to get off, this forty-something guy sits next to me. The guy wasn't all there. He was a little jittery, and had a bit of a speech impediment. He also made frequent loud outbursts, talking to himself, clutching his worn leather bible tightly and hitting himself with it. Anyway, I'm still reading my book and I'm aware that he's staring at me and the book intently. Like, not even breathing, intently. He is focused on the picture of Flair standing next to a very babyfaced and bescarved Michael Hayes. I turn to him, offering a very quizzical "Erm, hello?" He paused for a while, then motioned to the book asking "Wrestling?" I vaguely nodded assent before he started clutching his head, moaning "Ooh no, ooh no! Fighting!" After a while he stopped, and stared more intently at the picture of Flair and Hayes. As though the name had some dread power, he slowly and hesitantly whispered the words "Ric... Flair?" I flashed him a slightly nervous smile and said yes. With that, his face was illuminated with a smile that went from ear to ear, and he started rocking backwards and forwards in his chair. He looked at me excitedly and slowly eked out the phrase "To be... the man... you... gotta... beat... the man..." He then worked his shoulders and arms in such a fashion that the movements could only be the best approximation of the Flair strut by a beseated man who has limited co-ordination in the first place before flicking his head back and shouting "WHOOOO!" The nice man then gave me a tract to read, patted his bible, then my arm, called me "buddy" and left the train. Fantastic. And that is why Ric Flair can stick around as much as he wants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.