Jump to content
Pro Wrestling Only

Who Is Better?


Dylan Waco

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 717
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The Dustin Rhodes stuff was trendy too.

Ummm...the Dustin Rhodes stuff started in '02, and in '09 he's still recognized as great. Hell, even now the Goldust/Seamus feud got a bunch of positive reviews. If it's no longer trendy, then it's because it became conventional wisdom, not because he was a passing fad.

 

Really, Dustin was pretty well liked by sheet readers when a lot of those 90's matches were happening. The 91 series with Austin was often cited as being the only thing worth seeing at WCW house shows. We liked him and Windham. The Dangerous Alliance matches were always well received. The street fight with Bunkhouse Buck blew people away. Goldust and Savio Vega had some popular stuff. The fact that there weren't more nepotism charges thrown around against Dustin in the early 90's is really a testament to how much people respected him in the ring.

 

Also, Dustin was respected by the average non smark fans in WCW and the WWF as well. Dusting was always liked for his wrestling ability by the fans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look how quickly Kobashi's body broke down, or Sakie Hasegawa for maybe a better example because she had to retire. I don't want to see a running back average 150-200 yards through the first 10 or so games and be done by the time the play offs come around, y'know?

On a similar note, you could argue Lawler was a better worker than Benoit given that he didn't destroy his mind, body and soul by the age of 40 working such a dangerous style, instead working a style that was conducive to having entertaining matches into his late 50s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last really entertaining match I can remember from Lawler was the SummerSlam brawl with Bret. Everything I've seen in the WWF since then from him has been mostly mediocre to downright embarrassing.

 

Ok, so...

 

Dustin Rhodes or Shiro Koshinaka ?

 

Raven or Sandman ?

 

Abdullah the Butcher or Bruiser Brody ?

 

Shane Douglas or Eddie Gilbert ?

 

Sid or Kevin Nash ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last really entertaining match I can remember from Lawler was the SummerSlam brawl with Bret. Everything I've seen in the WWF since then from him has been mostly mediocre to downright embarrassing.

Jerry Lawler is still doing great, his match last year when he teamed up with Chris Michaels against Todd Morton and Bull Pain was an excellent match. In 2009, he has a pair of really good matches with Jeff Daniels and a great match with Bill Dundee on 3/14/09. Also, Lawler had another with Dundee at XCW-Midwest but I haven't seen that yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE(ohtani @ Aug 28 2009, 07:06 PM)

The idea that Takada is a great shoot style worker, for example, is a completely dated idea.

 

Maybe. That doesn't make it less valuable. The idea that Fujiwara was one of the greatest workers in Japan is very trendy. Doesn't make it more valuable than the other. It has became trendy to praise Fujiwara and Lawler. I echoes the feeling MJH expressed early in the thread

I think I said what needed to be said about the silliness of accusing opinions of being trendy in the Naylor comp thread.

 

 

http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?show...20&start=20

 

But worth posting jdw's piece again

 

It's odd to think back to late 1993.

 

Misawa was a year into his first reign with the Triple Crown, and not really thought of as The Man in hardcore fan circles yet. This was Kobashi's epic year in the ring, and you could see how people thought by his finishing 2nd in the WON Wrestler Of The Year award. The evolution of the champion, the person who would anchor All Japan with Jumbo gone, flew past on the radar, lost behind the work of another person in his promotion, even to a degree also the work of his rival (Kawada).

 

In New Japan, despite the complete failure of Muto's first IWGP reign to provide anything of interest to that point, there's are a noticable groan in hardcore circles when Shinya Hashimoto won the IWGP Title from him in September. Hash was the least thought of worker among the Three Musketeers, who inturn weren't thought of as highly as Hase. There wasn't much enthusiasm for the prospect of a Hash run on top, though most who followed it enough know that through Choshu's booking that at some point Hash would have a spin with the belt as would his other two rivals. This was "his turn".

 

There was a sense of "maybe we can just get through this stage and onto the guys we liked more". In the case of All Japan, it was Kobashi and Kawada. In the case of New Japan, Mutoh without the pain and Chono who was respected in hardcore circles. The hardcores who didn't study NJPW closely had hopes of Hase getting up there, but those really were delusions as they didn't see how Sasaki would eventually fit into the picture and that Hase's role would track Koshinaka's.

 

It's hard to pin point exactly when the views changed. It was clear by 1995 that it had.

 

There wasn't a great deal of enthusiasm for Mutoh winning the title back because Hash had opened eyes by then. In fact, no one really bought Mutoh as the top guy in New Japan until he beat Hash a second time, in a strong G1 Final in August. Then he sealed the deal against Takada, but oddly enough that moment passed quickly: he lost to Takada and it was Hash's role to restore New Japan honor. Then he ran off the longest IWGP run in history by the end of which not only did everyone think of his as The Man in New Japan, but a decade later the company has never been able to come up with someone to properly fill his shoes.

 

On All Japan, the title bounced from Doc to Kawada to Hansen before coming back to Misawa, who ran off a string of Budokan main events where you the night-and-day diffence between he and his peers in the promotion as The Champ was nakedly clear. The difference would still be there in 1996 and 1998 when others had the belt, and it always was clear that they were holding it until it went back to the rightful owners.

 

It's odd because so much of that 1994-97 period has not only forever shaped how we view that generation of wrestlers, but it's also almost obliterated how hardcore fans viewed the same wrestlers in the 1990-93 period and tried to project them forward. It's so strong that people coming along after that 1990-93 period, or those of us watching it now reflectively, tend to view it with that post-1994 perspective. It now seems so obvious that Misawa and Hash were going to be what they turned out to be. Less in the sense of the level of work that they reached when becoming The Man in their respective promotions. More in the sense that they were going to be the ones pushed by Baba and Choshu into those roles.

The idea that Takada is a great shoot style worker, for example, is a completely dated idea.

 

Maybe. That doesn't make it less valuable.

What is the value in holding onto circa 93 opions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holding onto 93 opinions? What? If I believe right now that Takada was a great worker, that makes my opinion "dated". I find this pretty silly.

Anyway, denying trends of thinking is pretty silly to me too, there are trends everywhere, in every domain. Music, cinema etc... At this point, I'm more interested in seeing of those trends are evolving rather than debating workers to death. Wrestling analysis historiography entertains me more than wrestling analysis itself these days. Then, there are some new line of thinking that I will agree with, and others I won't. I don't see what the problem is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last really entertaining match I can remember from Lawler was the SummerSlam brawl with Bret. Everything I've seen in the WWF since then from him has been mostly mediocre to downright embarrassing.

Jerry Lawler is still doing great, his match last year when he teamed up with Chris Michaels against Todd Morton and Bull Pain was an excellent match. In 2009, he has a pair of really good matches with Jeff Daniels and a great match with Bill Dundee on 3/14/09. Also, Lawler had another with Dundee at XCW-Midwest but I haven't seen that yet.

 

Yeah, Lawler in the WWF has never really been much (largely due to booking and opponents) since that match but his indy matches have still been top-flight stuff.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway, denying trends of thinking is pretty silly to me too, there are trends everywhere, in every domain. Music, cinema etc... At this point, I'm more interested in seeing of those trends are evolving rather than debating workers to death. Wrestling analysis historiography entertains me more than wrestling analysis itself these days. Then, there are some new line of thinking that I will agree with, and others I won't. I don't see what the problem is.

 

No one is denying the existence of trends in criticism.

David McCullough wrote a really great popular biography of John Adams. This led to people talking about Adams as significant figure and as a model far more than they had before and HBO put together a really great John Adams miniseries.

Trends exist. Never said they didn't exist.

 

I think I said what needed to be said about the silliness of accusing opinions of being trendy in the Naylor comp thread.

 

 

http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?show...=8738&st=20

Read that thread. Read what was written in the smarkschoice thread.

 

Nowhere did anyone say that critical opinions don't follow trends.

 

But dismissing them as merely "trendy" demonstrates an embarrassing inability to actually argue the merits of those opinions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Talk about old stuff. At this point I really have no time or energy to get involved into over detailled argument about this or that worker. Really, I've got past that point. But I do follow what's said, what's liked or not, and if something seems right, wrong, interesting, intriguing or just plain stupid I'll drop some thoughts about it. Some recent trends have delivered some interesting points or enlightments about somes workers, others seem quite bizarre to me. Plus, there's a point when you have to agree to disagree. I know me and Dan will never see eye to eye on some stuff. Ditto Dylan, with whom I can't share his love for the current WWE product, no matter how hard I try to watch and try some positive stuff to say about it. Lawler, I'll have to watch ever more Memphis than I did but I highly doubt that my opinion will change very much at this point (although I do like him a lot more now than 10 years ago). I've never watched wrestling with a more open mind than I do now actually. I find other thing to enjoy than what turned me on 10 years ago. Still, some trends of thought, some insane pimping of certain workers, I just don't get, and I won't get shy about pointing it whenever I feel like it. I don't take offense to the fact that Dan would say that Marufuji is everything bad about puroresu right now for instance. I've cooled off a whole lot over the years. If people took exception to my use of the term "trendy", well, too bad.

I re-read those old thread, and I admit I found pretty amusing that my not-so serious post were dissected with such detailed attention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holding onto 93 opinions? What? If I believe right now that Takada was a great worker, that makes my opinion "dated".

The idea that Takada is a great shoot style worker, for example, is a completely dated idea.

 

Maybe. That doesn't make it less valuable.

You acknowledged that the idea of Takada as great shoot-style worker might be dated, but even if it was, it was still valuable. Whether or not you still like him is a separate issue. If it was hypothetically dated, why would it still be valuable? "It's a Wonderful Life" was overlooked upon it's initial release. Is knowing that really important when judging it now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Takada as a great worker being "dated" seems... come on. It's one thing to argue Fujiwara as being better than him, but Takada doesn't have to suck all of a sudden for Fujiwara to take his mantle. I honestly have no problem with people arguing Fujiwara over Takada. I mean it's wrestling. So what. So long as you don't start saying ... are a better band than the Beatles and "The Beatles as a great band is an out-of-date idea"... ;).

 

I just weighed in that I'm not as sold on Fujiwara as some people. I *love* Takada/Yamazaki from May 4th, 1989, it might be my favourite UWF match (although the Backlund and Maeda '88 matches certainly are up there). It's not particularly story driven and I'm sure someone could make the argument that it's ... or what-have-you, but I just watch it and I'm swept away thinking how great both guys look. Given Yamazaki's involved I should hope that's not taken homoerotically but still... I've never seen Fujiwara and been in awe with regards how he moved and just how he looked doing everything.

 

As for saying that I'm wary of the Fujiwara and Lawler surges because they're "fads"... I think that's a justifiable position to keep. I'm not saying it's a hollow fad or comparing it to Mark Henry vs. Shawn, but y'know wrestlers, matches, they have booms and surges. Some stay, some wither away, I prefer to be a bit more cautious with it y'know. I respect people's opinions enough to let them make the arguments, we're all going to disagree on something. John had Flair/HHH's cage match as "creepy", I think it's the second best WWE match for that year and Flair's best match for at least fifteen years. Me and OJ might both love the CMLL Minis '97 classic and the Espanto/Santo matches, but I'm nowhere as keen as he is on Dandy/Casas even though I love both guys, generally.

 

I don't think Fujiwara or Lawler are *bad*, I'm not arguing against these "fads" as being without merit, I just don't think Fujiwara is the best (Japanese) wrestler ever. Nor do I think Takada is, or Jumbo, or Misawa, or a whole hell of a lot of great GREAT wrestlers...

 

Opinions change, certain matches and wrestlers don't age as well as others, I'm not arguing against a change in "consensus", y'know... I look at the DVDVR '90s Matches polls and think "nah" on a lot of it. By the same token just as much of it I still think is awesome. I think the NJ juniors are due a big fall off myself, I don't think much of it ages at the level it's been thought of before. I'm not saying Liger isn't a great wrestler, he clearly is and/or was, I'm just not sure he's Top 10 All Time anymore nor the best junior of his generation (Eddy, Benoit 2nd...). The NJ Heavyweights of the '90s being vastly inferior to the juniors, now that's a bit of a "dated" idea for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You acknowledged that the idea of Takada as great shoot-style worker might be dated, but even if it was, it was still valuable. Whether or not you still like him is a separate issue. If it was hypothetically dated, why would it still be valuable?

No, I said I found the idea of it being "dated" was silly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Takada was good in his UWF/UWF-i matches, I wouldn't have a problem with him. As it stands the only Takada performance I really like is his match against Backlund as I think it's a hell of a spectacle to watch him treating Backlund like shit, similar to the Fujiwara/Super Tiger handheld where it appears that they're no longer co-operating. If you like matwork, then Takada matches are the kiss of death.

 

Anyway, I'm not trying to win people over to Fujiwara's side. Everyone's off enjoying niche stuff these days. I don't think it's possible or necessary to get consenus opinions on stuff that barely anybody watches. I will state my opinion, however. The only shoot style worker who comes close to Fujiwara is Volk Han. Geniuses, the pair of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dustin Rhodes or Shiro Koshinaka

Dustin. I never really liked Koshinaka. I do think Dustin went through an awful lull before the Studd Stable feud, though. He could be a hell of a boring worker at times.

 

Finlay or Bret Hart

I dunno... I like early Finlay a lot, but once he hooked up with Princess Paula something went awry. '86-95 Finlay doesn't do a lot for me, but neither does 80s Bret Hart. I'm not all that high on Bret these days, though I still like the matches I've always liked. Finlay's had some great TV matches in WWE, but Bret's career is over. I guess you could argue that Finlay adapted better to WWE than Bret did to WCW, but the whole Bret Hart in WCW thing was a shambles. I'd rather watch an unseen Finlay match than an unseen Bret match, because the last new Bret match I watched (against Austin in South Africa) was nothing special.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is one

 

Briscoe Brothers or British Bulldogs

 

Really a pair of teams who work very similar, and I can't see much of an argument for the Bulldogs, and I am not even a huge Briscoes fan. Your best NOAH Briscoes tags smoke the NJ Bulldogs stuff, WWF Bulldogs never had any matches as good as the best ROH Briscoes even thought they had better opponents, and Marc v. Jay is way better then the pretty terrible Dynamite v. Davey Boy match.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meltzer often cited that Badd should have gotten Dustin's push.

As we learned tonight, apparently WWE doesn't feel the same. <_>

That's just because Mero said mean and nasty things about WWE when Chris Benoit died. Hunter's also probably still jealous that Mero got a bigger push than him in 1996. We all know that if Mero and Dustin turned up on the WWF's doorstep in 1991 looking like they both did, who'd end up getting the bigger push.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You acknowledged that the idea of Takada as great shoot-style worker might be dated, but even if it was, it was still valuable. Whether or not you still like him is a separate issue. If it was hypothetically dated, why would it still be valuable?

No, I said I found the idea of it being "dated" was silly.

 

Again, your own words in the second line....

 

The idea that Takada is a great shoot style worker, for example, is a completely dated idea.

 

Maybe. That doesn't make it less valuable.

"Maybe" is very hard to read as "no, that's silly".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...