2009 WON HOF thread

[ohtani's jacket]

I don't know much about the Baseball HOF, etc., but I assume there are journalists who get a ballot. I wonder what the chances are of a sports blogger one day getting a ballot. It seems like Dave isn't casting his net wide enough if he gives his opinion columnists a ballot but doesn't recognise other pro-wrestling journalism.

[Childs]

Online writers are slowly being admitted to the baseball writers association but I mean sloooowly. The BBWA is ridiculously protective of its "authority." And once admitted, writers still have to wait 10 years before voting on HOF.

 

The thing is, there are so many more more baseball writers (both at newspapers/magazines and online) that it's not an equivalent situation. In wrestling, you're leaving out a larger relative chunk of the intelligent electorate by ignoring online opinion makers.

[jdw]

It seems like a lot of the voters are old sheet readers he's known for 20 years.

The majority of voters are people currently in the business or who have been in the business in the past.

 

"Sheet Readers" for 20 years and don't fall under the categories above ("inside the business") are probably less than 5% of the voters. I haven't read the WON for 20 years (though not too far from it).

 

John

[jdw]

Veterans Committee? There's a Vet Com? I'll have to ask Steve if he's on it. I don't recall Dave ever mentioning in his HOF e-mail that there is one.

 

I'm trying not to be critical of Dave, and keep saying that the process is far more simple that people are reading into it simply because Dave isn't communicating well at all (nor providing the data & breakdowns). But the more he talks, the more he's coming across as having come up with a wacked out Rube Goldberg machine.

 

John

[kjh]

The problem is most wrestling reporters focus on one country or even one promotion (like Dan Wahlers or Sean Radican) and have little historical and international perspective.

 

I think the stuff about a veteran's committee is Dave-speak for people he deems worthy of voting on historical candidates on the official ballot, which would obviously include Steve. I think he also has a smaller subset of historians that he goes to for a consensus on pre 1950s stars who go in via fiat like Everett Marshall. I'd imagine that includes Steve too. It's why he's hit a brick wall on Orville Brown. Obviously his fellow historians were higher on Everett Marshall as a HOF candidate than Orville Brown.

[WrestlingPower]

Whether it's 5% or more of his voter pool, the point still stands about how in touch he may or may not be to solicit new opinions. It sounds like online writers who happen to be published on his site have a much greater advantage than people much more knowledgeable or more well versed that may choose to stick to their own sites/message boards. They also could be more likely to trumpet Dave's opinions rather than bring diverse ones. If that exact same person was an indy wrestlers does that make him more qualified? I hardly think so but it seems that way since then they would be "in the business".

 

The comparison to a sports HOF to me doesn't match up here. Wrestling isn't covered in the press like any other sport. Precious few historians and/or reporters of wrestling would be considered "professional" by the definition of being paid for or making a living from covering wrestling. You really have no choice but to choose from knowledgable correspondents whether they are internet bloggers or not.

[tomk]

My impression was that in 2003 there was a huge increase in number voters mostly in category of wrestling reporters…and that was year Shawn Michaels got in.

 

I’m not convinced that larger voting body of “reporters”/”editorial writers” is something that would improve the HOF.

 

I don’t know if Schneider still has Satanico’s contacts or if Javier Llanes’ digits are still listed on the Box y Lucha page. Assuming that the votes are done the way Meltz is now saying they are done, it might be worthy project to try to contact some 70s/80s era UWA/EMLL luchadors and try to get them ballots.

 

But again I want to argue that time spent trying to figure out how the gaming of the voting works is time better spent discussing candidates.

[jdw]

My impression was that in 2003 there was a huge increase in number voters mostly in category of wrestling reporters…and that was year Shawn Michaels got in.

Change that to "people in the business" at one point or another.

 

 

 

I’m not convinced that larger voting body of “reporters”/”editorial writers” is something that would improve the HOF.

There really aren't many "reporters". It's largely a nonsensical category that Dave created. Granted: "historians" is a stretch as well. Dave needs a bucket to toss someone like me into, and that's as close as he can find. It sounds better than "fans I send ballots to". But even stretching "reporters" to the breaking point, there really aren't that many of them. I doubt that everyone in Wade's large cast of character's has a ballot, nor everyone who sends in stuff that gets posted to WO-4.com gets one.

 

I would be surprised if very many people in Mexico get ballots. Don't you think the Lucha coverage would have been a bit better over the years if he did?

 

John

[jdw]

Whether it's 5% or more of his voter pool, the point still stands about how in touch he may or may not be to solicit new opinions.

5% doesn't mean dick in the HOF. Do the math. It takes 60% to get in. 5% can be complete idiots and it won't have any impact on whether someone gets in or not.

 

Christ... far more than 5% are voting on stuff they don't know a great deal about. Pretty much everyone who voted for Luchadors and Euros don't know a great deal about it. When Kobashi went in with that high percentage, an overwhelming majority of the voters didn't know a great deal about him other than "he's a guy Dave has pimped over the years!".

 

 

It sounds like online writers who happen to be published on his site have a much greater advantage than people much more knowledgeable or more well versed that may choose to stick to their own sites/message boards.

I wouldn't go that far. We have no idea how many folks like that Dave hands ballots out to. It's not terribly fair to think that everyone who gets a article "published" on WO-4 gets a ballots.

 

Who is more likely to have a ballot: John Muse or Dan Wahlers? Wahlers may have one now, but Muse likely had one from the start... or at least very early on when Dave started expanding the voter base.

 

We simply don't know who, what and how many. I frankly wouldn't get to bent on that aspect.

 

 

They also could be more likely to trumpet Dave's opinions rather than bring diverse ones. If that exact same person was an indy wrestlers does that make him more qualified? I hardly think so but it seems that way since then they would be "in the business".

Voters in every buckets are likely to trumpet Dave's opinion. It's always going to be there. Again: Kobashi's high number.

 

And that shouldn't be read to mean that "jdw doesn't think Kobashi is a HOF'er". I voted for him. Just saying that there would be a bit of a difference between me voting for him based on watching week after week through the years and closely following the business in the Japan up to the point he hit that ballot... and say Dan Wahlers voting for him based on just reading the WON.

 

 

The comparison to a sports HOF to me doesn't match up here.

The don't match, yet in some ways they do. Most sports HOFs are pretty fucked up in the selection process in one way or another.

 

John

[jdw]

I think the stuff about a veteran's committee is Dave-speak for people he deems worthy of voting on historical candidates on the official ballot, which would obviously include Steve. I think he also has a smaller subset of historians that he goes to for a consensus on pre 1950s stars who go in via fiat like Everett Marshall. I'd imagine that includes Steve too. It's why he's hit a brick wall on Orville Brown. Obviously his fellow historians were higher on Everett Marshall as a HOF candidate than Orville Brown.

There is/was a faux vet com in the sense of people who would suggest to Dave the old timers who should get in without being voted on. It really isn't a com, but just folks Dave completely informally and separately bounces stuff off. To a degree it's a shame that they all are so internet ass backwards that they never set up a mailing list or private board to discuss stuff among 10 or so of them. No doubt the people in the business Dave polls wouldn't want to participate, or would get annoyed when some of their Tall Tales got holes poked in them... as occassionally Lou did, though frankly Lou took it better than most.

 

Anyway... I digress again on how things having been terribly well thought out, and how it really isn't that hard to have done things better (and probably still do things better). That's the "old vet com", and has been around in one form or another since 1997.

 

I don't think there's a current VC in Dave-Speak relating to the Old Timers category on the ballot. I suspect that if either Bruce or I voted for old timers, it would have counted. When I checked my e-mail with the ballot from Dave, there isn't anything on there indicating _any_ category that I can or can't vote in. Seriously... you'd think he would tell me.

 

John

[Bix]

A couple clarifications:

 

- Dan Wahlers got a ballot within months (a year at most) of writing for WO.com.

 

- According to Kurt Brown, there is in fact an official veterans' committee. Dave has a specific group of historials who goes over the overlooked historical candidates, and they all went over Kurt and Steve's bio of Martin Karadagian to vote on inducting him. Before that, he thought the same thing that John did.

[KrisZ]

I've been contributing lucha news to Dave for 7 years now and I don't have a ballot so I think the word "reporters" is the wrong word.

[tomk]

My impression was that in 2003 there was a huge increase in number voters mostly in category of wrestling reporters…and that was year Shawn Michaels got in.

 

Change that to "people in the business" at one point or another.

Yes the "people in the biz" has changed the nature and purpose of the Hall of Fame more than anything else. I still got the impression that there was an influx of observer web writers who got votes around 2003.

[Dylan Waco]

From memory 02/03 is when Martin and Wahlers got ballots.

[kjh]

When I checked my e-mail with the ballot from Dave, there isn't anything on there indicating _any_ category that I can or can't vote in. Seriously... you'd think he would tell me.

I thought what we've learned is that any voter can vote for any candidate, but that some votes are counted differently than others depending on the expertise of the voter. And Dave "clearly explained" this in the email on the ballot, yet no-one understood his "clear explanation" leading to clear misconceptions about Dave's voting system. So in a sense he has told you.

 

I don't think Dave explicitly told the Japanese voters that if they voted for Marc Rocco their votes wouldn't count to his European totals, but to a separate Japanese total. What makes you any different? I suspect Dave feels you're knowledgeable enough in all categories (except possibly Europe) that you would be considered a voter of each region, but we don't know this for certain.

[jdw]

- According to Kurt Brown, there is in fact an official veterans' committee. Dave has a specific group of historials who goes over the overlooked historical candidates, and they all went over Kurt and Steve's bio of Martin Karadagian to vote on inducting him. Before that, he thought the same thing that John did.

I'll have to ask Steve. From my conversations with Steve, it doesn't sound remotely close to "official". Far more like an "informal" one of people that Dave talks to. Dave may know who all the members are, but it's not an official committee unless all the members can discuss the candidates among themselves and come to a collective decision. I don't think that's the case.

 

John

[jdw]

From memory 02/03 is when Martin and Wahlers got ballots.

I thought Martin got one rather quickly, and Wahlers had to wait a little while. I recall Martin making a HOF post earlier, and it was entertaining reading & punting.

 

That said, I'm not sure Todd has it *instantly*. I think the initial Shawn Michaels discussions we had (on Wrestling Classics and possibly elsewhere) were *before* he got a ballot. I think the pro-Shawn advocacy helped get him a ballot for the following year.

 

John

[Bix]

If you look at Wahlers' posts in the WON forum at WC, he mentions he was promised a ballot for the following year and I'm pretty sure this was a few months into his "columnist" stint.

[khawk20]

- According to Kurt Brown, there is in fact an official veterans' committee. Dave has a specific group of historials who goes over the overlooked historical candidates, and they all went over Kurt and Steve's bio of Martin Karadagian to vote on inducting him. Before that, he thought the same thing that John did.

I'll have to ask Steve. From my conversations with Steve, it doesn't sound remotely close to "official". Far more like an "informal" one of people that Dave talks to. Dave may know who all the members are, but it's not an official committee unless all the members can discuss the candidates among themselves and come to a collective decision. I don't think that's the case.

 

John

 

FWIW, Wrestling Classics has a thread in the Thez section (started by Yohe) about their inner circle of Historians...a club they vote members into occasionally, that reads like a who's who of real research guys.

 

It's possible that list could be the Veterans Committee. Lossely affilated or not, it makes the most sense if Dave feels that he needs such a committee to exist. He would likely want to make it as high-end as he could, right?

 

Those would be the guys.

 

Just a guess/observation. I'll post a link to the thread if I can find it.

[khawk20]

Link to the thread:

http://wrestlingclassics.com/.ubb/ultimate...c;f=10;t=002250

 

 

List of the club members:

 

Dan Anderson

Libnan Ayoub

Tom Burke

Mark Hewitt

Tim Hornbaker

Fred Hornby

Steve Johnson

J Michael Kenyon

Don Luce

Jim Melby

Koji Miyamoto

Greg Oliver

Scott Teal

Chuck Thornton

Haruo Yamaguchi

Steve Yohe

 

**edit** Note that Melby was an original member and his name stands postumously, in case someone thinks it's an old list.

[jdw]

As far as I know, that's not the WON Vet Com. It's more something that Steve and other historians started, sort of along the lines of Inoki's Greatest 18 Club (or whatever number Inoki was using). But I could be wrong and have misunderstood Steve.

 

John

[Guest Nell Santucci]

Judging by opinions at the time, Eaton really does have a case for being one of the top five workers in the business from '86 to '90. That's pretty impressive.

It's interesting how some crap on his match against Flair in 1991, but Eaton's match against Flair was one of the most impressive exhibitions I ever saw, and it sealed my fate to be a pro-wrestling fan for life when I was six years old.

 

A couple clarifications:

 

- Dan Wahlers got a ballot within months (a year at most) of writing for WO.com.

 

- According to Kurt Brown, there is in fact an official veterans' committee. Dave has a specific group of historials who goes over the overlooked historical candidates, and they all went over Kurt and Steve's bio of Martin Karadagian to vote on inducting him. Before that, he thought the same thing that John did.

I've heard for years that Wahlers has a ballot. How does he justify that? His editorials aren't that insightful. Maybe Wahlers knows a lot more than his articles allow for one to see. But it sounds like cronyism to me. Of course, that doesn't change the weight of his awesome HOF since there are hundreds of voters anyway. I think Tard Martin also has a ballot.

 

Dave's HOF is modelled after real sports HOFs. No real sports HOF would give ballots to very knowledgeable message board posters. So Dave isn't going to start giving ballots out to the likes of Phil Schneider, tomk, Goodhelmet, Loss or Bix. Which wouldn't be a problem if the depth of wrestling reporters' knowledge wasn't so poor. But that's why he had to start strictly assigning voters to certain regions & subsets.

True, but it's a silly comparison because pro-wrestling exists in its own plane in terms of perception than do other sports. Only in North American pro-wrestling do old timers like Nick Bockwinkel mean nothing to the audience because pro-wrestling depends on promotion than a living history of sorts (like with Baby Ruth in baseball). By that standard, Scott Keith is more qualified than all four of those posters, and that's obviously a ridiculous statement. I'm not sure what he's expecting. How is Steve Yohe any different from Bix, for example?--because Yohe was in the dirtsheet circle before the days of the Internet? How does that make any sense? That standard seems awfully reactionary against changes in technology.

[Dylan Waco]

This is not meant to be offensive to Bix who absolutely should have a ballot, but there is a big difference between Yohe and Bix. Yohe is a true blue historian. Bix is an encyclopedia of knowledge on things and extremely knowledgable, but Bix isn't writing bio's on the pioneers or digging up records on Hans Schmidt's drawing power. That's not a knock on Bix. It's just that they are different things

[khawk20]

This is not meant to be offensive to Bix who absolutely should have a ballot, but there is a big difference between Yohe and Bix. Yohe is a true blue historian. Bix is an encyclopedia of knowledge on things and extremely knowledgable, but Bix isn't writing bio's on the pioneers or digging up records on Hans Schmidt's drawing power. That's not a knock on Bix. It's just that they are different things

Well illustrated and better than I was going to try and explain.

[goodhelmet]

It still illustrates the bigger problem with the WO method of giving out ballots. People with more wrestling knowledge in their pinkie (Schneider, Dean, Bix, Loss etc.) than I have in DVDs are on the outside looking in but I can submit a weekly RAW recap for 6 months and get one. KHawk has more information on the AWA than anyone else known to man... people just don't fucking know. Dylan examines fucking numbers under a microscope to get people to reconsider people who were considered laughing stock picks just minutes before his post goes up. Being Dave Musgrave's friend has to help him for a future ballot but he should have had one a long time ago. The whole thing is fucked.