Most overrated "quality" in a wrestler?

[Phil Schneider]

Yeah, you're probably right, I'm being unfair because *I* feel the workers they're defending with that line of thinking are crap. But this is still one of the easiest way to defend poor workers to me. That and "Oh, he plays his role well".

Don't forget "he throws good punches". Always an easy out for us.

 

A lot of wrestlers rely on schtick. Some people dig their gimmicks, but I think if you're an average worker you've got to have at least some redeeming features that make you entertaining. A guy like Rayo can bring that when he's feeling it (which is about once a decade), but has there even been a good Jimmy Valiant match?

I don't think anyone's arguing that Jimmy Valiant is a good worker. Does his comedy shtick well, but does everything else poorly. "It's not what you do, it's the way that you do it".....the way Jimmy does a lot of stuff stinks, so I thing the saying holds true.

 

Rayo I don't see the problem. I thought we were past the whole "aging CMLL main eventers of the 90's suck by default" thing.

 

To be fair to the Boogie Woogie Man, he was clearly pretty washed up in the 80's. Going through the Memphis footage there was clips of 70's Valient were he looked like a pretty dynamic brawler.

[ohtani's jacket]

I don't think there's been a massive upswing in appraisal of Rayo, Caras, Perro Aguayo or any of the heavyweights. I bet Dave and his ilk still have the same opinions about them that they had during the early 90s.

[El-P]

Really? What were these great "pure" athletic credentials that Billy Gunn had? I always thought it was a BS talking point Jim Ross made up to cover for his ridiculous gimmick and push.

Heard several workers talk about how great of an athlete Billy Gunn actually was. I think JR couldn't keep mentioning it because he's a mark for legitimate athlete, kinda like he always mentions college football.

[Cox]

I would apply the best pure athlete tag more to a guy like Shelton Benjamin, who is clearly a very good athlete but has never picked up on how to put together a great, or even a good match. Because he's a great athlete, he will keep getting chances in WWE, but between being uncharismatic, his non-existant interview ability, and his lack of understanding on match structure, he's never going to get higher than he is now. He really is a good example of "it's now what you do, it's how you do it," because he can do some remarkable things, but doesn't know how to use them in creating a basic match structure that engages a crowd.

[S.L.L.]

I don't think there's been a massive upswing in appraisal of Rayo, Caras, Perro Aguayo or any of the heavyweights. I bet Dave and his ilk still have the same opinions about them that they had during the early 90s.

Dave and his ilk haven't changed their minds about them, but that's Dave and his ilk for you. Outside of them, there's been a reappraisal going on for a couple of years now. Not sure how big it is, admittedly. Seems to have benefited Universo 2000 and Mascara Ano 2000 the most, as it coincided with the height of the Perros/Capos feud, but it's extended to Rayo and Cien as well (Perro not so much, as far as I can tell). Phil and TomK could probably expand on it better than I could. It might just be us and our ilk. In any case, don't think Rayo deserves to be lumped in with 80's Jimmy Valiant as shitty worker who got by on shtick.

[kjh]

To add to what S.L.L. said, of course Dave has the same opinions about early 90s lucha heavyweights, he hasn't got time to rewatch their matches and also thinks it's unfair to judge yesterday's wrestlers with today's standards. Dave simply isn't the person to read if you want a fresh perspective on past workers.

[Indikator]

Being +6,0 and +220

[Jingus]

(Perro not so much, as far as I can tell)

I wonder if Perro is hurt because of When Worlds Collide? That's the one lucha show that even non-lucha fans have seen, and Perro was the lesser performer in what was the least impressive match on the card. He damn near looked like current-day Gypsy Joe in there, which felt like a letdown after all the fast-paced action we'd seen before that. I'm sure that there are tons of people who've only seen him in that one match.

[Bix]

Perro's been helped by people who have seen '80s footage of him now (and to a lesser extent people who saw his son and read comparisons to Sr's prime) but that's probably not a lot of people.

[S.L.L.]

That's true, 80's Perro has been reconsidered (really just "considered", maybe...don't know how many people really gave it much thought before). 90's forward, I think the most praise he ever gets is people saying he wasn't bad in his retirement match with Universo.

[Tim Cooke]

I'm not sure the consensus has necessarily changed on some of the 90's main eventers matches from the 90's - for the most part, Caras/Universo/Mascara dos Ano/Perro Sr./etc. didn't have many great matches on tape in the 90's. Pierroth did before the injury. It was the Capos/Perros feud in 2005 that showed they still had something left, using a lot of stiff brawling to make up for lack of high spots. When these matches were praised, I remember Rob Bihari being upset that these guys were thought of as better works than Mistico and Ultimo Guerrero.

[Bix]

Don't forget Alvarez comparing Universo to Snitsky ("so bad he's good") while calling me out by name and Dave's "but he's one of Los Hermanos Dinamitas, he would never do a dive" PBP when Universo got cut off in some report, not realizing that his plancha was a move he did regularly.

 

Oh, and the whole "control segments" debate w/ Ditch over the Universo-Perrito match.