Dave Meltzer stuff

[WashingtonFB]

I do find it rather amusing that Meltzer can print this:

 

The other tour opened on 6/21 in Reading, PA, before 3,000 fans. 6/22 in Newark, DE, drew 2,000 fans. The Blue tour crowds are noticeably down without Bryan headlining and with Orton and the former Shield as the top guys.

 

 

But then argue that Bryan isn't drawing on top.

[Matt Farmer]

I think Santo suffers from the same fate that Hulk Hogan once did. He was so over, everyone on the inside knocked him because he was so over. Hey Jim Londos & Buddy Rogers get knocked a lot too.

 

From the film I've seen Santo was as good as anyone in at the time in Mexico, and almost everything is 20 years into his career. In no way was he horrible.

 

Remember too wrestlers from that era were not performing for a television audience. SO many fans of today do not get that, today's wrestlers are trained specifically for that purpose. Wrestling for the cameras. It's a whole different art and effects the matches and the wrestlers mannerisms. Guys in that era were there solely for the fans there live. It's as different as acting on Broadway and acting in a movie.

[Sidebottom]

 

I've read Dave Meltzer claim a few times how people he's talked to have told him that El Hijo Del Santo was a far, far better worker than his father.

 

I've spoken with many people who think this; it's subjective after all. It's not like they are claiming he was a bigger star as that would be totally asinine.

[Sidebottom]

In no way was he horrible.

 

 

Well, some of his movies were but that's a different story

 

(For the record objectively there is some absolute trash there but how can you not get a kick out of them as a wrestling fan? Similar to how I put No Holds Barred up there with Raging Bull).

[Sean Liska]

Just watched Tanahashi-Shibata. It was a smart, entertaining match. But even knowing what Dave looks for from NJPW, I don't see how that's more than ****, much less the full 5. I don't normally comment on Dave's ratings nowadays because they're all over the place, but I feel like I watched something entirely different. They wrestled that match like they were trying to not burn out the crowd before the main event.

[Matt D]

Meltzer on drawing in January 1995 (following a list of cards that drew over 10K):

 

 

The first and most obvious conclusion is when it comes to drawing money, the promotion is what does it, not the wrestlers. Second is the shows that draw are cards either with fancy names or promoted as "big shows" because of their venue rather than because of the main event. It appears we all overemphasize the importance when a promotion announces a weak line-up for a PPV show, because (with the exception of the Hogan-Flair series which was unique) it appears the match-ups have less to do with it than we had imagined. That's the last thing any wrestler, particularly one making a big salary, wants to read.

The greatest draw in the world (Hulk Hogan) couldn't draw big crowds on a consistent basis in the wrong environment, even with the right opponent. While he seemed to significantly increase the crowd on every show he appeared which is something very few in this business can boast of, not once all year did he draw a crowd in excess of 10,000 paid. Hulk Hogan, Sting and Ric Flair don't even appear on the list once, largely because they were in the wrong place. The unlikely name of Bitarze Tariel does appear, and he wasn't in a hot promotion either, but was on the right big show in the main event. In 1994, Mascara Sagrada, the uncharismatic big guy and not the mini who does have a lot of charisma, headlined more big crowds than virtually all of the most charismatic wrestlers in the world because he was with a hot promotion. By promotion, we have 17 New Japan shows on that list, 17 AAA shows, 11 WWF, Eight UWFI, Seven All Japan, Four Pancrase, Three All Japan women and FMW, Two WAR and EMLL and One Rings. For Japan, I'd say we didn't miss any shows for any of the groups. We may have missed one or two with WWF in foreign countries but surely got most of them. For AAA, I'm sure we missed several because they run so many shows that we never hear about, but we got the vast majority and certainly enough to know who it was that was on top on the shows that drew well. About the only real conclusion this list gives is that wrestling draws a lot more big crowds in Japan than anywhere else, followed by Mexico and as many have noticed, the United States is something of a third-rate power although the U.S. is the only one with PPV and an overabundance of free wrestling on television. So, we should expect New Japan and AAA wrestlers to dominate the list because the promotions ran more shows that drew big crowds. And we find exactly that. AAA wrestlers have a double advantage, because most of their shows are headlined by six mans or eight mans, which puts more guys in the running so in those matches to keep things fair we'll only count the captain and one other major draw on each team so that way Mascara Sagrada isn't getting credit for big houses that he really didn't draw. Anyway, let's look at what wrestlers drew put the asses in the seats on the greatest number of occasions the past year and for a secondary stat, for those who were in better than half of the big drawing matches of their company, we'll give them a percentage. If nothing else, that percentage may be a good indication of the value of the wrestler to the promotion. If Wrestler of the Year is similar to the baseball MVP award in that the most valuable player to a contending team, or in this case, the most valuable when it comes to putting asses in the seats with a successful company, this percentage is probably something fairly important to consider.

Konnan 13 (76%); Perro Aguayo 10 (58%); Shinya Hashimoto 9 (53%); Bret Hart 8 (73%); Masa Chono 7; Love Machine 6; Cien Caras 6; Keiji Muto 6; Kensuke Sasaki 6; Nobuhiko Takada 6 (75%); Vader 6 (75%); Riki Choshu 6; Genichiro Tenryu 5 (100%); Gary Albright 5 (63%); Atsushi Onita 5 (100%); Steve Williams 5 (71%); Owen Hart 5; Mitsuharu Misawa 4 (53%); Toshiaki Kawada 4 (53%); Octagon 4; Yokozuna 4; Black Cat 4; Kenta Kobashi 3; Akira Hokuto 3 (100%); Aja Kong 3 (100%); Kazuo Yamazaki 3; Hiroshi Hase 3; Jushin Liger 3; Antonio Inoki 3; Yoshiaki Fujiwara 3; Undertaker 3; Blue Panther 3; Mascara Ano 2000 3; Jake Roberts 3; Steiners 3; John Tenta 3.

The only thing that can really be learned from this list of names by itself is that successful promotions putting on major shows is what draws big crowds, not the charisma of the people they put in the main events. But this list, if nothing else, gives one a list of what several reasonably successful companies in 1994 used in the top drawing positions. If it doesn't show a trend of what sells to fans, at the very least it shows a trend of what promotions that were successful were giving fans.

[goc]

There is a good point in there but in his "hot promotions are what draws big crowds" argument I also think he is kind of skipping over how important individual wrestlers are in getting those promotions hot in the first place.

[Matt D]

He does spend the next few paragraphs going over "Well, what makes a draw? is it interviews? is it workrate? is it looks?" etc. but it all rings sort of hollow after the opening which basically states that Flair, Hogan, and Sting would be much bigger draws if they weren't in WCW, basically.

[hammerva]

I know this is going to follow in the 'well why are you here then" category of message board complaints but can someone explain to me why Dave's Hall of Fame is treated so damn seriously. I listen to the podcasts on here and I do enjoy the history lessons (look forward to listening to the Dick Murdoch one) but the level of ANGER and OUTRAGE that wrestler A gets is something. You would have Edge and Sting has destroyed human lives listening to the last couple weeks.

 

There is a wrestling hall of fame in New York, a wrestling hall of fame in iowa (more all around wrestling I believe), and the cauliflower alley club that nobody ever talks about that is way more valuable than Meltzer's Hall of Fame. It seems like every year this HOF talk is stronger and stronger and starting to reach that MLB sabermetrics level of over analysis.

 

And unlike the other Hall of Fame's, I don't know if the wrestlers are as interested. I don't remember hearing any wrestler saying that being in Meltzer's Hall of Fame is the highlight of their career.

[Al]

It's the only Hall of Fame with any transparency about the process. People love arguing about Hall of Fames in any sport. Meltzer's allows for it.

[Cross Face Chicken Wing]

I don't give two shits about Meltzer's hall of fame, but I love all the discussion that surrounds it. I enjoy hearing the various perspectives on wrestlers I am both familiar and unfamiliar with.

[goc]

I'm in kind of in the same boat as not getting worked up and not caring too much about the results, but I do enjoy the discussion. I especially like when people write up a long bio like the one KrisZ did for Mr. Wrestling II. http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?/topic/16784-my-won-hof-opus-of-mr-wrestling-ii/

[BillThompson]

The WON HoF is a joke, in every possible way. That being said, I enjoy the discussions that come about because of it.

[Bix]

The WON HoF is a joke, in every possible way. That being said, I enjoy the discussions that come about because of it.

This is one of those things where you should probably expand on your thoughts a bit.

[shakla]

Sorry to change the subject for a bit, but does Todd Martin still update his Book Review tiers on the board? I'm not a site member currently. Someone posted the tiers on Classics in 3/2013 here: http://wrestlingclassics.com/cgi-bin/.ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=132247;p=0

 

And to stay on topic, the research and discussion about the WON HoF is the best part of it.

[BillThompson]

 

The WON HoF is a joke, in every possible way. That being said, I enjoy the discussions that come about because of it.

This is one of those things where you should probably expand on your thoughts a bit.

 

 

The discussion side is that I've enjoyed the VoW podcasts and the forum threads where the work of the wrestlers is really dig into. I find that sort of talk deeply compelling and I'm happy that Meltzer's HoF inspires talk of that kind.

 

As for why the actual HoF is a joke,

 

--Who and who does not have a ballot is completely arbitrary. Guys like Dylan are just getting a ballot, while someone like Mark Madden gets one every year.

 

--It's pro wrestling hall of fame, all the MMA and other outside pursuits should have no bearing. That's like saying Steve Tasker should get an extra bump to be in the NFL HoF because of his charity work.

 

--Speaking of MMA, Dave is incredibly vague about how people should factor in MMA careers into their voting. He refuses to take a stand and that means people are voting from vastly different sets of criteria that could easily be centralized by Dave taking a stance.

 

--The region/bracket process is horrible and yields horrible results every year. Guys are in regions that make no sense, or don't get in based on some sort of bracket methodology that is both confusing and irritating useless.

 

--There's never been a true standard as to how wrestlers get in. Some people have been grandfathered in, others have to go through the voting process, others disappear from the ballot and reappear at random times.

 

--Dave uses polls to decide who gets on a ballot sometimes, that's a really bad way of doing such a thing.

 

--I don't believe any emphasis should be placed on drawing power. It isn't a trustworthy metric, it tells us very little about the skills of a wrestler, and Dave has shown that when he feels like it (the High Flyers) for example he will ignore drawing power to suit his own needs.

 

There's more, but I'm tired and that's all I have right now.

[funkdoc]

bix, i can't speak for bill but for me it's the eligibility rules that make it impossible for me to take the HOF too seriously. i'm a longtime sports fan and the idea of anybody getting into a HOF while still active period, much less only 5-10 years into their career, is beyond a joke to me. the recent brock discussion highlights another huge issue for me, as that almost feels like putting bo jackson in the pro football hall of fame. the pro sports HOFs don't reward someone for brief dominance in their sport + being famous and playing other pro sports, and they are better for that.

 

i also think it's tacky as all hell that the guy running the HOF openly pushes for some candidates over others and has so much influence on the discussion. i haven't heard of that in sports either, though i could very well be missing something. it's definitely the most unprofessional aspect of the whole thing to me.

 

i will say that some of the stuff people complain about is found in pro sports too. for instance, the idea that the opinions of other wrestlers should matter most - that sort of "anti-sabermetric" or w/e thinking is omnipresent in any HOF i know of. but i don't recall seeing much of the above in actual sports...

 

EDIT: didn't see bill posted above me haha. i don't think the regions would be nearly as much of a problem if dave was clearer about what categories your votes would place you into. i'm inclined to think that non-wrestlers should count in their own separate category, though i could be convinced otherwise.

 

i also think drawing power SHOULD be factored in, as a sort of proxy for "stardom". i just can't picture a wrestling hall of fame without hulk hogan or dump matsumoto, i am sorry.

[W2BTD]

 

 

The WON HoF is a joke, in every possible way. That being said, I enjoy the discussions that come about because of it.

This is one of those things where you should probably expand on your thoughts a bit.

 

 

The discussion side is that I've enjoyed the VoW podcasts and the forum threads where the work of the wrestlers is really dig into. I find that sort of talk deeply compelling and I'm happy that Meltzer's HoF inspires talk of that kind.

 

As for why the actual HoF is a joke,

 

--Who and who does not have a ballot is completely arbitrary. Guys like Dylan are just getting a ballot, while someone like Mark Madden gets one every year.

 

--It's pro wrestling hall of fame, all the MMA and other outside pursuits should have no bearing. That's like saying Steve Tasker should get an extra bump to be in the NFL HoF because of his charity work.

 

--Speaking of MMA, Dave is incredibly vague about how people should factor in MMA careers into their voting. He refuses to take a stand and that means people are voting from vastly different sets of criteria that could easily be centralized by Dave taking a stance.

 

--The region/bracket process is horrible and yields horrible results every year. Guys are in regions that make no sense, or don't get in based on some sort of bracket methodology that is both confusing and irritating useless.

 

--There's never been a true standard as to how wrestlers get in. Some people have been grandfathered in, others have to go through the voting process, others disappear from the ballot and reappear at random times.

 

--Dave uses polls to decide who gets on a ballot sometimes, that's a really bad way of doing such a thing.

 

--I don't believe any emphasis should be placed on drawing power. It isn't a trustworthy metric, it tells us very little about the skills of a wrestler, and Dave has shown that when he feels like it (the High Flyers) for example he will ignore drawing power to suit his own needs.

 

There's more, but I'm tired and that's all I have right now.

 

 

I'll go point by point here.

 

-Unfortunately, there really isn't a way for dave to choose who gets ballots which isn't arbitrary. There isn't a collective group of wrestling writers like the BBWAA in baseball for example. When people fly into dave's radar, he sends them ballots. As far as people in the business, he says he sends ballots to just about everybody. When people like Colt Cabana talk about receiving ballots, that sort of backs that up. He can't make people vote, he can only send the ballots out and hope that they do. As for Mark Madden, even though i'm not a fan and don't agree with much of what he has to say, I think he definitely deserves a ballot. He's been a paid wrestling writer for decades, and worked inside the industry.

 

-I am someone who bugs dave all of the time about splitting the year end awards, and I no longer vote anything MMA related as my small meaningless protest in that regard. But when it comes to the HOF, I'm perfectly fine with dave being ambiguous about it, because of the crossover historically that is impossible to separate. If dave comes out and dictates that MMA shouldn't be considered at all, then people will complain about past inductees like Funaki or Sakuraba where is "counted". If he dictates that it should absolutely be considered, then you open up a can of worms with people wanting MMA fighters voted on. I'm fine with leaving it up to the voters to weigh the MMA stuff as they choose. To me that's a valuable part of the process, allowing each voter to weigh everything as they see fit.

 

-The brackets are an issues, but really an impossible one to fix. There is no perfect method. Some guys get screwed, but what is the alternative? I hate the AUS/CARIBBEAN/PACIFIC/AFRICA thing, and would change that by adding more names and splitting it into three regions (Australia/Pacific, Caribbean, Africa). Aside from that, I would leave the regions be, even with some of the flaws, because there is no better way that i've heard suggested.

 

-The 1996 class being auto inducted doesn't bother me at all, because aside from maybe Ted DiBiase, every single one of those guys were going to moonwalk in anyway. Why bother voting on Hogan or Baba or Flair or Santo? They're all getting 90%+, so who cares? Since then, it's 60% to get in, under 10% falls off. People reappear when voters show interest in voting for them by asking dave to put them back on. Wrestling isn't like real sports. Careers don't really ever end. There are no hard statistics, research never stops. I don't have a problem with people being put back on.

 

-When did dave ever use a poll to decide who got back on I am not aware of this.

 

-This last one seems mental to me. Wrestling at its core is all about drawing money. And drawing power is THE most trustworthy metric, because working ability & influence are purely subjective. The drawing power quotient is at least rooted in some semblance of fact, and then from there is open to interpretations. I do think that most voters weigh drawing power too heavily, as technically all three quotients are meant to be weighed equally, but the entire purpose of wrestling is to draw money. As far as dave "ignoring" drawing power to suit his needs, i'm not even sure what that means. dave has one vote. He's entitled to his opinion if he thinks the High Flyers didn't draw a lot of money.

[Loss]

I feel like drawing money is even subjective in some ways, but maybe this isn't the right topic for that debate. I don't know.

[W2BTD]

I feel like drawing money is even subjective in some ways, but maybe this isn't the right topic for that debate. I don't know.

 

It absolutely is subjective in many different ways. But it is also the only category of the three that is at least rooted in some semblance of fact. A million dollar gate is a million dollar gate. 12,000 fans is 12,000 fans. Not all 12,000 fan houses are created equally, but there is at least a starting point before we start arguing about it, where as working ability & influence are essentially 100% subjective and in the eye of the beholder.

[WingedEagle]

There are definitely facts in the drawing debate. A million dollar gate is a million dollar gate. But then you get into who is responsible for that gate which is not always that clear. That's why I've found the Murdoch HOF discussion so interesting.

[Matt D]

I sort of think it's the WON HOF and not the Pro Wrestling HOF. The WON is a very specific thing with specific views and specific criteria. Frankly, being good at MMA sort of matters within the confines of the WON. We bitch about how much he dedicates each issue to it, for instance. It's Meltzer's HOF and he sees it as connected.

 

As for drawing, I do kind of think the defense is funny on a page where the first post on it is meltzer talking about how you can't tell whether a guy is a draw or not (at least at certain times after the territory days died off).

[funkdoc]

I sort of think it's the WON HOF and not the Pro Wrestling HOF. The WON is a very specific thing with specific views and specific criteria. Frankly, being good at MMA sort of matters within the confines of the WON. We bitch about how much he dedicates each issue to it, for instance. It's Meltzer's HOF and he sees it as connected.

 

this is a heck of a good point. sorta like how the Rock 'n Roll HOF is really just the Rolling Stone HOF...

[BillThompson]

I've made my views on drawing known, but I don't think it is a reliable metric nor do I think it should matter. These are performers, they should be judged on their art, not on the money they make. For me it really boils down to that and it is that simple. I know lots of people will disagree, but if you're spending you're time worrying about drawing power and money made you're really missing the point of pro wrestling, in my opinion.

[JerryvonKramer]

The only HoF that all the wrestlers REALLY care about is the WWE Hall of Fame, because it's almost like winning a super bowl ring and means they can command bigger paydays and get instant respect from kids and stuff who might not remember them but go to local indy shows.

 

After that I think they care about Cauliflower Alley -- because that has legit respect within the business and several of the old guard still attached to it. And after that, probably the Professional Wrestling Hall of Fame and Museum in New York.

 

If Dave tried to put on a black tie event and attached a dinner with speakers and so on to it, the old wrestlers might give more of a shit, but as it is, I don't think "the business" cares that much about who is in or isn't it.