WingedEagle

It's not grading a curve, it's just not the focus. Not all great wrestlers have the same opportunities to have great matches. Nobody had the chance Flair had to travel everywhere in main events with as much time as he wanted it and for it all to be taped. The AJ guys got chances for huge matches against each other over and over. Bret had way lesser opponents and when he did get a good opponent he had a great match. Heck he had great matches with shitty opponents too. It's really a balancing act for me. In essence though, I value the performance over the end result. Bret gets value for smart in the ring and finishes, because look at the others in the WWF at the same time who both had Vince, Patterson and the WWF office. None of them are anywhere near his level or even stand out as particularly good at it. Isn't this second as much a function of the same opportunities you're downplaying in the first comment? How many of Bret's finishes before his rise to the top are at this level? As Parv noted above, and I found upon rewatching his big matches on the Network over the last couple years, the bodies of his matches were very formulaic depending on whether he was heel or face. As with anyone there are exceptions (Flair title change, Austin series, DBS at In Your House, Taker sometimes, Michaels at Survivor Series), but he had a a style and stuck to it. That's not at all a bad thing. Just don't see the case that this was someone always thinking outside the box throwing new looks at us. Hell, my big beef with the Owen Mania match is that it doesn't feel enough like a blood feud encounter given the stakes, the fact that it was in fact an actual blood feud and everything that led up to it. That's leaving aside the cage match with Owen at Summerslam. Can only imagine the vitriol that would be thrown at that match if you swapped the name Hart with Helmsley on that one. But that's neither here nor there. On the first point, I can only get so far with the performance if the result isn't there. It feels like quite the extrapolation to say that Bret Hart (or anyone) pulled a few rabbits out of his hat against less than stellar opposition and that trumps classics of let's say a Kobashi or Misawa solely because they had each other. Bret didn't work against Kawada. But how are we supposed to say he's better based on dragging Rusher Kimura up to the Mendoza line on a number of occasions? Is the bar greatness or consistent goodness? Again, I get that its all subjective but that kind of case feels like its rewarding a singles hitter in large part due to a lack of opportunity.

A few questions I'm legitimately interested in hearing folks address so I can understand their process and what they're seeing that I may be missing: 1) Great matches may not be the be all and end all -- not a fan of trying to make this process an entirely objective one because it is inherently subjective to each fan -- but shouldn't a great performer produce a ton of great matches? How does one reconcile a great performer who's lacking the great matches department? Is it at simple as grading on a curve and looking at what they did with limited opposition? As an example, I don't have Yoshiaki Fujiwara ranked anywhere near as high as his biggest supporters here seem to. Think he's tremendous at times and an integral part of some classic multi-man matches. But it seems that those who have him super high find his best matches (and thus his performances as well) to rank much higher than I do. Or are people finding he wasn't necessarily a part of so many great / classic matches but somehow put on great / classic performances in these matches? Help me resolve this. 2) Why does Bret get credit for being a great finish man or particularly smart in the ring? How many of his matches do we know are put together by him without input from Vince, Patterson, or others in the locker room or office, much less handed to him from them? Perhaps certain cases may be documented and supported towards that conclusion over the years, but as a general rule? I find it a stretch to give that kind of credit or blame for ideas to the wrestlers. Execution, pacing, facials, selling, storytelling in. the. ring. Sure. But the ideas that were then translated? Those waters seem muddy in almost every case.

Sounds like a pretty great day. I finished 5/21/94 before NBA tipped off and loved it. It remains one of, if not the best, finishing stretches I've seen. Misawa's first Tiger Driver still popped me at this stage. I've lately been watching a lot of Daniel Bryan Danielson, mid-aughts PPVs on the Network and 80s territories to refresh my thinking for GWE purposes -- and to enjoy some awesome wrestling (skipping many a match on mid-aughts PPVs). But watching this today served as a hell of a reminder that this era of All Japan remains my favorite ever. Misawa & Kobashi are potential #1's on my list, Kawada top 10 and Taue no worse than 15-20. Always looking for something new or a fresh take on something old, but the classics remain classic.

Probably followed by Edge & Christian, Jericho, Piper, Trish, Owen, Lance Storm, Dino Bravo, Bobby Roode, Mad Dog Vachon (who, all kidding aside, I am LOVING following a binge watch yesterday), Ron Garvin and Dino Bravo again.

Suggesting or asking about featuring certain big names is far from micromanaging booking. Don't know how credible the concept may be, but I don't believe for a minute USA is interested in the minutiae of the show.

For those of you that missed the podcast of the year (reminder link to part 2, with this particular discussion, ), Chad mentioned what I thought was a terrific idea in recapping his & Parv's top 100 matches -- watching a personal favorite match every year on Christmas. This seemed like a great way to get back to an old favorite in the midst of the copious new material that most folks here go through on a regular basis. So in between the diner and basketball I'm determined to kick this tradition off for myself this year and think it'd be fun to hear what match everyone else would or will look back to with this in mind. Chad's match (if it hasn't changed) was All Japan's classic 6/9/95 tag. Personally, I'm also going with Misawa & Kobashi vs. Kawada & Taue, but the 5/21/94 version. I'd seen a little puro here and there, but after getting a tape with this on it I was absolutely hooked. I had never seen anything like this growing up as a fan of the US product and it was just an incredible eye opener that led me down the rabbit hole that finds us here today. Probably wouldn't rank it as the best match I've seen at this point, but its still 5 stars every time out and without this match its possible that the names of these four and men like Jumbo, Tenryu, Choshu, Hashimoto, Liger, Akiyama, Fujinami, etc. might not mean as much to me. Absolutely love it. http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?/topic/31955-where-the-big-boys-play-76-top-100-matches-special-part-2-50-1/ So what's the big match for the rest of PWO?

Couldn't agree more with your point his playing to the crowd and overall charisma. Very unique for Japanese workers and while I can't quite put my finger on just what he does, it absolutely stands out. A few others I'd check out: w/ Muto vs. Vader & Bigelow (5/1/92) vs. Kensuke Sasaki 6/26/92 vs. Chono (8/6/93) w/ Muto vs. Chono & Hashimoto (11/4/93) I'm picking up the 80s set soon and very much looking forward to him there. For whatever reason I always thought he had a rep as a sound, technically proficient wrestler who was capable of decent output with a variety of opponents but at the same time was rather vanilla. The man is anything but vanilla. Oozing personality.

I think there's a big difference between explicitly factoring in promos versus simply acknowledging the impact they may have on your in-ring takeaways.

I'll have to rewatch that now. I remember the epic blood and Hase's aggression with the weapon but don't recall loving it on that level.

I think the story is that Inoki was born in Japan but had Brazilian lineage and for at least some time grew up there. Not familiar with Japanese culture but it sounded like they didn't want to highlight the extent of his Brazilian background as he was coming up, but am not sure if there was any real attempt to hide it once he was a star.

I went from The Wrestling Classic until No Holds Barred and got these number of shows they had matches on: Hogan: 11 Savage: 11 Hercules: 10 That is out of 11 ppvs. Hogan and Savage wrestled on every single ppv in the 1980s. Hercules missed on The Wrestling Classic, so that is why he is one down. Pretty irrelevant data given the difference in ppv schedules then versus now.

One down, one to go.

Yeah I definitely buy it. I met him once and he was very much Mr. Backlund, but soft spoken.

I can't wait to read the book and hope to get to it shortly. From what I've heard its no-nonsense with no reason to question his integrity or recall. That being said, if he believed Vince's promise of a one year reign I've got a bridge he might want to purchase.

Can't say enough about Bayley's performance here. She made a very limited worker with only a few move look like an absolute monster and never showed her up. Then the comeback and finisher were paced and laid out very well to keep the fighting champion strong. Just a tremendous job of booking and execution. I hope she gets called up because it'll mean a lot to her, but would love for her to work this type of title match at every NXT big show going forward.

Its a good question but one that probably won't be considered until the day after 32. It should be weighed before then, but between injuries, movies and other "shoot" issues blowing up plans for this year, I don't see patience entering the booking plans at this point. FWIW I believe Brock has 2 years left under contract.

I'm all for a North American bias if that's what you've watched and love. I just don't get ranking someone you think has only produced a couple really good matches. From what you've reviewed in the microscope thread it sounds like the basis is that she often prevented some models from having worst match ever candidates rather than argue that the matches were in fact good.

Negro Casas vs. Mocho Cota (9/23/94) I really liked this, particular the early attack by Cota, the consistent hair by Cota and Casas selling the limb work throughout. He also had some comebacks nicely cut off that were building towards a really hot finish. Not to womp womp it too much, but my only issue here, as I believe Matt D noted, was that ultimately the comeback never switched gears and moved into the left lane. Casas's offense down the stretch into the finish lacked the escalation you want after all that selling and heat. Its as though we replaced the hot tag with a stretch of cautious offense designed to weaken an opponent rather than build to a kill. Too much good stuff to go any lower than 4 stars, but not enough payoff to go any higher.

I only got home in time for the last hour of Raw but what an amazing hour it was. Say what you/we will about Vince, but he was as vital to that match and the crowd's reaction as either participant in the ring and used his character and gravitas from the years just perfectly last night. Can't wait to go back over the full show tonight. They've clearly built Roman-HHH but can't see going that route at Mania, not because of any issues with that as a main event match, but because it leaves Brock without a single viable opponent on the biggest show of the year. Is it crazy to think Hunter would wrestle at the Rumble?

Thanks for posting this. Have a few matches left to rewatch but this'll be helpful in throwing my ballot together.

Nod to the original poster, as the angle with Honky teasing a guitar shot to Elizabeth prompting a Hogan save is what permanently ensnared 7 year old me as a wrestling fan. I was 6.5 for Hogan-Andre at Mania 3, and not quite there yet, but vividly remember watching this one after my parents taped it for me. One of *the* all time angles, SNME or otherwise.

How great can a wrestler be if they never had an MVP season? Hell, an MVP month? This kind of over-inflation seems more damaging to her resume than attempting to put it in an objective context.

Big question of whether that's Reign's program for Mania or a stop along the way towards the title match.

Definitely a miscommunication here. I think I have a pretty good sense of which MX tags are necessary for Eaton, but am not familiar with what's considered his top singles work. More curious than anything else. That being said, if anyone wants to throw some underappreciated MX tags, go right ahead. I just can't rattle off what, if anything, are considered his standout singles affairs. Not sure there's enough there to move the needle on him at all but at worst I'll enjoy a different look at him.

Call me crazy but I enjoy this Charlotte a ton more than v1.0. No problem at all with her heeling it up and relying on the old man.