ohtani's jacket

To the people watching WCW in ten years time. Perhaps not, but it may look dated to people. I don't know about that. I started watching matches for the poll in December 2007 and I didn't get anywhere near watching everything I possibly could've. I saw almost all of the stuff I wanted to see, but there's enough to keep you going for years. What I think you'll see with the WCW results is that certain workers are going to do exceptionally well compared to ten years ago (chiefly Dustin Rhodes), and certain workers are going to do poorly (probably the cruiserweight division), and I also think you'll see a a clear distinction between people who favour the '88-94 period and people who still like the '95-99 stuff. You can put that down to Dustin of the Day or trend setting if you like. I think it has more to do with filesharing, but that's a topic for another day. The point I want to make is that in 10 years time, shit could get flipped on its head. 10 years ago, people loved the cruiserweights and if they watched any early 90s stuff it was Clashes and PPVs. 10 years ago, you had to go back through RSPW archives to get any sort of info from that era, and you sure as hell couldn't log onto dailymotion to see if they have that match people were talking about in 1991. What I'm saying is that there may be 180s or 360s in the future. Well, that's true. It's possible. Heck, the SC WCW list could turn out to be poor. But, y'know, the people who voted in RSPW awards or DVDVR polls didn't think their lists or choices were bad at the time. I don't mean to say "look at what the prehistoric wrestling fan thought was good," I'm just saying shit moves forward. Once people start making best ofs for this decade, I'll be useless. I'd struggle to get past five. I just can't do it. But I guarantee that whatever's produced in the next few years, in 2019 people will be saying, "what were they thinking?" Why not? I'd really like to know why you like Takada and what you honestly think of Fujiwara. MJH is trying to be diplomatic, but there's no need to pussyfoot around. I'm being honest. I can't understand what people think is good about Takada. This is not a new trend for me. I never liked Takada. The more I watch and rewatch stuff, the worse he gets. What am I missing? The old line about Takada is that he could carry a broom, which is a total crock since he needed carrying himself. The last time we talked about this, you mentioned his aura, but I can't get into the aura of a guy who's too bloated to work the mat properly and who's strikes are so weak. Not to mention his selling and general cowardice. The other day I rewatched Suzuki/Sano and it blew away every single Takada match ever. So, for the sake of a long winded argument, give me some pointers.

What makes you think "dated" is automatically dismissive? As far as I'm concerned, it's a fact. If you look at Lorefice's comments about shoot style wrestling, they're completely out of date with what people think is good at the moment. That doesn't mean Mike has to give a shit. He may or may not get around to reappraising shoot style, and he may or may not knock the Fujiwara thing on his ass. I don't doubt for a second that my reappraisal of shoot style is based on what I want from wrestling right now. It's the same with Black Terry and Negro Navarro vs. the crap that CMLL put out. In ten years time, perhaps people will want something different out of wrestling. Maybe stand-up fighters will come back into vogue. If you look at the DVDVR Best of the 90s results, the majority of it is dated. I'm fairly confident that minus the 80s matches, the SC WCW list will be a better list than the DVDVR results. Is that a bad thing? No. Ten years from now, the SC list will look poor. As far as I know, you don't really like trends Jerome. You've always liked what you like regardless of popular opinion, and more often than not you've been anti-trends. I also think you're not likely to rush and watch any UWF/PWFG any time soon, so I think you are being a little dismissive of the notion that Fujiwara could possibly be better than Takada. Anyway, this is probably boring most people. Fujiwara. I think they're extremely close in terms of working ability. They both worked in a way that no other workers were capable of. Volk's spots were probably more outrageous than Fujiwara's, but the advantage here is the sheer number of great matches that Fujiwara had over a longer period of time.

I doubt that Fujiwara is a fad for a guy like Phil. In essence, Destroyer was a fad because there aren't enough matches to go anywhere with it. In Fujiwara's case, there's a whole bevy of work out there.

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. 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.

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.

MJH, I watched the Fujiwara/Takada rematch from October. Pretty masterful performance from Fujiwara. I liked it better than the February bout since Fujiwara was aggressive with his strikes and matwork, and they stayed away from Takada's weaknesses on the mat. There was a lot more stand-up in this, which isn't Fujiwara's strength, but he paced the action well. Takada was pulling his kicks, but still I would've liked to see him press harder. The match went to a final down and Takada got a fairly convincing TKO win. Not a great match, but entertaining enough.

It depends what you're after. If you want a guy who can actually work the mat and sell well, Fujiwara's your guy. The fact that he had some awesome strikes, like his headbutts and punch combos, and a bunch of great schtick, certainly doesn't hurt. If you want a guy who tries to pop the crowd like a pro-wrestler, Takada's your man. Takada was spotty, which is probably why his matches with Yamazaki were spotfests and his matches against Maeda were all built around highspots. Fujiwara's matches had smaller arcs, but were far more intelligent. It's like comparing Black Terry and Navarro matches to Mistco and Casas matches. One has highspots, the other is full of nuances.

I watched this again and it's fairly typical for these two. Fujiwara is far superior on the mat, while Takada shows few, if any, mat skills. Nevertheless, Fujiwara's selling is good and helps carry Takada's matwork. Fujiwara blocked or evaded most of Takada's kicks, and considering how poor Takada's strikes were, I was pleased when he got the rope break. Fujiwara didn't need to go down to "re-affirm" that Takada was the man, the onus was on Takada to change the point of attack, which he did with one of his crappy legbars. Fujiwara dancing around after the strikes in the corner isn't a no-sell. It was obvious Fujiwara was in pain. Again, the onus was on Takada to get the KO. I liked the way Takada took Fujiwara's headbutt. That was easily the best thing he did in the match. Neither guy was really dominant, though. I dunno why you think Takada was authorative. He wasn't able to pierce Fujiwara's defences for most of the bout. And as for the ending, that legbar is not a submission move. That is a crappy, crappy hold and 90% of the reason why Takada is no good on the mat. The other 10% is his selling, which just looks like he's gassed. Anyway, Fujiwara turned him over a bit too easily, but he turned it into an actual submission, applied even more pressure, and sold it properly. Good match, thanks to Fujiwara. I don't mind if people disagree about Fujiwara or anybody else, so long as they bother to watch the matches.

I think you look for booking and storytelling too much in UWF. Takada beat Fujiwara in October the year before, so the February match was just a payback. Takada got another win over Fujiwara in October that year. Really, the only clear booking pattern there was that year was that Takada went down, Funaki went up and Maeda stayed strong against everyone. Fujiwara probably wasn't the No.2 native, but they protected him (or he protected himself.) If you watch the shows through to the finale, they really had no clear direction other than having Maeda beat Funaki. If they'd continued into 1991, I guess Funaki would've challenged him again, but who knows. Fujiwara's matches were better than Jumbo's for mine, and certainly better than the dizzying lows that UWF-i Takada reached. I don't see who in Japan was on Fujiwara's level in 1992. For the record, Backlund didn't carry Takada. I don't know how anybody can watch that fight and think that's the case. As for Casas in Japan, that's a bit of a duck out of water scenario. I can't really think of too many luchadores who've worked Japan well. Unfortunately, the Casas/Liger matches from UWA were never taped.

That wasn't a shock win. Fujiwara was the No.2 native that year and Takada did a fair number of jobs. The guy they were pushing in Takada's role that year was Funaki, and Fujiwara worked the same way against him. He always worked defensively against strikers. Anyway, Fujiwara smokes Takada as a worker like there's no tomorrow. Every single one of Fujiwara's UWF matches are good, regardless of who the opponent is. Only a handful of Takada's worked shoots are good. There is no big radar for UWF, PWFG or even Showa era New Japan compared to All Japan, so it's not surprising that Fujiwara slipped through the cracks. Elite guys miss the radar all the time. Stuff doesn't get watched, like Memphis, WoS or PWFG, or doesn't get reappraised like Dustin Rhodes in WCW. If you read Dave's comments on early 90s CMLL for example, there's a ton of great workers that Dave didn't get or appreciate. Obviously, there's a fine line between the mentality that Misawa, Kawada, Kobashi, Liger, Eddie and Benoit are all elite workers and the attitude that newly discovered workers, but if people didn't dig into the past a little they'd be no new movies to enjoy, no good music to discover. Pro-wrestling wouldn't be worth much as a hobby. People change and want different things out of their graps. Work dates and is no longer fresh. The idea that Takada is a great shoot style worker, for example, is a completely dated idea. Oh, and the one really good match Dynamite Kid had in England was against Marty Jones. The Rocco matches could've been great but never had proper finishes.

I like Regal a lot, but his WCW run was a disappointment as far as matches go. Aside from Larry Z match from Saturday Night and the Finlay matches, there's not much else except for maybe the Windham match and I guess some of the Benoit stuff. Early WoS Finlay is extremely good. I'm talking about the '82-84 period. It wasn't until the late 80s that he started getting sluggish. He was pretty damn athletic in his early years and earned the nickname "Fit." Davey Boy was far better than Dynamite Kid in his first few years as a pro. Both of them got screwed up by leaving Britain. I have a hard time believing that DK was a good influence on DBS in their tag team years. Haven't watched a Benoit match since the murders, so I don't really have an opinion about him anymore. My enjoyment of Lawler depends on his opponent. For some reason, I prefer Memphis studio stuff to the arena matches.

Might have to change my Jannetty/DBS answer, because I just watched some early Davey Boy Smith and the only British worker I've seen look as good at a similar age was Marty Jones.

I dunno. I've watched a fair bit of Fujinami vs. UWA workers recently and he was as workrate happy as any other junior. Stick Fujinami in a Tiger Mask and see what happens. That's the thing that's always bothered me about Sayama criticism. That was not an easy gimmick to play.

Well, there's really no Joshi matches left to watch.

Well, they were exciting matches for the time, and you simply cannot underestimate how popular Tiger Mask was, and still is, in Japan. Neither Sayama nor Dynamite were particularly suited to the feud they worked in New Japan. Sayama's calling was to do worked shoots with Yoshiaki Fujiwara, and Dynamite Kid's calling was to stay in Europe and work a million matches with Marty Jones, but they wound up in a NJPW ring trying to do something different from what Inoki was on top. Whatever problems the DK/TM feud had were problems all juniors matches had at the time. I know people will say Fujinami was better or Gran Hamada, but they were the same. It's just not that good a style.

Probably not. I'm not overly high on his NJPW stuff, but he was the best worker in the original UWF, and his stuff from the time he left NJPW in '89 to the last few years of PWFG is untouchable. Difficult to say without their UWA work, though I guess it's kinda telling that Santo never looked as good as he did in UWA unless he was working Casas. Casas made a smart decision to go to CMLL in '92 and ended up working two of the most memorable feuds of the 90s with Dandy and Santo. Fantastic rudo and a hell of a second too, if you ever get the chance to see him in the corner. I'm not a huge fan of his offence, but he was a hell of a performer. Santo was, and is, a formula worker, and sometimes I'm surprised by just how well he excutes that formula, but other times I think he mails it in as much as any other person who's ever been accused of doing so. I think I'll go with Arn here. Barry was never a great big match worker to me, and inconsistent as a TV wrestler. Arn, on the other hand, grew steadily better from 1990 until 1992, when he had one of the best years of any worker I've seen. Barry probably had more good matches, but I'd wager that Arn a higher number of good performances. Marty Jones. Not even close, though Dynamite Kid was awesome in the match they had together. He really should've stayed in Europe. Would rather watch a marathon of Dusty promos than watch either of these guys work. Dusty is far more disappointing for me in the sense that his promos are so good but I can't mark out and enjoy his matches. I like Regal better as a worker, but Finlay has a higher number of good matches, due to his WoS run and more successful WWE run. I'd rather watch Jannetty, but Davey Boy Smith got more of his career. If Jannetty had been more like Robert Gibson, this would be an easy pick, but despite not liking DBS in general, I feel he was better. I was impressed with that Vader feud in '93. Foley. Never seen an Onita match worth a damn. Man, this is a comparison that no longer means much to people. I'll go with Takako. LCO were insanely overrated. Takako's rise from '92-95 was a lot of fun, and when she finally got to play the heel character that she wanted to be in the first place, she was just as charismatic as Shimoda.

Did The Honky Tonk Man actually say that?

Uh, Steamboat was constantly one of the top workers in WCW.

August IWRG Avisman vs. Trauma II, IWRG Intercontinental Lightweight Championship, 8/16/09 This was OK. They put each other in interesting holds, and the selling was good, particularly from Avisman, who reminds me of this angry little kid I went to school with. The problem with these guys is that every time they work the mat, they put each other in submission holds. When they can't get a submission, they release the hold without being told to break. It doesn't make sense to give up position in a wrestling match. They'd be better off countering their way out of a hold, or better yet, countering the hold before it can be hooked into a submission. The annoying thing about all the resets is that you know that every single time they return to the neutral position that they're going to swap positions on the mat. So what you get is a bunch of highspots on the mat and some weak transitions. You almost get the feeling that these guys want to be maestros before their time. The difference between these younger guys and Terry and Navarro is that Terry and Navarro are looking to hurt each other. When Terry or Navarro release a hold, their selling tells the story. They're bastards, who've mastered the art of hurting each other. The second fall was better in this respect, as Avisman went after Trauma's injured shoulder, but the other thing I couldn't understand about this match is why Avisman went over. Trauma had a kayfabe reason for losing the belt, but he'd only just won it. IWRG booking just doesn't make sense. The finish was awful as they threw in a couple of unnecessary topes and Avisman wrenched the arm about twenty times before Trauma would submit. Was that supposed to make Trauma look tough? That was ridiculous. IWRG - Festival de Máscaras - 8/20/09 Cerebro Negro Dr. Cerebro Vs Orito El Panterita This was a tidy match, but I was expecting at least one spectacular sequence. Freelance was strangely subdued. Los Misioneros de la Muerte El Signo Negro Navarro Vs Los Temerarios Black Terry Shu el Guerrero This won't be to everyone's tastes, but I was really enjoying it until IWRG decided they'd had enough and blinded me with white light. The Terry vs. Navarro feud has morphed into Bill Dundee vs. Jerry Lawler. Both guys have developed amazing punches, adding another dimension to the best feud in wrestling. It's a shame that lucha doesn't do loser leaves town matches, as that would be the match of the decade. Terry lost his hair to Chico Che on the 16th, so now he truly looks as craggy and windswept as the great Western films and the directors who made them. He had a cut above his eye, which Signo did an expert job of reopening. Signo can't move like he used to, but he's still pretty useful with his mitts. The match itself was bare and minimalistic, just the way it ought to be. The match wasn't about matwork as much as it was about hurting people. Signo had his old mask on, where the mouthpiece makes it look like he's grinning the whole time. Shu worked an arm injury, so naturally Terry tried evening the score, but he had a tough time dealing with Signo's wrist strength. With some of the reverse holds they did, it looked like Signo was laughing at him. Navarro, as usual, was on another level. The finish was bullshit, like it usually is in Terry/Navarro matches, but Navarro is untouchable. I've seen some unbeatable workers in my time, guys who only ever lose because it's a work, but Navarro is on a whole nutha level. Now that he can throw rights and lefts equally well, he's just untouchable. Be warned: this was a slow match. There was a time when Signo and Shu el Guerrero would've torn it up in their opening mat exchange, but not anymore. Still, if you like selling and killer holds, here's this week's recommendation. Homenaje al Matemático This was a trophy presentation to honour Matemático's 40th year in wrestling. Very cool. You're better off watching this than the main event.

Are you sure it's not clipped?

Here's a question -- has there ever been a better Japanese pro-wrestler than Fujiwara? El Hijo del Santo or Negro Casas? Barry Windham or Arn Anderson? Marty Jones or Dynamite Kid?

Steamboat was pretty good at getting fired up. His WCW run from '91 to '94 is full of asskicking performances. The most cringeworthy thing I can remember Rey doing was that promo they made him do after Hogan turned heel.

Sorry, didn't read your post properly. I'm not sure that the Greatest Wrestlers Ever poll was all that impartial, but certainly "characterisation" can be used as a means of judging workers. I'd still argue, however, that you need to find some common ground. If you simply prefer Tito's work or Bret's characterisation, that's fine from your own point-of-view, but it's not really enough if you want to make a case for Tito & Bret > Rey. To be honest, I'm not really sure who I think is the better babyface out of those three, but if I were to think about it, first I'd have to wipe out all of my biases. Then I'd try to ignore the booking and the different positions those workers were in, and try to find something they all in common.