El-P

Love it if only for the masses of pissed off WWE fans that will scream bloody murder on Flair coming back after his "emotional" and "real" retirement. Flair is a true pro like Funk and Onita.

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".

Sure, it's not *always* a cop out. But some people genuinely like crap too. So...

Ok, so let's play... Here's one : athetic ability is overrated. How many "great athlete" ended up sucking at wrestling. Billy Gunn was refered for years as the "best pure athlete yaddi yadda", and it was certainly true. Didn't keep him from sucking, like a whole lot of "great athletes". I agree with Dan on "it's not what you do, it's the way that you do it" being overrated. It's a bad cop out to excuse some poor workers who have the right idea but just suck at execution to me. Kinda like "Size doesn't matter, what matters is how you use it.". Same thing. The "playing your role well" has been ridiculously overrated too, maybe since the Mark Henry pimping days. It's not because you play "your" role right that you become a good worker. This can pretty much excuse any big stiff around who know how to play the role of a big immobile stiff. It's easy to play a role when it doesn't take much talent. Overrated quality. I'd rather watch a worker who's still searching himself and makes mistakes but shows good stuff in the ring.

Sano or Ultimo Dragon? Sano's peak murders Ultimo's peak. His transition to shoot style was smooth and successful as hell, and he got a lot of mileage out of the style in the 90's. Ultimo has had his moment of shine in the mid-90's, but the post injury work, from what I've seen, just hurts him. Genichiro Tenryu or Randy Savage? Both have been involved in absolutely great matches. Both had period of lazyness where they got boring and/or underwhelming. Tenryu's longevity gets him the nod, although Savage's peak in the 80's might be more impressive than Tenryu's. Ted DiBiase or Rick Rude ? To me DiBiase was always the supposed great worker that never had any great matches. After the Mid-South viewing, it became obvious that as good as he was, he just was never that *great*. Rude had performances DiBiase just never had. Rude's best matches are better. Rude. 1980s Ric Flair or 1980s Jerry Lawler? Flair, not even thinking about it. Jumbo Tsuruta or Harley Race? Not seen enough Race, and although I find really absurd the "Race was Kurt Angle" lie of thinking, I'm not sold on Race as one of the absolute best of all-time. Jumbo without even having to think much. Rob Van Dam or John Morrison? From what I've seen, Morrison is Nova 2009 with better production. RVD was never a great worker or anything, but at least he had his own style, got his own niche and did work good matches. RVD. Kimala I ("Kamala" Jim Harris) or Kimala II a.k.a. Uganda ("Botswana Beast" Ben Peacock)? Kamala. One of the "played his role well" kind of good worker. I haven't seen anything notable from Kimala II, although working comedy matches in AJ with Baba certainly isn't easy to show much. Head Hunter A or Head Hunter B? Head Hunter B. I really don't have to explain, do I? Stan Lane or Dennis Condrey? Condrey. Very good old school worker who could bump, stooge, work, and look good doing anything. Lane's kick were goofy (to be polite) and he just wasn't that good of a worker by himself basically. Tom Prichard or Jimmy Del Ray? Pritchard. Same things as Condrey. Del Ray was really good though, and looked dirty as hell, which is a plus when you're doing this gimmick. Brian Blair or Jim Brunzell? Brunzell. Blair was dull as dirt, I don't see anything remotely notable about him. He was better than Jim Powers though... Dustin Rhodes or Barry Windham? Windham, in a landslide. At his peak, Windham was one of the best ever. And when he got fat and lazy, he was better than when Dustin became fat and lazy. Dustin got a longer career, but he never got as high as Windham did. Randy Orton or Edge? If there's something I absolutely don't get about today's wrestling, is why Randy Orton is considered a good (when not great) worker. To me he's a black hole, he's a one move wonder (and when you picked it up from DDP, really, it's not very creative...) and his matches are complete borefest. Edge wins by default.

Was Konnan a good worker at any point of his career ? I ask because I don't think I've seen one match when I though that he was even decent or put on a good performance.

I love this thread. In a few days pretty much everything quality a wrestler can have will be considered overrated.

Edge was decent as a smart ass clown, but for anything "serious" he's just terrible. There's nothing remotely credible in his acting, even by modern "soap opera let's pretend wrestlers can act" wrestling standart. What's Dave issue with Murdoch ? The fact that he was maybe a racist (that has been said many times). ?

I think he would have gotten old and boring and vanilla. Kinda like Kanemoto. His career has been a lot more interesting than a lot of juniors who have stayed at the same place. Unless they graduate to heavy and get somewhat of a sustained push like Hase and Koshinaka, and unless their name is Juhin Thunder Liger, most NJ juniors end up stale and boring at some point.

Ok, so... (Whatever his first name is) Sano or Ultimo Dragon ? Tom Zenk or Scotty Riggs ? Brad Armstrong or Jim Brunzell ? Genichiro Tenryu or Randy Savage ? Ted DiBiase or Rick Rude ?

Not everybody can be a headliner. Being a Roh main eventer means shit anyway in the grand scheme of things. Oh, whatever... He'll probably get more roids in his body so he can look like a headliner now...

NAh. CM Punk already had a look to him that made him stand out. He's been successful more than anyone could have expected though.

Come on. There's that Wellness programm which keep workers clean up there. Ok, never mind. Nigel would have been a good fit as a regular in Japan, and it would have complimented his work much better. Watching Nigel work the dull WWE style is not exactly something I look forward too. But he's got the size and look to do good. Danielson, I really wonder what's this guy is going to amount in HHHLand.

I'd tend to say yes. His peak was relatively short, but his work in NJ and UFW-I is great. In 89/90 he was just one of the top wrestler on the planet, better than Liger in their feud to me. I'm not familiar with his SWS work, but he adapted to the worked shoot style with an amazing ease, and he became one of the best in the company with Tamura and Yamazaki (and you know who;)). At his best, Sano was as good as anybody I've seen, as good as Ohtani, as good as Liger, as good as Yamazaki.

Owen Hart vs Brian Pillman Two stampede guys who died early, with great work early on their respective careers.

Rick Martel or Tito Santana? After watching a lot of Santana for the SC WWE poll, his stock has risen dramatically with with. Not a flashy worker, but an excellent babyface who could work intense programs and get the most out of everything he did. Worked as well with a deliberate Valentine and a fast and out of control Savage, could get "technical" (by WWF's standart) yet fire up and brawl with credibility. Martel, I really don't know, he hasn't been in any quality programs in his WWF stint, but he certainly delivered when he got the occasion. I don't think he was as good a babyface worker as Santana was. Haven't seen enough of his AWA work, but the big matches with Jumbo or Stan didn't convinced me he was that great. Martel is kinda like DiBiase to me, in that he's solid as hell, but he lacks truly great matches, or even, compared with Santana, consistent very good and compeling work. His match with Bret Hart are good, but don't get to the next level. At this point I'd choose Santana, but there's probably more Martel to watch. Butch Reed or Ron Simmons? Reed, without having to think two seconds about it. Ron Simmons never struck me as a very good wrestler. Could throw a few bombs, but that's about it. Edge or Christian Cage? Christian Cage, since day one. Edge is so indytastic, with a moveset consisting of lame Novaesque variation of basic moves, oversells everything with his goofy facials. Christian always looked more solid to me, and his matches with Jericho or recently with Swagger are a lot better than any of the "big" Edge matches I've seen over the years. Not that Edge is bad, but he's very overrated (like most WWE main eventer).

Well, Lawler's first program debuted at the KOTR, the night Hogan left, so technically, Bret was n°2.

I'd put the MX Express over the other two face teams. The Fantastics were more versatile and their work in Japan shows that. Tommy Rogers was a better worker than either Ricky or Robert. But what he lacked is the absolute perfect babyface charisma and psychology or Morton, who's just amazing in his role, able like Onita or Chigusa to make his audience cry. That made the Rn'R matches with the MX better than the Fantastics, who had better mechanics (mostly thanks to Rogers). It's really a matter of taste. The Fantastics have the great series with the Sheeperders in their sleeves too in term of versatility. Fulton was more colorful than Gibson and about as good a worker. Quite frankly it's a toss up to me, really depends of what you're looking for. The most perfect US wrestling tag match up remains the MX vs Rn'R to me though.

Well, maybe. I've not followed the WCW poll. Maybe I will batch an eye at it to see the final countdown and see what are the current "trends" that can be drawn. I get what you say about the distinction between fans of 88-94 and 95-99. Filesharing has indeed changed a lot of things. It's been a long while since I've been watching a Takada match, but what I got from watching him were what felt like great epics, great spectacles kinda like what I get when I watch a Riki Choshu match, although Takada had a lot more to offer than Choshu as far as pure work goes. The thing is, Takada has never been my favourite. Tamura was my all-time favourite. I should get back at watching the entire shoot-style scene, that would be a great project. From the early UWF to the late RINGS. But hell, right now, I'm into old FMW stuff which is, well, different. I know. I dunno, like I said it's been so long since I've watched Takada, but I have nothing but recollection of excellent matches. The Vader matches, the Allbright matches are great stuff to me. Takada sure carried Allbright to an epic, as Allbright was very limited in what he could bring. I remember you saying UWF-I sucked, so maybe it's a stylistic affair. Since I compare Takada to Choshu (I know you hate Choshu too), maybe that will comfort you in why you can seem to enjoy him at all though. Was Takada the greatest lat wrestler? No. Was Takada the better striker ? No. But he had that intangible that made him the total package as far as projecting himself as The Man, and he could have epic matches that felt like truly epics. His junior work in NJ were amazing to me too when I think back at those. He had an incredible charisma, second to none in Japan. The details of his matches totally elude me at this point, but what I got from them was really great.

Well, maybe. I've not followed the WCW poll. Maybe I will batch an eye at it to see the final countdown and see what are the current "trends" that can be drawn. I get what you say about the distinction between fans of 88-94 and 95-99. Filesharing has indeed changed a lot of things. It's been a long while since I've been watching a Takada match, but what I got from watching him were what felt like great epics, great spectacles kinda like what I get when I watch a Riki Choshu match, although Takada had a lot more to offer than Choshu as far as pure work goes. The thing is, Takada has never been my favourite. Tamura was my all-time favourite. I should get back at watching the entire shoot-style scene, that would be a great project. From the early UWF to the late RINGS. But hell, right now, I'm into old FMW stuff which is, well, different. I know. I dunno, like I said it's been so long since I've watched Takada, but I have nothing but recollection of excellent matches. The Vader matches, the Allbright matches are great stuff to me. Takada sure carried Allbright to an epic, as Allbright was very limited in what he could bring. I remember you saying UWF-I sucked, so maybe it's a stylistic affair. Since I compare Takada to Choshu (I know you hate Choshu too), maybe that will comfort you in why you can seem to enjoy him at all though. Was Takada the greatest lat wrestler? No. Was Takada the better striker ? No. But he had that intangible that made him the total package as far as projecting himself as The Man, and he could have epic matches that felt like truly epics. His junior work in NJ were amazing to me too when I think back at those. He had an incredible charisma, second to none in Japan. The details of his matches totally elude me at this point, but what I got from them was really great.

Ok then. My bad. I admit that to me the term "dated" sounds like a pretty negative one, be it in English or French (I don't think there's much difference between the two). Maybe I'm wrong to think that way, but I think when people use that word to talk about films, music, ideas or whatever, it's pretty much always in a dismissive way. Probably. I agree. Like I would still praise LCO's prime now, although that would be a very "1998" opinion to most people I guess. I can only agree with all you say there. Will look poor to the eyes of who? That's the question. Because it's been made in 2009 will not mean it's automatically badly done. Especially since there won't be anymore WCW matches to discover in ten years, most everything woiuld have already been seen. For the record most of the DVDVR Best of the 90's didn't look good to me when it was done. It doesn't look dated to me now. It looks just as wrong in many aspect as it was the year it was done. Maybe in ten years the people who will do a best of WCW list will have terrible taste and their list will look poor compared to what has been done in 2009. That's right. To a fault sometime I confess. Pretty much. I always get wary with mass enthousiasm. Well, sometimes it is justified. Hum... I wouldn't say that. I have stack of wrestling on my hard drive that I would want to watch and don't find the time too. I would watch more UWF/PWFG, because I really haven't seen enough, and I love that style. I wouldn't be against watching a lot more prime Fujiwara, but from what I've seen from him, I admit I don't see the argument of him being better than Takada. And like I said, I don't want to watch Fuji (or Lawler), with the "he's one of the greatest workers ever" thing on my mind, because it could only led to disapointment. Watching Backlund and expecting nothing in particular was eye opening. When watched all that Backlund for the WWF poll, I wasn't immersed at all in the Backlund pimping by John. I had seen Backlund vs Inoki a few years before, and it bored the hell out of me, so I got into those Backlund match with really an open mind. I watched a few big Lawler matches after the "Lawler is one of the greatest wrestler ever" trend was off and running, and really I was baffled watching the matches at how that notion could have surfaced. In a way it damaged my enjoyment of the matches because none could get to the level that it had been pimped. Probably. Plus the more I try to articulate complex ideas, the worst my English gets. Ugh.

Volk Han. Just amazing to watch.

Agreed. Revisiting stuff is good. I changed my mind on a lot of workers when I watched lots of early 90's NJ a few years ago, or during the GWE and WWE poll at SC. Once again, it echoes my own feelings. I just don't get caught easily into hyperboles about this or that guy suddenly becoming the great lost worker. Because it can lead to major disapointment when watching the footage later. Exactly.

I've seen more than I can remember. Some that disapeared quickly, some than gave birth to a new consensus. It' was pretty interesting, pretty informative, and also, sometime, pretty embarrassing. Oh, I can remember some grumpy people thinking all of a sudden I (and a few others) thought Backlund was great because JDW pimped him.

How the movie was judged back then is not required knowledge to judge it now. However, it is valuable knowledge if you're interested in movie reviewing history and how perception evolved. However, someone thinking in 2009 that "Night of the Hunter" is a bad movie should not be dismissed as having a "dated idea". It's stupid. He's probably got his own argument, maybe some which share points with ideas people have had back then, but in no way that means it's "dated".Much like thinking Takada is a great worker in 2009 isn't a "dated" idea just because there was a consensus 10 years ago that he was a great worker. There's no consensus anymore? Fine. Does that means that people thinking like the consensus 10 years ago have "dated ideas"? No. Don't be naive, you know how it works. Of course it's coming from the fact that footage showed up. But it also comes from the fact that there are some trendsetters and a large flock of seagulls following the ship, especially at DVDVDR. I've been around for more than 10 years, I've seen it work that way more time that I can remember. Not that *everyone* praising Fuji or Lawler does it because they are followers, but the fact that a consensus seems to emerge often comes from the fact that people follow trendsetters. Like I said, it's the same things in movie or music. Reviewers are influencials. Thanks. Doesn't mean that my ideas are dated for disagreeing with the people with the "new views" either. Plus I didn't say to Dan that he was *following* a trend. I said that the Fujiwara and Lawler pimping as all time great is trendy. Like MJH said earlier, the use of the term "trendy" is not automatically dismissive. But you seem very defensive to have it thrown at you for whatever reason. Nobody was pimping Dustin Rhodes ten years ago. No one. Lot of his old matches in the early 90's were thought as restholds dullfest. Really, there was absolutely no consensus about Dustin being this great worker in the 90's. After the Dustin of the Day he became second only to Terry Funk it seemed like. It was funny as hell. I always liked Dustin, even in his hated early Goldust days, but I never had the impression that I was in any kind of consensus. People talked bout how HHH was carrying Dustin back in 97. I've already answered this earlier. I don't want to sound rude or anything, but at this point you're clearly putting way too much though in dissecting the meaning of every word I type. I'm not writing an essay when I quickly reply in a discussion on a pro wrestling Internet board. You want to know my train of thoughts ? First of all it was "Well, maybe it's dated, but that doesn't make it less valuable", then after reading Tom's stuff about "holding onto 93 opinion", which pretty much meant "dated opinion" too, I just thought, "Well, it's just silly anyway.". I mean, I just told you that. I'm not trying to be a smart alec, it really was my train of thoughts about that, not that I spend a whole lot of times asking myself questions about this particular topic anyway.