I'm not in favor of extending the deadline for a couple of reasons. 1) If we extend it once why not a second time, or a third, or a fourth? 2) Sure, NWA Classics will be available, but there are modern guys who will also have matches past the deadline that could change where I rank them. It's a slippery slope where you're making an exception for some footage but saying that other present day footage that will come later isn't as important.

I wasn't really planning on submitting a ballot but I'm starting to think about how i can justify it more and more. If there are people who aren't really going to watch any lucha or include any luchadores surely I can do the same thing with puro?

Your ballot will reflect your preferences and your exposure level. Nothing wrong with that.

I think at this stage I'm not going to be ranking any lucha guys at all. I've watched what are reputedly El Dandy's greatest matches and didn't come out feeling strongly about him. The more lucha I watch, the more it doesn't click with me. If I was to make my top 100 music acts list, it would have a grand total of zero jazz acts, just as some other people would have a grand total of zero hip-hop acts. This is similar. I've seen enough lucha to know that I'm never going to be a lucha guy.

Thank you Parv. If I do a ballot now I will feel completely comfortable with only having Fujinami & Onita on my list.

At the end of the day, goc, your list has to reflect you.

I think at this stage I'm not going to be ranking any lucha guys at all. I've watched what are reputedly El Dandy's greatest matches and didn't come out feeling strongly about him. The more lucha I watch, the more it doesn't click with me. If I was to make my top 100 music acts list, it would have a grand total of zero jazz acts, just as some other people would have a grand total of zero hip-hop acts. This is similar. I've seen enough lucha to know that I'm never going to be a lucha guy.

I do find it strange you can give lucha matches ***** and claim you don't "get" any of the workers involved in those matches. Also don't see why not getting one guy, even if he is one of the most pimped lucha guys, means you should totally write off all lucha guys.

I like living in a world where El Dandy is one of the most pimped lucha guys out there.

I will have lucha guys on my list but I don't know if El Dandy will be one of them honestly. I need to get back to his 1990 that I was watching but he has only 1 match that I have really loved so far.

 

I think at this stage I'm not going to be ranking any lucha guys at all. I've watched what are reputedly El Dandy's greatest matches and didn't come out feeling strongly about him. The more lucha I watch, the more it doesn't click with me. If I was to make my top 100 music acts list, it would have a grand total of zero jazz acts, just as some other people would have a grand total of zero hip-hop acts. This is similar. I've seen enough lucha to know that I'm never going to be a lucha guy.

I do find it strange you can give lucha matches ***** and claim you don't "get" any of the workers involved in those matches. Also don't see why not getting one guy, even if he is one of the most pimped lucha guys, means you should totally write off all lucha guys.

 

Yeah, I did seem to dig quite a bit of the stuff that I watched of the 80s Lucha set, but also found myself curiously uncompelled to keep watching it, which is probably telling. It's less about Dandy and more about the style and its quirks. I just don't get on with it like I don't get on with modern WWE. I've given modern WWE matches ***** too. John Cena has a shot of making my top 100 so anything is possible, but I'm no longer going to be worrying about my list being "invalid" because of lack of lucha guys.

I will be honest. The rejection of lucha by Parv and others makes it increasingly likely that Jumbo will not appear on my list. If people aren't going to include guys who I consider to be all time greats, who I would rather watch bad performances from than Jumbo's best, it seems silly for me to include Jumbo even if I think he's been in a lot of great matches.

I think if you really despise Jumbo, you shouldn't lose any sleep over leaving him out. I will have Backlund on my list despite being one of his most vocal critics, so in a way I can relate to the dilemma, but I think your hatred of Jumbo seems to outstip my gripes with Bob.

 

The one little ray of hope I have for lucha is Negro Casas, who I've really dug in what I've seen. I'd love to make room for Mocho Cota if possible too, who was a major reason of why that early 80s stuff got over with me so big.

You shouldn't rank Jumbo. It's your own list. I'd much rather rank shoot style guy #38 than Randy Savage. It's much better to let the bias cancel itself out than to pretend to be objective about a subjective list.

What makes it tough for me is that I DO think Jumbo is a great wrestler, but my reaction to seeing his name pop up on a matchlist, or on a DVD, or on a YouTube listing is to say "ugh fuck now, bring on some Hack Myers." I am not sure there are ten wrestlers on Earth I would rather watch less than Jumbo. Objectively I think he's a top 100 guy, but I also can't be fair rating him at all.

How can it be a chore for you to watch great matches unless those matches aren't great? There's a lot of Jumbo stuff I love and a lot if that bores me. If the bad stuff stains him so much for you his best stuff can't redeem him don't include him.

I think you can watch a guy have a bunch of great matches, and then get to the point where you're sick of him and from there on out you don't find anything else of his great or ever want to revisit the great stuff. Doesn't mean the things you thought were great weren't great, but just that you have no desire to see any more of him, and thus anything of his you watch from that point on, you probably won't find it great because you never want to see him ever again.

 

If that makes sense.

I've said from the beginning that people shouldn't worry about what they have and haven't seen. Lists are like this, especially attempts at a comprehensive list. You're never going to see everything so I choose to not worry about what I haven't seen and instead focus on what I have seen.

Umm, not getting on with a style and overlooking it is fine with me. I've no time for recentish indie and puro and don't feel at all guilty. But jazz? Jazz is the most diverse genre of music there is. The screeching blitzkrieg of Brotzmann's 'Machine Gun' shares practically no common ground with say, Ella Fitzgerald. Jazz covers a spectrum that can't be dismissed like a wrestling style.

 

I think you can watch a guy have a bunch of great matches, and then get to the point where you're sick of him and from there on out you don't find anything else of his great or ever want to revisit the great stuff. Doesn't mean the things you thought were great weren't great, but just that you have no desire to see any more of him, and thus anything of his you watch from that point on, you probably won't find it great because you never want to see him ever again.

 

If that makes sense.

It does. In fact you pretty much described the four pillows* of All Japan for me.

 

 

 

 

 

*because they put me to sleep.

I've said from the beginning that people shouldn't worry about what they have and haven't seen. Lists are like this, especially attempts at a comprehensive list. You're never going to see everything so I choose to not worry about what I haven't seen and instead focus on what I have seen.

I'm not sure this statement is in the spirit of this project though. Part of it is about seeking out new stuff.

 

I've said from the beginning that people shouldn't worry about what they have and haven't seen. Lists are like this, especially attempts at a comprehensive list. You're never going to see everything so I choose to not worry about what I haven't seen and instead focus on what I have seen.

I'm not sure this statement is in the spirit of this project though. Part of it is about seeking out new stuff.

 

 

It is, but it's counterproductive to worry about what you haven't seen. If that's really an issue then no "Best Of" or "Greatest of All Time" list should ever be published for wrestling, music, film, etc. No one is ever going to see every match, let alone every match from every nominated wrestler, or every worthwhile match from every nominated wrestler. See new stuff by all means, that's something everyone should be doing, but don't think it's a prerequisite to see everything (or a suitable high amount) before you can submit a list.

It is, but it's counterproductive to worry about what you haven't see

Hmmm. I'm not sure about that.

 

If you're making a film list, you should make some sort of effort to watch some Hitchcocks, Citizen Kane etc. If you come out of it thinking "well, no, Welles and Hitchcock aren't for me and won't make my list", fine. But I don't like the idea of saying it is "counter intuitive" to fill gaps where said gaps are hyper-canonical or super pimped.

 

If you're going into this without ever having seen the Flair-Steamboat trilogy, you SHOULD make it a priority to see that. I have made 90s All Japan a priority for this exact reason.

 

Bryan is super pimped and a gap of mine, I'm making him a priority. And I do think to some extent that it is "right" that I at least make an effort to see some Bryan.

 

I don't see a negative to doing that.

 

There is time and practicality to consider though, so it becomes about what you prioritise. But saying you shouldn't worry about what you've not seen AT ALL, I think defeats the purpose and if that is what people are saying then we should just run the ballot TODAY. The whole reason for their being a deadline is so people can fill in their gaps or at least get a sense of nominees they are less familiar with.

I think there is a difference between trying to see everybody and making sure you are seeing the most highly pimped top guys.

I think there is a difference between trying to see everybody and making sure you are seeing the most highly pimped top guys.

 

I used to think this was important, I no longer do. If I spend time making sure to seek out highly pimped stuff that doesn't work for me and I end up not having seen less pimped stuff that I would have loved and that would have made a difference on my ballot I don't see that as time well spent. There's always going to be stuff that Person A thinks Person B should have seen, but in reality all that matters is that Person B feels they spent their time wisely and watched what they felt it was most important to watch.

Are you really suggesting Bill that the hypothetical fan going into this having never seen Flair-Steamboat trilogy or Flair-Funk or Bret vs. Owen or whatever SHOULDN'T make it a priority to seek those things out?

Parv, do you think there should be a required viewing set in order to participate?

 

I'm not trolling, it's something I was wondering about in general.