I can see the narrative already being written that the only reason Flair might finish #1 is because of the increased voter base.

 

I just want to point out that on PWO-PTBN podcast list shows so far, he's had three #1 votes (Charles, Pete, me), two #2 votes (Marty, Kelly), one #3 vote (Chad) and another #5 vote (Child). Tim and Timothy will both have to remind me where they had Flair but it wasn't lower than #10 which is where Steven had him.

 

This is just to say that the idea that Flair might finish #1 solely as a symptom of an increased user base just isn't true. If you take the podcast hosts as being reflective of the core PWO base in microcosm, he is doing pretty darn well.

 

I'm putting this here now because there have been stirrings of that suggestion and it is pretty disingenuous. And I say that as the guy typically hauled over the coals for being one of the people who said two years ago that we shouldn't open it up.

Agreed. Flair's matches also consistently finished well in the DVDVR 80s set rankings, even while many of our eyes were being opened up to previously unheralded workers and other hidden gems.

 

If Flair does finish No. 1 in this thing, I'm guessing it will be because he had plenty of support from both within the PWO circle and folks who might not be around PWO much but still voted.

Yeah, Flair always has had a chance to get #1 overall even without having the additional voters. Believe it or not he's still pretty well loved by most of the posters here. I had him at #12

I do think in general guys like Dylan are sometimes branded as anti-Flair when I think it's more that they have to sometimes focus on his weaknesses in order to make whatever point they are trying to make. Similar to how some people laughingly think I'm anti-Bret Hart. No one that I know of except GOTNW and Frankensteiner thinks Ric Flair was anything less than a top-tier, great wrestler.

I can see the narrative already being written that the only reason Flair might finish #1 is because of the increased voter base.

 

I just want to point out that on PWO-PTBN podcast list shows so far, he's had three #1 votes (Charles, Pete, me), two #2 votes (Marty, Kelly), one #3 vote (Chad) and another #5 vote (Child). Tim and Timothy will both have to remind me where they had Flair but it wasn't lower than #10 which is where Steven had him.

 

This is just to say that the idea that Flair might finish #1 solely as a symptom of an increased user base just isn't true. If you take the podcast hosts as being reflective of the core PWO base in microcosm, he is doing pretty darn well.

 

I'm putting this here now because there have been stirrings of that suggestion and it is pretty disingenuous. And I say that as the guy typically hauled over the coals for being one of the people who said two years ago that we shouldn't open it up.

I think Flair would have ended up at #1 even if it was only PWO voters. I think he is going to run away with it because of the additional votes. So not because of it, only reinforced by it.

"Disingenuous"?

I do think in general guys like Dylan are sometimes branded as anti-Flair when I think it's more that they have to sometimes focus on his weaknesses in order to make whatever point they are trying to make. Similar to how some people laughingly think I'm anti-Bret Hart. No one that I know of except GOTNW and Frankensteiner thinks Ric Flair was anything less than a top-tier, great wrestler.

In the end, I ended up ranking Flair. Not super high, but he was around the middle of my list. He did have too many matches that I thought were excellent to not include him, even if at the same time I consider him a contender for a list of guys with the highest volume of footage that I would never want to watch again.

 

But seeing as how he made my list, I would have to consider him a great wrestler, even if it's not top-tier great.

"Disingenuous"?

I don't know what you are asking.

 

"Disingenuous"?

I don't know what you are asking.

 

Well, I guess that's only fair because I don't really understand what you mean when you're saying that here. Do you think people are just manufacturing criticism of Flair for the hell of it? Do you really think it's out of bounds to acknowledge that Flair has a great deal of visibility that would generally help him (and other Big Names, to be fair) with a larger voting population?

 

 

"Disingenuous"?

I don't know what you are asking.

 

Well, I guess that's only fair because I don't really understand what you mean when you're saying that here. Do you think people are just manufacturing criticism of Flair for the hell of it? Do you really think it's out of bounds to acknowledge that Flair has a great deal of visibility that would generally help him (and other Big Names, to be fair) with a larger voting population?

 

The point was that we can see the narrative being written in order "to account" for the placement -- and remember, we still don't know for sure -- but the point is that he would have done darn well on a list done by just core regular PWO board members.

 

So it is "disingenuous" in the sense that the narrative ("All these extra voters = Flair wins") doesn't reflect or recognise the fact that there are a lot of us here who had him #1 or top 5.

 

It was starting to be talked about like Kurt Angle ranking or something like that, as a quirk of having 152 voters and "mainstream-erizing" the list. If that is the narrative being pushed, it is "disingenuous". I looked up the word just for good measure and stand by this usage.

 

 

 

"Disingenuous"?

I don't know what you are asking.

 

Well, I guess that's only fair because I don't really understand what you mean when you're saying that here. Do you think people are just manufacturing criticism of Flair for the hell of it? Do you really think it's out of bounds to acknowledge that Flair has a great deal of visibility that would generally help him (and other Big Names, to be fair) with a larger voting population?

 

The point was that we can see the narrative being written in order "to account" for the placement -- and remember, we still don't know for sure -- but the point is that he would have done darn well on a list done by just core regular PWO board members.

 

So it is "disingenuous" in the sense that the narrative ("All these extra voters = Flair wins") doesn't reflect or recognise the fact that there are a lot of us here who had him #1 or top 5.

 

It was starting to be talked about like Kurt Angle ranking or something like that, as a quirk of having 152 voters and "mainstream-erizing" the list. If that is the narrative being pushed, it is "disingenuous". I looked up the word just for good measure and stand by this usage.

 

Usually, the word "disingenuous" has to do more with the intent behind an argument, but I don't know that it's worth squabbling over. The only comment that I saw in regards to Flair was OJ's "cult of the old" comment, which didn't seem at all connected to the other complaints pertaining to Undertaker, Hogan, Dusty, Angle, etc. -- maybe I missed something. Considering that you resurrected a thread dedicated to handwringing over Flair's ultimate placement in the list, it sort of feels like you're eager to go on the defensive here, even moreso than usual when it comes to Flair.

Actually, it's a pre-emptive strike. I thought you might be able to appreciate the psychology.

 

Also, here are the "stirrings" of that narrative being written I was referring to: http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?/topic/33866-reactions-to-the-honorable-mention-list-part-3/page-53&do=findComment&comment=5744249

Actually, it's a pre-emptive strike. I thought you might be able to appreciate the psychology.

 

Also, here are the "stirrings" of that narrative being written I was referring to: http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?/topic/33866-reactions-to-the-honorable-mention-list-part-3/page-53&do=findComment&comment=5744249

Again, it was more about the votes solidifying him as #1 rather than necessarily getting him there.

We don't know yet, it's all speculation. We don't know how the list is going to go and I don't see Flair necessarily being "the guy" for all the Undertaker and HBK voters. We can't really tell can we.

 

Just wanted to head off the possible claim long, long before we get there.

Much of the Flair criticism was about him vs other number 1 contenders, not vs #101 "The Rock" or anything.

Actually, it's a pre-emptive strike. I thought you might be able to appreciate the psychology.

 

When you dredge up a thread that's been stale for six months -- a thread that effectively started with you questioning the motives of voters that might vote for somebody other than Flair as #1 -- it kinda comes across like you're jonesing for another pass at your favorite windmill. Anything for a pop, I guess.

There's no need for this to be an issue when all the data is to hand. Tally up the votes of people who were anonymous and those of so called "acceptable" PWO board originals (or whatever you want to call them) and compare where Flair finishes.

I think Flair is great. He finished in my top 50.