BionicRedneck

We are talking "wrestling" here...right? Not sport entertainers.

Yet you have listed Kurt Angle.

I just can't count Hogan. His matches were dull and repetative. He gets beat up, sells badly, then comes back like superman.

Sounds like you were describing Shawn Michaels to me. Oh yes, I went there

If anyone slags of HBK dont even bother.

Good idea. It's not like it would lead to any sensible discussion.

Just because he was a bastard backstage doesnt mean he is a bad wrestler

Yeah. That's why people who dislike some of Shawn's work critisize him. It's got nothing to do with the massive holes in his work. Ooops.

RVD? As in Rob Van Dam?! As in that guy who wrestles on RAW every week?!! erm....Ha!....er.....erm......:awaits punchline:

Let's try and make a discussion. LOP, based purely from an in-ring point of view how are Shawn Michaels, Keiji Mutoh, Yuji Nagata, Hogan or Rocky anywhere near the top ten. Seriously. I mean if we are picking 10 favourite wrestlers from 80-03 then fine.Anyway, my picks:HokutoMisawaTsurutaKawadaHansenTenryuFlairBenoitLiger

I'd say otherwise. The whole point of Shawn Michaels' character is that he's capable of going 'that one step further' than everyone else, that he has inner reserves of energy to call upon at the last moment and all that. The psychology behind Shawn's nip up is actually very complex, because the action is given its meaning ENTIRELY through the selling up to that point. By looking like he was about done, that he was spent and finished, he made the fans go ballistic when they realised he wasn't finished, and that he was going to go on for just a little bit more and MAYBE win the match before the andrenaline wore off. In psychological terms, of course. Its called crappy selling by you, because you blankly refuse to see it in any other light. -with a loo brush

How is this different from Hogan's "hulk up" which gets slaughtered. Everyone thinks Hogan's done, then he comes back etc. etc. It's also not just the nip-up, but what comes after it as well. Shawn doesn't nip-up do a couple of moves and collapse due to exhaustion, pain or whatever. He nips-up and runs about hitting highspots as if he is fresh as a daisy. Good selling? not in my book. When RVD does it he gets hammered by the net.

Other people have used the nip up in a similar fashion, but never to the same kind of results. The Rock used it to, a few times, and while he got a pop, it was never to the kind of meteoric levels that Shawn used to and sometimes still does.

Rocky's back was never the main focus of his opponents offense for 10+ minutes of a match when he did the nip-up as far as I can recall.

Maybe you should work out why people loved it when he did it so much rather than knocking it all the time and adding basically nothing to this discussion. I mean, how many times have you reiterated this exact same point? -in my pants

So people loved it. I get that. People loved The Worm. People loved the hulk-up. People loved Rikishi sticking his ass in peoples face in every match. I understand why he was doing it. Because people liked it. People like Limp Bizkit and when Fred Durst spouts his crappy lyrics but does that make their music any less shite?

(Nothing wrong with the nip-up, it's called babyface fire)

It's not called babyface fire when he has had his back worked on for 10+ minutes and then he does the nip-up. Then it's called crappy selling.

It wasn't necessarily the match which had the impact but more the fact that Austin had arrived as a true superstar.

But the match made Austin into that superstar.

Even today people talk about it less than they do about Savage-Steamboat, which as a match is still considered amongst the best of all time.

Who? Who are these people? If you ask the average person here they will mention Hart-Austin before Savage-Steamboat. I wouldn't say Savage-Steamboat is still considered amongst the best matches of all time, either.

It is true that people have overlooked the actual Bret/Austin match, whilst there is no doubt that the outcome will ever be forgotten, so I can't honestly imagine it being talked about for years to come.

The average internet fan talk about that match today more than they talk about Savage-Steamboat. They don't just talk about Austin becoming a superstar after it. They talk about the match. Because the match was fucking great.

For me Savage-Steamboat was revoultionary by WWF standards at the time and it set the bar for a whole generation of workers to aspire to meet.

Cool, so it was revolutionary. That doesn't mean that many matches that came after it weren't better.

Whilst the matches you mentioned were excellent, they didn't have nearly as much of a direct impact on the business as Savage-Steamboat.

Steamer-Savage had more impact than Hart-Austin at WM 13?!!!

A mouth-watering wrestling match which is still considered by many, over fifteen years later, to be amongst the best in company history, a feat which I doubt either Austin-Bret clash will manage to achieve.

I have absolutely no doubt that people will still talk about the Submission Match as one of the best American matches ever for decades to come. No doubt whatsoever. It practically made (arguably) the biggest wrestler ever, it was a fantastic match and Bret Hart turned heel. And it smokes Savage-Steamboat.

Kurt: In ring skill: 10/10 Bret:In ring skill: 9/10

So, Angle has never had a match as good as Bret did against Austin in 97 or Owen in 94, has never carried guys like Nash to good matches, doesn't have selling as good as Bret, doesn't work the crowd as good as Bret and his psych isn't as good as Bret....but he is better in the ring? hmmmmm....

I've just dug out the Armeggedon match between Shawn and HHH and sure enough, it fucking reeked. I don't care who was injured and who wasn't that was rank. It was like watching two backyarders at times. Ugh....

Bret, by a country mile. For the reasons I gave in the other thread:I can't see one area where Angle has Bret beaten.In-ring ability? Bret. Had more great matches, was technically better, better at selling, had better stamina and could carry a match better.Promos? Bret. Sure Angle can be comical sometimes but that's not really what a promo is about. A promo is supposed to get you interested in the match the wrestler is promoting. Angle has never really cut a promo which has made me think "Damn...I really want to see that now". Bret has.Character? Bret, easy. Angle has been booked as a 30 year old virgin, and he couldn't play a serious character if his life depended on it. Bret has displayed much more range and variety than Kurt has. Angle can play one character: The Goof.

The matches you have mentioned aren't exactly what you could call bad matches. In each instance they were at the worst, mildly entertaining, and I am still waiting for someone to find me a horrid HBK match.

Oh, that Three Stages of Hell match is utterly awful. It's 25 minutes of blow spots, sloppy and light brawling and crappy selling with no flow or little logic.

Yeah, but Shawn has often talked shat to put himself over. And he's the only performer to ever have done so?

Obviously not, but we are talking about Michaels here and his claim that he came up with a certain spot in HITC I.

in my eyes Shawn was a better rounded performer than they were. As a worker he was inferior to Flair but in terms of personality and charisma it's a close run race, but for me HBK edges it on the basis that both his heel and face characters were fantastic over the years.

Flair was a better heel and a better face. Michaels as a face in 96 bombed because many fans found it difficult to cheer someone like Shawn (see the reaction he got a SS 96?). As you say Flair was a better worker. Also, Flair was in a different league to Michaels when it came to cutting a promo. I don't really see anything (that matters) that Shawn has over "Naitch".

It makes him unique in the sense that during his peak he never had a match which would be considered horrible. Even Flair can't boast of a record without such belmish, as his 1985 match with Kerry Von Erich was painful (through no fault of Flair's though) and thought of to be among his worst ever. Von Erich was drugged beyond all realms of reality but the fact remains that it did happen and it's in the history books.

It's not fair to pick that match though is it? Michaels has had plenty of bad uns. His Iron Man match with Bret was hardly great, not to mention some of the shit he had to wrestle during the mid-90s (like Kama) or some of his crappy comeback matches (The three stages of hell vs. HHH was all kinds of stinky dogshit.)

QUOTE  This was the first televised 60:00 minute match in WWF(E) history which is why I referred to it as a 'first', because on the big stage this was the inaugral appearance of such a gimmick.

Depends on what you would call "the big stage" I suppose.

In 'From the Vault' Shawn makes reference to the fact that it was himself who had first suggested the idea of going to the top of the cell.

Yeah, but Shawn has often talked shat to put himself over.

As you say it all comes down to personal preference at the end of the time. Having seen a good deal of Vader both in the U.S. and in Japan, my feeling is that his match at Summerslam with Michaels was among the highlights of his career. His brawls with Sting and Cactus Jack were also highly entertaining but not on the same level as what he and HBK pulled off at Summerslam.

I don't mean to sound like a dick, but I think you should seriously go an watch the Sting matches again. They are much better than the Shawn match. As (I think) Terje said Vader had 20 matches from his time in Japan that were miles ahead of the SummerSlam match.

My favorite Sid match was the Wild Card match at Survivor Series 95. Sure the match was the shits but Sid shouting "SHUT UP! SHUT UP! SHUT UP!" at some little kids was fucking hilarious.That or the one where he snapped his leg.

Seriously Vader has had a dozen better matches than that. That Sid match was great for Sid, but not great compared to other great matches.

I consider the Summerslam 1995 bout with Michaels the best Vader had on U.S. soil, so again HBK deserves kudos for another world class performance and another superb little outing.

Vader's matches during the feud with Sting were much better, as were Foley series and arguably the match he had with Flair at Starcade 93. In the WWF alone he had a better match at Final Four. I didn't think that the Michaels-Vader match was all that, to be honest.

although in terms of working with the 'big slugs' and making them look great in the ring, few were as apt at it as Michaels.

Flair was better.

contested great 'big vs small' battles with both Vader and Sid in 1995 and 1996 and took them to some of the most exciting matches of their lives.

Seriously Vader has had a dozen better matches than that. That Sid match was great for Sid, but not great compared to other great matches.

No-one else can boast of doing this

Doing what? Carrying big slugs to great matches? (although Vader was never that. In fact he was a better wrestler than Shawn, IMO) If so, surely Flair did it even more often than Shawn.

Quite simply, despite his flaws and lack of a traditionalist approach, HBK was the man in the WWF circa the mid-nineties.

I can't see how. Bret had better matches than Shawn did, and was a better Champion.Oh, and this discussion owns~!

He did for me. He had great wrestling-based matches against Bret Hart, Jeff Jarrett, British Bulldog etc., daredevil matches against the likes of Razor Ramon and Triple H, which included a guaranteed high spot, brawls against Steve Austin, Undertaker and Mankind, and he would change his style in accordance with the opponent.

I would hardly describe those as great "wrestling-based" matches . They are basically the same matches he always works just without the gimmicks (ladder). He bumps, he comes back. The style doesn't really change. Oh, and the match against HHH fucking blew.

To say his pyschology is poor is way off, as it was his "how do I beat Mankind" pyschology that made the match so entertaining, and it was his "fear" of the Undertaker that made the cell match so superb.

His fear made the match superb? Huh?

Answer me this: Is the sit-up of Undertaker and Kane offensive to you?

Not really because they are never pimped as "the best wrestler ever!!!!!1~~~!!!" like Shawn is. Plus, they are total gimmick wrestlers whereas Shawn was basically a cruiserweight (in size and his offence was cruiserweight-like) who no-sold things so he put himself over as superman.

My comment was designed to emphasise the diversity of Shawn Michaels, not only as an in-ring competitor but also as an all-round entertainer.

Michaels never really displayed much diversity in his ring-work.

Hogan could work a crowd like no other, Bret Hart could put on a wrestling clinic in the ring, but how many were able to combine both charisma and the ability to have great matches as seamlessly as HBK?

Bret, Austin, Flair and many others could have the crowd in the palm of their hand as well as having great matches. Bret had loads of charisma it just wasn't as obvious as Shawn's.

It's like ignoring the 'Stone Cold' character when comparing Austin to someone like Bubba Dudley...take the gimmick out of the equation and they both work a similar, brawling style, but this doesn't do justice to 'The Rattlesnake' because his success lay in the character.

That doesn't do justice to Austin because he is a million times better than Bubba from an in-ring standpoint. If you strip the characters away Austin would still be seen as better than Bubba because he was an awesome worker.

SHAWN MICHAELS HAD HIS (BROKEN) BACK WORKED OVER FOR 15 MINUTES AND HE NO SOLD IT.End of fucking story. You can say "it's an entertaining comeback" or whatever but it's basically bad psych.

And as for your comment about "marks" voting, they're opinions are as valid as yours. Just because you're potentially (and very questionably) a more intelligent fan, they still have the same capacity to be entertained as yourself.

It wasn't a comment it was a question, I was simply asking who voted it MOTY.

I think that's a ridiculous comment. Hogan would get-up straight after an opponent's finisher, on a consistent basis. Michaels, although able to recover (as many wrestlers are, what with the matches being staged), didn't make a mockery of the opponents.

The reason I hated it as much as the hulk up is because Michaels is supposed to be a great worker. Anyone watching a Hulk Hogan match expecting it be fantastic from a pure in-ring standpoint needs to ask themself a thing or two. Michaels is a much better worker but he basically did the same thing. I'm sorry but you don't kip-up after a gruelling wrestling match, just as you don't kick out start shaking your fists/head like a kid who has just shat the bed. Michaels might not have been AS bad, but they are in the same ballpark.

And how did he not sell at SS2002?! Last time I watched it he was stretchered out and gone for a few months.

Oh, so he sold afterwards? Well, that's OK then. It doesn't matter that he got his back (You know, the back that's supposed to be broken!) worked over big style for the majority of the match (which was the main point of the match) and he no-sold it by "kipping-up", running around, jumping of ladders etc. pretty much rendering the whole thing pointless, but it's fine because he sold a sledghammer shot after the match.

Bret just got in the ring and did his stuff, no silly preening, posing and dancing from my man

...and no entertainment.

Unless you like good wrestling.

His character was about as boring as his matches. (reply with witty comment here) Same old routine, same old predictable Bret. Did he even have a personality?

Obviously. Suggesting otherwise is retarded. Bret's matches were boring? What were Shawn's then? Bret's were predictable? Then what were Shawn's?

If Michaels' matches against Ramon, Taker and HHH are all over-rated, why did they receive match of the year awards?

Ha! From who? Marks? Also, remember what is popular isn't always good. (remember Hanson?) Various people give various awards to various crappy matches. Mutoh-Kawada was Japanese MOTY in 02 apparently even though that was a pile of bilge, too. Remember when Austin-HHH was given the 2001 MOTY by WWF fans? Oh and HBK vs. Ramon (94/95), Taker (97) and HHH (last year) are nowhere near the MOTY from those years. The ladder match in 94 isn't even close. HITC 1 isn't even the best WWF Match from that year (Austin-Hart, WrestleMania 13 clearly smoked it) let alone the rest of the world.

*Why is it essential for each guy to sell exactly the same way?

Nobody said that.

I know it's not real, but so long as my intelligence isn't insulted (ie. Hulking up), i'm all for entertaining comebacks, even if it's not realistic.

Shawn's kip-up was sometimes as intelligence insulting as Hogan's "Hulk Up".

On some occasions Shawn has sucked but most of the time he was a fun worker and sometimes great. He is, however, easily the most overrated wrestler ever. The fact that some people claim him to be one of the best wrestlers ever when there were seriously 20+ guys better than him says it all. He strengths were his bumping, his charisma and his ability to connect with the crowd but Shawn did some really stupid things in the ring (the crappy selling, the kip-up and subsequent superman comeback).

OK, lets not allow this to decend into another Montreal thread.

I wouldn't say Shawn's matches were "unique" or even that flashy if you compare them to stuff outside of the WWF. Bret is seriously miles ahead of Shawn from an in-ring standpoint. Michaels gimmick matches are the best matches he had and they don't stand up nowadays because stunt fests lose there appeal over time, especially when more impressive stunts etc. are done these days. That's why Bret vs. Owen at WMX is still considered as great as it ever was and Shawn vs. Razor from the same show doesn't look as impressive. That's why the Bret vs. Diesel match is better than the Shawn vs. Diesel match.

Bret-Diesel at SS 95 is just a much, much better match. It's the basic "Bret Hart vs. Big Slug" match, but it's certainly better than the Shawn match. The two matches are a good example of how much better Bret is than Shawn. Watch the two table spots. The Shawn spot where one minute he's dead and the next it's superman comeback time and the Bret spot where Hart sells it as if he is dead and puts all his effort into one single move to get the victory.