Jump to content

Mildly interesting, completely useless wrestling facts


ShortOrderCook

Recommended Posts

The Hardcore Title Battle Royal at Wrestlemania 2000 was supposed to see Crash pin Tazz and then have Hardcore Holly pin Crash only for the time limit to be up as he got to two and the three count would not have been completed thus making Crash the winner. The end was mistimed however as the ref did his best to try and make it seem as though he only got to two when it was obvious it was a three count just before the bell rang. After the bell Crash quickly rolled out and grabbed the Title as he walked up the ramp, there was a little confusement and then Hardcore Holly was announced as the winner by the ring announcer. Pretty useless and I think a lot of people know about it but I had totally forgotten about it until I rewatched it a few weeks ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 44
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Paid Members
The Hardcore Title Battle Royal at Wrestlemania 2000 was supposed to see Crash pin Tazz and then have Hardcore Holly pin Crash only for the time limit to be up as he got to two and the three count would not have been completed thus making Crash the winner. The end was mistimed however as the ref did his best to try and make it seem as though he only got to two when it was obvious it was a three count just before the bell rang. After the bell Crash quickly rolled out and grabbed the Title as he walked up the ramp, there was a little confusement and then Hardcore Holly was announced as the winner by the ring announcer. Pretty useless and I think a lot of people know about it but I had totally forgotten about it until I rewatched it a few weeks ago.

 

I never understood why they didn't change the title during the post-game show they did on the PPV that year. Aside from the result not actually mattering that is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

True to form, I think I'll make a language-based contribution.

 

The wrestling historian of the future looking back at the period between, say, 1995 and 2045 might be able to make reference to a generic "Vince Bishop" as his alpha male characterising the period, much as we do with John Bull when speaking of Merrie Olde England.

 

The "Vince" element is easy - at the height of the 90s boom there was McMahon sitting atop the WWF empire and with Russo his chief writer spear-heading the charge, at the time lauded as the man responsible for turning around the WWF's fortunes. Russo then went to WCW as the man charged with repeating his earlier success and, the record will state, spent a decade leading the second-largest company in the industry in the opening decade of the twenty-first century.

 

The "Bishop" element is not so evident, although some of you might work out part of it. Vince McMahon wasn't consistently the undisputed kingpin of the industry and lost his crown during the mid-90s when Eric Bischoff led the charge at WCW. It was Bischoff who changed the nature of wrestling programming from the slow-burn that we were used to into a fast-paced show that featured PPV-calibre match-ups on weekly television and one PPV per month. The consequence, of course, is that match-ups are rarely new nowadays but his model still stands.

 

Bischoff is a mis-spelling of the original surname Bischof. It might have been written in its current guise for generations in that family, but it would originally have come to the United States via a German immigrant carrying the original surname, which in the native language translates as Bishop.

 

Still, unless I think that Eric Bischoff (or his son) will return to lead TNA to dominance over the next three decades, then my comment about Vince Bishop being the caricature czar of the wrestling industry between 1995 and 2045 seems to be about thirty years too ambitious. Not so.

 

When Vince McMahon shuffles off this mortal coil the reins to WWE will be handed to his daughter and her husband, Paul Levesque, pronounced more or less "l'vek". That surname is a strange one for sure, and you won't find it in any dictionaries. But there's a story behind it.

 

French surnames, like ours, are often rooted in occupations. So the name Matthew LeTissier suggests to me that the original bearer of that surname in his family was a weaver (le tisser in modern French) and so the name means "Matthew the weaver". But what's that got to do with Triple H? There's no word "evesque" in French for me to argue that it's an occupational surname. (Note that I'm leaving the 'l' aside, since that's the bit that will translate as 'the'.)

 

Language has a way of leaving the odd clue about etymology if you know how to look for it. One of these is that French words in which the letter 's' within it gradually stopped being pronounced and instead just lengthened the preceding vowel is that the 's' was often removed from the spelling and a circumflex (^) was added to the vowel. With that little bit of knowledge we can see clear links between French words and their English equivalents: h

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

Here's one ...

 

WWE has been named WWE for a decade now. Which means those fans who got into wrestling liking John Cena and Rey Mysterio look at us in the same way we looked at people who watched the WWWF. Think about that for a second. Its a big mind fuck and incredibly depressing to think we live in a world where people actually ask confusingly "you mean it used to be called WWF?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...