Impact wrestling thread - It's a Don West tribute thread now!

[Vamp]

I'd like to believe people could watch a silly family show without getting elitist over whether people should know AJ Styles because he's a "good worker" but you can't have everything you want.

[Sexy Dad]

Thought I'd give Impact a watch this week and despite fast forwarding all of the wrestling apart from Sabin vs Aries and the Feast or Fired match I thought it was a pretty good show. Spud as the cringe-inducing stooge of Dixie Carter is fun, Jeff and Magnus made the title seem pretty damn important, Aries and Sabin had a fun fast paced match and feast or fired was a good throwback to the old 'throw shit at the wall' TNA of old. I think they might be hitting a decent groove in terms of producing a decent show again which is the main thing they should be focusing in.

 

*Actually, throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks is hardly TNA of old...it's been an on going thing.

Edited December 14, 2013 by Sexy Dad

[Carbomb]

Haven't seen it yet, but just couldn't believe it when they announced another fucking Feast or Fired. Seriously, that lot still haven't bought themselves a clue - that was one of the worst things they've ever done.

[KingOfMetal]

It makes no sense the Feast Or Fired Match. Why would someone knowingly put themselves into a match were they have a 1/4 chance of being fired. And there's more than four guys in the match, so when it gets down to the last case, surely its better to leave it than risk being fired. The risk outweighs reward, it just makes no fucking sense

[King Pitcos]

It makes no sense the Feast Or Fired Match. Why would someone knowingly put themselves into a match were they have a 1/4 chance of being fired. And there's more than four guys in the match, so when it gets down to the last case, surely its better to leave it than risk being fired. The risk outweighs reward, it just makes no fucking sense

Why is the last case more likely to be the fired one?

[KingOfMetal]

It isn't, but there's a chance it could be so why risk your job. If you leave the match you've not won anything but at least your still employed

[Carbomb]

It isn't, but there's a chance it could be so why risk your job. If you leave the match you've not won anything but at least your still employed

 

But there's a chance any of them could be - why should any of them take part at all?

[King Pitcos]

It isn't, but there's a chance it could be so why risk your job. If you leave the match you've not won anything but at least your still employed

Right, but why does that become more of an issue when there's one case left? What's gained from busting your arse trying to get one of the first three -- all of which have an equal chance of being the fired case -- but then going "fuck it" when there's only one left?

[UK Kat Von D]

If the feast or fired matches were all jobbers who would never get a title shot then you could suspend your belief that they are going all in for the chance. Or maybe even Sting who can never have a title match. Going into a match like that you would need to have nothing left to lose to be willing to risk it. However that doesn't apply to most the roster and probably most of the participants.

[wrestlescotland]

Why would wrestlers do loser leaves town matches then 50/50 chance of getting the bullet. Point of the match is surely that the reward of a title shot is so great they are willing to get the bullet.

[Carbomb]

Why would wrestlers do loser leaves town matches then 50/50 chance of getting the bullet. Point of the match is surely that the reward of a title shot is so great they are willing to get the bullet.

 

Yeah, but "Loser Leaves Town" matches are usually feud-enders between two feuding wrestlers who hate each other. "Feast Or Fired" makes very little sense with no story to build it up. UK Kat Von D summed it up in that the only people who could possibly want to take part would be jobbers with no chance of winning, or Sting.

Edited December 14, 2013 by Carbomb

[IANdrewDiceClay]

Why would wrestlers do loser leaves town matches then 50/50 chance of getting the bullet.

Because the whole idea of it is there's only room for one of them in the promotion because they hate each other so much. You'd risk your own career for a chance to get your enemy out of the promotion. This is just "I'll climb this, oh! I'm sacked, cheers lads". On TV with no build. Just a rotten idea for a match which does nothing for anyone and makes the wrestlers involved look like clowns. Especially when TNA have loads of number 1 contenders matches, tournaments and firing angles per month. The idea that you can either be the person fighting for the world title or be rendered useless to the promotion is ridiculous. So much for protecting your stars and pushing your regulars as attractions. Its pretty much everyone can get a title shot and everyone is worthy of the sack. All on the same level.

Edited December 14, 2013 by IANdrewDiceClay

[Statto]

Especially when TNA have loads of number 1 contenders matches, tournaments and firing angles per month.

 

Or just hand title shots out like sweeties anyway, on a whim.

[King Pitcos]

Why would wrestlers do loser leaves town matches then 50/50 chance of getting the bullet.

The key difference is that if you win a loser leaves town match, you're not the one down the jobcentre on Monday.

[UK Kat Von D]

Why would wrestlers do loser leaves town matches then 50/50 chance of getting the bullet. Point of the match is surely that the reward of a title shot is so great they are willing to get the bullet.

 

Yeah, but "Loser Leaves Town" matches are usually feud-enders between two feuding wrestlers who hate each other. "Feast Or Fired" makes very little sense with no story to build it up. UK Kat Von D summed it up in that the only people who could possibly want to take part would be jobbers with no chance of winning, or Sting.

 

Mate you can just call me Kat