Your "quirks" in wrestling fandom

[air_raid]

OK, this will either get me some interesting answers, or die on it's arse. But it was a question I just thought of while walking home in the rain while randomly thinking about Survivor Series and I was wondering if there was anyone else that had any similar thoughts/opinions.

 

Do you hold any opinions or preferences when it comes to wrestling where you know or believe you're different from the vast majority of other wrestling fans? I'd like to think a little broader than just liking/not liking individual wrestlers or particular matches, because those topics have been done to death, but other aspects of pro wrestling?

 

I'll give you my example :

 

I'm pretty sure that for most people, "Survivor Series" will always mean the 5 on 5 match, and when WWE promote an eliminator these days, they always do a 5 on 5 and refer to it as the "traditional Survivor Series elimination match." However, to me, I will always think of Survivor Series first and foremost as 4 on 4.

 

The reasons are fairly straight-forward - the Survivor Series shows that I grew up watching the most either on tape or at the time, between childhood and late teens, were 1989 to 2000. These were, mostly, chock full of the 4 on 4 match. As that was what I thought "Survivor Series" was while I was growing up a wrestling fan, that's what it will always be to me, and 5 on 5 seems too many. Survivor Series will always be two teams of 4, ideally with a proper team name chosen for/inspired by the captain (which they're far too lazy about these days, "Team Cena" etc) and preferably with the names being barked out by Vince at the start of the tape. Like this :

 

 

But just to add a thought process beyond "Survivors is 4 on 4 because wrestling was better when I was a kid" which I'm worried this comes across as, in the intervening years as well, a faction formed will always seem most "factiony" to me when they have four members. The Horsemen with Flair, Arn, Tully and Windham. DX with Hunter, X-Pac and the Outlaws. Evolution with Hunter, Orton, Flair and Big Dave. I always get drawn to a group of four, and for the same reason I love a good "big names" eight-man one fall on a Raw or SmackDown, and the reason is that subconsciously I'm always thinking "Ooooh, you could get a great Survivors here." Ten-man tag always always makes me think of a big set-piece man event like Canadian Stampede or Invasion, but as I say, "Survivor Series" to me always puts me first and foremost of 4 on 4 rather than 5 on 5, but I think for most people it's the latter.

 

So..... any of you have any similar quirks where you feel you swim against the tide of other wrestling fans? I dunno.... do you prefer tag matches (player) to singles matches and get a big buzz for the VERY occasional PPV where a tag team match goes on last? For you, was Marty Jannetty the better one in The Rockers? Do you think the Royal Rumble is shit?

 

Please note, one answer I don't really need to see is "I preferred WCW to the WWF in (X year)" because that's a really predictable one and will be more popular an answer than you'll think. Even within my own circle of real life mates, I've got one that will say he preferred WCW in ANY calendar year even when it was at its worst because Sting and Vader were his two favourite wrestlers. So yeah, that's not unusual.

 

Oh, and being one of those tossers that cheers all the heels and boos all the babyfaces doesn't count either.

[Undefeated Steak]

Great post air_raid. I prefer to watch wrestling on a small screen (laptop or smaller) than a TV. Oh, and definitely by myself. I tried watching a Wrestlemania with some mates once and I didn't enjoy it at all. I think it's become more of a personal tradition that started by watching old VHS's on a small TV and watching poor streams. I love the glitz and glamour of WWE but I still watched Wrestlemania on a tablet this year.

[CleetusVanDamme]

Entrances are such an important part of the WWE package to me that I'd rather sit in the tiers with a good view of everything than ringside. I even turned down a 3rd or 4th row ticket for WM28. To stick with my ticket up high.

 

I'd have had a great time anyway, but not being able to sit in amazement watching Triple H and Undertaker's entrances and exit afterwards, would have took a lot out of the experience of that match alone for me.

[boshealecta]

Yeah its weird what your opinion is depending on when you started watching wrestling.  In a similar vein to the four on four being what you grew up with, mine is more about wrestlers who now I know are legends, but to me they just weren't.  

 

Jimmy Snukka I always thought was a jobber, he lost every match I saw, countout against Ted Dibiase at SS 89, lost to the Undertaker at WM7.  Same with Tito Santana, he seemed to lose every match I saw him fight, especially as El Matador.  And finally Ricky the Dragon Steamboat.  Its only from watching documentaries and retrospects that I know how well he was regarded, headlining events and stealing shows and seen as a top level superstar.  All I knew him as was "The Dragon" who breathed fire, wore a headdress and was the one who got beat up the most and was the weakest link at SS 91 when he teamed with Tornado and Bulldog against Warlord and Powers of Pain

[tiger_rick]

Completely agree on the 4 v 4 Survivor Series. Was years before I saw a 5 v 5 one.

 

I can't stand to listen to Gordon Solie and his ilk. So unbelievably dull. Give me Monsoon or McMahon any day.

[air_raid]

Entrances are such an important part of the WWE package to me that I'd rather sit in the tiers with a good view of everything than ringside. I even turned down a 3rd or 4th row ticket for WM28. To stick with my ticket up high.

 

That's an interesting one, for the entrances. I'm with you on floor seating being not for me, for getting to see stuff. Every time I've been stuck in floor seating, other than front row, I've been surrounded by smelly people or stuck behind tall (sometimes also fat) people and struggled to see much. I think it's a massive rip off. 2nd row at PCW was alright, but if I go to an arena show, its tiered seating all the way. I like to fucking see the show.

 

I can't stand to listen to Gordon Solie and his ilk. So unbelievably dull. Give me Monsoon or McMahon any day.

 

I loved Monsoon and it surprises me often how many people say he was shit. Except Fin, obviously.

[CTXRussomark]

I much prefer watching wrestling on TV than seeing it live. I've been to various WWF/WCW/Brit shows when I was younger and I just didn't enjoy them anywhere near as much as watching on TV with the benefit of production and commentary. I actually remember being at Rebellion 99 and just thinking "this is stupid", as if subconsciously my brain was making a distinction between watching a TV show and actually going to watch people pretending to fight.

[Briefcase]

I prefer watching the bigger events such as the Rumble & Mania on Sky Box Office despite having a WWE Network subscription (that can work thorough the same TV). 

 

Any other show I wouldn't mind so much watching back via the network or watching live but to me I would hate to risk my internet connection dropping or the streaming service not working properly so will always purchase those pay per views alone on top of the network. I might be the only person who does this but feel the picture and quality is much better than through the network.

[simonworden]

An old one for me but fits in with the survivor series quirk. I had a real (albeit private) sulk about the 2001 king of the ring.,purely because it was only the semi finals and final on the ppv. To me it took away the specialness of the ppv. I CanT remember which ones were just semi and which featured the quarter finals now on ppv. But the time I had just got into wrestling and watched the 2000 show right at the beginning of my fandom plus 1999 on a tape from my mate. To suddenly watch a cut down version just cheapend it for me. It was not the same.

[air_raid]

I'd like to think that's quite a popular one. Having a semi early doors then coming back later after a decent rest for the final is NOT the same as the storytelling you can get with "this guy won three matches in one night." They made Hitman look an absolute iron man in the first PPV version, in later years it really wasn't as special. Ken Shamrock and The Rock in '98 in particular barely had to break a sweat to reach the final on the night.

 

In case you were wondering, this is how the PPVs went down ;

Quarter-Finals included : 93-95, 99-2000

Just Semi-Finals : 96-98, 2001-2002

 

A "one night tournament" PPV just doesn't excite me if its only three matches, then it's just a part of the show, instead of the theme of the show as it should be.

 

Also pisses me off when occasionally Survivor Series is watered down to a single eliminator so they can pay lip service to the gimmick. It should be the majority of the show, damn it. Although I let them get away with it if the main event is a huge one promoted as massively important, like last year. I love Survivors. As should be obvious.

[JakeRobertsParoleOfficer]

 

i like the stars 'finishing move' to be the killer move that ends it 99.999% of the time. Makes when someone kicks out of it 'HUGE'when it gets kiked out of week in week out for me it devalues the quality of the match!

[Arch Stanton]

I don't think that's a quirky or contrarian thought though is it? I don't think anybody particularly likes the way in which finishers have failed to be protected in modern wrestling.

[Ars]

I hate when Raw starts immediately in ring without an intro video or pyro, for me that completely takes away from the show, granted they're phasing it back in, but it was over a year of no intro with the budget cuts. I also loved that every PPV felt special with a unique set, but again budget cuts, every PPV looks like weekly tv now regardless if you switch the colours. 

[pryko]

I don't think that's a quirky or contrarian thought though is it? I don't think anybody particularly likes the way in which finishers have failed to be protected in modern wrestling.

Agree 100% on this.  When someone does kick out, it should be something special.  Not every show, in almost every match.  Who was the last person who didn't kick out of a tombstone at Wrestlemania?

[air_raid]

Agree 100% on this.  When someone does kick out, it should be something special.  Not every show, in almost every match.  Who was the last person who didn't kick out of a tombstone at Wrestlemania?

 

 

It only took one Tombstone to pin Big Dave at WrestleMania 23. Every Taker opponent at Mania since has been permitted to kick out of one. I hate it.