Finish him

[tiger_rick]

What are your thoughts on finishers and finishing matches? I've heard two viewpoints recently that I broadly disagree with:

"Finishers should never be kicked out of"

"Every match should end with your finisher"

Now I'm not dunking on these views because I've probably held both of them at some point. The first one definitely, in one of the eras where finishers were having to be hit 3 times in matches. I don't agree fully though. Finishers should occasionally be kicked out of. And by occasionally, I'd say something like once every 3 years. A finisher, obviously, needs to finish most matches, otherwise it isn't a finisher. But once a big move is well established as a finisher and well protected, I've no problem with it being used to add drama to a big match. And by that, I don't really think Buddy kicking out of the Rainmaker counts!

I say "a" finisher too because to the second point, I really like people having multiple finishes that allow for matches to go in different directions. I don't want to get back to the days when there was a roll-up in half the matches on Raw for whatever reason but I do also like when guys would have a finish they could pull out of nowhere, like Bret countering the sleepers at WM8 and Survivors 96. AEW have done a great job in a lot of cases of establishing multiple moves that end matches and then big matches often see combos of these moves required, or the lesser ones kicked out of but the big finisher do the job. I like that layer of drama.

WWE have always been great at establishing multiple big moves for guys but I think you have to go back to the squash match days to see anything other than the main finisher winning matches. I get why, there's a great satisfaction in seeing Austin hit the stunner, for instance, and knowing that's the moment, but I think that's also the reason why they then ended up with matches where the stunner was kicked out of way too often because there was no other credible move that would build drama.

Anyway, agree/disagree?

[BomberPat]

I think finishers are inherently a very silly idea. And that's fine, because wrestling is inherently a very silly thing.

But I think they are a victim of wrestling becoming more video-gamey, the idea that everyone has a quantifiable Signature Move that they and only they can use. If you have a move like the Stunner or the RKO, which reliably wins matches for you, and can famously be hit out of nowhere, then why would you not spend the entire match just trying to hit that one move? When The Big Show's finisher was a knock-out punch, why didn't he just hit it immediately in every match? If Stone Cold is the top guy and winning every single match with the Stunner, then that move must be great, so why isn't everybody else trying to do it? It obviously works! 

It mostly comes down to just teaching the audience. I often say that a lot of my complaints about TV wrestling can so easily be explained by a ten second angle, or a single line of commentary, to fill in the blanks and explain away a plot hole, and finishers can be the same (to a point). When Ric Flair's signature move was the Figure Four Leg Lock, he wasn't the only person doing that move, and it didn't always end matches for him, nor was it the only move he ever used to win matches, but you knew that it was a hold that he applied better than anyone else, and that he liked to use, so it was still one to watch for. The commentators can just tell us that - "he applies this hold better than anyone", or "he's spent more time in the gym perfecting this hold than any other wrestler" - and that tells us why this version of this move is a finisher. On the point about why no one else tried to use the Stunner when it was winning Austin matches - that could be a story in its own right, a midcard heel trying to use the main eventer's move because it always wins matches for him, but because he's not put the work in to do the move as well as the main eventer, it rarely works out.

[Carbomb]

It's something I like about Japanese wrestling, that they tend to have signatures rather than finishers. Consequently, they won't always finish matches, and very often the finish can end up being a normal move that was just hit particularly well. Liger has finished a few of his matches with palm strikes; even though they're his "preferred" type of strike, they're not his finish.

It makes for a lot more flexibility, I think.

[BomberPat]

7 minutes ago, Carbomb said:

It's something I like about Japanese wrestling, that they tend to have signatures rather than finishers. Consequently, they won't always finish matches, and very often the finish can end up being a normal move that was just hit particularly well.

It's something Baba really instilled during AJPW's more isolationist years, and particularly with the Four Pillars, too. Each one of them had a different signature move from every conceivable position - they had their own signature strikes, signature suplex, signature powerbomb or driver, and so on. I've heard it called "Signature Set Psychology".

By building up equity in every one of those moves, rather than just one finisher, you keep the crowd much more closely invested in the match, because if they've seen all of those different moves end matches at one point in time, then they're going to buy into them as potential match-enders every time. On the flipside, because the same combinations of wrestlers are going to be fighting each other dozens of times, it means the matches are able to escalate and build in drama with kick-outs and near-falls without having to bury anyone's finish, or get to the point that @tiger_rick described in WWE where big matches needed people kicking out of formerly heavily protected finishers because it was the only viable near-fall they had; everyone in WWE has a set of three or four signature moves before they get to their finisher, but nobody buys into them because they've never actually ended a match.

I have a pet theory that a lot of the WWE main event style pivoted towards repeated finishers and finisher kick-outs from 2001 onwards, because they brought in Johnny Ace during the WCW buyout, and as an agent he had a reputation for booking creative and dramatic finishes; as an AJPW alumnus, he was trying to adapt their finishes to a WWE match format.

Edited February 26, 2025 by BomberPat

[Supremo]

I thought the online reaction to Toni Storm winning the Title with a Small Package was fascinating. Really hammered home how conditioned a lot of the fan base have become to the idea that it doesn’t count unless you win with your finisher. Doesn’t matter if it’s a legitimate wrestling move. It’s not the Real Quiz. Of course, that’s what the heel Mariah should argue, but not the fans themselves!

Essentially, a lot of people didn’t grow up on Bret Hart’s genius and it shows.

Edited February 26, 2025 by Supremo

[air_raid]

Broadly, I'm with you, rick. And I'm glad you mentioned Bret because I sure as shit am too.

1 hour ago, tiger_rick said:

"Finishers should never be kicked out of"

Now... there is a school of thought that every finish being a total killswitch kills the drama of the ref's count at the end. I don't particularly buy that, the drama of the match, the struggle and the competition to who gets to hit their finish first is surely enough drama and story that the ref's count is an exclamation point, and doesn't detract from the drama of the previous nearfalls. I've seen a few matches where the series of moves right before the "finisher" were such a huge combination that not only was the count academic, the actual finish itself was too, we already knew who was winning - but it didn't make it less dramatic or satisfying. However.. it's a nonsense idea that no finishers should ever be kicked out of it. It robs you of numerous dramatic avenues. Ultimate Warrior vs Randy Savage at Mania VI was one of the best slices of drama they delivered in the Hulkamania era and it was aided no end by both kicking out of the other's finish because these were unparalleled stakes, so both (especially Warrior) found reserves they'd never needed before. Bret Hart made a career out of kicking out of the heels' finishers to underscore that he was the embodiment of guts/fighting spirit, and his true "ascent" to singles stardom at SummerSlam 91 doesn't have quite the impact if he isn't permitted to kick out of the Perfect Plex. Further afield, the development of "special occasions only" MDK moves for when your usual finish fails were key in Kings Road - Musawa only pulled out the Tiger Driver 91 when he had to, Kobashi only did the Burning Hammer 7 or 8 times, ever, and it always put over the match as massively significant and the opponent as a triple tough nut to crack. More recently there was a fantastic story around Okada's Rainmaker... it wasn't that nobody kicked out of it, people were often able to kick out of the first, but for several years little Kazu never lost a match in which he hit it - i.e. it might not be the first, but you could bet the house on him winning in the end..... until, against Kenny O, he finally didn't. Of course, they could spin the story out since it was in a 2 out of 3 falls match, and I'd love to tell you if he's ever lost a one-fall match in which he's hit the Rainmaker, but I don't know. Point is - great stories, finisher kicked out of.

1 hour ago, tiger_rick said:

"Every match should end with your finisher"

Now, this is total cobblers. Strip the match down to that and you're virtually ignoring every move because there's no suspension of disbelief the guy is about to win. It robs you of a million creative finishes. Not to wave my "Bret Hart" flag again but... small package, cutback cradles, Victory Rolls, La Magistral... that guy won with all manner of things that weren't his finish, and he won big with them. King of the Ring, the ICT and the big one. Furthermore, you get to beat someone in many creative ways if you eschew going home with a decisive finishing move. Totally randomly but totally apropos to this thread, I've been watching Mania VI on Netflix because it's cool to watch the full version as opposed to the Silver Vision version and this morning I got to The Barber vs Mr Perfect. So, Brutus pins Mr P to end "The Perfect Record" but he didn't use the sleeper ; he used a slingshot and had the fortune that Perfect overshot the turnbuckle, bonked his head on the ring post and got knocked cold. In a way, even though it's a clean pin in the ways that matter, it gave Curt an excuse - Beefpiece couldn't outwrestle him, he beat him by "dumb luck." As fans, we don't care, the babyface won by clean, but the heel gets to complain ahead of a rematch (which that particular pair were meant to have at SummerSlam for the ICT). Heels are an even better example, do we end up hating our villains half as much if they do a spot of cheating then win with their finish rather than, say, feet on the ropes, a schoolboy with the tights, lamping your enemy with the belt, megaphone, The Genius' scroll etc? Of course we don't.

A finisher is a plot device, it's not the whole story.

Edited February 26, 2025 by air_raid
Friendship??

[The King Of Swing]

27 minutes ago, Supremo said:

I thought the online reaction to Toni Storm winning the Title with a Small Package was fascinating. Really hammered home how conditioned a lot of the fan base have become to the idea that it doesn’t count unless you win with your finisher. Doesn’t matter if it’s a legitimate wrestling move. It’s not the Real Quiz. Of course, that’s what the heel Mariah should argue, but not the fans themselves!

Essentially, a lot of people didn’t grow up on Bret Hart’s genius and it shows.

Toni should respond by winning all of her matches, with a backslide. 

Edited February 26, 2025 by The King Of Swing

[BomberPat]

21 minutes ago, air_raid said:

More recently there was a fantastic story around Okada's Rainmaker... it wasn't that nobody kicked out of it, people were often able to kick out of the first, but for several years little Kazu never lost a match in which he hit it - i.e. it might not be the first, but you could bet the house on him winning in the end..... until, against Kenny O, he finally didn't.

At EVE's first Wrestle Queendom show, there was a great match between Kay Lee Ray and Meiko Satomura. Kay Lee won, but Meiko never hit Scorpio Rising. I always think that's smart booking - you want the audience coming away thinking, "they lost this one, but if only they had hit that move, they might have won", and finishers do so much to instill that.

As you can probably tell, this is all a bit of a pet obsession of mine when it comes to wrestling psychology. I spent years fully bought into the idea that wrestling can be absolutely anything, and you should be free to play around with whatever genres and trappings of it you want, but increasingly I find myself these days thinking that wrestling has only ever really worked when presented as a sport, even though we know it isn't legit. I think the fixation on finishers as the way to end a match can have the unintended consequence of making anything less than a big move finish feel like a letdown, but something I used to say on commentary was that you don't need to knock someone out, you just need to get them down for three seconds. There's this expectation - and, again, I find it a bit video game-y - that a finisher is something that leaves you knocked out cold for ages, and that gives someone time to pin you and you can't kick out in time, but that doesn't have to be how a match ends, and there's an argument that it shouldn't be how a lot of matches end.

I wish I could remember the match, but there was an AEW match within the last couple of years where they did a strike exchange spot, and it ended the match. The last shot was a knock-out blow, and the other wrestler fell on top of them and got the pin. I love that, because it's telling the audience that this isn't just a format point that you can expect within the structure of a match, it's something that you should be paying attention to because the match could end here. When two technical wrestlers start exchanging pin counters one after the other, I'd love to see that actually end the match more often, because again, it's telling the audience that this could be the finish, and in a broader sense, that all it takes to end the match is the combination of timing, technique, and luck required to keep someone's shoulders to the mat for a three count. Because no match exists in a vacuum, so by doing that you enrich every other match on the card and on future cards by making the audience feel more invested in the fine details, rather than just sitting on their hands or making up chants to amuse themselves until the wrestlers start busting out finishers, at which point they're doing the equivalent of turning on the neon sign that says "the match might end soon". 

[air_raid]

34 minutes ago, BomberPat said:

At EVE's first Wrestle Queendom show, there was a great match between Kay Lee Ray and Meiko Satomura. Kay Lee won, but Meiko never hit Scorpio Rising. I always think that's smart booking - you want the audience coming away thinking, "they lost this one, but if only they had hit that move, they might have won", and finishers do so much to instill that.

I'm a bit ashamed I didn't clock that, I was there. Probably too stunned that KLR had won to think about it too much. That was a great show.

[Lion_of_the_Midlands]

Finishers mattered when kayfabe mattered, now they don't matter at all. If a piledriver on the ring steps isn't a finish then nothing is. Everything else is just moves during the simulation of the fight that help to tell the story that you want in the match, and it doesn't matter what you kick out of or what move is the finish. 

Take Will Ospreay. I don't know what his actual finish is but he has lots of stuff that could be the finish, and they actually told a decent story about him not wanting to use a move as his finish. That's good storytelling and good use of a move as a finisher. What's less good by him is his use of the Hidden Blade, or as it should be known The Glaringly Obvious Blade as he hits it so many times during a match, but you can't have everything. 

 

[DavidB6937]

It's a real tough one to balance these days.

I love an "oh shit, that's the end of them!" type deal for a protected finish when they keep trying to hit it and eventually manage to do so. That really works well for me.

Also a big fan of surprise finishes too.

But yeah I also find it annoying when someone has to hit their finish 2/3/4 times before something's over because it feels like it does take away from the move.

Probably no answer that really solves the conundrum as a whole but yeah audiences now are definitely conditioned to a different style of match than back in the day. That much is clear with all the basic stuff they could get over previously while now there's so many OTT things.

But there's no reason why a finisher can't be protected. Corbin's End Of Days was a fairly recent one that wasn't kicked out of for ages. It's a nice easy story to tell.

[BomberPat]

these things come and go in waves, though. There's a match from Georgia in the '80s, where Ted DiBiase takes four piledrivers, one on the concrete floor, from Terry Gordy, and still kicks out. There's a ton of sub-5 minute Attitude Era matches where people kick out of Piledrivers and it's not treated as anything special. Dynamite Kid used to use the Tombstone as a set-up for his Diving Headbutt, decades before people decided that there was something inherently special about that move that means it needs to be super well-protected, rather than just realising that they bought into the kayfabe and that it was only ever treated that way because it was The Undertaker's finish, not because of anything innate to the move itself.

Something I was surprised by when watching old wrestling matches from the '30s is that a lot of the time then, if someone had a "Signature Move" - Wayne Munn's Football Tackle, or Ed Lewis' Headlock - then more often than not the whole match was them just repeatedly hitting that move until the one that finished it. So even the WWE main event style of a few years ago, ushered in by Goldberg and Lesnar, of just spamming your finishers in a war of attrition, is nothing new.

At the end of the day, the one thing that has always been true and will always remain true is that anything is a viable finisher if you can get it over as one. That's the only part that really matters. For all the complaining you hear today of wrestling being too gymnastic, too choreographed, too cooperative, of the moves being too fancy and contrived, we've also seen Kazuchika Okada get a Clothesline over as one of the biggest finishers in the world in the past decade, and a Dropkick as one of his main high spots. 

[Carbomb]

This is something from the Fire Pro series, but one thing I liked about those games was that a wrestler could have a flash pin or a technical pin as their finisher/signature, e.g. Negros Casas with La Magistral, Gedo with the Gedo Clutch, or Super Delfin with the Delfin Clutch, and, despite being non-damaging, on occasion it would register as a Critical, which essentially rendered the opponent beaten for the pin.

The Perfect Plex did have an element of impact, but let's face it: the appeal of it wasn't the damage, was it? It was the fact that (as Mr. Perfect himself said) "it is virtually inescapable", and it looks it with the clasped fingers clearly visible to the audience.

I'd like to see if a wrestler could get over a technical pin like that as his finish, or at least a threat. I remember really liking Yoshinari Ogawa's Figure-Four Jackknife Pin. The Figure-Four bit is silly and meaningless if you really think about it, but it makes the pin look extremely difficult to kick out of.

[Chris B]

It doesn't take long to establish either. When Undertaker debuted Hell's Gate, it was mostly mocked. But it came good for a couple of amazing late match uses in Mania matches.

[JLM]

The signature inescapable pinning hold has been used as a device for rookies in recent years, with moves like Wheeler Yuta’s seatbelt and AZM’s Azumi Sushi. Stardom has a number of signature flash pins where they work on almost everyone, but their ultimate rival will be the first to either kick out, come up with some fancy counter to it or develop their own variant on it. Sometimes all of the above. They then tell the story of the arms race between the rivals to come up with counters and counters to the counters etc. 

Danny Garcia’s jackknife pin isn’t a named finisher, but it has earned him enough notable victories that people definitely buy it as a match ender. Fond memories of Genki Horiguchi’s backslide from heaven too of course. 
 

Genki also had a run where he kept losing to the classic schoolboy roll up. Otherwise incredibly resilient, kicked out of much worse routinely, but the schoolboy sent him into a blind panic and he could not escape. It was played for comedy and to tell the story of him being a choke artist, but I love the idea of wrestlers having kryptonite moves that turn those moves into “finishers” against them specifically. 
 

 

Edited February 26, 2025 by JLM