Is wrestling skill Alone enough

A skilled wrestler is a wrestler who gets the biggest reaction, not one who knows the most Japanese moves.

never has been
never will be


it DOES help though, because some guys who are not as great on the mic but can wrestle their asses off...still make it big

Most of the IWC would claim to want "Japanese" style wrestling despite never watching a second of it. They're just clinging onto stuff that sounds cool.

Not in the least.

Always the smart-arse... you know damn well that by "wrestling skill", he means pure technical skill and ability. A skilled wrestler is someone who can actually WRESTLE - plain and simple... nothing to do with crowd reaction.

I think yes cause I actually like wrestling unlike most people who watch World Wrestling Federation/entertainment

False. Pro wrestling is 100% about engaging with the audience/viewer. If a wrestler can't do that, he's nowhere near the most skilled.

Not sure what you mean by this, sorry...

I like the WWE, I also like independent wrestling, puro, Lucha, etc...what draws most people in is someone who makes you care about why they're doing what they're doing - if not, more people would remember Bob Backlund than Hulk Hogan.

What does one's ability to elicit reactions have to do with their ability to make an Irish-whip look convincing?

How does Jeff Hardy's death leaps making the most people scream have to do with how well the match was executed?

Clearly it's important to make the crowd care, but what good is it if you don't make them care about the wrestling? I'm not talking about mat-based puritanism when I say "wrestling," for the record; I'm talking about wrestling with high level, technical skill. Where the matches are a blend of physical chess & drama. WWE is the birth house of "Slam Bang Western Style," & that's why I don't have a problem with brawling til the count of 4 & things of such nature. What I do ask is that wrestlers do their best to make sense with their story-telling.

My point is that I agree with you in a way, but it's more accurate to consider good story telling/psychology in order to get a positive reaction the goal of Pro-Wrestling.

A good wrestler is someone who can convince the crowd to believe in the realism of their match, & perform with enough deliberation, that they can explain everything that happened in the match in an extensive interview.

We could actually have a 2 hour round-table discussion on the semantics of "skill" in Professional Wrestling, since the job requires such a plethora of qualities that are alien to the typical, authentic grappler, but that is for another day.

While I agree with your frustration with the IWC elitists, it doesn't make sense to not want wrestlers to be good at wrestling; unless the character is meant to be something outside of a normal wrestler.

Here's the main thing I wanted to say to the thread. What good is a huge reaction, if you can't justify your matches? I've established that eliciting a response is clearly important, but the desired response is one that makes people come back. You have to justify the matches. Thus, wrestling is always the most important thing.

Every promo & segment is either intended to make you interested in a match, or to add an element of fun in order to keep you from getting tired of the matches.

To conclude, the goal of wrestling isn't to just get a reaction, but to elicit an emotional response from the fans that makes them want to keep watching. Which accomplished by performing great matches & telling well thought out story-lines, in whatever form they may take.