Dwight
Main Eventer
Joined on: Feb 10, 2007 11:02:46 GMT -5
Posts: 2,686
|
Post by Dwight on Jul 24, 2009 16:23:35 GMT -5
Bret Hart gets my vote. I love Flair but for me personally this isn't even close.
I understand and accept that there are people that feel that Flair is better and feel its not even close. It's all based on opinion...not fact. There really isn't a reason to hate on either one of them as far as I'm concerned. Both were great performers and both will be remembered for generations to come.
|
|
|
Post by carly1988 on Jul 24, 2009 16:31:51 GMT -5
both guys were great and first ballot hall of famers....you can compare the two and always get an argument on which was better on every aspect except one....mic work. Flair was a ton better on the mic then Bret and that gives him the slight advantage.
But this is Wfigs and Flair didnt wrestle in the WWF during the Attitude Era, so he will not win this.
|
|
|
Post by jfinnomore on Jul 24, 2009 16:34:54 GMT -5
Bret Hart, he was amazing in the ring and knew when to hang em up. He only hung them up because he was forced to due to Goldberg's dumbass...... im sure he could of been in TNA in the last 6 years but he hasn't.
|
|
|
Post by Lita's Lover on Jul 24, 2009 17:50:26 GMT -5
Bret Hart bar none. My all time favourite and the best.
|
|
|
Post by DgenerationX092 on Jul 24, 2009 17:59:30 GMT -5
Ric Flair had the best career of all time.
Bret is a better Wrestler.
Ric is a better Entertiner.
My vote is for Ric.
|
|
|
Post by hoffy on Jul 24, 2009 18:45:13 GMT -5
Voted for Hart. His matches with Perfect and Michaels are amazing.
|
|
|
Post by OmegaGaijin on Jul 24, 2009 19:52:54 GMT -5
14 fannies voted for flair lol
he is a numpty end off.
|
|
|
Post by LeighD on Jul 24, 2009 21:00:00 GMT -5
Only a few people could even challenge Flair on the mic (Piper comes to mind). But for Flair it all depended on who his opponent was for the night. But I think Bret was consistently better wrestling-wise. I voted Bret, but I think spawn said it best when its like comparing apples and oranges.
|
|
|
Post by ztj_wwf on Jul 24, 2009 21:02:59 GMT -5
Bret Hart is defenatly better, Flair is quite overrated, most of the time he neede an hour to have a good match, Bret only needed 20 minutes.
|
|
|
Post by spawnsyxx9 on Jul 25, 2009 0:37:18 GMT -5
Bret Hart is defenatly better, Flair is quite overrated, most of the time he neede an hour to have a good match, Bret only needed 20 minutes. You do realize that both had good matches lasting all sorts of times right and that the times were scripted so it's not like they had a choice as to time length.
|
|
|
Post by "The Visionary" Eldniw on Jul 25, 2009 1:25:51 GMT -5
What answers you get is gonna depend on who is answering. Me, I grew up with Bret Hart. That's the biggest reason I voted for the Hitman. I like Ric Flair. I love and respect him for paving the way for the stars we have today, but his prime was well before I was even born. Face it, 1990's-2000's Ric Flair doesn't hold a candle to 1970's-1980's Ric. But Bret, on the other hand, his prime was the 1990's. His run in WWE is what he will forever be known for, and even when he left for WCW, I still saw him as a WWE star in the middle of it all.
And I do blame Bill Goldberg for ending Bret's career. Had Goldy-non existent locks not kicked him stiff in the head, I think we'd still see Bret on, at very least, the independent circuit.
|
|
Bret_Hart_Mark™
Main Eventer
Joined on: Apr 5, 2005 13:34:12 GMT -5
Posts: 2,272
|
Post by Bret_Hart_Mark™ on Jul 25, 2009 1:26:21 GMT -5
Bret Hart and Ric Flair are two mainstays of this business. Both come from very different generations and very different styles and how to conduct yourself within the business. That's what it comes down to really. Both acknowledge in their books feelings about the other that are less than positive but both also openly state they came from two different time periods and thus learned different things. It's really nothing personal and really nothing but comparing one's apples to one's oranges. They are just two different beasts, doesn't make either right or wrong. This..........but I picked Bret
|
|
Blackbird 13
Main Eventer
Joined on: Sept 6, 2005 3:32:41 GMT -5
Posts: 3,242
|
Post by Blackbird 13 on Jul 25, 2009 4:02:46 GMT -5
Wow, really? Ric Flair carried a company on his back, drew INSANE amounts of money, can have a good match with a wooden board, is in the best four or five mic workers of all time, and is honestly THE quintessential professional wrestler.
Bret Hart is solid.. but he's nowhere near Ric, at all
Remember, Hulk Hogan, Ric Flair, Steve Austin, and The Rock (whether you like them or not) are pretty much in class by themselves. Sting, Triple H, Undertaker, Shawn Micheals, Lex Luger, Ultimate Warrior, John Cena, Andre the Giant, Mick Foley, Kurt Angle, Sid, Bret Hart, Kevin Nash, Randy Savage, Randy Orton, Chris Jericho, Chris Benoit, Eddie Guerrero, and maybe ten others might be right below them as "over main eventers", but none of them compare to the other four, in terms of impact, drawing ability, and "overness". I think that's a good point for Ric as well.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Oct 4, 2024 19:20:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2009 4:12:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by spawnsyxx9 on Jul 25, 2009 4:30:07 GMT -5
Wow, really? Ric Flair carried a company on his back, drew INSANE amounts of money, can have a good match with a wooden board, is in the best four or five mic workers of all time, and is honestly THE quintessential professional wrestler. Bret Hart is solid.. but he's nowhere near Ric, at all Remember, Hulk Hogan, Ric Flair, Steve Austin, and The Rock (whether you like them or not) are pretty much in class by themselves. Sting, Triple H, Undertaker, Shawn Micheals, Lex Luger, Ultimate Warrior, John Cena, Andre the Giant, Mick Foley, Kurt Angle, Sid, Bret Hart, Kevin Nash, Randy Savage, Randy Orton, Chris Jericho, Chris Benoit, Eddie Guerrero, and maybe ten others might be right below them as "over main eventers", but none of them compare to the other four, in terms of impact, drawing ability, and "overness". I think that's a good point for Ric as well. Um not to be argumentative but at one point Bret was basically also carrying WWE on his back. This I didn't just get from his book as somewhere else I posted similar thoughts tried to state but go listen and read other wrestlers books and they will state it.
|
|
|
Post by Emerald Enthusiast on Jul 25, 2009 5:14:34 GMT -5
Is this a serious question? Flair was a main eventer for much longer than Bret. He was much better on the mic and better in the ring as well. Bret was good but his career can't compare to Flair's at all.
|
|
|
Post by spawnsyxx9 on Jul 25, 2009 5:41:07 GMT -5
Is this a serious question? Flair was a main eventer for much longer than Bret. He was much better on the mic and better in the ring as well. Bret was good but his career can't compare to Flair's at all. The better in the ring is debatable as Bret showed much more in the ring in terms of moves but both their abilities to tell a story is unmatched by most.
|
|
|
Post by DTP. on Jul 25, 2009 5:51:06 GMT -5
Flair's had tons of better matches in NWA/WCW, whereas Bret suffered from lack of good wrestling competition in the WWF. So I'll go with Flair.
|
|
|
Post by spawnsyxx9 on Jul 25, 2009 5:53:50 GMT -5
Flair's had tons of better matches in NWA/WCW, whereas Bret suffered from lack of good wrestling competition in the WWF. So I'll go with Flair. Yet put them in a match against one another and the match just isn't all that great.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Oct 4, 2024 19:20:25 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2009 9:41:14 GMT -5
Bret Hart, he was amazing in the ring and knew when to hang em up. Wasnt he supposed to sign a 20 year contract with WCW before the goldberg insident?
|
|