|
|
Post by Turnbuckle Zealot(Phil) on Jul 12, 2012 15:17:37 GMT -5
In the earliest days of Professional Wrestling as performance art in the traveling carnivals of America, the terms listed in this thread's titles were the first "Pecking Order" among wrestling's dressing halls.
My general question for WF is this: "Is this pecking order concept in particular relevant to wrestling now in any fashion whatsoever?
Before you answer, let's look at the original definition to this pioneering force in wrestling terminology.
We'll work from the top down starting with "Hookers" (yeah yeah laugh it up)
The term referee to wrestlers who were accomplished pros who were highly skilled illegal holds. They were kept in the troops & paid specifically to handle tough local wrestlers when the Carny promoters scheduled "take on all comers" matches. Ed Lewis, Farmer Burns, Frank Gotch & Lou Thesz are just a few examples of hookers. The term comes from "hooking" your opponents limbs into said "crippling holds" not allowed in the professional sport. They were the most feared men in wrestling since they could take over virtually any territory they pleased.
Now onto "Shooters". They were basically decorated amateurs who adapted themselves to "performing" matches, men who loved wrestling & wanted to make a living out of it the only way available during the 1910s.
Finally the term that sparks my question, The "Journeyman". The Carnival Strongmen, Ex-Football players, & general roughnecks that service stooges for the shooters or hookers depending on a particular wrestler's popularity. Men who only enjoy making money without doing hard labor, no real concern for sport or art whatsoever.
To conclude, could the general idea of this pecking order be altered to accommodate modern Wrestling at least in terms of pure descriptive purposes, or has it simply died off & is rather irrelevant to bother with?
It's all speculation so please give it some thought before just saying "yes" or "no".
|
|
|
|
Post by Turnbuckle Zealot(Phil) on Jul 12, 2012 20:01:52 GMT -5
Sidenote: The Undertaker. Greatest pure thespian in wrestling history. He is by definition a "journeyman".
Think about messed up that is... One of the most dedicated performers in the business is by definition lower on the totempole than Ziggler or Cody Rhodes. Thus my primary motivation for seeing if we can alter the terms accommodate modern Wrestling's dynamic.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 16, 2024 18:52:54 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2012 10:39:34 GMT -5
Sidenote: The Undertaker. Greatest pure thespian in wrestling history. He is by definition a "journeyman". Think about messed up that is... One of the most dedicated performers in the business is by definition lower on the totempole than Ziggler or Cody Rhodes. Thus my primary motivation for seeing if we can alter the terms accommodate modern Wrestling's dynamic. great point there man |
|
|
|
Post by Turnbuckle Zealot(Phil) on Jul 13, 2012 20:55:54 GMT -5
Thank you.
Furthermore, Batista. Wrestled as an amateur in high school to a high enough degree that it was worth mentioning in his DVD biography produced by the company, but is by no means ever been accurately described as a "shooter". Brock Lesnar: in his wrestling style could have toe to toe with anyone from Gotch to Gable & every man whose ever wrestled amateur or otherwise in between, has proven he is also a hooker with his dominant victories in MMA against gate keepers like Herring & Catoure YET, is by definition of his reason for becoming a professional, A JOURNEYMAN!!! Someone who wrestled solely as a business venture.
A man who could have given George Hackschmit nightmares for God's sake. Crazy right?
Granted, comparing the two(Wrestling at the start of the 20th century & now) is quite the stretch, but it only adds support to my desire to alter the terminology to give some nostalgic reverence with modern audiences.
Food for thought,
Bon appetite.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 16, 2024 18:52:54 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2012 0:23:49 GMT -5
great thread really has me going.
Look at Daniel Bryan, he is one of the top shooters, and a good hooker as well in the world yet in the beginning of his run he was treated as a journeymen
|
|
|
|
Post by Turnbuckle Zealot(Phil) on Jul 14, 2012 16:02:11 GMT -5
great thread really has me going. Look at Daniel Bryan, he is one of the top shooters, and a good hooker as well in the world yet in the beginning of his run he was treated as a journeymen THIS. I don't think Vince has ever done anything that pissed me off more! It honestly had me damn near dead from laughing during the first season of NXT. Thankfully though they did the right thing & he's been the most successful of the original cast, but I digress. This is one of countless examples of a concept that was once the defying terminology gone obsolete. Anyone else have good examples? William Regal & Dean Melanko: True blue shooters. Shawn Michaels: A man who cannot be classified in any one distinction due to his ground breaking in-ring compositions, & amateur background be it more of a childhood memory in spite of his dreams, but causes contradiction none the less. Superstar Billy Graham: Journeyman from almost every criteria. Andre The Giant: An educated journeyman who respected the business. A thespianic Journeyman if you will. Come on people! Hit me! |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 16, 2024 18:52:54 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 14, 2012 16:30:18 GMT -5
Hows about Mick Foely by all definition was a journeymen, as was the Rock.
Bob Backlund a great shooter refused to drop the wwf title to a Journeymen so instead gave the belt to a fellow shooter
|
|
|
|
Post by paperbackhero on Jul 14, 2012 16:44:29 GMT -5
Great thread.
How do we know Bryan is a hooker? We have no idea if he has ever been in a real match
Going by the criteria outlined...who, in the last 40 years, has been a hooker? Severn? Angle? Shamrock? Del Rio?
I always thought a shooter, was the one who Could "shoot" and start getting into real fighting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Turnbuckle Zealot(Phil) on Jul 14, 2012 19:14:29 GMT -5
Hows about Mick Foely by all definition was a journeymen, as was the Rock. Bob Backlund a great shooter refused to drop the wwf title to a Journeymen so instead gave the belt to a fellow shooter You're right about Mick up to a point. A typical journeyman was someone who cared about money & did not have emotional sentiments towards wrestling be it sport or performance. Any man who cries more when winning his first WWE championship than when he's thrown in a sheet of plywood laced with barbed wire & explosives clearly loves what he does. I also admit I'd cry if I won it also. Backlund was among the highest level of shooters Absolutely. |
|
|
|
Post by Turnbuckle Zealot(Phil) on Jul 14, 2012 19:22:46 GMT -5
Great thread. How do we know Bryan is a hooker? We have no idea if he has ever been in a real match Going by the criteria outlined...who, in the last 40 years, has been a hooker? Severn? Angle? Shamrock? Del Rio? I always thought a shooter, was the one who Could "shoot" and start getting into real fighting. Excellent point. Technically, as far as we know no one has been a full fledged hooker. The full criteria is as follows: 1:Specializes in Catch Wrestling Hold & Techniques banned from competition. 2:Has been paid to cause injury to a wrestler who was scheduled to be the opponent of his employer or employer's client as managers were typically the ones sliding the money under the table. 3:Feared by majority of locker room due to reputation. Severn, Shamrock & Angle are ALL hookers in terms of skill & reputation kafabe or shoot. I suppose WORLD CLASS shooters would be the best description. As far as Danielson goes I would say he's the hooker of WWE since no one on the roster can out wrestle him in terms of a ratio spanned over consistency of work rate, technical wrestling skill, & sport specific athleticism. |
|
|
|
Post by paperbackhero on Jul 14, 2012 20:54:48 GMT -5
[quote author=paperbackhero board=classicwrestling thread=253820 post=5041833 time=134230226 As far as Danielson goes I would say he's the hooker of WWE since no one on the roster can out wrestle him in terms of a ratio spanned over consistency of work rate, technical wrestling skill, & sport specific athleticism. I wonder about that. Ive always heard guys say, "All the wrestlers know all of the moves...its just they dont use them all.". I believe this. Watch Akeem wrestle...he could work technical style, rather than the lumbering beheamoth. Hogan, Rock, Austin, Flair, Sammartino, Warrior, Andre, Taker, Dusty...the biggest money earners in the business werent really technical guys...they did what worked, what the people liked. Have you ever thought that maybe all the guys could do technical wrestling, but thats not what sells, hence low attendance for amateur wrestling,OR, you need to have different styles of wrestlers...a couple guys doing the the tecnical thing, a couple of brawlers, a couple of high flyers, some lucha.... |
|
|
|
Post by Turnbuckle Zealot(Phil) on Jul 14, 2012 21:36:11 GMT -5
[quote author=paperbackhero board=classicwrestling thread=253820 post=5041833 time=134230226 As far as Danielson goes I would say he's the hooker of WWE since no one on the roster can out wrestle him in terms of a ratio spanned over consistency of work rate, technical wrestling skill, & sport specific athleticism. I wonder about that. Ive always heard guys say, "All the wrestlers know all of the moves...its just they dont use them all.". I believe this. Watch Akeem wrestle...he could work technical style, rather than the lumbering beheamoth. Hogan, Rock, Austin, Flair, Sammartino, Warrior, Andre, Taker, Dusty...the biggest money earners in the business werent really technical guys...they did what worked, what the people liked. Have you ever thought that maybe all the guys could do technical wrestling, but thats not what sells, hence low attendance for amateur wrestling,OR, you need to have different styles of wrestlers...a couple guys doing the the tecnical thing, a couple of brawlers, a couple of high flyers, some lucha.... You raise Avery compelling point, but Jim Helwig even as a theatrical wrestler was a 4 from 1 to 10. Also people say Rhodes wasn't a good technical wrestler. Watch his matches with Flair, Race, The Funks & so on, even he wasn't Lou Thesz. He still could do his maneuvers with better technique than 70% of the men he worked with in his life time. I wouldn't be surprised if most wrestlers knew how Tge majority of moves are done, but that's like a powerlifter who squats 400lbs understanding on paper the technique used when someone attempts 900lbs. Just because you know have to do it, doesn't mean you can. But, I will agree with on this, Andre had a solid catach as catch can repertoire. My video link of a match he with Antonio Inoki is a good example to back up your theory. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 16, 2024 18:52:54 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2012 11:50:55 GMT -5
To answer the question, I'd say No this pecking order is irrelevant today as it applies to catch wrestling a legitimate contest vs sports entertainment which provides pre determined outcomes. Supposedly curt angle knows some some which doesn't show, but all college level or even Olympic wrestlers are considered shooters at best. From what I understand hookers were the wrestlers that developed these skills through the rules of these matches though real competition. Josh Barnett or kazushi sakaraba are examples of catch wrestlers even though they only use one submission. I think Tony cechine is mOre skilled and possibly Matt furey. There are some tourneys trying to revive the sport. I actually plan to take a class tommOrw with Billy robinison:)
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 16, 2024 18:52:54 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2012 11:20:34 GMT -5
Great post.
I think unfortunately Vince makes every wrestler perform in the capacity of each at different points in their tenure. For example, DB has been a Hooker & Shooter and it seems as if he may be placed in the role of Journeyman if he engages Charlie Sheen tonight.
This is exactly the problem I have with the progression of Pro Wrestling..the change to Entertainment has really led to an unbalanced mix of what initially what a simple formula that made it so great.
I understand that taste, demographic and mentality change and that business is about making money, but the changes made have been far from the best for the art of wrestling itself.
A Shooter never had to worry about if his holds were tweeting as boring via social media..he had time alotted to tell a story and make a point before judgements were made.
Great topic.
|
|
|
|
Post by Turnbuckle Zealot(Phil) on Aug 21, 2012 3:04:48 GMT -5
To answer the question, I'd say No this pecking order is irrelevant today as it applies to catch wrestling a legitimate contest vs sports entertainment which provides pre determined outcomes. Supposedly curt angle knows some some which doesn't show, but all college level or even Olympic wrestlers are considered shooters at best. From what I understand hookers were the wrestlers that developed these skills through the rules of these matches though real competition. Josh Barnett or kazushi sakaraba are examples of catch wrestlers even though they only use one submission. I think Tony cechine is mOre skilled and possibly Matt furey. There are some tourneys trying to revive the sport. I actually plan to take a class tommOrw with Billy robinison:) Okay one: I hope you hugged Billy & Jake Shannon for me. Great men. Also beware of Tony, he's good, but not as good as he thinks he is. Also I don't know what you're talking about when you say Josh & Gracie Killer only used one submission. Yes, the ORIGINAL pecking order doesn't apply. I implying that in the introductional post, so thank you for stating so. Also as Tootz Mondt said "Average people will never appreciate Scientific wrestling." The sport of Gotch is dead & only lives in the performers of professional wrestling who keep it alive. Quite frankly? I like it that way. Keeps it from becoming a fad like the UFC. Now about Kurt Angle. It's not supposedly, he does. Look at the top, pure, mat based, catch wrestlers in American Professional Wrestling over the last 22 years. Hart, Hennig, Guerrero, Benoit, Malenko, Angle, Lesnar, Danielson, Shamrock, & Severn just to name a few, who among them has wrestled near the time limit in the main event of WrestleMania, Has won match of the year, & is STILL performing at a main eventer's capacity? Kurt Angle. You don't hold the spot Harley Race, Lou Thesz & Strangler Lewis once held WITHOUT knowing our artform's father. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 16, 2024 18:52:54 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2012 0:27:23 GMT -5
I dunno for me it's just hard to imagine the wwf guys being legit since it's not real sport anymore and when do they actually perform in real competition or get to test out their techniques? From what I heard or read Catch wrestlers could hang with bjj practitioners and defeat them, which kazushi did well. If you look at Barnett and shamrock though they don't really strike me even as shooters since their sprawl or takedown defense is so bad. And I would consider that the basics of an amateur wrestler. I grew up on 80's wrastlin which was awesome and occasionally will turn it on but it'snot the same for me. Lesnar got hhh in a double wrist lock and they called it a kimura lol. From what I learned kimura lost to a wrestler by this lock and implemented it in his game. I don't like when they have idiots like snooki or Floyd mayweather show up either:( I hope to see catch revived as it's sorta american and the techniques are unique to the art. Iron sheik seemed legit
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Jun 16, 2024 18:52:54 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2012 0:35:15 GMT -5
If u look at Severn when in ufc he couldn't even do a submission, half nelsons and suplexes yes. He man handled some guys but lacked submissions. I just would a imagine a hooker as someone who had a full arsenal of techniques and could apply them all. Sham has a good heelhook, kneebar and ankle lock but lacked in other areas alot.
|
|
|
|
Post by Turnbuckle Zealot(Phil) on Aug 23, 2012 21:39:57 GMT -5
Great post. I think unfortunately Vince makes every wrestler perform in the capacity of each at different points in their tenure. For example, DB has been a Hooker & Shooter and it seems as if he may be placed in the role of Journeyman if he engages Charlie Sheen tonight. This is exactly the problem I have with the progression of Pro Wrestling..the change to Entertainment has really led to an unbalanced mix of what initially what a simple formula that made it so great. I understand that taste, demographic and mentality change and that business is about making money, but the changes made have been far from the best for the art of wrestling itself. A Shooter never had to worry about if his holds were tweeting as boring via social media..he had time alotted to tell a story and make a point before judgements were made. Great topic. I agree with you entirely & really have nothing to add on. Harley playing "The King" & Dusty Rhodes wearing "Polka dots" were great examples as well, since the point was for them not to be in top spots, take breathers, a step back from their prior world champion status. |
|
|
|
Post by Turnbuckle Zealot(Phil) on Aug 23, 2012 21:44:10 GMT -5
If u look at Severn when in ufc he couldn't even do a submission, half nelsons and suplexes yes. He man handled some guys but lacked submissions. I just would a imagine a hooker as someone who had a full arsenal of techniques and could apply them all. Sham has a good heelhook, kneebar and ankle lock but lacked in other areas alot. That was the fault of booking. It doesn't mean Severn doesn't have the ability. Go watch matches during his NWA title reigns. I'm certain he worked an extremely different style then than when he was a mid carder in WWE. I work in an Indy promotion where our top faces play dastardly heels in other shows in other cities. That's one of the great things about wrestling. it's a PERFORMANCE, so much like when telling a story with your mouth, wrestlers don't have to tell the same story every match. |
|
Johnny Lawrence - Cobra Kai
Main Eventer
Promotional consideration paid for by the following
Joined on: Jul 25, 2005 17:12:49 GMT -5
Posts: 3,209
|
Post by Johnny Lawrence - Cobra Kai on Aug 23, 2012 22:29:49 GMT -5
Great thread. How do we know Bryan is a hooker? We have no idea if he has ever been in a real match Going by the criteria outlined...who, in the last 40 years, has been a hooker? Severn? Angle? Shamrock? Del Rio? I always thought a shooter, was the one who Could "shoot" and start getting into real fighting. This is all very interesting. In terms of who you'd consider a true "hooker" or "shooter," I guess it has a lot to do with perception, and also depends on whether or not you think in absolutes. If you think in absolutes, then anyone that had ever been in a confirmed real fight would be a "hooker," I suppose... but what if they were no good? For example, Santino Marella has fought MMA before, but I doubt most people think of him that way, and there may be guys in the locker room that have never had a documented "real" fight that still might be tough enough to take him. In the days of Lou Thesz, he was considered a hooker (and therefore a good choice for champion) because the promoters and the other wrestlers of his day knew that it would be difficult to double-cross him in the ring or make him look foolish. His matches were works, but everybody knew that trying to turn it into a shoot was not a good idea. In other words, if pro wrestling *were* real, there is a very good chance Thesz still would have been world champion. It was about credibility. The terms "shooter" and "hooker" might be a bit antiquated now, and certainly more difficult to pinpoint. What about wrestlers who are flat-out tough, but have never had to prove it publicly? Or guys that train MMA as a pasttime but have never had a fight, but they could conceivably be better shooters than a guy like Del Rio or Marella, who have had fights? |
|
