Deleted
Joined on: May 16, 2024 7:09:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 11, 2014 12:40:13 GMT -5
Technical wrestling isn't really my thing. But Tiger Mask and Dynamites first match.
|
|
|
Post by Flair Forever on Jun 11, 2014 16:49:48 GMT -5
Flair VS. Steamboat - Clash of the Champions That match shows ideal examples of everything I'm discussing. Thanks Flair Forever! Don't thank me too soon... I'm about to derail the discussion.... I'm much more interested in watching a "non" technical match that has a hot crowd rather than a technical masterpiece that the audience couldn't care less about.... In other words - many times, the crowd makes (or breaks) the match. Honestly - I'd rather watch Hogan VS. Rock from WM18 ten times in a row rather than sit through one Dean Malenko match, where the crowd is sitting there looking bored... Right now as I type this - Cena VS. Punk from Money In The Bank 2011 is playing on the WWE Network.... and it's got some good technical stuff - but the crowd is absolutely RED HOT.... I don't know where that match stands among "Greatest Technical Matches" - but is sure is great to watch, even three years later (and I imagine it will be 10 years later, too). There's a time and a place for technical wrestling - but it rarely makes it into the Main Event.... Maybe Cesaro will bring it back to that level?
|
|
|
Post by Brad on Jun 11, 2014 16:58:55 GMT -5
One of the matches that has the strongest claims to the title of "Pro Wrestling's most authentic masterpiece," hasn't actually been witnessed in over 80 years. Joe Stecher vs Ed "Strangler" Lewis in their famous "Longest bout in history. Such a stalemate could only occur between two of wrestling's finest geniuses. Back to the topic. The beauty of discussing Technical or Authenticity-based Wrestling, is that it minimizes entertainment preferences & puts the greatest emphasis on objectivity. How well did the wrestlers portray the story of a legitimate wrestling contest? Another problem with this topic is the potential ignorance of the members of the discussion. How many wrestling fans studying anything wrestling-related that precedes 1970, or the arts of Catch, Collar & Elbow, & Greco-Roman Wrestling? To declare that a match is the most "technical" match, is to declare it the most "authentic" match in all of Professional Wrestling's history. Given the fact that authenticity has been the Wrestler's goal, dating back to the invention of the formal concept of "work" back in the 1910s in the carnivals, you have to have knowledge of the last 114 years of wrestling before you can even begin to hypothesize the match to be selected. Food for thought. I dare to say you take wrestling too seriously. If I were a potential fan nothing about your post would draw me in. I have no problem with you. I don't know you. I'm sure you're a good guy. But you try to sound too smart for your own good.
|
|
|
Post by Turnbuckle Zealot(Phil) on Jun 11, 2014 22:31:09 GMT -5
One of the matches that has the strongest claims to the title of "Pro Wrestling's most authentic masterpiece," hasn't actually been witnessed in over 80 years. Joe Stecher vs Ed "Strangler" Lewis in their famous "Longest bout in history. Such a stalemate could only occur between two of wrestling's finest geniuses. Back to the topic. The beauty of discussing Technical or Authenticity-based Wrestling, is that it minimizes entertainment preferences & puts the greatest emphasis on objectivity. How well did the wrestlers portray the story of a legitimate wrestling contest? Another problem with this topic is the potential ignorance of the members of the discussion. How many wrestling fans studying anything wrestling-related that precedes 1970, or the arts of Catch, Collar & Elbow, & Greco-Roman Wrestling? To declare that a match is the most "technical" match, is to declare it the most "authentic" match in all of Professional Wrestling's history. Given the fact that authenticity has been the Wrestler's goal, dating back to the invention of the formal concept of "work" back in the 1910s in the carnivals, you have to have knowledge of the last 114 years of wrestling before you can even begin to hypothesize the match to be selected. Food for thought. I dare to say you take wrestling too seriously. If I were a potential fan nothing about your post would draw me in. I have no problem with you. I don't know you. I'm sure you're a good guy. But you try to sound too smart for your own good. Do you have a problem with my supposed attitude or is there something flawed in the observation I made about the subject? Secondly, I didn't expect my "Lit-Crit" style of analysis to captivate anyone. I simply stated the logical truths. You can't define how well someone has performed a task, until there's an agreed upon objective which the person is trying to accomplish. An 8th Grade student could write my opening statement, so let's not get into a quarrel over my ineptitude in terms of expository writing. I've repeated the lesson enough times to know, if you want to know anything, act as though you know nothing. Do you know why Wrestling's saving grace was television? Because the craft doesn't cater to verbal description. It can be described beautifully, but not without some form of imagery. Thus, Radio was unhelpful. Anyways, leave my writing style alone & I will leave yours alone. No one on this forum can accuse me of taking figurative shots at their grammar or spelling. My quarrel is the objectivity of claims & statements. To conclude, the more you & everyone else condemn my style, the harder you make it for me to write sincerely. If anyone examines my post history, they will notice that my lexicon is as repetitive as everyone else's. The word selection is just different.
|
|
|
Post by Turnbuckle Zealot(Phil) on Jun 11, 2014 22:40:40 GMT -5
That match shows ideal examples of everything I'm discussing. Thanks Flair Forever! Don't thank me too soon... I'm about to derail the discussion.... I'm much more interested in watching a "non" technical match that has a hot crowd rather than a technical masterpiece that the audience couldn't care less about.... In other words - many times, the crowd makes (or breaks) the match. Honestly - I'd rather watch Hogan VS. Rock from WM18 ten times in a row rather than sit through one Dean Malenko match, where the crowd is sitting there looking bored... Right now as I type this - Cena VS. Punk from Money In The Bank 2011 is playing on the WWE Network.... and it's got some good technical stuff - but the crowd is absolutely RED HOT.... I don't know where that match stands among "Greatest Technical Matches" - but is sure is great to watch, even three years later (and I imagine it will be 10 years later, too). There's a time and a place for technical wrestling - but it rarely makes it into the Main Event.... Maybe Cesaro will bring it back to that level? That's a reasonable preference. The goal of Pro-Wrestling has always been to entertain along with suspending disbelief. Neither is less valuable than the other. However, a blend of the two is the ideal foundation for great matches, but even this guideline has exceptions. You haven't derailed the conversation per say, as much as you've expanded it to a discussion of the importance of eliciting an audience response. You made us turn the coin up to the bridge of our nose, & peer down both sides at once. Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by Jonathan Karate on Jun 11, 2014 23:24:18 GMT -5
Benoit/Angle RR03 Hart/Perfect SS90 Angle/Lesnar WM19 Hart/Hart WMX Flair/Steamboat ANY
Pick one.
|
|
shenmue
Main Eventer
Joined on: Oct 30, 2007 10:12:45 GMT -5
Posts: 2,719
|
Post by shenmue on Jun 12, 2014 17:18:08 GMT -5
Benoit/Angle RR03 Hart/Perfect SS90 Angle/Lesnar WM19 Hart/Hart WMX Flair/Steamboat ANY Pick one. Pretty awesome list there, i do prefer Hart vs Perfect from 1993 though but both are great. Angle vs Benoit RR03 was a match i used to watch a lot before you know what happened, its a classic match and my fav Technical match of all time.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 16, 2024 7:09:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2014 23:42:55 GMT -5
Lynn Vs RVD from Hardcore Heaven 99 I think.. or was it 98? Whatever their first PPV matchup was where Lynn won.
That's the one that stands out in my mind, anyway
|
|
|
Post by Matt on Jun 13, 2014 22:13:10 GMT -5
Benoit vs Angle at Rumble 03 was a thing of beauty.
|
|
Duke Silver
Superstar
Joined on: Aug 15, 2011 20:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 685
|
Post by Duke Silver on Jun 13, 2014 23:22:59 GMT -5
Survivor Series 1996 Bret Hart vs. Stone Cold Steve Austin
|
|
|
Post by ztj_wwf on Jun 13, 2014 23:23:51 GMT -5
Most fans aren't interested in wrestling that pre-dates the 80s simply because a great deal of it is not readily available. And of course, things have evolved a great deal. Very few people (even those who consider themselves to be film-buffs) are willing to sit through the classic 3 hour silent films, mainly because they are not used to the style of storytelling on film that was utilized prior to the advent of more modern technologies, and I would say it's quite similar in regards to wrestling.
To answer the question of the thread, I love Eddie and Dean's ECW matches. My favourite match of all time is probably Shawn and Angle from WM 21, which included a good deal of technical wrestling.
|
|
erokthegreatest
Mid-Carder
Joined on: Apr 7, 2014 3:29:31 GMT -5
Posts: 158
|
Post by erokthegreatest on Sept 2, 2014 19:35:46 GMT -5
Dory Funk Jr. vs. Horst Hoffman was extremely technical.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 16, 2024 7:09:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2014 4:38:10 GMT -5
Props to all who selected Angle vs Benoit or mentioned it.Its a spectacle of greatness
|
|
bigraj
Main Eventer
PSN: bigraj70501
Joined on: Nov 5, 2010 16:46:40 GMT -5
Posts: 1,779
|
Post by bigraj on Sept 3, 2014 11:11:45 GMT -5
A few:
Bret Hart vs Mr. Perfect (1989) from the 2nd Bret DVD set, I think. Also here:
Flair-Steamboat (any)
Benoit-Malenko (Hog Wild '96)
Benoit-Bret (Owen tribute)
Owen & Bulldog vs HBK & Austin (WWF Tag Titles in '97)
Benoit-Angle (Royal Rumble '03 is their best)
R&R Express vs Midnight Express (any)
|
|
|
Post by johnnyb on Sept 4, 2014 0:51:04 GMT -5
I love the series of Punk/Bryan matches from 2012... both guys really had a nice mix of technical execution of moves, psychology of laying out a compelling match, and the ability to work a crowd. And include me in the camp that believes a match between two guys that know how to work a crowd is almost always better than a match between bland, black holes of charisma.
But the beauty of wrestling is that there's no right and wrong answer. For example: I hate the Flair/Steamboat matches... Flair, while a great, charismatic heel, isn't a very gifted technical wrestler and Steamboat wasn't ever a very interesting character to me. But I understand why a lot of people love their feud.
And for my money, the most talented in-ring performer (factoring in one's skill with executing moves, creatively performing the stories within the matches, working a crowd AND making his opponent look great win-lose-or-draw) of all-time is Shawn Michaels.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 16, 2024 7:09:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2014 0:58:08 GMT -5
This right here. Angle and Benoit ain't got sh-t on this. One of the matches that has the strongest claims to the title of "Pro Wrestling's most authentic masterpiece," hasn't actually been witnessed in over 80 years. Joe Stecher vs Ed "Strangler" Lewis in their famous "Longest bout in history. Such a stalemate could only occur between two of wrestling's finest geniuses. Back to the topic. The beauty of discussing Technical or Authenticity-based Wrestling, is that it minimizes entertainment preferences & puts the greatest emphasis on objectivity. How well did the wrestlers portray the story of a legitimate wrestling contest? Another problem with this topic is the potential ignorance of the members of the discussion. How many wrestling fans studying anything wrestling-related that precedes 1970, or the arts of Catch, Collar & Elbow, & Greco-Roman Wrestling? To declare that a match is the most "technical" match, is to declare it the most "authentic" match in all of Professional Wrestling's history. Given the fact that authenticity has been the Wrestler's goal, dating back to the invention of the formal concept of "work" back in the 1910s in the carnivals, you have to have knowledge of the last 114 years of wrestling before you can even begin to hypothesize the match to be selected. Food for thought. Preach that sh-t my brother. I dare to say you take wrestling too seriously. If I were a potential fan nothing about your post would draw me in. I have no problem with you. I don't know you. I'm sure you're a good guy. But you try to sound too smart for your own good. No, he doesn't take wrestling too seriously and he's not trying to sound too smart for his own good. He gets it. What he described in his post IS technical wrestling. If you're going to have a conversation about the greatest technical match, you're going to have to be open to discussing matches that focused on the actual technical aspect of wrestling and not having some mat wrestling involved before going to flashy moves. To write his post off as if it's insignificant or without a point is ridiculous. What he's saying is right.
|
|
|
Post by Brad on Sept 4, 2014 6:39:25 GMT -5
This right here. Angle and Benoit ain't got sh-t on this. One of the matches that has the strongest claims to the title of "Pro Wrestling's most authentic masterpiece," hasn't actually been witnessed in over 80 years. Joe Stecher vs Ed "Strangler" Lewis in their famous "Longest bout in history. Such a stalemate could only occur between two of wrestling's finest geniuses. Back to the topic. The beauty of discussing Technical or Authenticity-based Wrestling, is that it minimizes entertainment preferences & puts the greatest emphasis on objectivity. How well did the wrestlers portray the story of a legitimate wrestling contest? Another problem with this topic is the potential ignorance of the members of the discussion. How many wrestling fans studying anything wrestling-related that precedes 1970, or the arts of Catch, Collar & Elbow, & Greco-Roman Wrestling? To declare that a match is the most "technical" match, is to declare it the most "authentic" match in all of Professional Wrestling's history. Given the fact that authenticity has been the Wrestler's goal, dating back to the invention of the formal concept of "work" back in the 1910s in the carnivals, you have to have knowledge of the last 114 years of wrestling before you can even begin to hypothesize the match to be selected. Food for thought. Preach that sh-t my brother. I dare to say you take wrestling too seriously. If I were a potential fan nothing about your post would draw me in. I have no problem with you. I don't know you. I'm sure you're a good guy. But you try to sound too smart for your own good. No, he doesn't take wrestling too seriously and he's not trying to sound too smart for his own good. He gets it. What he described in his post IS technical wrestling. If you're going to have a conversation about the greatest technical match, you're going to have to be open to discussing matches that focused on the actual technical aspect of wrestling and not having some mat wrestling involved before going to flashy moves. To write his post off as if it's insignificant or without a point is ridiculous. What he's saying is right. You changed my opinion! Oh...wait...no you didn't...
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 16, 2024 7:09:36 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2014 7:00:04 GMT -5
This right here. Angle and Benoit ain't got sh-t on this. Preach that sh-t my brother. No, he doesn't take wrestling too seriously and he's not trying to sound too smart for his own good. He gets it. What he described in his post IS technical wrestling. If you're going to have a conversation about the greatest technical match, you're going to have to be open to discussing matches that focused on the actual technical aspect of wrestling and not having some mat wrestling involved before going to flashy moves. To write his post off as if it's insignificant or without a point is ridiculous. What he's saying is right. You changed my opinion! Oh...wait...no you didn't... ...I wasn't trying to change your opinion. Frankly, I don't give a flying about your opinion. Doesn't change that what dude was saying is right.
|
|
|
Post by Brad on Sept 4, 2014 7:14:14 GMT -5
You changed my opinion! Oh...wait...no you didn't... ...I wasn't trying to change your opinion. Frankly, I don't give a flying about your opinion. Doesn't change that what dude was saying is right. There is simply no right or wrong answer in wrestling. Wrestling is entertainment and therefore it is completely subjective. I have never told him that he didn't have a right to feel the way he does about the genre. However, his replies sound like he is writing some paper to be graded. Most of us don't care to read that. We are here to have fun. Not feel like we are in school with someone trying to "teach us a better way"
|
|
erokthegreatest
Mid-Carder
Joined on: Apr 7, 2014 3:29:31 GMT -5
Posts: 158
|
Post by erokthegreatest on Sept 4, 2014 14:43:58 GMT -5
90% of fans don't want to, and aren't interested in watching wrestling that pre-dates their existence. Right, wrong, like it or not, that is just how it is. You should recognize that your level of fandom is extreme and outside of the norm. Outside of finding other "golden age" wrestling fans, you aren't going to get much if any response. Opinions on the greatest technical match are all subjective anyway, there is no right or wrong answer especially when people can't even agree on what technical wrestling even is. I apologize. I just don't see the logical consistency in saying something is there best of "all time," when you don't know of the other possible answers from other time periods. See what I mean? Secondly, the textbook definition of "Technical Wrestling," is that said phrase is a synonym(always misspell that word) of "Authentic Wrestling." The original means of making money in Wrestling was to convince every last man, women, & lollipop licking youngster that what they were watching was a legitimate sporting contest. The better a match accomplishes this objective while taking the crowd on a figurative "emotional joy ride," the stronger it's claim to greatness. Secondly, I hope I'm not acting arrogantly, by taking your statement about my feelings on the subject as a positive. A sign that my study & participation in Pro-Wrestling is out of sincere appreciation for it, as opposed to pseudo-intellectualism. Which I was guilty of in the past. Not arrogant man. I knew where you were coming from as I used to read my PWI wrestling almanacs from cover to cover at a pretty young age. I use this place to learn from others about customizing figures, wrestling news, or anything wrestling related. Now some of the youngsters who may be thirsty for wrestling knowledge can look up some of these matches and learn a bit of the history.
|
|