Jump to content
Pro Wrestling Only

Serious Greatest of All Time Candidates


Dylan Waco

Recommended Posts

I was thinking about this over the last couple of days, but when I started posting about wrestling on the net over fifteen years ago the range of acceptable "best ever" candidates was really small. It expanded a bit over the years but by and large there was a very small number of candidates that wouldn't be met with accusations of insanity/trolling. I would say about ten years ago the serious candidates would have been:

 

Kawada, Misawa, Jumbo, Flair, Destroyer (I believe the Beyer pimping) and maybe Liger. There were a few guys touting people like Funk, Takada, various Joshi figures (most notably Jaguar, Aja or Hokuto), Dynamite and Harley but they were more isolated and in many quarters were viewed as contrarian picks. Lucha was almost never discussed, shootstyle was off the radar, NJPW heavies largely ignored and a non-NWA champ GOAT claim from the States would have been dismissed out of hand (yes I realize Terry is not pimped for his title run but I'm on a role here).

 

Fast forward ten years and the explosion of available footage and access to it and it seems like there are a mammoth number of available GOAT contenders.

 

I am a Lucha novice but I have seen claims for:

 

El Dandy

El Hijo Del Santo

Negro Casas

Satanico

 

Blue Panther is another name that I know is highly regarded though I get the feeling GOAT would be considered excessive. Still those are guys with followings that weren't even in the discussion before.

 

From the U.S. you've got:

 

Terry Funk

Ric Flair

Eddy Guerrero

Stan Hansen (though I guess you could argue that a lot of his claim rests on stuff from Japan)

Jerry Lawler

The Destroyer (see Hansen)

 

You still see an occasional Harley fan out there though he's not as touted as before. Bockwinkel has fans. Benoit was a guy with supporters before the murders. A couple of days ago my brother mentioned Rey and I found it impossible to argue against. I get the feeling if you were in the right place Michaels, Austin and Bret would all have many advocates as well. Even someone like Bill Dundee does not seem like a totally off the reservation pick to me. The point is there are more obvious candidates then before and several others that I think would be in the discussion.

 

Japan probably has seen the biggest shake up as people pay less attention to Juniors and no attention to Joshi. This has led to a situation where no one is touting Joshi gals anymore but I think if anything the over all field has expanded dramatically.

 

Japan:

 

Tenryu

Kawada

Misawa

Kobashi

Jumbo

Fujiwara

Fujinami

Hashimoto

Liger

 

I am tempted to include Volk Han, Tamura and even someone like Ishikawa as he is someone that has a vocal following online though I don't know that anyone would tout any of these guys as GOAT.

 

Anyway I was curious to see if the general view is that I am crazy and we have just seen a sea change in who is pimped so heavily or if we are actually seeing a broadening landscape leading to a more inclusive and (perhaps) thoughtful appraisal of who the best ever was. Also would love to hear if anyone thinks any of these names are stretches, if anyone else could be included, et. For example are their any Europeans worth considering? Did I name all the relevant Luchadores? et, et, et

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 304
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Really, with a few exceptions (Fujiwara, Lawler, lucha guys), I don't see that much of a shake up. The fact that no ones pays attention to joshi is just sad, but it doesn't change the fact that Hokuto, Aja, Jaguar, Chiggy and Devil were some of the greatest of all time.

Even back in the late 90's, Volk Han and Tamura were considered GOAT by people who cared about the style. Benoit is dropped for non-wrestling reasons, while Dundee shows up. I have no notion of Race not being pimped anymore, when did that happen ?

You forgot Backlund though, he's a guy that after the WWF polls and SC and DVDVR can easily be add to the list.

Really, I don't see any major changes, most of these guys were already pimped 10 years ago as GOAT. Most notable additions in the US and Japan fields are Lawler and Fujiwara. Fujinami I never heard him massively pimped as a GOAT, and considering his 90's work, I don't see it at all. It makes me laugh that Fuji would be considered while Takada of all people would be dropped. Takada's career murders Fuji. And I like Fuji.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the differentiation needs to be made between "an all-time great" (one of many) and "greatest of all-time" (singular). And, even still, I think there's only ever roughly the same dozen-or-so 'places', hence the pro-Fujiwara movement bringing an anti-Takada one... Lawler coincided with a fall (of sorts) for Harley etc... and then other people fall by the wayside like Dynamite etc...

 

Personally I don't see much of an argument for the majority of the people on that list, though I'd call most "great". I've never got the Lawler/Fujiwara pushes, though I can see something in Lawler (the same for, say, Tenryu or Fujinami), but I think GOAT is laughable hyperboly. Ishikawa is even moreso. I'm as big a Han and Tamura fan as anyone, but I don't see a case at all - "best matwork" and that's about it. It doesn't mean they weren't great, but...

 

[There's probably some European guys to be added to your list of "new-found great worker" etc...]

 

I still think it has to be one of the All Japan Four (Jumbo, not Taue, of course). I can understand where Terry or Eddie comes from, and obviously Flair will always be around, but their best stuff was just on a different level to everyone else's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tamura and Volk Han were more than just "great matwork". In the confines of their styles, they're just the greatest workers ever. Volk Han got good match out of the shittiest of the shittiest, the name of the guy was Tariel I think, and he managed to get something actually exciting out of that guy.

The anti-Takada trend is the most ridiculous ever. I can understand the anti-Tiger Mask trend, moreso because I never bought Tiger as a great worker to begin with, although it goes way too far.

Lawler I've had the opportunity to see more of him, and the issue is that, well, if you can get past the fact that 99% of his offense was a punch, the rest of Lawler's work was great (selling, bumping, facials). But the punching is an issue though. I have no idea where he would stand compared to Bret or Flair.

Tenryu is a strange case. I think some anti-Tenryu sentiment came from the infamous Jewett comp which tended to show that Jumbo carried Tenryu to the famous greatest match of the 80's. And the fact that Tenryu was dismissed because he worked too much with NJ heavies, whose style was considered inferior, and indy leagues, including FMW. To me, the more I watched Tenryu, the more it was obvious this guy was a great worker. Not the greatest mechanic, but a great worker. Not as great as Jumbo, Misawa, Kawada and Kobashi, but who was ?

Fujinami was great in the 80's, and merely good at best in the 90's, whith a very dated and often boring style whenever he didn't feel like working hard. Don't see a case for Fujinami at all.

Despite what Benoit did, there's no doubt he is one of the greatest ever. Too fucking bad.

Michaels is a rather laughable candidate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really think this is a pressing concern for people anymore. I can't imagine people ever getting as involved in a topic like this as they may have done in the past. If you asked people now who they thought the greatest of all-time were, you'd get a bunch of new choices from folk who like "digging in the crates" for new stuff and standard answers from folks who've either stopped watching or only watch a bit.

 

I agree with MJH. I don't think there's all that many people pushing the names you've mentioned. Jerome's fretting about people being anti-Takada, but that amounts to all of four or five people. Speaking for myself, finding new workers is the only thing that keeps me interested in wrestling and seeing any list of great workers with names like Jumbo or Kawada instantly bores me. This tends to influence my own wrestling opinions a lot, but it can'be helped. New is better for me, and revised opinions are paramount. Personally, I'd like things to go further. I'd love for there to be a great overall of the thinking about lucha, for example, but I can't see it happening. All told, I think wrestling opinions are becoming less and less important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, Jerome, I'll totally with you on Han and Tamura, I wasn't implying that all they had was the matwork. It's a bit like Blue Panther; that's their calling card, and the one aspect I feel safe as saying they were the best ever at. I think perhaps it's just that bit removed, or different, similar to how people talk of Lucha but in (especially) RINGs case being closer to an actual truth. There's "story" and "structure" to a point. You could say Han had a great moveset, he was as creative in his form as Toyota or Kobashi were really, but I find myself sort of transposing the idea almost. Selling, too, although that Tariel match (assuming you mean the '95 loss, which I agree is a fantastic short match and a fantastic performance/"carry job") is really an exception within the form, generally the selling's more pure body language, putting over the long-term toll rather than hobbling excessively to put over a kneebar or whatever.

 

Tenryu, I'll agree, was pretty great. Fujinami too. But it's back to my first point; there's "great" and there's "might be the single greatest wrestler ever".

 

I'll admit that the excessiveness of the "Lawler Movement" irked me into holding more against him, or focusing on what I didn't see there rather than the good stuff I did. (kind of like the NJ Juniors in the '96 Yearbook forum). I'd hear stupid arguments about how "Lawler showed more counters to a headlock against Race in their '77 broadway, ergo, he's better than Steamboat". Or something of that ilk. Whereas those headlocks were Race's routine (and he used the same ones with Steamboat) and I'd put the entire match as perhaps our best example of Harley's touring 60:00 routine. Lawler was great (or thereabouts) and I love his stuff with Bill Dundee. I think he just became too much of a poster-child for the whole "anti-moves", "big-up for brawls", "punches and angles for hicks = wrestling" trends etc... Ultimately I agree that his selling and bumping etc... were really, really strong, but there's a big leap between that and GOAT, isn't there?

 

And, yeah, it's what Dan said. People are always more interested in what's new to them, it keeps things fresher.

 

Though there is an anti-AJ rising; Misawa's death exacerbated the discomfort people felt with "dangerous" moves after Benoit's death. Do people really think Misawa or Benoit are less-talented? I couldn't say. I'd hope not, it doesn't affect me, I never really stopped watching or avoided Benoit's matches, and I don't wince any more than I used to at Misawa falling on his head. Maybe I'm alone in that...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully you guys dont mind me posting this here as Im posting it everywhere else. But it is pretty resounding who the Powerslam magazine editorial staff think dominated during the history of the publication (1994-present):

 

10. Mitsuharu Misawa vs Kenta Kobashi

(All Japan, October 31, 1998)

 

9. Mitsuharu Misawa and Kenta Kobashi vs Toshiaki Kawada and Akira Taue

(All Japan, June 9, 1995)

 

8. Manami Toyata vs Akira Hokuto

(All Japan Women Destiny, September 2, 1995)

 

7. The Undertaker vs. Shawn Michaels

(WWE Wrestlemania XXV, April 5, 2009)

 

6. Kenta Kobashi vs Jun Akiyama

(NOAH Departure, July 10, 2004)

 

5. Dragon Kid, Genki Horiguchi and Ryo Saito vs CIMA, Naruki Doi and Masata Yashino

(ROH Supercard of Honor, March 31, 2006)

 

4. Manami Toyata vs Aja Kong

(All Japan Women Big Egg Wrestling Universe, November 20, 1994)

 

3. Mitsuharu Misawa and Jun Akiyama vs Kenta Kobashi and Jun Akiyama

(All Japan, December 6, 1996)

 

2. Mitsuharu Misawa vs Kenta Kobashi

(NOAH, March 1, 2003)

 

1. Mitsuharu Misawa vs Kenta Kobashi

(All Japan, January 20, 1997)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More and more lately I am thinking Terry Funk should be considered the greatest of all time. I always would have said Flair before but looking at Funk's career he was great in so many ways in so many places and eras. And he talks about the business with more intelligence thatn just about anyone. ONe of my future orders from Will is probably going to be the Funk set just to re-affirm this in my mind, and also becaus it will be awesome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really, with a few exceptions (Fujiwara, Lawler, lucha guys), I don't see that much of a shake up. The fact that no ones pays attention to joshi is just sad, but it doesn't change the fact that Hokuto, Aja, Jaguar, Chiggy and Devil were some of the greatest of all time.

Even back in the late 90's, Volk Han and Tamura were considered GOAT by people who cared about the style. Benoit is dropped for non-wrestling reasons, while Dundee shows up. I have no notion of Race not being pimped anymore, when did that happen ?

You forgot Backlund though, he's a guy that after the WWF polls and SC and DVDVR can easily be add to the list.

Really, I don't see any major changes, most of these guys were already pimped 10 years ago as GOAT. Most notable additions in the US and Japan fields are Lawler and Fujiwara. Fujinami I never heard him massively pimped as a GOAT, and considering his 90's work, I don't see it at all. It makes me laugh that Fuji would be considered while Takada of all people would be dropped. Takada's career murders Fuji. And I like Fuji.

Speaking for myself of course but I think Fujinami destroys Takada. Takada would not even make a top hundred for me at this point. Really disappointing on the NJPW 80's sets and the UWFI stuff does not hold up nearly as well to me as the other "shootstyle" feds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it depends on the criteria that you're looking at. Growing up in the United States and watching NWA & WWF, being able to talk matters a lot and when watching Puroresu I never see them talk at all and if I did, it would be in a language that I do not understand anyway. In Japan, at least when talking about the Misawa's and Jumbo's, it was more about what happened in the ring. In the United States, I think it was more about making people want to see the match because of the storyline leading up to it. People didn't want to watch Hulk Hogan because he was a master technician in the ring.

 

In the end, professional wrestling is a business, so how much does being a draw matter? Or longevity? Austin made a ton of money but wasn't on top for very long. Plus when he was on top, his body was pretty broken down and his best matches, I would argue, were behind him.

 

The first name that came to mind for me was The Great Muta. Although he falls into the can't talk/speaks foreign category so how could I put him over someone like Flair? Even with his longevity.

 

I think it's like trying to ask someone to name their favorite song. If you listen to a lot of heavy metal and you ask a hip-hop fan what their favorite song is, obviously you're not going to agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Enjoy the responses so far. This is kind of what I expected to see as I figured some people would say that I was conflating greatest with GOAT, figured others would say a few of the names have changed but the amount of serious candidates are about the same and pretty much knew OJ would say that no one thinks about wrestling this way anymore :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking for myself of course but I think Fujinami destroys Takada. Takada would not even make a top hundred for me at this point. Really disappointing on the NJPW 80's sets and the UWFI stuff does not hold up nearly as well to me as the other "shootstyle" feds.

Well, you know we don't always the same tastes, to say the least.;)

Your list is really the first time I've seen Fujinami in a "greatest wrestler ever" talk though, that's interesting. I wonder if that's strictly a personnal thing from you, or if it's a new "popular" opinion than emerged with the NJ set (I haven't followed the discussions much) ? I've been aware of the Fujiwara craze for a long while, but Fujinami being mentionned in that list really surprised me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, Jerome, I'll totally with you on Han and Tamura, I wasn't implying that all they had was the matwork. It's a bit like Blue Panther; that's their calling card, and the one aspect I feel safe as saying they were the best ever at. I think perhaps it's just that bit removed, or different, similar to how people talk of Lucha but in (especially) RINGs case being closer to an actual truth. There's "story" and "structure" to a point. You could say Han had a great moveset, he was as creative in his form as Toyota or Kobashi were really, but I find myself sort of transposing the idea almost. Selling, too, although that Tariel match (assuming you mean the '95 loss, which I agree is a fantastic short match and a fantastic performance/"carry job") is really an exception within the form, generally the selling's more pure body language, putting over the long-term toll rather than hobbling excessively to put over a kneebar or whatever.

But that's really all about the style he worked within, it's hard to compare, just like lucha. It's so specific.

 

Do people really think Misawa or Benoit are less-talented? I couldn't say. I'd hope not, it doesn't affect me, I never really stopped watching or avoided Benoit's matches, and I don't wince any more than I used to at Misawa falling on his head. Maybe I'm alone in that...

You're not. I've been watching the whole ECW product last year, so I watched a good amount of Benoit, and I'm into WCW 98 these days, so I'm watching ton of Benoit, and it doesn't bother me at all nor does that affect my views of his work. I know it might seem odd, but that's the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Destroyer (I believe the Beyer pimping)

 

You forgot Backlund though, he's a guy that after the WWF polls and SC and DVDVR can easily be add to the list.

Two examples of what drives me nuts about how people run with positive and negative comments about wrestlings. This is the other end of the spectrum of criticism of Flair, where people run with the notion that you think Ric "sucks" if you mention anything critical about the High God of Work. No... even good workers do goofy things that warrant pointing out.

 

As far as I know, no one major has even pushed Beyer as the greatest worker of all-time. What "Destroyer Pimping" was about was that he was a great worker who pretty much got lost in time in hardcore (and even more mainstream wrestling) discussions about wrestlers and workers of the era. As his matches were more widely available, more people tended to come to the same conclusions: he was a great worker in the style of that era, especially in terms of holds and matwork.

 

Why this pissed people off, and why people read more into it... one can only guess. I suspect it was due to the people pointing out Beyer was a great worker, and probably the manner they did it (i.e. contrasting good Beyers hold/matwork with shitty hold/matwork of sacred cows). And perhaps because we were assholes in general that there were always folks who had a gag reflex to want to hate what we liked.

 

But even Yohe while saying that Beyer was his favorite wrestler of all-time dating back to seeing him at the Olympic as a kid wasn't calling Dick the best worker ever. So where the notion that "Beyer Pimping" = "Beyer Best Worker Ever" came from... I tend to think it's another example of people not able to parse what's being said.

 

The Backlund comment is similar. As probably the biggest "Backlund Pimper" around, or at the very least the one who gets tagged with it, I've gone out of my way over and over and over again to say:

 

I'm not trying to say or convince anyone that Backlund was a "great worker".

 

I've tried to get across that he was a "good worker" and that a lot of what was Hardcore Consensus about him (and often still is) doesn't match up with what we see in the ring.

 

Before someone uses Mr Searchy and finds the word "great" in various posts I've made about Backlund, saying that something a wrestler does is "great" doesn't mean you think they're a great worker. Saying they're in a great match doesn't mean you think they're a great worker. I don't know if I'd classify Samurai as a great worker. He was a good, solid worker. But if one were point to me using the word "great" or "off the charts" in talking about his match with Ohtani, it's the *match* and the work in it.

 

Backlund-Patera and Rude-Warrior are two of the greatest matches in the WWF in the 80s... probably Top 5 for me, and candidates for 1-2. Would I say that over the course of their careers that any of those four were great workers? A stretch. I do think Patera was a great heel in 1980. But spinkling around the word "great" in those two matches, and around for other stuff that Patera did in 1980, doesn't raise any of them to GWOAT status.

 

I know that's not quite what Jerome is doing. But we have the tendancy to take other people making mild/normal level of praise/criticism and run with it to make it far more than it is. I tend to think it's a reflection that we largely can only have discussions and assigning of value/worth at extremes. This goes back more than a decade on things like star ratings, where *** and **** lost meaning when you suddenly have 100 ****+ matches in a year, and 25 ****1/2 matches. Simply giving a match *** and calling it "good" either had no meaning, or was an insult.

 

An example:

 

Tito-Orndorff from St. Louis that was on the 80s set was a good match. Solid work, good selling, lots of nice little stuff. I use it a lot as an example of the fact that there was good wrestling in the WWF in the 80s, not just all the stuff people bag on. Good match, along the lines of a good match that people would see in other territories in the era.

 

I may mention it so often that people when watching it expect a MOTYC, that Tito and Paul will be off the charts, and that his one of the great lost matches of the decade between two of the great lost workers of the decade.

 

No. It's just a solid, good match.

 

In the original set it stood out a bit because there were a fair number of pretty mediocre matches. It's entirely possible it won't stand out in the DVDVR 80s WWF Redux because there will be a larger number of good to excellent matches on the set. It wasn't "great" on the first set, and it won't "suck" on the second set. It's still just a solid, good match.

 

Our natural rush to talk at extremes on judging the value of things that are simply "good".

 

Backlund was a "good worker". More people see that now than in the past. That's a long way from the consensus of 1996. That's all people are trying to do.

 

Beyer was a great worker. More people get that now. That's a long way from 1996 when only Yohe gave a shit about him, hardly anyone had seen any matches of his, and Beyer was little more than a name on a list.

 

#1?

 

Does it really matter?

 

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More and more lately I am thinking Terry Funk should be considered the greatest of all time. I always would have said Flair before but looking at Funk's career he was great in so many ways in so many places and eras. And he talks about the business with more intelligence thatn just about anyone. ONe of my future orders from Will is probably going to be the Funk set just to re-affirm this in my mind, and also becaus it will be awesome.

Last weekend, Ted DiBiase made an indy appearance and I took the opportunity to ask him his opinions regarding Jumbo being the GOAT. He said that he'd rate Jumbo as one of the greatest Japanese wrestlers of all time, but that he felt that Terry was the best of all time. He also mentioned that he'd trained in Amarillo with Jumbo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always liked DiBiase's criticism of Misawa/Kobashi/Kawada - "they worked harder than they needed to." And, yes, I'm aware of the wider point.

 

No one's going to react much to someone calling Terry Funk GOAT, though; I think I have him at 1/2 US GOAT and that's a below-average position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just for the record, I always loved Backlund and thought he was better than *good*, and the WWF SC poll complete with watching tons of Backlund matches from the 70's and 80's convinced me that he was a great worker. So, I may be on the "He's overrating Backlund" wagon, but I've always been a fan, I just wasn't aware he had so many excellent matches in his prime.

 

DiBiase surely never worked harder than he needed too, especially in Japan.:)

 

Terry Funk as the best wrester ever ? I'm ok with that thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To John's post two things:

 

First thing is that I absolutely have seen people pimp Destroyer as the best ever so I don't think this is the case of projection. There was a period of time where tOA guys were pretty influential on the web and I think your points about Destroyer being a great, somewhat forgotten worker, led people to proclaim him the best ever after watching the matches themselves. Not saying you were one of those people - just acknowledging the fact that they existed.

 

On Backlund I get your point to an extent and I personally don't see him as a guy that you or anyone is really touting as the best of all time. Having said that I have to ask - if the point of the Backlund stuff was just to point out that he was a good, solid worker why bother writing and talking so much about it over the years? I don't say this to accuse you of duplicity either as I don't doubt that was your intent. I'm just curious as to why it became a project of sorts for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I continue to talk about Backlund because he had a lot of matches in the territory/era that I've spent most of my time talking about in the past 3-4 years: WWF 80s. If you watch and write about that, you're going to talk about the guy who held the belt for the first four years. I have another 21 matches in hand of his two watch from that period, and another 20+ may be in circulation.

 

That's a drop in the bucket compared to 150 or so Hogan Matches that I need to sit through. :) And the Savage spreed sheet looks to be long, with quite a few matches popping up that I still need to add (like the Steamer IC defense that popped up on WWE.com). That doesn't even take into consideration the WWF tag division, which I've largely ducked/not focused on.

 

Is there anything more for me to say about Backlund? Suspect there is.

 

There's a knock on Will's set that it was culled to make Bob "look good". It was a Best Of, so you are going to get the good stuff. I've written up some of his matches with weaker opponents or lesser matches that didn't make the set: Khan (not a bad worker, just a bad match), Ventura and some others. I've got more of the same in the cue, like Duncam, Mosca, Steele, Superstar and Studd. I've written up some good matches that didn't make Will's set. There's still some out there than might fall into that category, such as some Valentine matches (including the full version of the Philly cage match) and some Slaughter matches in Philly. There's also some things that are of interest not just for Bob, but the opponent, such as the series in Philly with Snuka. I really want to see the full match with Mike Sharpe that was in Philly, even if it's a stinker.

 

So get them all and watch them all as part of the WWF 80s process.

 

Is it repetative? No doubt. Watch and write up 36 Flair matches that took place in a 4 year period (let's say 1986-89 since it would be in a closed promotion of Crockett/Turner) or Savage (1986-89 WWF) or Lawler and it's going to get repetative in the comments being made if you're writing at any length. There are times when you want to be repetative to get across elements that are common to what Flair or Savage or Backlund do in the ring, with simply in terms of spots/moves, or in terms of how they work. It's hard to talk about a Hogan match and not reference the Hulking Up. :) Or Lawler with the Strap. It's part of what they did. There are other things that are clear points that you as a writer might want to get across as a continuing theme: how Flair, Hogan, Lawler and/or Bob engaged/worked/sucked in the crowd.

 

Or simply jokes you enjoy, even if no one else does (such as Bob taking two counts).

 

Anyway, that's the overwhelming majority of Backlund that I write about.

 

I have a chunk of 70s Backlund that's I've never really written up like the 80s WWF stuff (including two of my favorite matches of his). There's a lot of stuff with New Japan that I've barely scratched the surface of, some of which never aired on Classics but Dan G has tracked down and is sitting over an a shelf. At some point I may watch that and write about it. Some of it gets watched at KOC's, and gets talked about in brief... but that's akin to watching a Jumbo match at a KOC and tossing off a few sentences.

 

He's a good worker that I enjoy watching, so I'm likely to watch whatever I can get my hands on down the road. I tend to write about what I watch. The lack of writing about matches over the last two years is a pretty good indication of how little I'm watching stuff, even what I like. :)

 

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting thread, and I have waaaay too much to say in response to some things posted.

 

I was thinking about this over the last couple of days, but when I started posting about wrestling on the net over fifteen years ago the range of acceptable "best ever" candidates was really small. It expanded a bit over the years but by and large there was a very small number of candidates that wouldn't be met with accusations of insanity/trolling. I would say about ten years ago the serious candidates would have been:

 

Kawada, Misawa, Jumbo, Flair, Destroyer (I believe the Beyer pimping) and maybe Liger. There were a few guys touting people like Funk, Takada, various Joshi figures (most notably Jaguar, Aja or Hokuto), Dynamite and Harley but they were more isolated and in many quarters were viewed as contrarian picks. Lucha was almost never discussed, shootstyle was off the radar, NJPW heavies largely ignored and a non-NWA champ GOAT claim from the States would have been dismissed out of hand (yes I realize Terry is not pimped for his title run but I'm on a role here).

 

Fast forward ten years and the explosion of available footage and access to it and it seems like there are a mammoth number of available GOAT contenders.

I agree with the general sentiment, but I don't think that there are more GOAT contenders. There has been some shuffling of the deck, and a pretty big discovery of more great wrestlers that were pretty much never talked about, which is awesome. But I think increasing the GOAT contenders may be overstating it.

 

I do think it would be much easier to do a top 100 list now than it was in 2006 or 2007, whenever it was that the Smarkschoice poll was done. Many people -- Goodhelmet stands out only because we went round and round about it so many times -- said they would only submit a ballot of 50 wrestlers because they didn't think 100 wrestlers could be qualified as great. I suspect some of those people who have paid attention to the newly available footage the last few years would approach that differently now.

 

But as evidenced in this thread, sometimes the discussion is a semantics argument over what it means to be great, which to me always felt like a waste of time, but I respect that others can and do see it differently.

 

I am a Lucha novice but I have seen claims for:

 

El Dandy

El Hijo Del Santo

Negro Casas

Satanico

This is where I absolutely agree that there are more GOAT contenders. If you recall, when the El Dandy love started, you had many people jumping on the bandwagon, but most of them thought it was an ironic Snitsky-like thing, I think. More lucha footage is available now, so it's easier to form opinions on some of the premier guys and compare them with American wrestlers, which is a great thing.

 

I also feel like this is worth mentioning, as something that is in some ways disappointing, yet no less true. I would say most wrestling fans decided a long time ago who they like and who they don't, and very little has changed. I don't think that's the case as much as it used to be. Ever year that passes is a year when Dave Meltzer's opinions are seen less as coming down from a mountain. His old opinions still provide value, but more as a reference point to see what the consensus was at the time, and Dave was the tastemaker. God bless him for that. Otherwise, it would be hard to figure out where to even start.

 

But going back to my point, the eye opening has taken place with a subculture (DVDVR, WKO, Smarkschoice, here) of a subculture (Internet wrestling fans) of a subculture (wrestling fans). I wish it went beyond that, but I'd expect you wouldn't find many too people praising El Dandy or Fujiwara at the F4W or Torch boards unless they also post at one of the other places.

 

Japan probably has seen the biggest shake up as people pay less attention to Juniors and no attention to Joshi.

I know more attention is paid to heavyweights, but I think opinions are still generally positive of guys like Liger. Tiger Mask and Dynamite Kid have taken a beating. The flaws in the NJ juniors style have definitely been discussed more for sure. Sadly, I think the pendulum has swung too far in the opposite direction at times, because guys like Ultimo Dragon and Shinjiro Otani (and El Samurai, who is perhaps the most overlooked great wrestler of all the Japanese guys) have lost some spotlight that they deserve.

 

I'm not sure what the cause of that has been. The easy answer would be to blame Segunda Caida for hating on things like Dragon Gate, but that's really short-sighted, because they talk about and praise matches involving those guys from this time period. Maybe it's because so many people were turned on to wrestling in Japan through the J-Cups that they think the wrestlers are old news. It's hard to say.

 

I understand the need to seek new thoughts, but this ties into something I'll talk about more when I get to Ohtani's Jacket's quote that really stuck out to me.

 

Really, with a few exceptions (Fujiwara, Lawler, lucha guys), I don't see that much of a shake up.

I'm surprised to hear you say this, because you always strike me as "Oh, so this isn't liked anymore, when did THAT happen?" guy. Maybe that's unfair, I don't know.

 

Luckily, I don't see much of the guy who always did that the most anymore -- one Mike Oles.

 

The fact that no ones pays attention to joshi is just sad, but it doesn't change the fact that Hokuto, Aja, Jaguar, Chiggy and Devil were some of the greatest of all time.

This a thousand times. Not so much for the Joshi point, although I do agree with that, but more that new evaluations don't always lead to new truth. Praising Joshi wrestlers isn't really at the foreground of wrestling discussion these days, but that has nothing to do with the careers they all had.

 

Takada's career murders Fuji. And I like Fuji.

Having a better career and being more talented are two different things. I think what bugs people about Takada is his lack of emotion. It bugs me. That said, I'm not sure why I have no problem with Misawa's stoicism, but Takada's annoys me. Both are key players who the wrestling scene in Japan would be drastically different without, both are great wrestlers, both are highly regarded. All I know is that Takayama, Hashimoto and Tenryu outworked Takada in their big matches against each other in '96, and Misawa's big matches feel much more even. Maybe I just answered my own question. :)

 

I still think it has to be one of the All Japan Four (Jumbo, not Taue, of course). I can understand where Terry or Eddie comes from, and obviously Flair will always be around, but their best stuff was just on a different level to everyone else's.

Possibly, but key lucha guys are very much in contention on this list now. I'm with you on the others, although there are probably guys like Tenryu whose stock have improved vastly in the past few years who I wouldn't say has a better argument than the guys you listed, but I think he's at that level.

 

So I'm talking in circles and now I guess I am agreeing with Dylan when I thought I didn't at first. :)

 

Lawler I've had the opportunity to see more of him, and the issue is that, well, if you can get past the fact that 99% of his offense was a punch, the rest of Lawler's work was great (selling, bumping, facials). But the punching is an issue though. I have no idea where he would stand compared to Bret or Flair.

(1) This is not true. Quite a few guys have walked through Lawler's varied offense many times.

 

(2) Bret is a guy who I can't believe is still in this discussion. He was a great WWF-style main eventer, but when seeing him in the context of the wrestling world at large, he loses something.

 

Speaking for myself, finding new workers is the only thing that keeps me interested in wrestling and seeing any list of great workers with names like Jumbo or Kawada instantly bores me. This tends to influence my own wrestling opinions a lot, but it can'be helped. New is better for me, and revised opinions are paramount. Personally, I'd like things to go further. I'd love for there to be a great overall of the thinking about lucha, for example, but I can't see it happening.

I see this, but I also worry that the end result is that it bleeds over into opinions about the wrestlers themselves. Jumbo and Kawada being talked about in a GOAT context may bore you, but I think allowing that to limit their case is unfair. It's not any wrestler's fault how much they're talked about years later. And new opinions aren't always better opinions. They are more interesting to read sometimes, but that's a statement about a message board poster, not a wrestler. I think it's important to not let emphasis on being original impact matches or wrestlers themselves.

 

Sometimes I see a match I like and do a lousy job of explaining what I liked about it without talking about it in generalities. That's not a reflection on the match. That's a reflection on me.

 

All told, I think wrestling opinions are becoming less and less important.

I don't know that I understand what this means. Less important to whom?

 

I'll admit that the excessiveness of the "Lawler Movement" irked me into holding more against him, or focusing on what I didn't see there rather than the good stuff I did. (kind of like the NJ Juniors in the '96 Yearbook forum).

What are you saying? I have praised quite a few of the NJ juniors match in the '96 yearbook forum.

 

I think it depends on the criteria that you're looking at. Growing up in the United States and watching NWA & WWF, being able to talk matters a lot and when watching Puroresu I never see them talk at all and if I did, it would be in a language that I do not understand anyway. In Japan, at least when talking about the Misawa's and Jumbo's, it was more about what happened in the ring. In the United States, I think it was more about making people want to see the match because of the storyline leading up to it. People didn't want to watch Hulk Hogan because he was a master technician in the ring.

There's something to this. That said:

 

(1) This is a topic that seems to be focused on in-ring above all.

(2) People may not have expected Hogan to be master technician, but I think there was still expectation that his matches would provide certain things. Had they not provided those things, Hogan would not have been a success. The reason I mention this is because you can point to guys like Hogan, the Road Warriors, Goldberg, etc., but those are guys who got over for what they did in the ring, even if they weren't great wrestlers in the technical sense. Their charisma and physical appearance helped also, but these are guys who if they spent 90% of their matches selling would not have been stars. I only mention that because of the mindset I see sometimes that what happens bell-to-bell doesn't matter.

 

Two examples of what drives me nuts about how people run with positive and negative comments about wrestlings. This is the other end of the spectrum of criticism of Flair, where people run with the notion that you think Ric "sucks" if you mention anything critical about the High God of Work. No... even good workers do goofy things that warrant pointing out.

 

As far as I know, no one major has even pushed Beyer as the greatest worker of all-time. What "Destroyer Pimping" was about was that he was a great worker who pretty much got lost in time in hardcore (and even more mainstream wrestling) discussions about wrestlers and workers of the era. As his matches were more widely available, more people tended to come to the same conclusions: he was a great worker in the style of that era, especially in terms of holds and matwork.

 

Why this pissed people off, and why people read more into it... one can only guess. I suspect it was due to the people pointing out Beyer was a great worker, and probably the manner they did it (i.e. contrasting good Beyers hold/matwork with shitty hold/matwork of sacred cows). And perhaps because we were assholes in general that there were always folks who had a gag reflex to want to hate what we liked.

 

But even Yohe while saying that Beyer was his favorite wrestler of all-time dating back to seeing him at the Olympic as a kid wasn't calling Dick the best worker ever. So where the notion that "Beyer Pimping" = "Beyer Best Worker Ever" came from... I tend to think it's another example of people not able to parse what's being said.

I strongly agree with this. Were you assholes? Possibly at times, but for the most part, probably not. But stuff like "Destroyer/Mascaras is better than any Flair match ever" (Which I don't recall you saying, but I did see) did irk people. Chris Coey listing 40 wrestlers better than Flair did irk people, which I seem to remember happening at tOA. Frank Jewett talking about how the problem with Flair was that he didn't add a DDT to his arsenal made him seem like someone who only cared about the mechanics of wrestling and nothing more. (I think you and Frank may have at times misunderstood the MOVES~! criticism toward him. It was never about Frank only caring about wrestlers who did big spots as much as it was that Frank would say things like that all one needed to be NWA champ was a nice vertical suplex, completely ignoring every other factor that one needed to be an NWA champ. :))

 

Fairly or not, I think any praise of guys like Jumbo, Backlund or Destroyer was instinctively seen by some as an agenda to make people think less of Ric Flair that was somehow tied to your falling out with Dave Meltzer. That sounds even dumber to me in hindsight than it did at the time. Like we all (self included) do with wrestling in general, we probably read too much into that. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The range of responses to Dylan's query is, in itself, an argument for the value of periodically revisiting the GOAT question. I know that when I began delving deeper into the worldwide wrestling scene, the threads associated with the Smarkschoice poll were some of the most valuable references I found. The ultimate answer didn't matter to me as much as the little sub-arguments, which gave me all kinds of ideas about what to watch and helped me to understand the community of critics that had evolved online.

 

I hope the 80s projects, other polls, the threads around Will and Loss' yearbooks, etc. will provide the same service for the few souls who stray into hardcore fandom going forward. Whether you're talking about wrestling, baseball or TV shows, I find "who is greater than whom" discussions irresistible. They help me to frame my own thoughts about the stuff I like, and if the right people are involved, I learn.

 

As for the original question, I don't think the GOAT field has expanded considerably since the Smarkschoice poll. I'm sure Lawler, Fujiwara, Tenryu and Hash would do better if we ran a poll right now. Benoit, Liger, Kobashi and Takada would do worse. But I don't know that the pool of guys pulling Top 5 votes would be significantly expanded. I can't speak to the change from 10 or 15 years ago, because I wasn't around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I strongly agree with this. Were you assholes? Possibly at times, but for the most part, probably not. But stuff like "Destroyer/Mascaras is better than any Flair match ever" (Which I don't recall you saying, but I did see) did irk people. Chris Coey listing 40 wrestlers better than Flair did irk people, which I seem to remember happening at tOA. Frank Jewett talking about how the problem with Flair was that he didn't add a DDT to his arsenal made him seem like someone who only cared about the mechanics of wrestling and nothing more. (I think you and Frank may have at times misunderstood the MOVES~! criticism toward him. It was never about Frank only caring about wrestlers who did big spots as much as it was that Frank would say things like that all one needed to be NWA champ was a nice vertical suplex, completely ignoring every other factor that one needed to be an NWA champ. :))

I'd have to see a quote of Frank saying this, and then look at the context because it doesn't sound like him. We were the guys joking about Lou Thesz wrestling NWA Heel Champ Style against Verne: bitching, stooging, begging off. I tend to think that if people really paid attention to what Frank would say about what was needed to be an NWA Champ, they'd likely find it lines up closer to Flair (who he wasn't really a fan of) than Harley (who he clearly was a fan of).

 

Dittos on the DDT thing. I suspect most people who read Frank's comments on Flair can recite the theme: it wasn't that Ric didn't add "new hot moves", but that Flair threw away a lot of his old stuff to narrow and further narrow what he did in the ring.

 

Irony?

 

He said the same thing about Jumbo in the 90s: Grumpy Old Heel Jumbo that we all loved (including Frank) cut back on the volume of MOVES~! that he did in a match.

 

Frank talked a lot about moves. But I think that people made the same mistake in reading him that they did with Bill James in baseball, thinking that all James did was talk stats and numbers. It wasn't the case. Frank's the guy who wrote a long piece on the Stinky Face Match, putting over how well it was layed out. He's the one who loved Flair bitching out for Tommy Young while I groaned about it. :) He walked through full version of Patterson-Patera, which was hardly a high tech match even for the era, but he went over in detail why he thought it was a really well laid out, smartly worked match. It's not a match that grabs me, but he certainly gave me something to think about when rewatching it.

 

People have their reasons for not liking and dimissing what he wrote. He was an asshole, and admittedly I was (and still am though I continue to try hard to tone it down). I think people let the assholishness get in the way of reading what he had to say, and often their own defensiveness about contrary (to their own) and detailed opinions make them look for a way to eject out of thinking.

 

It's easier to pigeon hole what he wrote as Asshole MOVES~! Mark rather than think about it. The equiv would be to dimiss everything Schneider writes as Lawler & Fujiwara Mark, as if it's the sum total of what Phil has written about over the past two decades. Or people still holding what Daniel wrote about Joshi more than a decade ago against him as a reason to ignore what he's written about Lucha.

 

The rebellion against NJ Juniors? I think if people had access to what Frank wrote about them in 1996-99 on AOL, on tOA, in e-mail and other places, they'd likely see that the Grand Rethinking Of Juniors isn't terribly far removed from what he said back then. It's also entirely likely that some of the current Juniors Haterz were Juniors Luvers on the other side of some of his discussions. :) And no... I don't have easy access to any of that stuff. Just have a pretty vivid memory of him pointing out lots of NJ Junior goofiness, and not just on Tiger Mask long before everyone else started shitting on Sayama.

 

Again, that gets lost and/or forgotten in the "He's an asshole", and him (as was I) being rather combative in discussions.

 

 

 

Fairly or not, I think any praise of guys like Jumbo, Backlund or Destroyer was instinctively seen by some as an agenda to make people think less of Ric Flair that was somehow tied to your falling out with Dave Meltzer. That sounds even dumber to me in hindsight than it did at the time. Like we all (self included) do with wrestling in general, we probably read too much into that. :)

Hard to see what Destroyer has to do with any of that. As people have become more aware of the Destroyer, Dave has also said more positive things about him. It's not like Dave ever said anything critical of him: Beyers was simply a name on lists, including the WON HOF. Really don't even think Beyer is a comp for Flair as they're entirely different generations. I know people have made comps, but it's little different from comps between Flair and Shawn: they're just workers in a line. Putting over Beyer has nothing to do with Flair, anymore than putting over Shawn has anything to do with Flair... unless there are Flair fans that are defensive of any wrestler in that line being put over. Don't get that one.

 

Jumbo is an odd one: Dave thinks he was a high end all-time great work, I think he's great, most people think he's great. Putting over Jumbo doesn't change any of that. There's really just one are of disagreement on Jumbo that's been strange and/or fun and/or annoying, depending on how you look at it. In a sense, it's like Derek Jeter. People who think Jeter's defense has been rather overrated through the years also happen to think that Jeter is a HOF. In other words: a great player. They just disagree about how one aspect of him is portrayed. The Jumbo Was Lazy discussion actually started *before* there was a falling out. It goes back to 1997-98 originally, though the best moments of it (such as Bix's call into the old WOL show or the funny references to Mick Foley) were later. It's been out there for so long that I think people lose track of just how far the scratching of the head goes back.

 

Bob no doubt has lots of elements of cracks at Dave. They're also cracks at me, since I hated Bob as well and was completely wrong on him. If in 1996 I happened to think about Bob what I even thought of him in the early 00's, he would have gone in the WON HOF. I would have advocated strongly enough to get him begrudgingly in. I aspect my fair share of the blame for that, so considered the knocks mutal and my penance for the error of my ways.

 

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...