[GWE] What skillsets and experiences do you value?

[Loss]

Can a guy who is almost exclusively a great brawler do well on your list, or do you need some good traditional wrestling matches to go with it? For guys who have mostly traditional wrestling matches with a slow build to a hot finishing stretch on their resume, do you need a great brawl? If someone's peak is focused within a very narrow style, do you need something that shows they can step outside of their comfort zone too? I'm just curious what everyone values.

 

For me, I need anyone I'm voting for to have at least one longish main event epic to their name in order to be considered. It's hardly the only factor, but it's hard for me to consider someone great until they have one. I also tend to lean toward guys that have wrestled well in many places, although there's something to be said for doing it well in the same place repeatedly too, so I'm more flexible there.

 

I realize there are different ways to look at all of this, hence the thread.

[Dylan Waco]

Define "do well?"

 

Ideally I want some degree of versatility and range, but if someone is a master at one particular style, form, role, et. it's hard for me to view their failure to do anything else as a negative.

[dawho5]

I treat this as a more case-by-case deal as wrestlers go. Dragon Kid is easily one of the most spectacular and influential high fliers I've ever seen once he goes into his arsenal of flips and fancy stuff. But he can't do shit otherwise and that brings him way, way down for me. Vader is pretty one-dimensional when you get right down to it, and his act is really similar everywhere he goes. He's a big bully who beats people up and then squashes them like bugs with his body weight, but still bumps around at times. I think he's fucking great. A lot of it probably comes down to how a one-dimensional wrestler can fit that dimension into matches with multiple opponents. If they can make it work it's a positive. If not they need to find some new ways of getting things done.

[Loss]

Define "do well?"

 

I just meant it as simple as that. Do well, as opposed to doing bad. I didn't want to give the idea that just travel alone is enough to make a wrestler a contender. I can think of a few wrestlers that went to quite a few places but still never put it together.

[Chess Knight]

Doesn't matter to me as long they didn't spend annoying amounts of time outside what they're good at. Jake Roberts did what he was good at, and if he tried to be a high flyer he almost assuredly would have made a mess of it. He probably thought that and stuck to what he knew he was capable of. I think versatility is a positive (and a bonus), but I don't know if I'll ever consider lack of versatility a negative. That is unless the wrestler's matches get repetitive, but I don't think you always have to change up the 'style' of wrestling to get around that.

 

A wrestler can be "pretty good" at five things, and another wrestler can be "amazing" at one of those things and never tries the other four. If the latter always sticks to that one thing, I won't fault him for it and will still rank him ahead of the former.

[concrete1992]

I have a chart with imaginary values attached to things such as "Worked a variety of styles", "Worked a variety of places", "Meshed with several different types of wrestlers", "Smokes a cigar", "Has quality feuds".

[JerryvonKramer]

I think I really value a guy who can "do it all". I said this about Jumbo:

 

To me, Jumbo is just a transcendent worker. When he's on form, I can't think of many better offensive wrestlers. He hits every single move with such velocity and impact that it makes the ground shake. Jumbo might not be the biggest guy ever to step into the ring, but he's certainly one of the most physical. He can make a slight size advantage really count in a way that is special.

 

He is great at selling. He bumps his arse off. He can work the mat. He can trade strikes. He can work hour-long technical broadways. He can work heated sprints. He can brawl. He can be the nice babyface champion who'd shake hands with your mother. He can be a total prick. He has a wonderfully expressive face that registers that unique mixture of disgust and being affronted that only Jumbo can register.

To me this automatically puts Jumbo over guys who can only work one style. Same goes for Flair. It's a major plus point for Nick Bockwinkel.

 

On the flipside, I see Bob Backlund's lack of versatilty as a major knock on him. I said this:

 

If you've seen one Backlund match, you've seen em all. Armwork to start, maybe the "row row row" spot. Heel struggles and tries to fight back. Bob gives them nothing, beats them back down. Heel almost gets a hope spot and maybe gets a few moves in on offense. Bob barely sells them before KILLing the heel with a massive piledriver and maybe a suplex variation. If it's match one, he'll get thrown from the ring for a countout, or cut his head for blood stoppage. If it's match two, it'll be a draw of some kind. If it's match three he goes over. Doesn't really matter, cos whatever the match and whatever the opponent, the basic structure is the same. Only the finish changes. To me, this suggests that ultimately he's a limited worker.

 

Kayfabe Bob is one of the most single-track minded guys ever to step in the ring. He'll get one idea in his head (e.g. "grind headlock" or "wrench arm") and proceed to do that and only that for the next 20 minutes. You might say it's good psychology, which I guess it is, but the problem is that he'll pursue his basic gameplan by going back to the same move again and again and again. It could be a headlock, it could be an armwrench. Bob's plan is not so much to work a bodypart, it's TO USE ONE MOVE over and over again. This belies his lack of imagination.

So absolutely I'm looking for versatility.

[BillThompson]

I'm not too high on versatility. It's a great trait for a wrestler to have, but in the end I can't see punishing someone for a lack of versatility. If they tried to spread their wings and failed, sure, that is a knock against them. However, if they knew they were good-great at a specific style or match type and that is what they stuck at, well, more power to them for knowing their limitations.

[Exposer]

Versatility is a big thing for me however I won't penalize people like Colon and Onita for mastering a style even if they rarely if ever deviate from it.

[Jimmy Redman]

What about even face/heel versatility? Is there a point at which people penalize the Reys and Steamboats of the world for never having a (good) heel run?