Jump to content
Pro Wrestling Only

Wrestle Kingdom 10


Loss

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 126
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

They had to have opened their wallets for Styles in a big way in order for the jump to make sense for Styles.

Oh yeah. Whats Styles asking price on the indies? I've heard between $3,000 and $4,000 an appearance. Multiply that by 80 to 90 matches a year for the past two years and that is somewhere around $240k to $360k a year that the WWE has to at least match for it to make sense financially.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

They had to have opened their wallets for Styles in a big way in order for the jump to make sense for Styles.

Oh yeah. Whats Styles asking price on the indies? I've heard between $3,000 and $4,000 an appearance. Multiply that by 80 to 90 matches a year for the past two years and that is somewhere around $240k to $360k a year that the WWE has to at least match for it to make sense financially.

 

 

Or he got the Rhino/original Samoa Joe where he works NXT and non TNA/ROH indies on the side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Show was good, but didn't feel like a major show. Hard to explain, but at no point did it come across like I was watching the biggest wrestling show of the year for the second biggest promotion on the planet.

 

I thought every match was at least decent, though the overbooking and run-in's on the under card were way over done, and there were some booking decisions I hated (Jado and Goto winning especially).

 

My favorite match on the show was Nakamura v. Styles, though the back work not going anywhere bothered me. Still felt like a low level MOTYC on first watch, with lots of fun spots, strong sell jobs, and clever moments/transitions from both. I enjoyed Ishii v. Shibata for what it was, though they walked right up to the edge of absurdity two or three times. Liked the tag title match a whole lot. I actually liked Kushida v. Omega more than I thought I would too, though Omega is annoying even when he isn't shitty.

 

Main event was what it was. I'm less bothered by the leg work being blown off (I actually think Okada at least kind of sold it a bunch down the stretch actually), then I am by the fact that by far his most effective and consistent weapon in the match was a dropkick. Some of the spots with dropkicks were excellent looking in isolation, but I just can't get invested when a match unfolds that way. In many ways it felt like an overblown Mania main event, with tons of shit shoehorned in (including each guy doing the others finish), some of which worked very well, and some of which didn't work at all. It was the right match for the crowd, and the right guy won, so over all I was fairly indifferent to it. That said it blows my mind that some of the same people who were middling or tempered in their praise for the Bayley v. Sasha matches, seemed to loved this match of all things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just finished watching this.

 

Nak/Styles ruled. It's Nakamura in a big match on the Dome show. Do you really need more motivation to check it out? They play up on AJ's recent back problems which result in a great spot where AJ plays possum. Near enough every near fall and submission felt like it could end the match, and even as the match approached the 25 minute mark, I still didn't want it to end. A total war.

 

 

Agreed, this is the match I was looking forward to the most and it delivered. AJ will be sorely missed in this environment but it was awesome whilst it lasted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, I watched the last three matches of Wrestle Kingdom 10 last night and while I understand some of the criticisms I loved all three of them.

 

Ishii and Shibata worked the exact match their fans wanted them to work. Are there any Ishii and Shibata fans who want them to work a match based on selling and psychology? I guess some people go to a burger joint and complain that they don't have lobster and caviar, when there is absolutely nothing wrong with a good burger. If you don't like hamburgers, that is fine, but don't act like you didn't know you were in a burger joint.

 

AJ Styles and Shinsuke Nakamura put on a great match, and apparently both decided they're done in New Japan. If you are going to have a last hurrah, that match was perfect. Between the two of them, they've been two of the best wrestlers in the world over the last few years and I couldn't possibly be more excited to see them in NXT/WWE.

 

OK, so the criticisms of Okada vs. Tanahashi are all valid, but none of them took me out of this match. This match could have been marginally better if Okada would have sold the leg work, but I think the bigger problem is Tanahashi working over his arm in the first place. I'm sure they discussed how they were going to work this match beforehand, and somehow they decided that Tanahashi is going to work over Okada's leg AND all of Okada's big comebacks are going to be built around dropkicks and top rope moves. Why not work over Okada's arm, so he doesn't have to ignore the leg work to work the match they put together? Okada's arm is vital to his finisher, and it would make sense that he had to hit multiple Rainmakers to put Tanahashi away. With all of that said, it didn't make me like this match any less. This is essentially a Game 7 between the '96 Bulls and the '86 Celtics. These two guys care more about beating the other, than anything else in the world. The IWGP Championship, being the ace of the company, and everything else is secondary to proving once and for all who is the better man. People claiming this is a forced epic don't understand context. This is not HHH vs. Undertaker after a month of buildup, this is the conclusion to an overarching story that has lasted years. Tanahashi and Okada have been fighting to see who will be the Ace of the company since 2012, and Okada finally wrestled the torch away from Tanahashi. As an individual match, this match is still pretty good. As the culmination of the story they've been telling, this was phenomenal. Both guys absolutely had to win this match, and they both wrestled like losing wasn't an option. Tanahashi's time as the Alpha dog had to end at some point, and Okada had to do everything in his power to take that spot. I loved this match flaws and all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Ishii and Shibata worked the exact match their fans wanted them to work. Are there any Ishii and Shibata fans who want them to work a match based on selling and psychology?

I am a pretty big fan of them both but if your match has no psychology and selling it can't be good. It's impossible. Even if there is a bunch of no-selling you stil have to have more selling than no-selling otherwise it loses its effect and point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the whole idea of psychology in wrestling is to manipulate a reaction from an audience, so if they got the desired reaction, the match had psychology, assuming it was a reaction to the work in the ring and not just two guys living off their name entirely. But still, I see what you're saying -- perhaps it's a really cheap, unimaginative way to engross the people. I haven't watched this show yet (ran out of time yesterday and hope to see it today) but I'm going to try to go in with an open mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can consider a match successful and effective but not good based on what you value.

 

Sometimes the right match is what you would consider to be an artistically bad match.

 

Sometimes the right music is a very well produced, well targeted Justin Bieber/Nicki Minaj song. Sometimes the right movie is an effectively directed and scripted comedy staring Adam Sandler. They can be successful. They can be effective. You can remark on the craft put into them and their understanding of the audience. None of that means you have to consider them good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the whole idea of psychology in wrestling is to manipulate a reaction from an audience, so if they got the desired reaction, the match had psychology, assuming it was a reaction to the work in the ring and not just two guys living off their name entirely. But still, I see what you're saying -- perhaps it's a really cheap, unimaginative way to engross the people. I haven't watched this show yet (ran out of time yesterday and hope to see it today) but I'm going to try to go in with an open mind.

Well there was psychology (let's do more of the kick-out at 1 and no selling spots everyone loved the first time), I just thought the logic behind it was terrible and it was extremely cheap and uninteresting. And I've seen hundreds of matches worked in the same vein get it right so I'm not going to be impressed just because they did shoot headbutt spots and ignore all the structural and selling issues.

 

You can consider a match successful and effective but not good based on what you value.

 

Sometimes the right match is what you would consider to be an artistically bad match.

 

Sometimes the right music is a very well produced, well targeted Justin Bieber/Nicki Minaj song. Sometimes the right movie is an effectively directed and scripted comedy staring Adam Sandler. They can be successful. They can be effective. You can remark on the craft put into them and their understanding of the audience. None of that means you have to consider them good.

Bingo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

You can consider a match successful and effective but not good based on what you value.

 

Sometimes the right match is what you would consider to be an artistically bad match.

 

Sometimes the right music is a very well produced, well targeted Justin Bieber/Nicki Minaj song. Sometimes the right movie is an effectively directed and scripted comedy staring Adam Sandler. They can be successful. They can be effective. You can remark on the craft put into them and their understanding of the audience. None of that means you have to consider them good.

Bingo.

 

I disagree. Just because something isn't what you like doesn't diminish the quality of it. I don't like country music, but there is good country music. Your tastes don't dictate the value of something. Your tastes only dictate how you receive it. It is fine not to like a match, because it is wrestled in a style you don't like, but that doesn't make it a bad match. Like I said earlier, if you don't like hamburgers it is 100% OK for you not to go to a burger joint. If you find yourself in a good burger joint, you can't(well you can) then shit all over it because you want something else. In my opinion you shouldn't judge the quality of a hamburger joint based on the fact that wish you were at the surf and turf place next door. The hamburger joint is trying to do something completely different and should be judged on whether or not they are good at making burgers. The Ishii/Shibata match was a hell of a match when you understand that they aren't trying to have a traditional wrestling match. Did you honestly expect a different type of match than what you got from those two? As soon as they booked the match, I knew exactly what I was going to get. I knew the match was going to be a contest to see who is tougher, selling everything is against the point. They were going to hit each other as hard as possible, and then no sell it in order to prove they can take more punishment than the other guy. If they sold everything like it hurt they very well could have had a great match, but that would have been a much different match than what the audience would have wanted. This is the type of match the audience expected from these two guys, and honestly I thought it was about as good of a match of this type as possible. Like I said, when you go to a burger joint you should hope they serve good burgers. This is the type of match I was expecting, and it was damn good for what it was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I don't like country music, but there is good country music. Your tastes don't dictate the value of something.

Except they do. Art is subjective. Unless you want to talk about commercial success which I don't care for.

 

The Ishii/Shibata match was a hell of a match when you understand that they aren't trying to have a traditional wrestling match. Did you honestly expect a different type of match than what you got from those two?

I wanted them to brutalize each other and not do something incredibly stupid. Traditional japanese wrestling is almost dead anyway. If they'd structured the match at least half-decently I would've probably loved it.

 

I knew the match was going to be a contest to see who is tougher, selling everything is against the point. They were going to hit each other as hard as possible, and then no sell it in order to prove they can take more punishment than the other guy. If they sold everything like it hurt they very well could have had a great match, but that would have been a much different match than what the audience would have wanted. This is the type of match the audience expected from these two guys, and honestly I thought it was about as good of a match of this type as possible.

They could've had a similar match and gotten the same reaction without all the bullshit they used. Or even if they just used less of it. It worked just fine for their predecessors who worked in front of bigger crowd and got better reactions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you believe that nothing in this world can be good, unless you personally say it is good? The value of everything in the world is based on your opinion and your opinion alone? It is OK not to like something, I get that. I don't like a lot of things while recognizing their quality and I absolutely love things that are pretty fucking stupid(I've seen every Fast and Furious movie in the theater, I wouldn't describe any of them as good). My opinion of those things is irrelevant when it comes to their value, merit, or quality. My opinion of their worth is only relevant to me, but I can see their value outside of my personal opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm with supremebve on this one. I'm also with Matt D on this one, with the caveat that I think you can call something "good" (rather than "effective") and still admit that you don't like it. There's nothing wrong with liking or not liking anything, but I also think it's important to separate arguments of good or bad from arguments of it worked for me vs it didn't work for me. It's a conflict that will always be present and I think it's okay that it's unresolved. I feel like the best wrestling writers capture that struggle more than they lean too much in either direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's fair for someone to say "I think a wrestling match needs to have element A, B, and C to be good. This match didn't have one of these elements, so it wasn't good." Maybe it's a narrow way of looking at things, but when we're discussing something as primal in the DNA as the nature of selling, I think it's a fair view for someone to have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So you believe that nothing in this world can be good, unless you personally say it is good? The value of everything in the world is based on your opinion and your opinion alone?

No need for this pretentious bullshit please and thank you.

 

It is OK not to like something, I get that. I don't like a lot of things while recognizing their quality and I absolutely love things that are pretty fucking stupid(I've seen every Fast and Furious movie in the theater, I wouldn't describe any of them as good). My opinion of those things is irrelevant when it comes to their value, merit, or quality. My opinion of their worth is only relevant to me, but I can see their value outside of my personal opinion.

There are plenty of things in which I have no interest which I won't judge. I like pro wrestling. I like japanese pro wrestling. I've watched and enjoyed a lot of it. You're making an argument that doesn't apply to me. I'm not going to say e.g. a whole genre of music sucks just because I haven't liked the bits I've heard of it. This is a match where I'm perfectly aware of the context of the match and what they're trying to accomplish, maybe even better than you. You're not going to convince me by saying "this isn't for you and you can't say this isn't good" because I've watched every singles match Ishii and Shibata have had since they've a)in Ishii's case been even remotely pushed or even featured or B) in Shibata's case, since he returned to pro wrestling and this is the only one I've criticized so much. The second worst match I could think of for either of them would probably be maybe slightly under average of average and I wouldn't blame it on their performance in either case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) Is “not selling” really a style?
2) Is not selling really what the live New Japan crowd wants? It’s possible - I’m not saying otherwise - but the assertion is being made here and I don’t want to gloss over that. I buy that “Who can take the most violent strikes and punishment?” may be what some of them want, from a slightly sadistic perspective. In praise of sadism: I love BattlARTS/FUTEN, but I wouldn't if the selling sucked.

 

No-selling and poor selling often get swept under the rug in Japanese wrestling conversations, because non-native defenders of the workers in question say “Selling doesn’t matter in this match/moment/context/style/fighting spirit forever.” That rationalization has been used quite often, in discussing many different workers and companies, for anything even approximating an “epic”/big match.

The “good in my opinion/objectively bad” vs. “not my cup of tea/fine then you shouldn’t be critiquing said cup of tea” semantic arguments over selling have been going on in IWC conversations of Japanese wrestling for at least ten years. Probably much longer. I found the case against selling to be suspect when Alan4L and Gordi were making it back then, and I find it suspect now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's fair for someone to say "I think a wrestling match needs to have element A, B, and C to be good. This match didn't have one of these elements, so it wasn't good." Maybe it's a narrow way of looking at things, but when we're discussing something as primal in the DNA as the nature of selling, I think it's a fair view for someone to have.

I don't think that is unfair, but I also believe that is a extremely narrow way to look at things. I think judging things for what they are is more important than judging them for what I want them to be. The Ishii vs. Shibata match is a match that doesn't fit into any criteria I would use to judge most matches, but it wasn't most matches. I personally think selling is the most important aspect of wrestling, but I can also see the value in this match. It wasn't the best match I've ever seen, or even the best match on the card, but I think they tried to do something a little different and totally succeeded. If I judged it like I would judge a Ric Flair vs. Ricky Steamboat match I wouldn't have enjoyed it, but I also wouldn't be acknowledging that they were trying to have that kind of match. I'm not trying to tell anyone they have to like this match, I'm just saying judging it by some set criteria isn't fair to someone trying to do something outside of that criteria.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I think it's fair for someone to say "I think a wrestling match needs to have element A, B, and C to be good. This match didn't have one of these elements, so it wasn't good." Maybe it's a narrow way of looking at things, but when we're discussing something as primal in the DNA as the nature of selling, I think it's a fair view for someone to have.

I don't think that is unfair, but I also believe that is a extremely narrow way to look at things. I think judging things for what they are is more important than judging them for what I want them to be. The Ishii vs. Shibata match is a match that doesn't fit into any criteria I would use to judge most matches, but it wasn't most matches. I personally think selling is the most important aspect of wrestling, but I can also see the value in this match. It wasn't the best match I've ever seen, or even the best match on the card, but I think they tried to do something a little different and totally succeeded. If I judged it like I would judge a Ric Flair vs. Ricky Steamboat match I wouldn't have enjoyed it, but I also wouldn't be acknowledging that they were trying to have that kind of match. I'm not trying to tell anyone they have to like this match, I'm just saying judging it by some set criteria isn't fair to someone trying to do something outside of that criteria.

 

 

I'm still not with you, but I feel like if I go any further down this road, I'm going to have to actually watch the match and I really don't want to, so I think we're going to agree to disagree on this and you can keep fighting it out with our young friend here.

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...