Jump to content
Pro Wrestling Only

Why does puro get so much love? Why does lucha get so dismissed?


Grimmas

Recommended Posts

This is one of the things that I find really regrettable about GWE, and the sorts of lines it created.

 

So some people look at someone like me now and think I'm this fuddy duddy conservative upholder of cannon because I think Flair, Jumbo or Misawa are all-time greats.

 

Whereas on the level of matches I've very much been part of a conversation reassessing standard takes inherited from Meltzer or jdw. I feel like that revisionism has a lot more value than in questioning the greatness of workers.

 

It's back to the matches vs workers debate.

 

But that's the sort of thing I'd hope Lucha fans would be more invested in. Less who is or isn't into lucha and more debate on what are the great matches and why.

 

Like I have Casas vs Mocha from 94 (*I think*) 4.75. I'm much more interested in the conversation about if that really is a near-classic than in the conversation about whether lucha is any good or the topic of this thread.

I like this. The conversation appears to be spinning its wheels here. I am sure this is available somewhere here, but can I ask where you have a few matches that I am pretty sure you have seen and reviewed?

 

Chicana vs MS-1 - 9/23/1983

 

Satanico vs Cochise - 9/14/1984

 

Santo vs Espanto Jr - 8/31/1986

 

Dandy vs Azteca - 6/1/1990

 

Dandy vs Satanico - 12/14/1990

 

Santo vs Casas vs Dandy - 12/6/1996

 

Atlantis vs Vilano III - 3/17/2000

 

Trauma I vs Lupus - 9/4/1016

 

Not to pry for full reviews of them all, but I am curious as to where you have them. Those are all matches I have at *****. They aren't the only lucha matches I have there, but they are matches I think are fantastic and are sure fire classics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 632
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I think ultimately as we were younger fans of mainstream US wrestling, mockery by family, peers etc was an inevitable part of the fandom. It can be enuinely embarrassing to be known as a wrestling fan. As we seek to expand horizons, traditional Japanese wrestling allows fans to validate their fandom of their hobby which is routinely ridiculed, presenting a hypermasculine, "real" form of wrestling without many of the infantile pantomime of wwf or wcw that causes much of the mockery. Lucha won't offer that validation to the fan who finally discovers wrestling that is "pure" and averse from the tropes that make being a wrestling fan such an easy target (for the record, personally I think New Japan and the likes of Tanahashi are genuinely awful but that is neither here nor there)

I think insecurity and wrestling fandom go hand in hand, when one is invested heavily in a hobby and is mocked because all others see is fake fighting with Mounties, Vikings and clowns. Deny if you will but hypermasculinity and insecurity are key. One could also legitimately mention homo-eroticism and oriental fetishism but not sure if we are ready to go down those (legitimate) paths

Isn't lucha more hypermasculine than puro? I can't claim to be an expert, but most of the explanations of lucha I have seen speak in terms of "machismo" and other masculine notions.

 

Yes El-P, as many sought to evolve their fandom in the 90s, how exotic to see this advanced, post-absurd presentation of wrestling from the land that gifted us Nintendo and Sega, Akira and Fist of the North Star.

Japan has just as much absurd pro wrestling as anywhere else. Maybe they just do a better job of segregating it from the serious stuff?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Japanese wrestling is just more excessive than American wrestling in general. The absurd is more absurd just as the serious is more serious.

That's probably a better way of putting it. I think the absurd deathmatch stuff was definitely an appeal to 90s teens. I remember hearing about some of these Onita matches that may or may not have ever happened, e.g. an exploding ring match on an island, and being intrigued.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

On another side note, I also disagree somewhat that Japanese wrestling was easier to come by than lucha. CMLL Friday night shows aired on Galavision for many, many years at a time when the only way to Japanese shows was to tape trade. Certainly presently CMLL is easier to watch than any Japanese promotion with three weekly FREE streaming shows. People can watch whatever they want to watch but I don’t think its an accessibility issue.

 

It should be noted that networks like Galavision/Telemundo/Univision weren't normally accessible in most places in the US that didn't have very large Spanish speaking communities (Florida, California, Texas) until quite recently. My area didn't get any Spanish speaking cable networks until this year, and they're on a different tier than standard cable. It was a lot easier to go online in 1998 and get Japan tapes than Mexico tapes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

My understanding is that there are multiple rooms inside the Manhattan Center. I believe for example the room Raw used to air in is different from the Hammerstein Ballroom which may be the biggest room in the facility. I think for wrestling Hammerstein can hold in he neighborhood of 2500 tightly packed, whereas the room Raw ran in is closer to 1000 though I admit this could be a false memory on my part

 

Pretty much this, but let me clear this up for you guys.

 

"Manhattan Center" is the name of the entire building. Within that building are two rooms that house events, Hammerstein Ballroom, and Grand Ballroom.

 

Hammerstein is the bigger room, and the one used for the early RAW's, the One Night Stand PPVs, and the bigger ROH shows over the years. That can hold close to 2500 like Dylan noted. It has the trademark balcony facades that you are probably familiar with.

 

Grand Ballroom is the smaller room, which I don't believe WWE ever ran (I could be wrong). ROH uses this one when they don't think they can fill Hammerstein. It holds about 1200 maximum. I *think* this is the room TNA ran when they did tapings at Manhattan Center.

 

EDIT - I just scanned through some of the early RAW's, and it looks like for the most part they used Grand Ballroom. The first RAW is Grand Ballroom for sure. I checked One Night Stand, and that was Hammerstein.

 

 

The TNA tapings were definitely in the Grand Ballroom (at least the one I attended).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

This is one of the things that I find really regrettable about GWE, and the sorts of lines it created.

So some people look at someone like me now and think I'm this fuddy duddy conservative upholder of cannon because I think Flair, Jumbo or Misawa are all-time greats.

Whereas on the level of matches I've very much been part of a conversation reassessing standard takes inherited from Meltzer or jdw. I feel like that revisionism has a lot more value than in questioning the greatness of workers.

It's back to the matches vs workers debate.

But that's the sort of thing I'd hope Lucha fans would be more invested in. Less who is or isn't into lucha and more debate on what are the great matches and why.

Like I have Casas vs Mocha from 94 (*I think*) 4.75. I'm much more interested in the conversation about if that really is a near-classic than in the conversation about whether lucha is any good or the topic of this thread.

 

I like this. The conversation appears to be spinning its wheels here. I am sure this is available somewhere here, but can I ask where you have a few matches that I am pretty sure you have seen and reviewed?

 

Chicana vs MS-1 - 9/23/1983

 

Satanico vs Cochise - 9/14/1984

 

Santo vs Espanto Jr - 8/31/1986

 

Dandy vs Azteca - 6/1/1990

 

Dandy vs Satanico - 12/14/1990

 

Santo vs Casas vs Dandy - 12/6/1996

 

Atlantis vs Vilano III - 3/17/2000

 

Trauma I vs Lupus - 9/4/1016

 

Not to pry for full reviews of them all, but I am curious as to where you have them. Those are all matches I have at *****. They aren't the only lucha matches I have there, but they are matches I think are fantastic and are sure fire classics.

I just went and had a look through all my lucha ratings (reviews mainly in 80s catch-up or microscope threads). Picked out notables:

 

MS-1 vs. Sangre Chicana (9/23/83) *****

Atlantis y El Hijo del Santo vs. Fuerza Guerrera y Lobo Rubio (11/25/83) ****4/3

Atlantis vs. El Satanico (1984) ****

Mocho Cota vs. Americo Rocca (1/27/84) ****4/3

Mocho Cota vs. Americo Rocca (2/3/84) ****

Atlantis y Lizmark vs. El Egipcio y El Faraon (2/17/84) ****

El Faraon, Herodes y Mocho Cota vs. Lizmark, Ringo Mendoza y Tony Salazar (2/24/84) ****4/3

El Dandy vs. Angel Azteca (6/1/90) **1/2

El Dandy vs. Satanico (12/14/90) ****

El Dandy vs. Negro Casas (7/3/92) *****

Negro Casas vs. La Fiera (1/10/93) ****

Negro Casas vs. Mocho Cota (9/23/94) ****3/4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that's the sort of thing I'd hope Lucha fans would be more invested in. Less who is or isn't into lucha and more debate on what are the great matches and why.

 

Like I have Casas vs Mocha from 94 (*I think*) 4.75. I'm much more interested in the conversation about if that really is a near-classic than in the conversation about whether lucha is any good or the topic of this thread.

I'm sorry, but who are you trying to kid with this? Everything you've said in this thread goes against the idea that you just want to learn and talk about the matches. If you didn't want a conversation about whether the style is any good then you shouldn't have started the conversation by saying that the style isn't any good.

 

On the other hand, this entire post has the sincerity and timing of Fuerza Guerrera reluctantly entering the ring with his hand outstretched, looking for nothing but a handshake, so kudos on your homage to one of the greats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

This is one of the things that I find really regrettable about GWE, and the sorts of lines it created.

So some people look at someone like me now and think I'm this fuddy duddy conservative upholder of cannon because I think Flair, Jumbo or Misawa are all-time greats.

Whereas on the level of matches I've very much been part of a conversation reassessing standard takes inherited from Meltzer or jdw. I feel like that revisionism has a lot more value than in questioning the greatness of workers.

It's back to the matches vs workers debate.

But that's the sort of thing I'd hope Lucha fans would be more invested in. Less who is or isn't into lucha and more debate on what are the great matches and why.

Like I have Casas vs Mocha from 94 (*I think*) 4.75. I'm much more interested in the conversation about if that really is a near-classic than in the conversation about whether lucha is any good or the topic of this thread.

I like this. The conversation appears to be spinning its wheels here. I am sure this is available somewhere here, but can I ask where you have a few matches that I am pretty sure you have seen and reviewed?

 

Chicana vs MS-1 - 9/23/1983

 

Satanico vs Cochise - 9/14/1984

 

Santo vs Espanto Jr - 8/31/1986

 

Dandy vs Azteca - 6/1/1990

 

Dandy vs Satanico - 12/14/1990

 

Santo vs Casas vs Dandy - 12/6/1996

 

Atlantis vs Vilano III - 3/17/2000

 

Trauma I vs Lupus - 9/4/1016

 

Not to pry for full reviews of them all, but I am curious as to where you have them. Those are all matches I have at *****. They aren't the only lucha matches I have there, but they are matches I think are fantastic and are sure fire classics.

I just went and had a look through all my lucha ratings (reviews mainly in 80s catch-up or microscope threads). Picked out notables:

 

MS-1 vs. Sangre Chicana (9/23/83) *****

Atlantis y El Hijo del Santo vs. Fuerza Guerrera y Lobo Rubio (11/25/83) ****4/3

Atlantis vs. El Satanico (1984) ****

Mocho Cota vs. Americo Rocca (1/27/84) ****4/3

Mocho Cota vs. Americo Rocca (2/3/84) ****

Atlantis y Lizmark vs. El Egipcio y El Faraon (2/17/84) ****

El Faraon, Herodes y Mocho Cota vs. Lizmark, Ringo Mendoza y Tony Salazar (2/24/84) ****4/3

El Dandy vs. Angel Azteca (6/1/90) **1/2

El Dandy vs. Satanico (12/14/90) ****

El Dandy vs. Negro Casas (7/3/92) *****

Negro Casas vs. La Fiera (1/10/93) ****

Negro Casas vs. Mocho Cota (9/23/94) ****3/4

 

 

How can you say a style mostly sucks and give that many four star ratings? It doesn't make any sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There has been a lot of thought provoking discussion in this thread.

 

Except by Stro, who has seemingly decided that the behavior that got him rightfully banned from DVDVR deserved an unnecessary sequel.

 

The behavior that got me banned from DVDVR was saying that the wrestling fans who were chanting one more match at a guy who was retiring because he had had seizures due to brain lesions from all the concussions he had in the ring were disgusting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's an important factor no one has mentioned yet: the predominance of lighter weight classes in Mexico. The traditional American focus on heavyweights is part of the reason why relatively few American stars have worked in Mexico and few luchadores have worked in the US outside of California and Texas. And plenty of fans just don't like smaller wrestlers in general, whether they be New Japan juniors, WCW cruiserweights, or luchadores.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There has been a lot of thought provoking discussion in this thread.

 

Except by Stro, who has seemingly decided that the behavior that got him rightfully banned from DVDVR deserved an unnecessary sequel.

 

To be fair, DVDVR turned into madhouse where a lot of members were constantly talking about banning each other . It was mob mentality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's an important factor no one has mentioned yet: the predominance of lighter weight classes in Mexico. The traditional American focus on heavyweights is part of the reason why relatively few American stars have worked in Mexico and few luchadores have worked in the US outside of California and Texas. And plenty of fans just don't like smaller wrestlers in general, whether they be New Japan juniors, WCW cruiserweights, or luchadores.

Didn't a lot of the people who got into puro in the 90s get introduced via the J-Cup and other juniors events? I know that was my own experience, and El-P made a similar assertion earlier in the thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It always seemed like people were more into the power juniors like Benoit and Liger than the guys who worked a more high-flying style like Ultimo Dragon, Rey, Juventud and Psicosis or Sasuke, Taka and the Michinoku Pro crew, although they definitely all had their supporters. So I do think there's something to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rey and Ultimo were more over than Liger and Benoit in WCW. Ultimo Dragon was crazy over in 1997-1998 especially and WCW pushed him as hard as anyone in the undercard. If he lost the TV or Cruiserweight title, he was guaranteed to be winning the other one a week or two later. He always had a title or an angle. He was treated as something almost outside and above the cruiserweight division for most of his time there. Benoit always got the "we respect this guy" pops and fans would get very engaged in his matches, but Ultimo got a much different reaction for most of his run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

This is one of the things that I find really regrettable about GWE, and the sorts of lines it created.

So some people look at someone like me now and think I'm this fuddy duddy conservative upholder of cannon because I think Flair, Jumbo or Misawa are all-time greats.

Whereas on the level of matches I've very much been part of a conversation reassessing standard takes inherited from Meltzer or jdw. I feel like that revisionism has a lot more value than in questioning the greatness of workers.

It's back to the matches vs workers debate.

But that's the sort of thing I'd hope Lucha fans would be more invested in. Less who is or isn't into lucha and more debate on what are the great matches and why.

Like I have Casas vs Mocha from 94 (*I think*) 4.75. I'm much more interested in the conversation about if that really is a near-classic than in the conversation about whether lucha is any good or the topic of this thread.

 

I like this. The conversation appears to be spinning its wheels here. I am sure this is available somewhere here, but can I ask where you have a few matches that I am pretty sure you have seen and reviewed?

 

Chicana vs MS-1 - 9/23/1983

 

Satanico vs Cochise - 9/14/1984

 

Santo vs Espanto Jr - 8/31/1986

 

Dandy vs Azteca - 6/1/1990

 

Dandy vs Satanico - 12/14/1990

 

Santo vs Casas vs Dandy - 12/6/1996

 

Atlantis vs Vilano III - 3/17/2000

 

Trauma I vs Lupus - 9/4/1016

 

Not to pry for full reviews of them all, but I am curious as to where you have them. Those are all matches I have at *****. They aren't the only lucha matches I have there, but they are matches I think are fantastic and are sure fire classics.

I just went and had a look through all my lucha ratings (reviews mainly in 80s catch-up or microscope threads). Picked out notables:

MS-1 vs. Sangre Chicana (9/23/83) *****

Atlantis y El Hijo del Santo vs. Fuerza Guerrera y Lobo Rubio (11/25/83) ****4/3

Atlantis vs. El Satanico (1984) ****

Mocho Cota vs. Americo Rocca (1/27/84) ****4/3

Mocho Cota vs. Americo Rocca (2/3/84) ****

Atlantis y Lizmark vs. El Egipcio y El Faraon (2/17/84) ****

El Faraon, Herodes y Mocho Cota vs. Lizmark, Ringo Mendoza y Tony Salazar (2/24/84) ****4/3

El Dandy vs. Angel Azteca (6/1/90) **1/2

El Dandy vs. Satanico (12/14/90) ****

El Dandy vs. Negro Casas (7/3/92) *****

Negro Casas vs. La Fiera (1/10/93) ****

Negro Casas vs. Mocho Cota (9/23/94) ****3/4

How can you say a style mostly sucks and give that many four star ratings? It doesn't make any sense.

I can tell you Backlund era WWF mostly sucks too but could also provide a list of four+ star matches from the stuff I've seen.

 

Why doesn't 70s/early 80s WWF get more attention? It's the same answer.

 

A style can't be judged only by its best stuff, you have to look at the average and not very good stuff too. Average JCP or average AJPW feel better to me than average AWA, average WWF, or average lucha.

 

I lack the knowledge to be able to differentiate between CMLL and AAA. I can distinguish between technical matches (title), brawls (hair / mask), trios, and tags.

 

I don't like the mat-work style, dive trains, or the 2/3 fall structure in the brawls, all these are reasons why I watch Lucha less than other styles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

This is one of the things that I find really regrettable about GWE, and the sorts of lines it created.

So some people look at someone like me now and think I'm this fuddy duddy conservative upholder of cannon because I think Flair, Jumbo or Misawa are all-time greats.

Whereas on the level of matches I've very much been part of a conversation reassessing standard takes inherited from Meltzer or jdw. I feel like that revisionism has a lot more value than in questioning the greatness of workers.

It's back to the matches vs workers debate.

But that's the sort of thing I'd hope Lucha fans would be more invested in. Less who is or isn't into lucha and more debate on what are the great matches and why.

Like I have Casas vs Mocha from 94 (*I think*) 4.75. I'm much more interested in the conversation about if that really is a near-classic than in the conversation about whether lucha is any good or the topic of this thread.

I like this. The conversation appears to be spinning its wheels here. I am sure this is available somewhere here, but can I ask where you have a few matches that I am pretty sure you have seen and reviewed?

 

Chicana vs MS-1 - 9/23/1983

 

Satanico vs Cochise - 9/14/1984

 

Santo vs Espanto Jr - 8/31/1986

 

Dandy vs Azteca - 6/1/1990

 

Dandy vs Satanico - 12/14/1990

 

Santo vs Casas vs Dandy - 12/6/1996

 

Atlantis vs Vilano III - 3/17/2000

 

Trauma I vs Lupus - 9/4/1016

 

Not to pry for full reviews of them all, but I am curious as to where you have them. Those are all matches I have at *****. They aren't the only lucha matches I have there, but they are matches I think are fantastic and are sure fire classics.

I just went and had a look through all my lucha ratings (reviews mainly in 80s catch-up or microscope threads). Picked out notables:

MS-1 vs. Sangre Chicana (9/23/83) *****

Atlantis y El Hijo del Santo vs. Fuerza Guerrera y Lobo Rubio (11/25/83) ****4/3

Atlantis vs. El Satanico (1984) ****

Mocho Cota vs. Americo Rocca (1/27/84) ****4/3

Mocho Cota vs. Americo Rocca (2/3/84) ****

Atlantis y Lizmark vs. El Egipcio y El Faraon (2/17/84) ****

El Faraon, Herodes y Mocho Cota vs. Lizmark, Ringo Mendoza y Tony Salazar (2/24/84) ****4/3

El Dandy vs. Angel Azteca (6/1/90) **1/2

El Dandy vs. Satanico (12/14/90) ****

El Dandy vs. Negro Casas (7/3/92) *****

Negro Casas vs. La Fiera (1/10/93) ****

Negro Casas vs. Mocho Cota (9/23/94) ****3/4

How can you say a style mostly sucks and give that many four star ratings? It doesn't make any sense.

I can tell you Backlund era WWF mostly sucks too but could also provide a list of four+ star matches from the stuff I've seen.

 

Why doesn't 70s/early 80s WWF get more attention? It's the same answer.

 

A style can't be judged only by its best stuff, you have to look at the average and not very good stuff too. Average JCP or average AJPW feel better to me than average AWA, average WWF, or average lucha.

 

I lack the knowledge to be able to differentiate between CMLL and AAA. I can distinguish between technical matches (title), brawls (hair / mask), trios, and tags.

 

I don't like the mat-work style, dive trains, or the 2/3 fall structure in the brawls, all these are reasons why I watch Lucha less than other styles.

 

 

WWWF did get some attention around the time that the DVDVR crew released their first WWF set and jdw began working on his 100 nights of WWF project. Longtime posters will remember the Backlund revival that originated as a result of ToA challenging the accepted wisdom on Backlund and how that led to a Backlund boom of sorts. Then came the call for a revised DVDVR set, the Smarkschoice best of the WWF poll, and so forth. I don't think anyone cared whether that era sucked or not. They just wanted to see the great matches.

 

As far as I'm aware, you've only written about the lucha you've seen on the DVDVR set or the yearbooks. Perhaps a few more matches you sought out on YouTube. All of those matches, whether they were chosen for the DVDVR sets or the yearbooks, were seen to be "above average" by the people who suggested them. That makes me wonder when exactly you've seen the "average lucha match." No doubt about it, most lucha is distinctly average and some of it down right bad, but how would you know if you're basing your opinion on selected trios matches that are actually better than the standard fare? Average JCP and average AJPW may be better than the average match from other styles, but who cares? Are there people who set out to watch as many average matches as they can? The fact that you agree that the best of the 80s matches are fairly good should be an end to any discussion about whether lucha sucks. You say you don't like title matches but you rated some of them highly. You say you don't like the three fall structure in brawls, but you agree that most of the top ranked brawls are good. I have no idea why you don't think there could be other lucha matches out there that are in line with the matches you enjoyed. How many four star matches does a star need to have before it stops sucking?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

A style can't be judged only by its best stuff, you have to look at the average and not very good stuff too. Average JCP or average AJPW feel better to me than average AWA, average WWF, or average lucha.

 

I agree here, but I think a few matches stand out as potential places where the conversation could be much more substantive. Even though I think there are broader systemic things at play I do think that individual reception of matches and divergences could shed light on why even some of the high end stuff might not catch with broader audiences. Maybe we are still too new in the modern way of watching and consuming wrestling and/or perhaps we (as the type of fan that might stumble in here) are to niche-y in our consumption habits, but I think with these booms in footage availability and the ease of access, that high end stuff is going to be the gateway for a lot of people. I know that isn't a lot of people's preferred way of watching, but its a reality.

 

That is a whole other conversation, but I'll just say two quick things about why I think this matters: 1) You can't judge a genre by its high end matches, but with the ever expanding ocean of footage and the omnipresence of match reviews and lists on the interwebs it only seems logical that some will start with high end stuff. Lets assume for conversation sake that this is the case, might a relevant way to get at the more recent questions about how do we promote or how does lucha get better footing in the future be to look at the hyped lucha matches and see why they are or are not capturing new fans and encouraging them to dig deeper. 2) We of course harp on people like Meltzer because their influence is far reaching, but I think people are underplaying their own modest reach and how wrestling fandom is still evolving. Even in the last 3-4 years you can see tangible changes in sites like CSS that has a section for fan posts. Membership there went through the rough during WM 30 season (i believe) and more people are now being exposed to pieces highlighting wrestlers outside the WWE cannon. Participation here in GWE was much higher than people expected. The point being, more than ever there are spaces for people to establish a trendsetting voice. The nodes of influence are dispersing quicker than ever so when stuff is hyped, it resonates. Sure it is modest right now, but its always expanding. For example, the vast majority of the high end lucha I have watched (and LOVE) is because of the 80s set and this board, primarily Will, Grimmas, and OJ among many others. I had honestly never really had much desire to give lucha another try until a yearish or so ago when I was listening to people talk about greatest matches ever, gwe, making cases and so on.

 

So the question is how does the hyped stuff hold up on first view? Why does (or doesn't it) resonate with people? Does it inspire people to seek out more? Does it help people get into lucha or deter them or set up false hopes. Do top end matches help or hurt Lucha's chances of catching on in the future as (or "if") nodes of influence continue to dissipate a bit?

 

I am interested in the 2/3 isn't great for brawls statement. I get it in the abstract and have seen you say when talking about Park, but could you maybe comment on further?

 

I know you have reviewed Dandy vs Azteca and discussed it elsewhere. That is perhaps the biggest rift between how I see some of those matches and how you do. I am more interested in Dandy vs Satanico. Do you have a posted review of that match and if so, where might it be? I am curious as to why that one didn't rank as high for you. Is the 2/3 falls issue a thing here?

 

Have you gotten to Sangre Chicana vs El Satanico 5/26/89 yet? If so, how does that one grab you and is the 2/3 falls an issue there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree that you can't judge a style by its high end matches. The majority of all wrestling is average at best, so why would you judge styles on what was the least average? High end matches represent the best a style can be. When I think of lucha I think of the high end matches. I don't think of the average stuff. Maybe I'm out of touch, but I always thought us fans were on the look out for great matches. I can't imagine waking up one day and thinking, "boy I sure feel like watching an average All Japan match," or watching said match and thinking "man, that was good. Another average All Japan match."

 

It's not like we're talking about matches that are outliers and make a worker seem like they were great when really they weren't. We're talking about the best matches from an entire style and what the style is fully capable of. The problem here is that people can't stop comparing lucha to what they think is good/great. They're imposing a standard on it instead of appreciating when it's done well. Not only that but there hasn't been any real consensus about what lucha is from the people who say it's not for them. It's not clear whether they mean the kind of comedy tropes that were adopted by the Michinoku pro guys ,the Memphis style brawling, the trios matches, the dive trains, or the tricked out matwork. It seems people are talking past each other when it comes to what they actual mean by "lucha." If we could all agree what lucha is considered particularly bad then that would be a starting point for guiding folks toward lucha that is considerably better and perhaps closer to their tastes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually great point, lucha is incredibly diverse. There is brawling, spotfests, techinical matches, high end drama, etc... There is lucha for every type of wrestling fan.

 

That is why I found it so bizarre when Parv said Negro Casas wasn't a luchador. What the fuck is lucha libre then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Here is some of the Black Terry stuff I tried, I'm hardly an expert, but these would be mat based "maestro" style bouts no?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kq_R-SGTGGE

I watched 30 seconds in the middle of this match and gave up. Unbelievably terrible. Matches worked slower than a training demonstration? I'll pass.

 

 

I don't think anybody should watch maestro matches for the execution. You watch maestro matches because it's long time pros working the same sort of style you might have seen in Monterrey in 1992. You shouldn't expect their timing to be as good as it was 25 years ago. It's the thought behind what they're doing that counts. But if you're not enamored with the old style of lucha libre, and you're not dissatisfied with the modern style, then there's no real reason to watch what old men are doing on the independent circuit. It was kind of a poor sampling from W2BTD, though. Lucero is a fabulous worker and Terry is a legend, but not even Terry fans were pimping that much so strongly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, I've read every post up to this point, and I'm starting to formulate a potential explanation for why lucha libre isn't as beloved as puro is. Before I talk further, I'm turning to those who know more about the style and history of lucha than I do when I ask this:

 

How "protected" was the kayfabe of lucha? American wrestling was presented as legit for most of its existence, ditto puro, but was convincing fans that they were witnessing a real fight as big a cornerstone for lucha as it was for the other styles that receive more praise?

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...