Importance of movesets / escalation of violence

[JerryvonKramer]

I didn't want to derail WK11 thread, so here is my reply to OJ here:

 

What I want to know is how you can complain so much about modern wrestling and yet hand out five star ratings to upper mid-card bouts.

It's because my beef has always been more to do with presentational elements (promos, commentary, angles, character work, etc.) than it is to do with in-ring quality. I am not an ideologue though, I'll watch good wrestling from any time or any place.

 

Although I do think on the whole an above average worker in the 80s (e.g. Terry Taylor, Dick Slater) had better fundamentals than an above average wrestler now (e.g. Kevin Owens). But this ultimately comes down to style. As a self-styled "goldilocks fan", I ideally want psychology AND athleticism / cool moves in my wrestling. So my sweet spots are almost all guys who can deliver both. The wrestling now seems geared more towards athleticism, and psychology can go missing. I think it's because of the culture of hitting lots of fancy bombs rather than layering the bombs. There is no obvious hierarchy a lot of the time.

 

Moves of Kevin Owens as listed on Wikipedia:

 

 

Finishing moves

 

As Kevin Owens

Pop-up powerbomb[6]

Argentine neckbreaker 2016; used rarely

Powerbomb onto the ring apron, mainly used to cause storyline injuries [97][110][158]

As Kevin Steen

Crossface[159] 2010

Deep Sea Diverticulitis[160] (PWG) / F-Cinq[161] (ROH) (Spin-out fireman's carry facebuster)[162][163][164] 20122014

Package piledriver,[5][165] sometimes from the top rope[50]

Sharpshooter[7]

Steenalizer (Package fallaway powerbomb,[5][165] sometimes into the turnbuckles)[166]

 

Signature Moves

 

Bullfrog Splash[167] (Frog splash)[168][169][170]

Cannonball[165]

Double knee facebreaker[110][171]

Enzuigiri[5]

Go Home Driver (ROH/PWG)[5] Scoop lift spun out into an over the shoulder back-to-belly piledriver (WWE)[5][165]

High-angle senton bomb[5][165]

Moonsault,[5][165] sometimes while performing a double jump[172]

Multiple suplex variations

German[110]

Sidewinder Suplex (Swinging leg hook belly-to-back)[165][173]

Sleeper[174][175]

Swinging fisherman from the top rope usually used as a superplex counter[110][176][177]

Package lift spun into a sidewalk slam[109][110][178] 2015present

Running senton[179][unreliable source]

Sitout scoop slam piledriver[180]

Somersault leg drop[5][165]

Steen Breaker (ROH/PWG)[165] Pumphandle neckbreaker (WWE)[181][182]

Spike DDT

Suicide somersault senton[97][177][183]

Superkick[5][165]

 

Moves of Dory Funk Jr:

 

Finishing moves

 

Cloverleaf Innovated[2][15]

Piledriver

Spinning toe hold

 

Signature moves

 

Abdominal stretch[16]

Atomic drop[16]

Belly to back suplex[16]

Delayed double underhook suplex[16]

European uppercut[16]

Russian legsweep

Vertical suplex[16]

* I'd probably add in his stump piledriver too, as well as the running forearm.

 

I've watched a good few matches from both guys.

 

Kevin Owens struggles to escalate violence in his matches because all his moves are called things like "Swinging fisherman from the top rope"

 

Dory, who has a lovely pared down moveset that still has some depth can escalate violence by moving through his high spots towards the biggest bomb in his arsenal which is usually that "Delayed double underhook suplex".

 

We can chalk it up to style preference, but for me economy is important.

 

I want enough moves so that there is clear progression, but not so few that guys are only throwing punches. Goldilocks like I said.

 

All of these things are still possible in 2017.

[KawadaSmile]

Part of this escalation is what made me love Goto/Shibata. The hate was there from the beggining, but as the match went on and their bodies were more beaten up, the feeling of violence and even dread increased as well.

 

Shibata selling the whiplash of normal clotheslines like he was getting hit with a baseball bat was a fucking incredible visual, and the finishing stretch was downright brutal. They didn't rely too much on big moves, despite Goto having some crazy looking bombs, and that only added to the match. It seemed that they indeed wanted to kill each other, and those two consecutive final cuts were pretty much a death sentence.

 

 

Another match that is an incredible example of escalation is Terry Funk vs Bob Orton Jr. It starts as a quite friendly match, with both guys respecting each other, but then it doesn't take long until slaps to the face and headbutts are thrown. By the end of things, a quite well worked, technical match turns into a very heated brawl, and it's made in such a fashion that it never stops getting your attention. They did so without resorting to many different moves, opting instead for overall body language. It was dope.

[ohtani's jacket]

This is all fine and good, but the more you keep dropping five stars on modern matches, the more it seems the qualities you are looking for in wrestling are there in abundance if you keep plugging away. if you watched the amount of modern wrestling that Chad does, or Soup, or Dylan, perhaps you would find even more matches that defy the Kevin Owens mould and appeal to your sensibilities. That won't solve the presentation issue but it might kill the idea that modern wrestling is more than just athleticism over psychology (an argument you could have st any point of wrestling history post catch-as-catch-can, IMO.)

[JerryvonKramer]

I don't think I've ever said that modern wrestling is ALL athleticism over psychology, just that it has been a trend, and one that is exacerbated by overly fancy movesets. This has been something increasingly prevalent in indie epic ROH main event style, which has now been fused with the worst excesses of WWE main event style, and it seems like NJPW main event style has picked up elements of both too.

 

Seems to me that 90% of workers could be improved if they replaced two of their fancy suplexes with a basic stomp and a basic bodyslam. Feels like the lower order of moves have been all but eradicated.

 

Does anyone do like a basic atomic drop any more? It's funny really, the atomic drop was Backlund's finisher at one point. Does anyone even do that move any more?

 

People say things like "things evolve", but that's not really evolution for good in my view. It's almost like trying to evolve language by eliminating conjunctions. Conjunctions are words like "and" and "but", and it's like a style has developed in which the workers have no conjunctions.

 

Imagine writing to write sentences without the words "and", "but", "so", "because" etc. That's Kevin Owens, Kenny Omega and other such workers.

[concrete1992]

I understand the point but looking at Kevin Owens' Wikipedia page probably isn't where the discussion should start.

[supremebve]

I don't think I've ever said that modern wrestling is ALL athleticism over psychology, just that it has been a trend, and one that is exacerbated by overly fancy movesets. This has been something increasingly prevalent in indie epic ROH main event style, which has now been fused with the worst excesses of WWE main event style, and it seems like NJPW main event style has picked up elements of both too.

 

Seems to me that 90% of workers could be improved if they replaced two of their fancy suplexes with a basic stomp and a basic bodyslam. Feels like the lower order of moves have been all but eradicated.

 

Does anyone do like a basic atomic drop any more? It's funny really, the atomic drop was Backlund's finisher at one point. Does anyone even do that move any more?

 

People say things like "things evolve", but that's not really evolution for good in my view. It's almost like trying to evolve language by eliminating conjunctions. Conjunctions are words like "and" and "but", and it's like a style has developed in which the workers have no conjunctions.

 

Imagine writing to write sentences without the words "and", "but", "so", "because" etc. That's Kevin Owens, Kenny Omega and other such workers.

I agree with a whole lot of this. I think the biggest problem with modern wrestling is that almost every match is just everyone fitting in signature spots. I don't think too many fancy spots is the problem. The fact that they put every single fancy spot into every single match that creates the problem. It makes those fancy spots the only spots that mean anything, while simultaneously making them less meaningful. If Kevin Owens were to only use that top rope fisherman suplex at Wrestlemania and Summerslam it would mean so much more. At the same time, how do you buy into a 2-count on a body slam or a clothesline when you know he hasn't hit his top rope fisherman suplex yet? The style is great for putting on 3+ star matches every single week on television, but it is terrible for making anything meaningful, and/or memorable.

[pol]

I take your overall point, but when was the last time anyone bought a near-fall on a clothesline or body slam?

[WingedEagle]

I take your overall point, but when was the last time anyone bought a near-fall on a clothesline or body slam?

 

They certainly don't have to be used for near falls, but rather building towards bigger, more devastating moves that should produce near falls or finishes. All about the escalation.

[supremebve]

 

I take your overall point, but when was the last time anyone bought a near-fall on a clothesline or body slam?

 

They certainly don't have to be used for near falls, but rather building towards bigger, more devastating moves that should produce near falls or finishes. All about the escalation.

 

That is kind of what I was saying, but not quite exactly. My point is that any move should be able to be a nearfall based on the story of a match. The problem is that matches aren't worked in a way that makes moves that aren't signature spots valuable. A worker should be able to target his opponent's back so that a simple body slam could be a nearfall, but since people kick out of Michinoku Drivers and Blue Thunder Bombs on a regular basis, no one takes a simple move like a body slam seriously. The problem isn't that a body slam isn't effective, the problem is that a Michinoku Driver is routinely ineffective. My point isn't that we should think a body slam is worthy of a 2-count, my point is that almost every single move is devalued based on the fact that no one buys into anything that isn't one of a workers two or three biggest spots. I don't think those moves are negative on their own, but we see them so often that we know nothing else matters but those spots. Does anyone buy into the finish of a John Cena match before we see an attempt at an AA? When was the last time Randy Orton worked a match without hitting that second rope DDT? Has Sami Zayn ever finished someone with his awesome looking Blue Thunder Bomb? What could any of those dudes possibly do before hitting one of those moves to make you feel like the match was in jeopardy? Randy Orton's entire gimmick is based on being able to finish his opponent with one RKO out of nowhere, but that never happens. It is always after hitting that DDT, The Garvin Stomp, that snap power slam and sometimes after attempting a punt. My point is that all of those moves should be like the punt. We know all of those moves are in his arsenal, but the fact that everyone shoots every bullet in their gun in every match devalues those moves and every other move in between.

[WingedEagle]

Totally agree. You've got both:

 

1) the bodyslam that's used as a transition spot as part of an overall build during the body of the match that clearly works the body without being trivialized, as well as

2) the bodyslam that follows a sustained attack on the back, which after a series of kicks, stomps, strikes, backbreakers can be used for an effective near fall.

 

Its all about conditioning an audience to where moves beyond those that make up a finishing arsenal matter, and is just as much as using those big spots sparingly as it is mixing in simpler offense. Both are necessary and effective to healthy, varying matches.

[supremebve]

Totally agree. You've got both:

 

1) the bodyslam that's used as a transition spot as part of an overall build during the body of the match that clearly works the body without being trivialized, as well as

2) the bodyslam that follows a sustained attack on the back, which after a series of kicks, stomps, strikes, backbreakers can be used for an effective near fall.

 

Its all about conditioning an audience to where moves beyond those that make up a finishing arsenal matter, and is just as much as using those big spots sparingly as it is mixing in simpler offense. Both are necessary and effective to healthy, varying matches.

Another thing that needs to happen is that some of those signature spots need to be used as finishers from time to time. Every once in a while that rope DDT, Blue Thunder Bomb, top rope fishermans suples, etc., need to finish a TV match. On 205 Live, Neville has been finishing matches with a top rope superplex instead of the Red Arrow, and it is going to mean a lot once someone kicks out of it. It is a move that we've been seeing as a transitional spot for over 20 years, but at least on that show it is a credible finisher. He's won two straight matches with it, including a win over the former cruiserweight champion. I don't know when it's going to pay off, but the investment in the superplex as a finisher is going to matter to the limited 205 Live audience once it does.

[Coffey]

Here's what I don't get and something that I was talking with a buddy about today: when we were kids, growing up in the 80's & the early 90's, the top guys at the time, at least in WWF which was the TV we got locally, were wrestlers like Hulk Hogan and The Ultimate Warrior.

 

When we were teenagers, in the late 90's and even through the early 2000's, the top guys were wrestlers like Stone Cold Steve Austin and The Rock.

 

If you were a kid that grew up in that era, either era, and you fell in love with pro-wrestling to the degree that you wanted to become a pro-wrestler yourself, why are so many modern wrestlers marks for highspots?

 

I just saw an animated .gif on Twitter of a dude at an Indy show doing a Top Rope Moonsault Styles Clash in front of about maybe two-hundred people. I just don't get it. It's so stupid to me. You're willing to risk your health and your opponents health on something that risky for basically no money in front of no one?

 

Hogan, Warrior, Austin & Rock all made bank. And it appears as if the majority of wrestlers on the Indies today grew up as bigger fans of wrestlers like the Luchadores on WCW Monday Nitro (whom were all basically job guys to the stars), some ECW wrestlers (that were a lot of garbage) or WWF guys like Jeff Hardy.

 

Nowadays, someone like Braun Strowman gets a bad rap because he's a big hoss whereas someone like Kenny Omega gets called the greatest wrestler alive because he's doing Moonsaults into the crowd and top rope Dragon Suplexes. I'm starting to feel like Kevin Nash over here as I don't fucking get it.

 

We need more wrestlers like The Revival and less wrestlers cosplaying as highspot Shawn Michaels.

[Fando]

If you were a kid that grew up in that era, either era, and you fell in love with pro-wrestling to the degree that you wanted to become a pro-wrestler yourself, why are so many modern wrestlers marks for highspots?

 

 

Because they could never look like Hogan, Warrior, Austin, Rock

[JerryvonKramer]

What I really couldn't get behind in that recent match with Kenny Omega is that the guy literally has no *normal* moves, like not one.

 

Imagine it was a video game.

 

You control Ted DiBiase, and the A button makes him do a punch and the B button makes him do a kick. Hold down the A button and it'll make him do an elbow and collar tie up and from there he can do a piledriver, a suplex, or a backbreaker. Throw the guy to the ropes and as he runs back you can do a backdrop or a scoop powerslam. And so on and so forth.

 

With Omega, it's like the A button would make him do a senton with a quarter twist and the B button would make him do a somersault. From the grapple position he can do a perfectplex, a Tombstone or a tornado DDT!

 

He has NO.NORMAL.MOVES.

[supremebve]

What I really couldn't get behind in that recent match with Kenny Omega is that the guy literally has no *normal* moves, like not one.

 

Imagine it was a video game.

 

You control Ted DiBiase, and the A button makes him do a punch and the B button makes him do a kick. Hold down the A button and it'll make him do an elbow and collar tie up and from there he can do a piledriver, a suplex, or a backbreaker. Throw the guy to the ropes and as he runs back you can do a backdrop or a scoop powerslam. And so on and so forth.

 

With Omega, it's like the A button would make him do a senton with a quarter twist and the B button would make him do a somersault. From the grapple position he can do a perfectplex, a Tombstone or a tornado DDT!

 

He has NO.NORMAL.MOVES.

Not only that, it became very clear to me that the only two moves that could possibly finish the match were The Rainmaker or the One WInged Angel. All of the other stuff they did, which ranged from kind of cool, to absolutely absurd, was just decoration. I liked the match, but I kind of felt like it should be the last match I watch before giving up wrestling for good. If I ask myself, "where does wrestling go from here?" I honestly don't know what the answer would be. Trying to outdo that match is like building a bigger atomic bomb. Sure you could build a bigger bomb, but do you really need a bigger bomb?

[fishbaugh]

I work with someone whose partner did some training and indy wrestling in Southern California in the mid-2000s. When she found out I was a fan, we started chatting and she told me her partner said the secret to a good match was "lots of nearfalls".

 

This guy never did anything or went anywhere, but that way of thinking does seem to be widespread with those that did. Not that nearfalls can't add drama and excitement and unpredictability to a match, but the idea that their very existence will increase the "quality" of the match is a major disconnect for me.

 

If you need 3 nearfalls to make a good match today, you'll need 4 tomorrow and 5 next year -- where does it stop?

[Coffey]

Why can a good near fall not exist from a Powerslam, Russian Leg Sweep, Spinebuster, Neckbreaker or Backbreaker? Why does it always have to be some ridiculous, outlandish spot to get the fans to buy into the near fall? The crowds need reconditioned.

 

I was watching an old WCW Monday Nitro on the WWE Network yesterday and over the course of the show, several matches ended and all of the finishes were believable. Wallstreet beat Mike Enos with a Samoan Drop after Ted DiBiase distracted Enos. Chris Jericho defeated Bobby Eaton after Eaton missed the Alabama Jam, then Jericho hit a Superkick followed up by a Missile Dropkick. These aren't generic moves and the finishes were believable.

 

The crowds nowadays have just continually been reconditioned over and over again throughout the years. We had Mick Foley being thrown off of Hell in a Cell and then the match continuing. Then he gets Chokeslammed through the Cell and that doesn't end the match either. We had a lot of the craziness that was ECW. Nowadays we have a whole bunch of Money in the Bank ladder matches that try to keep one-upping the last insane highspot. Shane McMahon, not that long ago, just jumped off of a Cell again. So of course in non-gimmick matches the wrestlers feel like they have to do a ton of craziness to get the crowd to notice. There is at no time in pro-wrestling history that a freakin' Top Rope Dragonplex should be a 2-count. That's insane. But here we are.

 

The first time I ever saw a Moonsault was by the Great Muta in the late 80's. It blew me away. I had never seen anything like that. It was incredible. Then the years go by and you see Shawn Michaels do a Moonsault, and Hugh Morrus on Nitro and 60-year-old Terry Funk in ECW, and awful-ass Blue Meanie... and then when you see a Moonsault in 2017, suddenly you don't really care anymore. Look at the DDT. When you have Torrie Wilson doing a DDT in pillow fight matches, it's hard to remember the days of when Jake Roberts was killing people with it.

 

No one seems to care about protecting moves anymore. Everyone wants to keep trying to up the ante. It's frustrating. Wrestling is becoming about the moves for the "ooh" and "awe!" from the crowd instead of about the story or psychology. A bunch of people wrestling like Kurt Angle where they think the hell with selling, I gotta get my next spot in.

[El-P]

It's less an issue of nearfalls and what moves are used to produce them. It's an issue of false finishes. Nowadays, you usually have a thousand nearfalls but zero false finish. Back during AJPW's glory days, you actually had false finishes. Raven, of all people, used to produce legit false finishes with his dog & poney show. The indierrific styles just as the WWE self-consicous Mania epic style have zero false finish, it's all about nearfalls for the sake of it, often with the thought that kicking out of a finisher means it's shocking and exciting, when in fact it's not unless it's being bought as the actual finish. Which doesn't happen since everyone kicks out of finishers all the time, and only one finisher can end the match anyway. (well of course you can argue people are going crazy for it, but I'm speaking for myself of course)

 

The infamous Taker loss was the perfect illustration. No one bought the finish because people actually thought it was gonna be an usual near-fall via finisher kick-out. It's like the whole thought-process had been reversed. If people bought it as a true potential finisher and it ended up being the finish, then it would have been awesome because "Shit, Taker is done ! SHIT HE IS DONE !!!" But it flopped because people were like "Wait, why wasn't this a near-fall ? Did Taker actually lost ?"

 

Build to one false-finish, and then you get a fucking moment where you buy what's happening. The move itself doesn't matter, it can even be cheap spot or a run-in, it's what it leads to that matters. It's the build to the idea that it is it. The use of near-falls for the sake of near-falls, with kicking out of finishers galore, is bad because they don't actually produce any false finish. Because the idea is that just the number of near-falls is what makes a match great. Which is wrong, of course.

[PeteF3]

Goldberg vs. Lesnar might have been a healthier and more far-reaching match than we all thought at the time.

[Superstar Sleeze]

The problem is eventually some nearfalls are false finishes and they go one or two too far and the heat is in the false finish not the finish.

[pol]

I'm not sure it really matters what moves are 'big enough' to win a fall, so long as there is still a hierarchy. Complaining about specific moves not being viable finishes anymore always comes off more to me as clamouring for the wrestling of one's youth than anything else. What constitutes a viable finish has been escalating for at least 70 years, it's hardly a recent thing.

[supremebve]

I'm not sure it really matters what moves are 'big enough' to win a fall, so long as there is still a hierarchy. Complaining about specific moves not being viable finishes anymore always comes off more to me as clamouring for the wrestling of one's youth than anything else. What constitutes a viable finish has been escalating for at least 70 years, it's hardly a recent thing.

The issue isn't being stuck in the past as much as so many of the moves that are being used as transitions feel much more impactful than the finishers they are being replaced with. A regular old DDT looks much more vicious than the 300 different Complete Shot variations we see every week. Okada vs. Omega had a top rope dragon suplex, but ended with a short arm clothesline. The issue is that the hierarchy is completely out of whack when the moves that get the near falls are much more violent than the ones that get the pinfalls.

[pol]

Totally agreed on that point.

[G. Badger]

Okada seems to be an odd case of having a 2010s pro wrestling physique with a 80s move set. Dropkick, top rope elbow drop, piledriver, short arm clothesline...now if everyone else in NJ would do the same with their moves...

 

Guys for the last 15 years in the US have been more interested in having more moves rather than developing characters. People told them kickouts equal good matches so, they use turnbuckle bombs like vertical suplexes etc...gets them over in the short term but, ups the ante in the long term for "the business" especially when no one in authority says, "cut that shit out." The more you do crazy shit, the less people care. It becomes routine.

 

From what I hear WWE doesn't even say that to guys and gals. I mean Kevin Steen/Owen was/is champ right?? Powerbombing a guys neck into the apron edge 2 minutes into a semi main event match in 2010 in PWG...not even close to the finish or used for a story BTW. He is the one time I hope someone has been reprogrammed by the WWE. I digress...

[BrianB]

 

I'm not sure it really matters what moves are 'big enough' to win a fall, so long as there is still a hierarchy. Complaining about specific moves not being viable finishes anymore always comes off more to me as clamouring for the wrestling of one's youth than anything else. What constitutes a viable finish has been escalating for at least 70 years, it's hardly a recent thing.

The issue isn't being stuck in the past as much as so many of the moves that are being used as transitions feel much more impactful than the finishers they are being replaced with. A regular old DDT looks much more vicious than the 300 different Complete Shot variations we see every week. Okada vs. Omega had a top rope dragon suplex, but ended with a short arm clothesline. The issue is that the hierarchy is completely out of whack when the moves that get the near falls are much more violent than the ones that get the pinfalls.

 

 

That's a good point, and I intuitively want to agree but at the same time, how violent was Hogan's leg drop or Warrior's splash compared to their other moves? The people's elbow certainly wasn't a killer impactful move, and arguably the rock bottom wasn't the most violent looking Rock move either.