The greatest match of all time

[Childs]

 

Edited because this is a peaceful thread. I'll just say I don't know what the greatest match of all time is.

I think that a lot of this feels more like 'best' match ever, and a lot less like 'greatest'.

I don't think that's a relevant distinction for most people.

[Loss]

It's not really a relevant distinction for me. What I said was, and I'll say it respectfully because I think it's appropriate after all, was that I think it's an interesting contradiction how comfortable we are talking about what the best match of all time is, yet if I offer a critical opinion of WWE after following it in some form for the past 30+ years while not having seen the complete episodes of every recent episode of Smackdown, then that's a problem. What is the difference between offering an opinion on WWE booking without watching every show and offering an opinion on the greatest match ever without watching all of the matches people typically say are at that level that are available?

[Coffey]

Misawa/Kobashi Vs. Kawada/Taue is the best wrestling match I've ever watched. If we're talking about impact on pro-wrestling, my answer would be different but bell-to-bell? Nothing is touching that for me. And I'm not even a big Taue guy.

[Childs]

Do a lot of people have problems with you expressing opinions on WWE? That seems odd.

 

I will say that if I know a poster's likes/dislikes/viewing history, I consider that when weighing his/her opinion on a question like this. I know Jimmy is a WWE lover first so I'm not surprised to see her pick Cena-Umaga. Doesn't in any way invalidate her opinion but it shapes my understanding of it.

[Loss]

I don't know, it's a can of worms that I already regret opening because it comes across like I'm seeking an argument when I'm really just trying to understand the difference. I just couldn't come up with a nice-sounding way to ask the question.

[Grimmas]

I don't know, it's a can of worms that I already regret opening because it comes across like I'm seeking an argument when I'm really just trying to understand the difference. I just couldn't come up with a nice-sounding way to ask the question.

If its the situation I remember it was just something taken out of context. Unless this wasn't about the AJ promo.

[Jimmy Redman]

It's not really a relevant distinction for me. What I said was, and I'll say it respectfully because I think it's appropriate after all, was that I think it's an interesting contradiction how comfortable we are talking about what the best match of all time is, yet if I offer a critical opinion of WWE after following it in some form for the past 30+ years while not having seen the complete episodes of every recent episode of Smackdown, then that's a problem. What is the difference between offering an opinion on WWE booking without watching every show and offering an opinion on the greatest match ever without watching all of the matches people typically say are at that level that are available?

 

I delicately preface this by saying that you're clearly referencing a particular incident that I am not aware of so I'm not speaking to that. Nor do I agree with the theoretical principle of "Your opinion on the product is invalid because you don't watch every single show".

 

BUT, there is a difference between criticism of booking and judging match quality. Booking, even for a single show, is usually part of a larger storyline, storylines or direction, and they have beginnings, middles and ends (hopefully, at least) and on any show you could be at any point on that timeline. So in following a narrative it helps to have seen, be aware of or understand the steps that lead to that point. Again, I'm not saying you can't criticise if you haven't seen every step, but when you're talking about a story, the more you know of the story the better you will understand it, I think goes without saying. I have what I think are perfectly valid criticisms of, say, Orton winning the Rumble, but I still can admit that I don't know everything about the Wyatt angle and it's possible it may come off better to someone who is following it.

 

As someone who's familiarity is that sometimes I walk into the room when Smackdown is playing, I can admit that my judgment of Smackdown as a television show is less informed than the judgment of someone who does watch it every week. I can absolutely watch a single episode and form an opinion, but when it's about a long term pattern, a weekly viewer can speak to that much better than I can.

 

Judging match quality in itself, which is what we're doing here, has nothing to do with narrative or following a story, so you don't need understanding of a context in the same way. It's just a different thing to do. Take every match you've ever seen and pick the best one. Of course everyone's list of matches will be different sizes and depths and breadths. We've done this before but this is where I come up against your mania for watching absolutely everything in existence before being comfortable giving a value judgment. We (that is, the rest of us who aren't you) will never, ever, in a million years be able to see everything. It's an impossible standard to even strive for, and it's really not the same thing as being someone who does or doesn't watch Smackdown every week. When we're talking about the Best X Ever, of course we can only judge on what is available and what we've seen. That's all we ever do and it goes without saying.

 

In this particular context, I think all of us at PWO have seen enough wrestling in our lives to be able to tackle this question without worrying about having seen enough wrestling. I mean, if you look at the bunch of us just trying to have this thread and your reaction is "Well how can we possibly know when there's so much we haven't seen?" then you're basically just snuffing out any kind of discussion at all. It's not GWE or anything, this is just a thread, I wouldn't take it too seriously.

[dedhemingway]

It's not really a relevant distinction for me. What I said was, and I'll say it respectfully because I think it's appropriate after all, was that I think it's an interesting contradiction how comfortable we are talking about what the best match of all time is, yet if I offer a critical opinion of WWE after following it in some form for the past 30+ years while not having seen the complete episodes of every recent episode of Smackdown, then that's a problem. What is the difference between offering an opinion on WWE booking without watching every show and offering an opinion on the greatest match ever without watching all of the matches people typically say are at that level that are available?

I'm not really a regular around here, mostly because my interest in wrestling waxes and wanes in a cycle that even I don't understand, but I feel like, if you're even a somewhat regular poster (and you're well beyond that) on PWO you've watched enough wrestling to have your opinion respected on the subject. It's not rocket appliances...

 

Of course, the more content you've seen, the better idea of where a story is going you'll have, but as long as you can accept being corrected if you're wrong, criticize away.

 

I feel there is a big difference between 'best' and 'greatest', but that may be that I'm a jock at heart, college and pro football, and being the 'greatest' requires accolades, while being the 'best' is simply based on talent. Like, Bo Jackson is my pick for the 'best' runningback of all time, he's everything you could ever want from the position, 'better' than Jim Brown, Emmitt Smith, or Barry Sanders, but I'd never argue he was the greatest. Hulk Hogan is in the argument for greatest wrestler of all time, but I wouldn't call him the 'best'.

 

I admit, it gets muddied with matches, because they're events, not individuals, but I think it still applies. You can have the 'best' match anywhere, from Arena Mexico to a guard armory in Florida, but the 'greatest' matches are the best big ones, titles on the line, biggest events, the total package.

 

Tl;dr: 'Best' is a measure of talent in a vacuum. Great requires a convergence of factors.

[Cap]

Sangre Chicana vs MS-1 for me.

 

Lots of matches are in the running and if I ever made a top 50 or 100 I'd have a lot of rewatching to do, but I'll take Sangre Chicana vs MS-1 over anything right now.

[Mrzfn]

I can't really say "greatest" for a lot of reasons, some touched on by Loss and some related to the overpowering subjectivity of wrestling. I will say, if I could only take one wrestling match to a desert island with me and watch it again and again, it would probably be the '92 Rumble. So many great factors converge in that match, it's a very layered overall performance from a ton of different perspectives.

[Parties]

A testament to all of the matches people have listed is that I would happily see them again right now, like some wrestling equivalent of stumbling across Goodfellas halfway through on cable and inevitably watching the rest. 80s set favorites that I haven’t seen mentioned yet:

 

Lawler vs. Dundee, “Loser Leaves Town” (’83, ’85)

Lawler vs. Mantell (3/22/82)

Fujiwara vs. Yamazaki (7/24/89)

Reed vs. Murdoch (9/22/85)

Mr. Olympia vs. Chavo (6/24/83)

UWF vs. New Japan (3/26/86)

[elliott]

Re-reading this thread I feel like if we did a Greatest Matches Ever project 6/9/95 would run away with the top spot like Flair in GWE.

[Johnny Sorrow]

I said Lawler/ Dundee 83. It's fucking perfect.

[KB8]

I'm actually leaning towards the '85 LLT. Either that or Chicana/MS-1.

[elliott]

Chicana vs MS-1 is my pick. And I've honestly always preferred the 12/85 LLT match to the 6/83 one myself. Last time I watched them both (within the last 3 months) I thought 6/83 was a classic match but I thought 12/85 is a match that could challenge Chicana vs MS-1 for #1 ever. The story with Lawler's taped up eye, Dundee's focus on it and especially Lawler's selling is everything I could ever want. 12/85 would be the match I would use to show Lawler's genius.

 

Johnny, I'm surprised you're not beating us all over the head with Magnum vs Tully

[Tabe]

I'm gonna go with Clash 6. My answer might change tomorrow as I don't know that I have a clear #1, more like 5 that share the top spot.

[Matt D]

The really interesting question is what people's favorite match would be.

[JerryvonKramer]

The really interesting question is what people's favorite match would be.

For me, it's still Clash 6.

[InYourCase]

The first match that comes into my mind is Kobashi vs. Misawa from 3/1/03. Somehow there's been three and a half pages of talk, and I dont' think anyone has mentioned that. For that style, in that time and place, it's the perfect match. It holds up 14 years later as a five star, no doubt about it, classic.

 

I would listen to arguments for 4/7/13 or 1/4/16, the two best Okada vs. Tanahashi matches. If I was compiling a list, it would be hard to not include at least one of those two in my top 10.

 

I don't think there's ever been a more dramatic match than 1/28/86. It's the perfect balance of emotional storytelling and in-ring action. I could buy arguments for 12/3/93, 6/9/95, and Kobashi vs. Kawada from 6/12/98, as well.

 

I have to mention Blood Generation vs. Do FIXER from 7/3/05 and Mochizuki vs. Shingo from 11/1/05. I think those are two of the greatest matches of all-time.

 

tl;dr - Kobashi vs. Misawa, 3/1/03

[JKWebb]

I was referring to the '83 match when I mentioned Lawler/Dundee LLT, but definitely see the '85 as an equal (or maybe better now that I think about it). Favorite vs. greatest is always a great question. I take more sentimental factors into account when talking about favorite vs. greatest. I love David/Goliath type matches - the big dominant guy vs. the underdog or sometimes smaller guy. As a kid I loved Rocky IV. Stallone was jacked, but you have the big dominant heel. Anyway, for that reason, I always loved Lawler vs. Bam Bam Bigelow and I recently fell in love with Kawada vs. Gary Albright. In my eyes, also based on some childhood nostalgia, the ultimate match like this is Sting vs. Vader from Starrcade 1992. It's the perfect David/Goliath-Rocky IV-80's Action - toe-to-toe brawl. If someone were to ask me the greatest movie off all-time, I might say "The Godfather" or "Seven Samurai" or "Pulp Fiction" (you get the idea). But, my favorite movie is "Back to the Future." Because, I can watch it anytime. It's fun. Well, that's how I feel about Starrcade's Sting vs. Vader. Kobashi/Misawa 03/01/03 is amazing. Definitely a favorite, and would be also be in the running for greatest with me as well. Currently, I'm still going Clash 6.

[Matt D]

I don't know the answer to favorite either. The Rockers vs Rose/Somers match that was brought up is a good choice. Bockwinkel vs Robinson and Bockwinkel vs Funk are up there. Funk vs Martel and Funks vs Martel/Zenk are up there. Owen vs Bret from Mania probably is too. RnR vs Russians maybe? One of the Dandy vs Satanico matches. It's tough.

 

One thing that's interesting is that a lot of my favorite wrestlers (Casas, Garza, Cota, Rose, just to name a few) aren't necessarily people that are in a lot of my favorite matches. It's more of a constant performance thing on a week to week basis from them.

[concrete1992]

The problem with this discussion is Magnum vs. Tully was the first match I saw that I went "This is the greatest of all time" and that stuck. I can watch other great matches but there is a personal attachment to that match I simply can't replace. It probably turned me into the type of fan that goes onto PWO and other places down the line. One day I hope to sit down and figure this out. Can I remove that nostalgia? Not a clue but I'm hoping.

[JerryvonKramer]

One of the little issues I have with people citing Lawler / Dundee as "perfect" ... isn't it clipped?

[Loss]

In response to concrete1992: Maybe there's no reason to ever try.

[Cap]

While I put Sangre vs MS-1 as my number one I would also really consider 6/9/95, Bock/Hennig, LLT '85 (i like it a good bit better myself), Jumbo/Tenryu, Clash 6, Kandori/Hokuto, Dandy/Satanico (12/90). That kind of feels like the short list to me right now. There may be others that are kind of fringe to me right now that get in the mix.

 

 

As for "favorites".... there isn't really a huge distinction for me. With a hand full of exceptions, what I think of as my favorite matches shapes what I think of as "great" wrestling. It certainly isn't 1:1, but there isn't a giant divide either. At the top it is mostly overlap for me I think. Maybe something like Necro Butcher vs Super Dragon, Kobashi vs Hansen, Eddie vs JBL (judgement Day), Kandori vs Bull, or Dragon vs Nigel (Unified) would have the biggest jumps for me. However, I honestly think they are all great matches, I just know they are outliers (sans Kobashi/Hansen) of sorts. Those matches would place higher on a "favorites" list vs a "greatest" list if I were making that clear distinction.