|
Post by Cap on Mar 24, 2019 9:10:40 GMT -5
I am sort of torn on Lawler/Dundee. I do love the feud, but I find the two matches i have on my list moving down a bit. They will both be on there, but I wont be surprised if next they are pretty low or if one of them falls off.
I agree with Benoit/Angle. I actually sort of find most of Angle's big matches a bit overrated. I rewatched the Eddie Guerrero feud a while back and it was real good, but not quite as good as I remembered. I need to go back and watch some of the other hyped things one day, but not for this list.
|
|
BestThereNeverWillBe
Guest
|
Post by BestThereNeverWillBe on Apr 2, 2019 13:07:42 GMT -5
I thought it was odd that Brian Pillman vs Jushin Liger won MOTY in PWI yet wasn't even nominated here
|
|
|
Post by Cap on Apr 2, 2019 14:19:01 GMT -5
That is odd. I don't think it has a shot at my list, but it is definitely a victim of this being our first go around and some organizational issues we admittidly had... much moreso than it reflecting on the quality of the match.
|
|
|
Post by wrestlingfan on Apr 2, 2019 15:32:50 GMT -5
Maybe it's because people here don't care about the PWI.
|
|
|
Post by microstatistics on Apr 2, 2019 15:39:48 GMT -5
No Hansen vs. Kobashi 7/93
No Hansen vs. Andre
None of the Flair vs. Steamboat matches ended up on my list
I had 5 Tamura matches but no Tamura vs. Kohsaka 98
|
|
|
Post by elliott on Apr 26, 2019 15:00:00 GMT -5
I've done my best to avoid outright shitting on matches, because this is a positive project and there's way too much great wrestling to spend time focusing on the negative on a forum about the top 100 matches ever. Build up your matches instead of tearing down others. But this isn't the thread for that. Cap mentioned "thoughtful criticism" and that is always welcomed but This is also the thread for taking a dump on classics if you need too take a dump on a classic. So I'm going to do that. Two matches I didn't rank that folks might be surprised by are Hansen vs Kawada 2/93 and Magnum vs Tully.
Hansen vs Kawada might make sense given that I only ranked 2 90s AJPW matches at all, but given my fondness of hard hitting brawls in general and Hansen specifically, it would have been fair to assume that this was one of them. But I have never enjoyed this on the level of other folks. Even when I was a devout 90s AJPW fan, this never clicked. It have given it a ton of opportunities and it is by far my most rewatched "Match I don't like" ever. So I've always wanted to like it. But I've never been able to see it as more than a few memorable spots lost in an aimless wandering mess of a match. I honestly think Kawada's selling is outright bad in this match and while it was important for him to go toe to toe with Hansen because Kawada needed to be built up in general and specifically as a "tough ass kicker." But the visual disparity between the two is ridiculous. I know Hansen is aging and that was a key storyline for the year so that certainly plays into things, but I'm sorry. Kawada going toe to toe with Hansen is ridiculous. And I also know smaller guy can beat/work evenly with bigger guy and younger guy entering his prime can take out/work evenly with legend barely hanging onto his prime are perfectly viable and classic narratives and perfectly fine ways to structure a match.
I just think "Smaller guy attempting to steamroll much bigger, albeit aging, legendary steamroller" with no other discernible strategy is a really stupid way to execute those classical match structures regardless of whatever the booking needs of the promotion happen to be. Aimless wandering mess of a match. I have no clue what people see when they watch this match. I've tried hopefully/wistfully to see it. At times I've lied to myself and pretended to see it because "It's Hansen and Kawada and everyone else sees it so it must be there." Its not there. It finishing one point (ONE POINT!) ahead of Piper vs Valentine, my #1, was one of those "Hahaha...moooootherfucker...of course it did" moments that you just shake your head at. Like my own personal version of the Red Wedding.
As far as Magnum vs Tully...honestly the less said the better. Its like if Deliverance was a wrestling match in all the worst ways.
|
|
|
Post by microstatistics on Apr 26, 2019 15:04:00 GMT -5
Oh yeah, no Hansen vs. Kawada and Magnum vs. Tully for me too.
I'm glad Elliott and I have been in agreement that Hansen vs. Kawada might not even be good, let alone a Top 100 classic.
Still really like Magnum/Tully. Might make my Top 200.
|
|
|
Post by elliott on Apr 26, 2019 15:13:40 GMT -5
I don't want to accuse people of being disingenuous but I think Hansen vs Kawada might be one of the worst case of perceived wisdom matches ever. Hansen & Kawada are beloved critical darlings so you just assume it is going to be great based on the names alone. Its been called great by the big smart fan taste makers since probably March of 1993. The only criticism I've ever seen is that it's "not as good as the Kobashi match" but then i've seen plenty of people say its better than the Kobashi match. And I just have no idea what they are seeing. Sure, they hit each other really really hard a bunch of times and there are definitely a couple of really good spots (the Hansen lariat and...there's at least one more I'm sure of it) but its 2019 and Futen happened. "Hitting each other hard" isn't as impressive if you're not doing anything else.
Worth pointing out I ranked Hansen vs Kobashi 11th overall and Hansen has been one of my 5 favorite wrestlers of all time for like 20 years.
|
|
|
Post by fxnj on Apr 26, 2019 16:01:31 GMT -5
Read shodate’s review of Hansen/Kawada. There are various strategies attempted by both guys throughout the match and there’s plenty of big moments that are sold as such. It’s far from an aimless stiff fest. Also, the match is building off of years of tags and singles between the two going back to RWTL 88 with the overarching narrative of Kawada slowly hanging better in the matches as they go on. Kawada is not just some random guy stepping in and going toe-to-toe with Hansen. The match does play up the size/strength disparity anyway.
|
|
|
Post by elliott on Apr 26, 2019 16:17:32 GMT -5
Where is shodate's review? I am very familiar with the history of Kawada and Hansen and various strategies they might employ and what it means for their growth/storytelling. What I'm saying is they did a poor job executing and expressing that due to a lack of structure which is made ever more apparent when you directly compare it to Hansen's best matches with the other pillars. I posted about this before in the nominations thread for it shortly after watching it and mentioned a lack of a hook beyond stiffness. I also noted there, and forgot to bring up here, how stupid it was for Kawada to do two of his "Kawada Down!" KO spots in this setting.
|
|
|
Post by fxnj on Apr 26, 2019 16:42:34 GMT -5
gweproject.freeforums.net/post/3749I’m not really getting what you mean by a lack of structure. There’s a clear cut dynamic between the two, progression from earlier matches, and logical selling and escalation just like you’d get with Hansen/Kobashi or Hansen/Misawa. And, yeah, the match featured knockout shots that were treated as such with Hansen generally being the guy throwing them because he’s the bigger and stronger of the two. Where is the aimless stiff fest in all this?
|
|
|
Post by elliott on Apr 26, 2019 20:40:52 GMT -5
I mean, I don't think that review really helps you...He says it has unique structure and lots of neat details, but doesn't go into what they are, which is kind of a great metaphor for my experience with this match. People act like its clear and self evident and then I go at look and I'm like "did they even watch the match/read the review?" Unless stuff like "they tried to work the leg and failed" which I just read as "they did some leg work, got bored with it and did something else" is supposed to be this unique structure. But there is a lot of "and then he just kicks him in the jaw and destroys him" and "gets to beat the soul out of Stan but gets cocky and slaps him brutally." A lotttt of talk about the violence. Not much about the unique and clearly self evident structure. "hansen answers with a elbow to skull and kawada goes down. then its just becames a war as both man gets urgent and try to just beat each other to death as all their startegies failed." At this point there has been literally no mention of strategies other than this specifically "than both guys try to work at each others leg but both fail. kawadas leg is hurt more considerbly.at one point hansen just kicks kawada in jaw and destroys him its so brutal kawada screams in pain" and the mention of how the "structure is unique." There's no mention of anything else. He talks about how it becomes a war after strategies fail and that's halfway through the review. The rest is just in awe of the brutality. So "tried to do some leg stuff but dropped it so they could beat the soul out of each other" is a unique (and good?) structure? "hansen starts to get desperate and throws bombs at kawada at one point he realizes its hard but its denial." What am I supposed to do with that sentence? And finally, a knockout shot is not being treated as a knockout shot if the guy selling he's knocked out gets knocked out in the first 3 minutes of the match (and said knockout is immediately followed up upon, its not like there was a 10 count, Hansen was over there kneeing him in the head immediately). I mean, people are allowed to like that and think it is good selling, but I happen to think that is the dumbest fucking shit ever. First, if you're the company's "badass" tough guy with great strikes, who happens to be smaller than everyone else, it is probably not a good idea for one of your staple spots to be getting knocked unconscious repeatedly by other people's strikes throughout the course of your career, no matter how "cool" or "realistic" his slumping down selling might be, it is a spot he was meaninglessly throw out all the time. Second, if this is an important match where you're showing your growth of being able to stand with the legendary ass kicker, and the company specifically needs the crowd to start seeing you as the main native ass kicker, you probably shouldn't be doing a KO spot in the opening 3 minutes of the important match meant to show you're a tough guy now. It isn't just counter intuitive. It is openly stupid. Now you probably want to say "Oh, but it shows he's tough and can come back." Sure. Still stupid. That spot/way of selling was unique to Kawada and stood out in a pro wrestling context because it is not how people traditional sold in pro wrestling, it is a more "realistic" way to sell a "knockout" than to fly on your back with your legs above your head to take the extreme opposite example. The selling is meant to convey that Kawada is "really knocked out" and not just "pro wrestling knocked out." Kawada doing the slumping selling to show that he's knocked out and then "waking up" when Hansen immediately hits him with a kneedrop is worse than Savage using the reviving elbow drop in WCW because in WCW it was intentional and hilarious. Here it is just frustrating because it happens, people finish the match and say "Great psychology and selling. Boy golly, every move sure does matter in All Japan. That Kawada sure is smart." So rolling out that spot this early in this match is egregious in my mind. It is as meaningless as Flair bumping for Tommy Young. Great spot to pop the crowd. So if you'd rather I say it is "poorly structured with terrible ideas in the opening moments" instead of "aimless" would that be preferable?
|
|
|
Post by bossrock on Apr 26, 2019 21:05:57 GMT -5
Sangre Chicanga vs. MS-1 was definitely my biggest omission. I've seen it probably about 5 times now and I've honestly enjoyed it every single time. It's funny because all the criticisms that come to mind are really more nit-picky than anything egregious. Like I get how Chicana winning the second fall by countout is to drive home how badly in trouble he is and how all the work done by MS-1 is still affecting him, but I can't help feel that it came off as a bit cheap. Granted, it's only only the second fall and the finish is far more definitive. But it just kinda nags in the back of my head at the same time. And while MS-1 trying the top rope splash twice and missing both times is meant to drive home how he's undone by his own hubris, it comes off as kinda dumb on his part. Granted, heels should generally be dumber than faces, but it still feels like "Nice job, dumbass." And I don't know why, but for some reason I feel like the third fall goes on longer than it needs to. That may seem rich coming from a guy who put a few Bushiroad-era NJPW matches in his top 100 (although I'll be the first to criticize long for the sake of long), but I felt like they could have wrapped things up a bit sooner.
In regards to the stuff I really like, I love how all the punches matter. As much as I still enjoy modern wrestling, punching and selling punches are probably the most lost of all the lost arts. The selling is excellent. Even as Chicana mounts his comeback he's still stumbling around half-unconscious. All in all it's a wonderful display of minimalism. Sometimes you can't really explain why a match doesn't push itself over the edge for you. It's just every single time I've watched it I've never walked away with "Wow, this is one of the greatest matches ever!" but rather "Wow, that was a really good match."
|
|
|
Post by elliott on Apr 26, 2019 21:15:10 GMT -5
The luchadore dominated in the first fall wins by countout/dq/banana peel is a pretty common trope in lucha. I actually think the countout after a big dive like Chicana's is my preference of those options. Not saying that means you have to like it just pointing out it happens quite a lot.
Im too lazy to look right now, did you vote for any lawler/Dundee matches. This always felt like the cousin of a lawler/dundee
|
|
|
Post by bossrock on Apr 26, 2019 23:36:34 GMT -5
I did not, although I do like the Lawler eye injury one.
|
|