|
|
Post by AstroBoy on Jan 8, 2018 0:01:58 GMT -5
So how do people treat crowd heat? Is it a by-product of the work being done in the ring or is it a more random, uncontrollable element? Is it given too much weight? Not enough weight?
I think crowd heat absolutely matters a lot. An okay match with a great crowd doesn't suddenly become a great match. But a very good match with a red hot crowd absolutely goes up a notch. I value it a lot and while a great match can stand on its own without it, a really awesome crowd definitely helps. So yeah, how is everyone valuing crowd reaction and atmosphere as they go about this?
|
|
|
|
Post by gordi on Jan 8, 2018 0:10:27 GMT -5
I also put a pretty high value on it. My take is that the wrestlers' job is to get the live crowd into what they are doing. Maybe recently there is an element of wrestlers working to try and create a "classic" that people will watch again and again, or to please reviewers watching on a streaming service or whatever... but for most of the history of pro wrestling, the point was to work the crowd and sell them on what you are doing. A hot crowd helps me get more into it as a viewer, as well. The crowd helps elevate matches like Kobashi & Kikuchi vs the Can-Ams, Chiigy vs Dump, and IYH Canadian Stampede near the top of my personal list.
That being said, it can't be the only criteria or the top criteria. There's no accounting for acoustics and recording techniques. I'm sure some hot as hell crowds have been lost due to factors beyond the wrestlers' control.
|
|
|
|
Post by microstatistics on Jan 15, 2018 18:01:33 GMT -5
Great heat/an actively engaged hot crowd - Something that can really enhance a match so is definitely a factor.
Dead crowd/no heat - Disappointing but it's not really a negative.
Smarky crowd with "appreciative" chants - Will hold this against a match (unfortunately) because it actively dampens my enjoyment of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by supremebve on Jan 17, 2018 9:56:51 GMT -5
I put a pretty big emphasis on crowd heat. I honestly don't know how good I can call a match if no one in the crowd cares. If the people who paid money to watch the match aren't excited about the match, I'm probably not going to be very excited watching for free at home. I also don't care if people cheer, chant, boo, sing, do a little dance, or whatever else. As long as the crowd is engaged, I take it as a positive.
|
|
|
|
Post by Grimmas on Jan 17, 2018 10:03:55 GMT -5
Crowd heat is like a bonus to me, if it's a bad crowd I can't really count that against the match, however a great crowd is a big bonus.
|
|
|
|
Post by supremebve on Jan 17, 2018 10:24:04 GMT -5
Crowd heat is like a bonus to me, if it's a bad crowd I can't really count that against the match, however a great crowd is a big bonus. I never fully understand this, because I believe the responsibility of a wrestler is to entertain the crowd who came to see them work. If the paying customers aren't entertained, the wrestlers failed at some level. Don't get me wrong, there are matches I love with little or no crowd heat, but I don't know if I can make a case for greatest match ever for any match that didn't engage the people who spent their money and time to go see the match. |
|
|
|
Post by El Mckell on Jan 17, 2018 11:56:25 GMT -5
OK so crowd heat is something I count a as strong positive because the enthusiastic crowd make the experience more enjoyable to me. I see them as part of the show as much as the production or commentary. So I wouldn't supermebve's argument about how the wrestler's job is to engage the crowd, nobody else's opinion but mine is important to me when making my list and that includes members of the crowd, not to mention that lack of noise doesn't mean lack of engagement.
|
|
|
|
Crowd Heat
Jan 17, 2018 12:10:34 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by maddog1981 on Jan 17, 2018 12:10:34 GMT -5
I would say a dead crowd would disqualify it for me. Part of what makes the Rock/Hogan match at Mania so memorable is they rolled with what the crowd wanted. It was a mediocre match but it was an absolute clinic in working a crowd for every ounce of energy they had.
Or look at Misterio/Dragon from WW3. That crowd wasn't there for them but that crowd was completely in to what they were doing.
I think dead crowd means you weren't doing your jobs. It's kind of the equal of racking up great garbage time stats in other sports. It looks pretty on paper but it's ultimately meaningless.
|
|
|
|
Post by supremebve on Jan 17, 2018 13:45:30 GMT -5
I would say a dead crowd would disqualify it for me. Part of what makes the Rock/Hogan match at Mania so memorable is they rolled with what the crowd wanted. It was a mediocre match but it was an absolute clinic in working a crowd for every ounce of energy they had. Or look at Misterio/Dragon from WW3. That crowd wasn't there for them but that crowd was completely in to what they were doing. I think dead crowd means you weren't doing your jobs. It's kind of the equal of racking up great garbage time stats in other sports. It looks pretty on paper but it's ultimately meaningless. This is pretty much what I was trying to say, but better. |
|
|
|
Post by smash1992 on Jan 17, 2018 16:10:30 GMT -5
Crowd heat is like a bonus to me, if it's a bad crowd I can't really count that against the match, however a great crowd is a big bonus. This is essentially where I stand. At the top of the list it is likely that ones with great heat will benefit since that just gets me more personally involved. If you deliver a style of wrestling that doesn't resonate with the audience in the building but does resonate with me, why would I care that the crowd wasn't into it? |
|
|
|
Post by supremebve on Jan 17, 2018 16:37:56 GMT -5
Crowd heat is like a bonus to me, if it's a bad crowd I can't really count that against the match, however a great crowd is a big bonus. This is essentially where I stand. At the top of the list it is likely that ones with great heat will benefit since that just gets me more personally involved. If you deliver a style of wrestling that doesn't resonate with the audience in the building but does resonate with me, why would I care that the crowd wasn't into it? Because theoretically they are working for the people that are watching, not some person who may never watch. When the match is going on, the only people that they can say for sure are watching are the people in the crowd. Therefore they are failing if the people in the crowd aren't engaged. They don't know if the satellite feed died, that the camera's failed to record, or the film is going to catch on fire on the way to the vault. Entertaining the crowd is their first responsibility. Don't get me wrong, there are exceptions to the rule, but I can't say a match is one of the best ever if they don't actually entertain the people who paid to see them wrestle. Rock vs. Hogan is going to make my list, because that is a match that is worked specifically for that crowd and they ate it up like fucking hot cakes. Is it a great technical masterclass? Nope, but wrestling is live theater and that may be the best piece of live theater in the history of the sport. These things take place in front of audiences for a reason, and I can't disregard the reaction of the intended audience just because it suits my personal tastes. For all they know I'd never watch their match, but they know that crowd is there and that is who they need to be trying to entertain. |
|
|
|
Post by Grimmas on Jan 17, 2018 19:39:26 GMT -5
Crowd heat is like a bonus to me, if it's a bad crowd I can't really count that against the match, however a great crowd is a big bonus. I never fully understand this, because I believe the responsibility of a wrestler is to entertain the crowd who came to see them work. If the paying customers aren't entertained, the wrestlers failed at some level. Don't get me wrong, there are matches I love with little or no crowd heat, but I don't know if I can make a case for greatest match ever for any match that didn't engage the people who spent their money and time to go see the match. Because sometimes it is out of their control. There was something shitty before hand. It was a super long show before hand. It was a market that doens't know the people. There is lots of reasons a crowd wouldn't care and nothing the wrestlers could do about it. Put Kamitachi vs Dragon Lee on 205 Live next week. It would be a great match with a quit/dead crowd. |
|
|
|
Post by gordi on Jan 17, 2018 20:03:26 GMT -5
Also: Sometimes there are problems with the acoustics or the recording technology. What we hear on video may not accurately reflect the actual crowd heat in the building.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cap on Jan 17, 2018 20:46:24 GMT -5
I'm i the "it can be a positive" but not a negative camp. I do sometimes have to watch a match with a dead crowd more than once to really appreciate it. Usually in first watch I can sort of ebb and flow with the crowd unless I am really focused on a critical engagement with it for some reason.
|
|
|
|
Post by supremebve on Jan 17, 2018 21:43:04 GMT -5
I never fully understand this, because I believe the responsibility of a wrestler is to entertain the crowd who came to see them work. If the paying customers aren't entertained, the wrestlers failed at some level. Don't get me wrong, there are matches I love with little or no crowd heat, but I don't know if I can make a case for greatest match ever for any match that didn't engage the people who spent their money and time to go see the match. Because sometimes it is out of their control. There was something shitty before hand. It was a super long show before hand. It was a market that doens't know the people. There is lots of reasons a crowd wouldn't care and nothing the wrestlers could do about it. Put Kamitachi vs Dragon Lee on 205 Live next week. It would be a great match with a quit/dead crowd. We aren't talking about regular old matches though, we are talking about the greatest matches of all time. How many of the greatest matches of all time don't have any crowd heat? How many of the greatest matches of all time were between two guys that the crowd didn't know? How many of the greatest matches were put in a death spot on a show? Off the top of my head I can't think of a single match that I think will make my list that didn't engage the crowd. There are times that the crowd had to warm up to a match, but a dead crowd? I don't think I could include a match like that. Wrestling fans go to wrestling shows to watch wrestling. If something truly great happens, the fans will respond. I'm not saying that 100% of crowds appreciate all great matches or that every building has equal technology. I'm saying, if something great happens and the people who spent the time and money to go see it don't respond to it, I have real questions about how great it really was. |
|
