|
Post by Cap on Aug 18, 2018 10:13:29 GMT -5
This sort of started to come up in the star rating thread talking about shoot style. I thought it might be good to start a thread about different kinds of psychology. Different styles, genres, time periods, and regions use different psychologies in their matches. Sometimes that works for you and sometimes it doesn't. I know some people have a difficult time with Lucha, for example. I have really started to dig into two blind spots in the past year (classic british and shoot style) and each has taken a minute to digest and get used to.
So what works for you? What doesn't? What do you have trouble with? What are some interesting comparisons and contrasts you have come across or thought about?
|
|
|
Post by bossrock on Aug 18, 2018 16:47:13 GMT -5
Shoot style is something I've always had trouble with and as a result have found myself more drawn to the shoot-inspired yet still somewhat traditional wrestling of BattlArts. It's interesting because even though I like a sense of authenticity in wrestling and love to get lost in a match, I still know in the back of my head "this isn't real". I still find myself thinking "that was a great spot" or "this is great selling". I go into wrestling knowing what I'm about to see is essentially a performance art, no matter how physical and violent it can be. When I see shoot style, unlike those other matches, I AM seeing an actual fight. It's just the finish that's pre-determined. I recall you and Elliot discussing in the other thread about how you don't have traditional limbwork in shoot style. It's just two guys going for several different submissions to see what will finish the job. It's just like an MMA fight. You don't have one guy "softening up" an arm to go for an armbar because once he locks it on, it's over regardless. Tap or snap. And I understand and admire that approach to wrestling. It just doesn't work for me on that level because I still WANT that level of performance art you may see with other styles but not shoot style.
As some of you may have guessed based on what matches I've talked about in these threads, I'm very action-oriented. That's not to say I don't appreciate a minimalist approach. Stuff like Duggan-DiBiase and Funk-Lawler will rank very highly on my ballot. But action and intensity with a dramatic flair is what I've always been drawn to most. I WANT to see that level of frequent action you may not see in shoot style when it's often two guys jockeying for position. And that's not to say that two guys fighting for submissions isn't or can't be dramatic. It's just not the drama that works for me. And while I still enjoy MMA, I know it's MMA and not pro wrestling. I know shoot style is still pro wrestling at the end of the day. I know what I like and don't really care for in pro wrestling. And I think that's why stuff like BattlArts works for me and RINGS doesn't because you still have that intense action with the strikes. It also still has that "traditional" pro wrestling feel. Sure, there may not be pins but you still have a lot of the tropes such as rope running and moves such as german suplexes that translate into virtually every other style of wrestling.
Lucha is another style I've always had difficulties with. That's not to say I won't have any lucha matches on my list. Bloody, hate-filled lucha brawling is easily one of my favorite styles. When it's on, it's tremendous. It's usually the more "sporting" grappling affairs that I have trouble getting in to. And that may be because I have a hard time understanding the struggle or story they're trying to tell without background information. Mat-based wrestling isn't my favorite but if there's a story that I can sink my teeth into, then it works. Stuff like Atlantis-Villano works for me because not only are the stakes high with both men's masks on the line, but the traditionally heel Villano is actually the crowd favorite. With the odds stacked so much against the babyface and with the odds at their highest, it's easy to get lost in the struggle and desperation from both men. Without knowing much about the characters or the story they're trying to tell, it's hard for me to get into a grappling-heavy lucha match (or any grappling-heavy match) if I don't have context.
|
|
|
Post by fxnj on Aug 19, 2018 0:56:14 GMT -5
I've started to struggle with lucha matwork for how it often comes across to me as two guys putting on an exhibition of all the wacky holds they can do. This is kind of frustrating as I used to love watching lucha matwork, but it's kind of gone the way of NOAH juniors in that it was some of my favorite stuff a decade but it hasn't been rewarding to revisit. It bothers me how they almost never bother selling bodyparts and often tapout instantly upon applying certain holds, yet still insist on working these long mat exchanges where guys spend long periods sitting in ineffective holds. The shoot-style fan in me can't help but wonder they why aren't just going for the match-ending holds out of the gate and building the drama around getting said holds fully applied. The explanation I've heard is that matwork is wrestled like that because it's about oneupsmanship, but that's the same explanation I've heard about long Kurt Angle suplex-fests, and they both have about the same level of appeal to me.
Mask matches are alright when there's a good atmosphere and it feels like there's a lot at stake, but I'm usually taken out of it by how the last fall is always worked 50/50 regardless of what came before it. I often get the feeling of matches degrading into a collection of spots with how they turn into guys hitting a move, getting a count, and then laying around before repeating the process. It perplexes me how people might speak out against stuff like Undertaker Wrestlemania epics for being too near-fall heavy yet heap praise on mask matches that are much worse about it.
|
|
|
Post by elliott on Aug 19, 2018 22:38:36 GMT -5
This sort of started to come up in the star rating thread talking about shoot style. I thought it might be good to start a thread about different kinds of psychology. Different styles, genres, time periods, and regions use different psychologies in their matches. Sometimes that works for you and sometimes it doesn't. I know some people have a difficult time with Lucha, for example. I have really started to dig into two blind spots in the past year (classic british and shoot style) and each has taken a minute to digest and get used to.
So what works for you? What doesn't? What do you have trouble with? What are some interesting comparisons and contrasts you have come across or thought about?
I've been struggling to figure out how to answer this because different matches have different psychology within the same style, genre, time period and region. Lucha title matches have different psych from lucha brawls. The psychology of a Midnight Express vs Fantastics match is different from Flair vs Luger. Shit, look at Spring Stampede 94. Cactus & Maxx Payne vs Nasty Boys Dustin Rhodes vs Buck Vader vs The Boss Flair vs Steamboat All matches from the same show and have different psychology. 3 of them are brawls and are all still different. For me what works is the stuff that makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by elliott on Aug 19, 2018 23:44:35 GMT -5
Bossrock said: First, in response to this "have found myself more drawn to the shoot-inspired yet still somewhat traditional wrestling of BattlArts." I would strongly recommend checking out UWF 1.0 in detail. They haven't fully developed the style yet and are still trying to figure out what works. You'll see a ton of piledrivers, elbow drops, knee drops, body slams, and traditional Pro-Wrestling moves. Even the occasional dive off the top rope. Guys like Perro Aguayo, Gran Hamada, Misioneros de la Muerte, Dutch Mantell, Bob Sweetan, MS-1, Scott Casey, Mark Lewin, Leo Burke etc all work UWF 1.0. UWF 1.0 is much more similar to BattlArts than it is to late period RINGS or even UWF 2.0 On the bolded part...This isn't true. There are allegedly a few occasions in RINGS where the finish was pre-determined but they'd go out and have a "fight." But it really wasn't a fight....it was more sparring. An actual fight would have guys actually trying to knock each other out which you can't do if you have a pre-determined finish. Beyond that, every shoot style match I've seen you can tell the guys are clearly cooperating with each other. They leave themselves open for counters and transitions to keep the pace of the match moving in ways they clearly wouldn't if you're in a real shoot fight. I remember waaaaay back in the day jdw would talk about guys "feeding a limb" to someone. This was a way to describe when Wrestler A is controlling a sequence but he clearly leaves an arm, a leg, hand, ankle, neck, (whatever) clearly open or available or even manueveurs it into a better position for a counter in order for Wrestler B to snatch it and build to a counter. It isn't overt and is sometimes imperceptible, but if you are watching closely or have watched enough of it and are familiar with what real MMA looks like, you can absolutely see it happening. The highest end guys like Tamura, Kohsaka and Han you can barely tell they're doing it, but it is how they made the style work. Every "shoot style match" you've seen the guys are cooperating 100% as much as Flair and Jumbo Tsuruta cooperated with people in the 80s and AJ Styles & Okada do today. When MMA became all the rage in Japan and some of the shoot style guys started working actual MMA matches, this reality of shoot style cooperation manifested itself. Kiyoshi Tamura was the best shoot style wrestler ever and actually has at least one match (off the top of my head) that people aren't sure to this day if they were works or shoots. But when he went into real shoots, his career was hurt by two things. The first being the lack of weight divisions in Japan leading him to fight much bigger guys all the time that just wore him down. The other thing was that he had a rep for leaving himself open for his opponent because it had become second nature for him due to his time in UWFi & RINGS leaving himself open. I understand your point of view, but I respectfully disagree with it. I mean, I don't really see how something like Vader vs Takada isn't performance art but Vader vs Sting is? One of the big things I'm struggling with is where to rank the best RINGS matches. Personally, my favorite matches are wild out of control brawls. If you told me two previously unseen Terry Funk classics were just found, one a brawl in Puerto Rico with Invader 1 and the other an title match against Nick Bockwinkel, I'm watching the Invader 1 match first. Stuff like Hansen vs Andre, Dump vs Chigusa, Empty Arena, Magnum vs Tully etc will rank super duper high on my list. But when I watch the great shoot stylists like Tamura, Volk Han & Kohsaka, I think it is the highest level of wrestling performance art there is. It is the most consistently "realistic" pro wrestling to ever exist on film in terms of "looking" like real fighting (which at its core, is what pro wrestling is: pretend fighting) while still having the flair, drama, and excitement of cooperative pro wrestling. Every great shoot style match ever would have been worse if it was an actual shoot. This is all fair and not really stuff I can argue against because it just comes back to opinion. All that stuff that doesn't work for you, works for me. Different strokes, to each his own, all that stuff. Agreed with this. Lucha brawls are the best. I'll have a bunch on my list and will rank them really highly. Chicana vs MS-1 will be my #1 and there are another 5 or 6 I'd consider for the top 20. If this was a strictly favorites list, it'd be like half lucha brawls. I disagree with the rest about lucha title matches and mat work. The best lucha mat work is my favorite style of mat work after the best shoot style mat work. There's a beauty and grace to the best lucha mat work that you don't find in Japanese or US style mat work that makes it more balletic. I see and understand the often used "too cooperative" critique, but it is something that doesn't bother me in good lucha mat work. Obviously when its shitty, its shitty. But that's the case for any style. Personally, I've always loved stuff like Santo and Blue Panther rolling around on the ground together.
|
|
|
Post by fxnj on Aug 20, 2018 1:50:44 GMT -5
I disagree with the rest about lucha title matches and mat work. The best lucha mat work is my favorite style of mat work after the best shoot style mat work. There's a beauty and grace to the best lucha mat work that you don't find in Japanese or US style mat work that makes it more balletic. I see and understand the often used "too cooperative" critique, but it is something that doesn't bother me in good lucha mat work. Obviously when its shitty, its shitty. But that's the case for any style. Personally, I've always loved stuff like Santo and Blue Panther rolling around on the ground together. That's exactly why lucha matwork doesn't appeal to me, lol. It's two guys fighting tooth and nail for holds that have the potential to break bones. It shouldn't be "balletic." It should look grueling, explosive, and hard-fought.
|
|
|
Post by elliott on Aug 20, 2018 2:30:40 GMT -5
I get it. And there are absolutely exceptions. Casas vs Santo 91 & 97 standing out for some completely brutal mat work. Satanico is another guy who is great at building drama through intense mat work. I'd recommend the Gran Cochise match of course, but even more so the 83 Sangre Chicana match and the 1992 Pierroth Jr match. The Pierroth match in particular is an awesome match.
What I like about the more balletic beautiful lucha mat work is that it is so different from all the other mat work. But I get not digging it.
|
|
|
Post by microstatistics on Aug 20, 2018 19:57:10 GMT -5
I'd argue that the matwork in Santo vs. Casas 97 is actually pretty weak. It has a purpose but none of it looks particularly good. That and the weak limb selling (from Santo especially) is my big problem with that match because the second half is off the charts great.
|
|
|
Post by bossrock on Aug 20, 2018 21:11:47 GMT -5
It's funny, because for the longest time I never understood the hype with Santo-Casas '97 but on a recent re-watch I loved it. The submission work is great but to me that's not even the best part. It's the stuff in between where their hatred boils over and they just smack the shit out of each other.
|
|
|
Post by microstatistics on Aug 20, 2018 23:29:06 GMT -5
Yeah, those apron exchanges and the final third or so in general is nuts. Santo/Casas 97 is must see for anyone, just for the stylistic uniqueness, historical build and ultra aggressive exchanges. If you have stuff like Casas smirking while Santo is pulling him by the hair in a surfboard, in the most violent manner possible. But you also have stuff like Santo barely kicking Casas with his bad leg and Casas taking a really light bump in the corner and having to oversell it to compensate.
The latter is the kind of thing lucha lovers give a pass to but immediately rip apart any joshi or modern NJPW match that contains a weak offensive sequence. The formulaic nature and obviously cooperative sequences are also things that annoy me about lucha.
|
|
|
Post by Cap on Aug 24, 2018 8:04:29 GMT -5
This sort of started to come up in the star rating thread talking about shoot style. I thought it might be good to start a thread about different kinds of psychology. Different styles, genres, time periods, and regions use different psychologies in their matches. Sometimes that works for you and sometimes it doesn't. I know some people have a difficult time with Lucha, for example. I have really started to dig into two blind spots in the past year (classic british and shoot style) and each has taken a minute to digest and get used to.
So what works for you? What doesn't? What do you have trouble with? What are some interesting comparisons and contrasts you have come across or thought about?
I've been struggling to figure out how to answer this because different matches have different psychology within the same style, genre, time period and region. Lucha title matches have different psych from lucha brawls. The psychology of a Midnight Express vs Fantastics match is different from Flair vs Luger. Shit, look at Spring Stampede 94. Cactus & Maxx Payne vs Nasty Boys Dustin Rhodes vs Buck Vader vs The Boss Flair vs Steamboat All matches from the same show and have different psychology. 3 of them are brawls and are all still different. For me what works is the stuff that makes sense. This is a good point. However I would say that it is a matter differences in differences. I would say that we could all probably look at 80s US wrestling and 80s Lucha and 80s Japanese wrestling and be able to point out some general differences in the structure and tropes - in turn a very broad psychology. Within each of those we could probably identify - what - at least 5 different types of matches that have their own structure and tropes and, again, in turn different psychologies. That is why it is tough to fully define. I think people can get hung up at any level. We all know people who "just can't get into lucha" maybe save a match or two. We also probably know people who can't stand contemporary indy or WWE or joshi or death matches. I know someone who has trouble getting into the vast majority of Japanese wrestling.
The point is more that as wrestling fans we engage endless different "psychologies". I like to think of them as different languages and dialects almost. I think we all have a few we lean toward and a few that will have less representation on our list because, even if we like them, they just don't resonate as much with us. That can happen at the broad level for people or the more narrow.
I have trouble with deathmatch wrestling. I certainly don't dislike it on the whole. There is great deathmatch wrestling and I often really like it when people bring deathmatch tropes into more traditional pro wrestling settings (necro butcher, nick gage, and jimmy havoc for example), but as a stock type of wrestling it just isn't really my thing. I have been trying to figure out how to articulate it without making it sound like the nature of the violence turns me off because I don't think that is it. However, I still haven't been able to come up with it. I think its a matter of how escalation can work and maybe a matter of excess. Not sure.
|
|