Post by Strobe on Jan 3, 2018 23:41:12 GMT
This is a thread to discuss matches that you think are great and the possible flaws in them.
I'll chuck in some examples and counterarguments to get us started.
Bret/Austin Mania 13 is my favourite US match, but why didn't Austin go for the Million Dollar Dream at any point? It used to be his finisher, it was a submission match and it could've provided a fantastic callback spot with Bret kicking off the ropes like the SS match finish but there are no pinfalls here and he is struggling to hold on. There are two reasons why this was likely a smart move to not include though. 1) Austin's character was becoming more and more of a badass and it worked better for him to want to just beat Bret until he quit rather than put him in a submission; 2) More importantly, the double turn was being cemented here, so putting Bret in such a vulnerable position as struggling in the Dream would likely not be the wisest play.
Why was Steamboat not trying to rip Savage's throat out at Mania III? Savage tried to end Steamboat's career, if not outright kill him, and The Dragon is not a ball of rage and tries to beat Savage with lots of rollups. It is the sort of thing we often rag on blood feuds for today, where instead of going out there and having a match that fits the story, they go for the Meltzer **** workrate match. One defence is that if you see their February Toronto match, Steamer's aggression gets the better of him and this is his last shot at Savage, to get the revenge of taking his title. But that doesn't help everyone watching at home who wasn't in the crowd at the Maple Leaf Gardens that night. The match's place in history shows they made the right call though, even if I think the match would have been better and more fitting with more hate and blood. Knowing they'd have not just a huge crowd but a massive PPV/closed circuit audience and that this show was going to be historically memorable, they decided to put on a match with a pace and style that was uncommon in the WWF of that time, making it stand out and make a lasting impact that my "better" fictional encounter very well may not have had.
I'll be adding some more later, but have at it. And try to include matches you think are genuinely great. We can all list flaws in matches typically considered great that we didn't like much or think are overrated as that's precisely why we think that. And I know I sort of showed that my two examples could be considered non-flaws but that's sort of the point as well, to point out why the match works in spite of what would be a flaw in other circumstances.
I'll chuck in some examples and counterarguments to get us started.
Bret/Austin Mania 13 is my favourite US match, but why didn't Austin go for the Million Dollar Dream at any point? It used to be his finisher, it was a submission match and it could've provided a fantastic callback spot with Bret kicking off the ropes like the SS match finish but there are no pinfalls here and he is struggling to hold on. There are two reasons why this was likely a smart move to not include though. 1) Austin's character was becoming more and more of a badass and it worked better for him to want to just beat Bret until he quit rather than put him in a submission; 2) More importantly, the double turn was being cemented here, so putting Bret in such a vulnerable position as struggling in the Dream would likely not be the wisest play.
Why was Steamboat not trying to rip Savage's throat out at Mania III? Savage tried to end Steamboat's career, if not outright kill him, and The Dragon is not a ball of rage and tries to beat Savage with lots of rollups. It is the sort of thing we often rag on blood feuds for today, where instead of going out there and having a match that fits the story, they go for the Meltzer **** workrate match. One defence is that if you see their February Toronto match, Steamer's aggression gets the better of him and this is his last shot at Savage, to get the revenge of taking his title. But that doesn't help everyone watching at home who wasn't in the crowd at the Maple Leaf Gardens that night. The match's place in history shows they made the right call though, even if I think the match would have been better and more fitting with more hate and blood. Knowing they'd have not just a huge crowd but a massive PPV/closed circuit audience and that this show was going to be historically memorable, they decided to put on a match with a pace and style that was uncommon in the WWF of that time, making it stand out and make a lasting impact that my "better" fictional encounter very well may not have had.
I'll be adding some more later, but have at it. And try to include matches you think are genuinely great. We can all list flaws in matches typically considered great that we didn't like much or think are overrated as that's precisely why we think that. And I know I sort of showed that my two examples could be considered non-flaws but that's sort of the point as well, to point out why the match works in spite of what would be a flaw in other circumstances.
