No clue really. Haven't looked at my post count in ages.

ask him what it was like doing shawn's wife!

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7e1dS01TiSk&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7e1dS01TiSk&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

look at this, 403 views in less then a day. people love Bret Hart/HBK threads. It's a ratings explosion

I promise you that Bret Hart couldn't have carried John Cena to the WrestleMania main event HBK did because at the end of the day Bret was very good...but he wasn't great.

I would beg to differ. Bret could carry a mop to a great match just like HBK can. Different styles, but the same level of workers.

The only advantage HBK has is he is still wrestling.

This fued will never end. Germany will own up to there war crimes before this will ever end

They only matches of Bret's that are true classics were against: British Bulldog, Mr. Perfect, Shawn Michaels, Steve Austin, and Roddy Piper.

HBK had classic matches with John Cena, Vince McMahon, Hulk Hogan, and Randy Orton...all after coming back from a broken back. Also, that isn't counting all his other classics with the same guys Bret has and then some.

both were in the nwo

Bret Hart wrestled none of those people that you say Shawn had classics with. Michaels wrestled all those guys Bret had classics with besides maybe Piper. Think about that.

So Piper vs Micheals never happened ever?

he also wrestled a great match with Kevin Nash, a pretty damned good match with Yokozuna, some good matches with Sid. Damn what do you want from him? He's retired now.

Both of them were on the same level, but now one of them's retired. But when they were working at the same time, it's not like one outshone the other.

Bret was also a better drawing champion.

Shawn and Bret are the two best wrestlers from their generation. Hating one and loving the other seems insane, but I suppose that sums up most pro wrestling fans pretty well.

Shawn vs Bret summary:

Shawn vacates the title in Feb 97' because he's absolutely unwilling to put ANYONE over. This includes Bret, Sid, Mankind, Steve Austin & the Undertaker. If Shawn had his way Mankind and Austin would have never won a world title.

WCW approaches Bret with one of the largest deals ever. Bret instantly turns it down out of loyalty to Vince McMahon. Bret enters a lifetime contract with the WWF for far less money than the WCW was offering him.

Vince forces Bret to go heel, claiming there is nothing left for him to do as a face.

Vince explains that Shawn Michaels is now the top heel, and that creatively, he doesn't know what to do with Bret because he's no longer a face in America.

Vince tells Bret he can no longer afford to pay him, Bret offers to work for an amount Vince can pay, but Vince tells Bret that he should go back to WCW and see if their offer still stands.

WCW agrees to take Bret, so Vince lets him out of his lifetime WWF contract and writes up a temporary one for his last months in the company (as he's still world champion at the time). The contract gives Bret full creative control over his career and character during those last months.

Vince agrees that Bret should be able to go out how he chooses, because of their relationship, the effort Bret put in working nightly for small payoffs to keep the company alive, and his loyalty in staying with Vince.

During the weeks before survivor series Bret suggests multiple ways in which he could drop the world title. His ideas include Austin, Mankind, the Undertaker or Kane going over him. He is willing to drop the title to Shawn anywhere other than the Canadian shows.

The day of Survivor series (in Canada) Bret and Vince agree that the main event will finish with a run in by the Hart Foundation and DX. Bret will come out on Raw the next day, say goodbye to the fans and vacate the title.

We all know what happens next, Vince, Brisco, Earl Hebner, Shawn Michaels and HHH lie through their teeth.. Vinces walks into the dressing room to let Bret punch him out, because he knows that he was in the wrong, but he felt he had to do it.. yada yada..

The Evil Mr McMahon character is born and a bunch of marks don't realize that Vince is in character when he says "Bret Screwed Bret"



WrestleMania 14: After a 10 year career, the beyond over Steve Austin is set to win his first world title. On the day of the show Michaels says that he wont drop the title to Austin and that he wants to vacate it. Only after a confrontation with the Undertaker, in which he threatens Michaels life, does Michaels walk out to the ring and job cleanly.



Wonderful. :)

Those are classic matches?

HBGay doesnt have a clean victory over Bret. WM12 Bret retains in the time limit Piper stipulated, then gorilla screws him over with a distraction.

And we know SS'97.

HBK cant beat Bret.

Zen gtfo, sock.

I haven't read this thread at all because I honestly can't be bothered.

I will say though I enjoy the irony in people telling Bret, who was directly involved in in the situation to get over it, while they continue to give their own opinions still 11 years later....

thats Kofi Kingston btw

It is a fake sport. Wins don't matter, but the performances that occur in the ring do and Shawn Michaels is better than Bret Hart in that regard (past, present, or future).

Of course it's a "fake" sport..if it were real HBK wouldnt last 10 seconds in there with a guy like Hart...and many others for that matter.

As for getting better performances? Bret at 40 was the best wrestler in the company. HBK was 32 and in his prime and still wasnt the man. That says a ton.

Bret got the best out of the wrestlers he faced, moreso than any other guy. And I'm talking about the guys BOTH Bret and HBK have faced.

They both suck

Well even though I like Bret better, Michaels vs. Perfect is unfair to compare to Hart vs. Perfect cuz Perfect was a shell of himself. Michaels vs. Austin wasn't as good as Hart vs. Austin because Micahels back was fucked. I've only seen one of Michaels vs. Bulldog from 1992, obvious Bret's match was better because it was given more time and Bret was a better worker at thetime. Though I'll assume Michaels vs. Bulldog wasn't as good, there I have no excuse for Michaels.

And also, Bret and Owen had a WAY better match than Michaels vs. Owen.

But Michaels did get more out of Sid... that does say a lot.

I mean they were both fuckin phenomenal, that's what it comes down to really. They both stole the show on a consistant basis. They both just don't like each other and rightfully so, it's just the way it is. It doesn'tmean one was better than the other.

Perhaps you didn't notice where you were posting. On TPWW, the only way to gain any real cred is to ruthlessly mock the crippled and dead. :D

I'm not clicking that

This is just absolutely hilarious. I've got The One so riled up right now...he's just absolutely going OFF on me through reppage...never seen such lengthy reps before, he is beside himself. He is out of control.
If you are recieving pos reps, be sure to know you're only acquiring them because he MUST neg me again, asap.

I mean, to wonder how Bret would be able to beat up HBK in a real fight....yeah the Dungeon produces some legit badasses. HBK would have lasted 30 seconds with Stu before Stu threw the pansy out of his house in shame.

lol @ Stu throwing HBK out

Source?

Have to agree with what ABT said, even though both were great for the WWF/E

Oh yeah Zen, ToVo is really flipping his lid right now. You must have him really worked up for him not to post anything about it in the thread.

Shawn Michaels' refusal to put Austin over has been mentioned in a bunch of wrestling books... You have to remember that Shawn is the guy who had a "No Job Policy" in his territory... His "territory" of course, being the United Sates of America in their entirety..... :roll:

Anyway, best to go straight to the Source. Mark Calaway is asked directly about the incident during an interview on Off The Record and confirms it. :y:

They discuss the incident 3:30 into this part of the interview:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ldZBXoK3zwo&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ldZBXoK3zwo&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

...or being an overbearing self-righteous asshole.

You mean like you right now?

I am not a smark on a wrestling board talking down about smarks on a wrestling board. I also don't present opinion as fact.

I do not believe that Bret Hart is better than Shawn Michaels, and I damn sure don't believe Shawn Michaels is a pussy like oh so many Hart fans want to claim, even though the only claim those in the dungeon have is that they are tough because they got stretched by an old man who they trusted with their bodies. Of course, I'd think I was a bad mother fucker too if I punched out my boss who just stood there.

I have not posted anything that says I am better than anyone, that I am above wrestling fans, or just in general being a prick. I will admit that I am an asshole, but at least I can admit it...as does Shawn Michaels repeatedly when discussing his past. Bret Hart can't even handle looking down his nose at anyone in the business who wasn't family or friend.

He seems pretty riled to me. He went off on me in a positive rep... it was kind of odd.

Cool. Thanks for that.

I believe The One only posts via rep messages these days.

I P.M.ed this to the one, but I kinda figured how Bret definitely did better business than Shawn. I don't really have sources but I kinda used common sense.

well you need to think about when Shawn had his first reign which was in '96 and business was SHITE, and Bret was gone. Bret won his first title in 1992 which I dunno how good business was for sure, but it was defnitely better than 1996, which we've established is terrible.

Bret's second reign in 1994, again I don't think business was all that bad, he had that great feud with Owen, and with Backlund, again not Hogan or Austin numbers but if you think about it, it was probably pretty decent.

1995-'96 he was more transitional I'd think he probably didn't do THAT GREAT business, but at the same time he was heading into the rumble and Mania which always do good business. His next 2 reigns, (one was like one night so it doesn't really count) came in 1997 all in the time business started to pick up again, with the rise of Austin, DX and the Hart Foundation.

Michaels won the title in November and business was good I'd assume cuz it was the start of the attitude era but not enough to make up for his previous 2 title reigns (I believe it to be 2 cuz he lost to Sid then won in back right)?

It was more timing than anything, but looking at it... facts are facts, just think about when Bret had the belt, and when Shawn had his.

Both guy are gold in the ring, HBK got a little bit more charisma than Bret but thats all, outside the ring they are both assholes, at least Michaels and his fans knows it, Bret still play the victim and thats the only thing I hate about him. There might be one other thing I hate about him, his little bitch called Zen !!!!

How exactly is Bret an asshole outside the ring? Multiple people I know have met him and said he was a stand up guy and those opinions coincide with every report I've seen.

Sure, most of the time I'd prefer to watch an HBM match, but I'm not sure how HBK being a selfish prick makes Bret one by association....?

btw: The neg rep from the "Kliq" was a good laugh. Everything I said in the large post is either caught on film in "Wrestling With Shadows", written in wrestling books or said in interviews/shoots. I'd be interested to see you guys prove any of it untrue?