Personality vs. Wrestling Ability
 

I was watching some discussion on this topic. Is one more important than the other?

Yes. Personality. You can be the greatest in the ring, but if you have the personality and charisma of a wooden board, you aren't going anywhere.

On the other hand, you can enjoy a terrible wrestler if he has a good personality/charisma to make up for it.

Don't forget the fact that what you or I consider to be a terrible gimmick might be enjoyed by a near consensus of fans. Really, what matters most is the talent's ability to engage fans and secure their money on merchandise, tickets and PPV buys.

I personally prefer Wrestling Ability, but a good mix of both is always welcome.

RVD sold me on his ring-work. Guy had amazing charisma in the ring, though I never thought he had much on the mic.

Not everyone can out-promo Bill Alfonso though...

Personality is the most necessary but a good performer needs both

To make it in WWE you need personality. To make it anywhere else I'd say wrestling ability.

This.....

I generally need to be interested in a wrestlers character before I get interested enough in their matches.

It's mostly why I'm not a fan of Daniel Bryan. I know that he's good in the ring, but I find his character so boring and tedious that I'm not interested in his matches in the slightest. Same used to apply to Benoit for me.

Personality and it's not even close

Personality, hence why Otunga is awesome and Danielson isnt.

Rasslin ability is more serious than personality which is why Dean Malenko is the greatest rassler ever bitches!

Which is exactly why "anywhere else" is not nearly on the same caliber as World Wrestling Entertainment, and never will be.

For Sports Entertainment: Personality. For the indies: Personality is practically poison.

this i think at this point the wwe audience has been conditioned to hate wrestling. it seems like they wish they were watching a variety show instead.

wrestling in mexico currently generates more income. the world is bigger than the us folks.

Well, I'm not worried about Mexico. I'm only concerned with my country. But I will type that Mexico is a very poor and primitive country that lacks education and original entertainment, so it doesn't shock me that those people get overly excited about a fake sport. NOTE - I have been to Mexico and they enjoy WWE above everything else.

no they enjoy CMLL above everything else.

When I went to Mexico, I had a Hulk Hogan t-shirt on and I had several Mexicans praise the shirt and talk to me about WWE wrestling. I also was in a store one time and a local newspaper had a picture of the Undertaker on it, and the store owner and I chatted about WWE for several minutes. World Wrestling Entertainment is a world-wide thing for a reason.

My limted experience is more important than fact!!!!

good for you. none of that means anything toward the argument tho. bothAAA and CMLL are bigger in mexico (and texas) than the WWE. point in fact due to that largemexican fanbase in mexico when the fed runs the cow palace that cant draw as well as either of the previously mentioned promotions. your personal expiriance of having people adress the merch you were wearing and not the merch you werent wearing means little.

See I'd take a Dean Malenko over Santino Marella any day of the week. I'd rather see a good match than a farce wasting my time.

It means WWE is not just an American thing. I've never heard of CMLL and I only know about AAA thanks to my memory of the PWI magazine, and I've never seen those numbers, and again, even if it were true, I stand by my first statement - Mexico is a very poor country hungry for anything, and since WWE cannot go there all the time, or Texas, of course, local indy feds are going to do well, but if WWE was there weekly, more people would go to WWE events. But we can agree to disagree.

I wonder how many people can spot the irony here.

The world is not bigger than the U.S....except China...unless you mean collectively.

Are you serious RN dtts?

entertainment wise maybe, wrestling wise, hell no. You must one of those people who actually think CM Punk is the best wrestler in the world, lol.

For the record, despite my post, I'm a fan of both. I love a good, technical match, as much as I love a good entertaining story as well. Both have their places in wrestling and WWE.

Cm punk is up there he's no danielson.

Wrestling Ability!!!

"Wrestling ability" is great, but true "wrestling ability" isn't just cool moves. Personality, charisma, and the ability to tell a story that fans get emotionally invested in (to the point of paying money to see it) is what wrestling has always been and will always be about.

Yeah, but having both can make you a total package, which is rare.

You can't just say "Personality = Mic Skills" and "Wrestling Ability = Moves". That is what makes wrestling more than just acting and more than just glorified gymnastics.

RVD and Chris Benoit only cut a "good promo" a handful of times, but they both had charisma and personality in the ring and it sold their character and their psychology.

I almost want to copy and paste my rant on TNA from awhile back. TNA has bar-none the most athletic roster in the world, but it doesn't mean shit because all they can fucking do is flips and loud kicks in their shiny pants. If you are only over because of cool moves, you won't stay over because people become desensitized to your cool moves. Same thing that happened with the overuse of blood, weapons, run-ins, etc.

I'm not too familiar with him. In any case, how am I suppose to know who to cheer for and boo for if I don't know anything about the men's personalities?

Professional wrestling always has been and always will be sports-ENTERTAINMENT. The athleticism seen in the ring is only half of what makes the business as unique and successful as it has become.

Take a look at the last major boom period in the industry beginning about 1997. It was during that time that some of the most memorable moments came to fruition. Skits like D-Generation X dressing up like the Nation of Domination and the Corporation or using a tank to invade WCW headquarters amidst the Monday night ratings wars were segments that will undoubtedly live in our minds for eternity.

Where would the Austin/McMahon feud have gone if it relied simply on in-ring action? The answer is not very far. It was the back and forth promos between those two rivals that made for months worth of great television. Do you think that The Rock would be making movies in Hollywood if he were never allowed to cut promos and show the audience his quick wit and unique sense of humor?

If a show like “The Sopranos” were to only have nonsensical violence without any storyline, it never would have made it past a first season. If “ER” were only about tales from the operating room and never dwelled on the lives of it’s physicians, they probably never would have won an award.

:y: This is true, I think maybe Ric Flair is in this category.can anyone else give an example?

Finding a 'total package' isn't that hard. There are loads of examples:

Kurt Angle, Shawn Michaels, Chris Jericho, Steve Austin, Eddie Guerrero, The Rock, The Undertaker, CM Punk, Sting, Booker T, Curt Hennig, Randy Savage, John Cena, Edge, Christian, Sheamus, Dolph Ziggler, DDP... the list goes on and on.