The six sided ring sucks.
 

There I said it.

And so have about 30 other people on this board.

I don't like octagons, but I don't go around telling people about it...

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

ROFLMAO "Stickman"

lol good stuff

I agree. Six sides is not enough. Why settle for six when you can have..... SIXTY?!!!

LOOK AT ALL THEM EXTRA IMPACT POINTS!!!!!!

Agreed, they did it just to be different, but honestly, it doesn't bother me. They can pull of a good match in there, just as easily as a four sided. If they want to go over board and throw us a new design of a ring just to catch someone's eye, fine. But it in no way effects how I think their product is.

:shifty:

I mean...6 sides? That's like...2 more the needed. Fuckers.

Why settle for one six sided ring when you can settle for... 7!!!!! TNA should have World War 7, where it's a huge 60 man battle royal between 7 rings and it's all pinfall and submission!

I like the 6-sided ring. LOL at all the Disturbed316 comments.

I have no formal opinion on the six-sided ring. I know how this must disappoint you.

At least TNA is trying something different. You can't critise innovatism

lol @ me. "yes"

genius

LAMO @ Hexagonal ring.

and lol @ AJ Styles:

Guy: OK AJ, if you could name one thing that makes TNA unique from the rest of the feds and makes you guys stand on your own, what would it be

AJ: You wanna know what it is; I'll tell you what it is, Our Ring has 6 sides.

:lol:

...and Jeff Jarrett or course

that was a real comment btw. not making that up

I'm sure it was. The lasers are also a good reason to sit through an hour of crap to watch too

If Vince would have had the idea to amend the field in the XFL a bit more, it would have been a success. He should have made the field square. From the mid-point, create a 50 yard field in all directions. Whoever has the ball can run in whatever direction they want. Goal posts in all 4 directions. Now that would have worked!:lol: :lol:

You can criticise innovation when it's not innovation.

They didn't bring anything new to the table with a six sided ring.

Anyway, I don't give a shit about the ring. It could be 2-sided, four sided, double ply, triple threat, or 4 dimensional, it's the action that makes wrestling wrestling. And TNA lacks action (Sportfests aside) and drama and all the things that make wrestling good to watch.

This is true. Before I noticed you made this point, though, I was going to ask why you can't criticize innovation. If we couldn't criticize any "innovation" ever, the world would be full of stupid ass "innovations" to everything even moreso than it already is.

They should fight in virtual reality chambers.

This is true, as the criticism of innovation is how we refine innovation. My first thought, howver, was that it wasn't innovation. Innovation implies something new and inspired. This, I would dare argue, is the very antithesis of innovation; They nicked a concept from south of the border and used it as a gimmick instead of innovation.

Yes, but we're not talking about the world in general are we? We're talking about the wrestling industry which has become notorious for repetition and recycling old crap. Although the six sided ring isn't a whole lot of clever, it's still a sign that TNA is trying something fundamentally different with their product. Hopefully they will continue to think outside the box and hit the spot with one of their ideas eventually.

Except that when you add a new "innovation" to a business, then book it like latter-day WCW, you're in no way bettering yourself.

They added a NEW GIMMICK BAH GAWD, then booked TNA as though they were trying to run it into the ground. I'm missing the "fundamental" difference here, I guess, since fundmentally they are providing the same action.

I like the six-sided ring. It adds to the matches by allowing more men to stand on the outsides, and more cool looking spots because of the ease at which you can bounce off the ropes and attack at any angle.

Oh, and if saying "They just want to be different" is supposed to be an insult, it's really not, because they admit it:

"What we have been doing to separate us from everyone else is the strong emphasis on youth," Tenay commented. "It's never been more evident that you need to have a core group of recognizable talent. At the same time, you need to have new, young, fresh talent that's being put on your programs on a regular basis. I think from an esthetic standpoint, the visual of people tuning in and seeing a six-sided ring, I think is a big help. It separates us from everybody else. Personally, I like the aspect of it and the different angles that guys can springboard off of and dive off of. If nothing else, it will cause that person who has that remote control to stop and take a look at your product." - Mike Tenay, SLAM Wrestling

I'm surprised Sadistic hasn't come in to tell us the six-sided ring=great storytelling.

Want to know something else? The Pounce is the most DEVASTATING MOVE IN ALL OF SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT.

So does the emo crowd, doesn't make either one of them less of a joke.

OMGSTFU THIS IS WRESTLING NOT SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT :foc:

But that's different. TNA is wrestling. Emo kids are douche bags. Totally different.

Douchebags indeed.
=D

Yeah, but TNA separates itself with lackluster production and booking that makes the WWE look solid.

If being different means that you make your product look like shit, then yes, it's a good thing. But I don't like them for being different any more than I like the White Stripes (OMG! NOT BEING ABLE TO PLAY YOUR INSTRUMENT IS DIFFERENT!)

So im gussing that people dont like the six sided ring

FUCK THE SHUT UP

Have to agree with everyone here. The size of the surface is far more important than the matches. Imagine Kurt Angle vs. Bret Hart in an iron man match.........but the ring didn't have 4 sides! How much would that suck!?!1

You're missing the point. People are saying 6-sided rings suck, not "the size of the surface is far more important than the matches". (So you didn't actually agree with anybody "here".)

However, something like a ring that sucks would perhaps hinder the feeling people get if they imagine Kurt Angle vs. Bret Hart in an Iron Man Match.

Thanks for the laugh, tardboy
 

1. It's shape. Not size. What are you, five?

2. Too bad they don't have match quality going for them either. Then your argument might hold water, except:

3. Nobody's saying that number of sides = match quality. Least, not til you came along.

Sarcasm can be a powerful tool, when the mind behind it isn't limp as a noodle.