Barbwire Massacre!!!!!!! - Page 3

**DaVe** · 11-28-2005, 07:24 AM

Sure, if you watch an AJ Styles match or a Christopher Daniels match or a Sabu match you're going to see spot after spot after spot. But that's their style, and some people, myself included, have taken it as a breath of fresh air from the WWE's boring, pedantic style of scripted matches.

Who are your top wrestlers in TNA (Styles and Daniels?)? Compare their matches to a HBK or Angle match. They don't overly use any sort of spot - it is good wrestling.

How is watching Sabu hit his usual spots every match any different from a fucking Undertaker match? Taker dominates to start - opponent cheats to get the heads up - opponent has the advantage - Taker comes back with a flying clothesline - Taker does his tight rope walk thing - Taker hits the Chokeslam or Tombstone and wins.

Yeah, usually Undertaker dominates at the start. Although it may seem like it, versus any decent opponents the rest is never in that order, and sometimes it all doesn't happen. To be honest, Sabu's usual spots don't bore me, it is just the style of wrestling TNA is as a whole.

Or a WWE tag team match: Evenly matched to start - faces get some offense in - heels divide the ring and work over one of the faces - face gets the hot tag - hot tag leads to a face victory, or the heels win by cheating. Every time like fucking clockwork.

WWE is beginning to pick up a little in its tag division so this isn't always the case, but yeah, that is usually the case.

#1 wrestling promotion in the US today has a lot of spotfests too

For example?

You're comparing spots to Undertaker, who nobody gives a shit about?

Anyway, basically... To conclude:

It's not that good wrestling can't have spots, it's that you can't use spots instead of good wrestling. TNA tends to be spotfests, which are not conducive to a good match. CZC tends to rely on spots and "hardcore" shit to get it done.

**Kane Knight** · 11-28-2005, 10:58 AM

Awwww...Poor Dave...You gonna pretend that Undertaker is a relavent and contemporay superstar?

**Fox** · 11-28-2005, 05:04 PM

Who are your top wrestlers in TNA (Styles and Daniels?)? Compare their matches to a HBK or Angle match. They don't overly use any sort of spot - it is good wrestling.

Good wrestling is a subjective term; it means different things to different people. You compare the styles of Styles(no pun intended)/Daniels to HBK/Angle, and that's pretty easy to do since both pairs of men wrestled 30 minute iron matches against each other in the same month, with Styles/Daniels at Bound for Glory and HBK/Angle at the RAW Homecoming.

In my opinion, the Styles/Daniels match was by far the better encounter. It was quick, the wrestling was sound, and the moves performed perfectly. The psychology was good too: the history of these two was hyped by Tenay, about how Daniels and Styles have always shadowed each other, which spilled into the 30 minute frantic battle to score a single pinfall. Both men were tired and bruised (Styles especially) after the encounter and with less than 10 seconds to go, Styles hit the Styles Clash to win.

HBK/Angle was good, there's not doubt about that: but it was only good by WWE wrestling standards. The big-time indies like TNA and ROH feature fast paced, unscripted and highly entertaining matches, and Daniels/Styles was the peak of that style. The WWE wrestles slow paced, methodical and planned out matches: watch them from 1999-2001 and now and you will see a difference. The fact that cruiserweights have been told to tone it down is a perfect example of this.

HBK/Angle was both more slowly paced and faster than Styles/Daniels: in the same 30 minutes it took AJ to score one pin, HBK and Angle scored four (five if you count HBK's running out of time). In this way, it was faster than Styles/Daniels. In every other way it was slower: more rest holds and submissions, and more brawling. Of course, all of this was done as well as it can be, as Angle and HBK are both masters of the mat. Still, it did not have the same explosive quality of the Styles/Daniels match.

#1 wrestling promotion in the US today has a lot of spotfests too

For example?

I was referring to the way that they style their matches, as their "spots" are slower and less exciting, yet they are usually the same every match.

Take any wrestler: Chris Jericho for example. He hits his few "spots" every match: the dropkick off the apron, the enziguri, the attempted Walls of Jericho, the winning move (Walls or Lionsault). The rest is usually just filler. The same goes for RVD: he's been limited to the split-legged moonsault, rolling thunder, and the spinning kick from the apron. The rest is usually filler. If you look closely, this can be applied to a lot of the wrestlers. Granted, they do have great matches every now and then, but they're less often than more.

It's not that good wrestling can't have spots, it's that you can't use spots instead of good wrestling. TNA tends to be spotfests, which are not conducive to a good match. CZC tends to rely on spots and "hardcore" shit to get it done.

The TNA wrestlers use all styles of wrestling: technical, brawling, high flying, lucha libre, martial arts, and they encompass them into one style. They do not leave out a storyline. Take this quote from an interview by Jason Levett of SLAM Wrestling with AJ Styles:

"For many fans, it is talent like Styles, Daniels, Petey Williams, Chris Sabin and others that are the reason they order the pay per views. It is flattering for Styles to hear that.

"It makes us feel important, I hope that TNA realizes that as well. We try to do something that you don't see anywhere else, its not just high spots its psychology and people forget that. It separates us from other wrestlers is we know how to put on a match with a bit of everything."

And people love to see it. I've had friends who hate wrestling watch an AJ Styles match and want to see more of it. He and the rest of the X-Division wrestlers are innovative, fast paced, all encompassing athletes with great skill. They are exactly the types of wrestlers that the WWE isn't allowing to shine on their own shows, because they tell the cruiserweights to slow down.

**Sadistic** · 11-28-2005, 05:11 PM

Fox you, unlike most of the board, are 100% right.

**redoneja** · 11-28-2005, 05:16 PM

WTF??? Have people forgot how to use the quote button???

And WWE is still better than TNA, which is still better than CZW. Sorry but its true.

**Xero** · 11-28-2005, 05:23 PM

Do you TNA marks know what a spotfest is?

A spotfest isn't just someone's normal arsenal. It's pulling off spots for the sake of pulling off spots. Hitting five top rope moves just to say that you've hit five top rope moves in one match. Getting a chair and hitting someone over the head with it for the sake of hitting someone over the head. Throwing someone into barbed wire and then hitting them with a light bulb for the sake of violence. They (usually) don't tell a story, they're just nonstop flashy moves, sometimes a shit load of violence, and a finish.

The X Division, except for a few, are all high flying risk takers who risk it all for what, to say that they can pull off a flipping piledriver or risk snapping someone's neck off with a Styles Clash?

**redoneja** · 11-28-2005, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xero Limit 126

Do you TNA marks know what a spotfest is?

A spotfest isn't just someone's normal arsenal. It's pulling off spots for the sake of pulling off spots. Hitting five top rope moves just to say that you've hit five top rope moves in one match. Getting a chair and hitting someone over the head with it for the sake of hitting someone over the head. They (usually) don't tell a story, they're just nonstop flashy moves, sometimes a shit load of violence, and a finish.

The X Division, except for a few, are all high flying risk takers who risk it all for what, to say that they can pull off a flipping piledriver or risk snapping someone's neck off with a Styles Clash?

See, this is how you quote someone.

Anyway Xero hits it right on the head. And I am going to take it to an extreme(no pun intended). Hulk Hogan > TNA X Division(save a few). Why?? Cause he could tell a story and relate to the fans what was happening in the ring. Its called "RING PSYCHOLOGY". It isn't about being able to do 1000 different moves from 1000 different positions, its about telling a story to the fans.

**Sadistic** · 11-28-2005, 05:30 PM

I have a pretty far out idea:

If you don't like spotfests, don't watch them.

**redoneja** · 11-28-2005, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sadistic

I have a pretty far out idea:

If you don't like spotfests, don't watch them.

I have a good idea too:

If you don't like the type of matches WWE put on, don't watch them.

**Loose Cannon** · 11-28-2005, 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sadistic

I have a pretty far out idea:

If you don't like spotfests, don't watch them.

yea, exactly what people HAVE been doing with TNA. Not watching

**Sadistic** · 11-28-2005, 05:34 PM

WWE can put on a good match.

**redoneja** · 11-28-2005, 05:36 PM

So can TNA. Just not very often.

**Destor** · 11-28-2005, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sadistic

WWE can put on a good match.

TNA could, if they would stop doing garbage spotfest.

**Xero** · 11-28-2005, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sadistic

I have a pretty far out idea:

If you don't like spotfests, don't watch them.

I have a pretty far out idea for you, too.

If you hate the way WWE is going, DON'T WATCH IT, you fucking hypocrite.

You talk about how wrestling should have a variety when all you do is praise spot fests, hardcore matches, and drop a few technical names. Wrestling should have a variety only if YOU like it, right?

I don't care if spotfests are out there. But YOU'RE the one always arguing that the WWE is shit because of Hassan, Cena, and JBL, among others. Which is why WE go back and try to get it through your little brain that you're preaching something that you obviously don't believe in.

**McLegend** · 11-28-2005, 05:40 PM

Yeah about everyone ignores Sadastic because this isn't going anywhere nor will it ever.

**Sting Fan** · 11-28-2005, 06:07 PM

Jesus no one can accept that both feds cater to different ideals and fans.

How hard is it just to accept that because you dont like it doesnt mean its shit. Oh I know because no one here is ever wrong, my bad I will go back to my cave.

**Loose Cannon** · 11-28-2005, 06:09 PM

shut the fuck up and clean up my shit in the corner

**redoneja** · 11-28-2005, 06:17 PM

lol

**DaVe** · 11-28-2005, 06:55 PM

Awwww...Poor Dave...You gonna pretend that Undertaker is a relavent and contemporay superstar?

Nah, I'm just being pedantic:

You're comparing spots to Undertaker, who nobody gives a shit about?

Quite obviously PEOPLE DO care about the Undertaker. Just not most of the smarks.

WTF??? Have people forgot how to use the quote button???

Haha, no.

It is just that copying and pasting parts and using italics is easier.

I was referring to the way that they style their matches, as their "spots" are slower and less exciting, yet they are usually the same every match.

So basically, just read what Xero Limit said.

**Kane Knight** · 11-28-2005, 08:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sadistic

I have a pretty far out idea:

If you don't like spotfests, don't watch them.

Hey, maybe that's why nobody watches TNA anymore, despite your "They will watch it again and again and again" claims.

**Kane Knight** · 11-28-2005, 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaVe

Quite obviously PEOPLE DO care about the Undertaker. Just not most of the smarks.

Or most of the wrestling fanbase, since he's lost hsi drawing power. But Hell, let'signore that, it makes yor point look more like a point instead of some silly contrary stance.

**Kane Knight** · 11-28-2005, 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sting Fan

Jesus no one can accept that both feds cater to different ideals and fans.

How hard is it just to accept that because you dont like it doesnt mean its shit. Oh I know because no one here is ever wrong, my bad I will go back to my cave.

TNA's trying to go mainstream. They are trying to appeal to a larger fanbase. They are failing.

Yeah, that doesn't make it shit.

**redoneja** · 11-28-2005, 08:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fox

Who are your top wrestlers in TNA (Styles and Daniels?)? Compare their matches to a HBK or Angle match. They don't overly use any sort of spot - it is good wrestling.

Good wrestling is a subjective term; it means different things to different people. You compare the styles of Styles(no pun intended)/Daniels to HBK/Angle, and that's pretty easy to do since both pairs of men wrestled 30 minute iron matches against each other in the same month, with Styles/Daniels at Bound for Glory and HBK/Angle at the RAW Homecoming.

In my opinion, the Styles/Daniels match was by far the better encounter. It was quick, the wrestling was sound, and the moves performed perfectly. The psychology was good too: the history of these two was hyped by Tenay, about how Daniels and Styles have always shadowed each other, which spilled into the 30 minute frantic battle to score a single pinfall. Both men were tired and bruised (Styles especially) after the encounter and with less than 10 seconds to go, Styles hit the Styles Clash to win.

HBK/Angle was good, there's not doubt about that: but it was only good by WWE wrestling standards. The big-time indies like TNA and ROH feature fast paced, unscripted and highly entertaining matches, and Daniels/Styles was the peak of that style. The WWE wrestles slow paced, methodical and planned out matches: watch them from 1999-2001 and now and you will see a difference. The fact that cruiserweights have been told to tone it down is a perfect example of this.

So is the slower pace of Japanese strong style wrestling bad?

**Kane Knight** · 11-28-2005, 08:55 PM

Also, even Sadistic admits garbage wrestling isn't wrestling. I just figured I'd point out that the definition of good wrestling isn't subjective when it ISN'T WRESTLING.

**Xero** · 11-28-2005, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sting Fan

Jesus no one can accept that both feds cater to different ideals and fans.

How hard is it just to accept that because you dont like it doesnt mean its shit. Oh I know because no one here is ever wrong, my bad I will go back to my cave.

No shit. The problem is, they've been catering for the Underground fanbase for so long, and seeing that isn't working (See: Ratings), they're starting to go more mainstream. Yeah, you fucking "WE'RE UNDERGROUND" marks, they're going mainstream and they'll be going more traditional if they want to succeed. And that's whether you fucking marks want it or not.

It seems that their idea of main stream, though, is barbed wire. They SHOULD keep what they've been doing, no doubt, but they should ALSO start catering to the casual fan who enjoy squash matches with big guys and storylines.

Yes, I know it's hard to believe, but a lot of marks like the big guys because they tend dominate.

Edit: Don't think I'm saying they don't like action, though. Big guys sell, it's a fact.

11-28-2005, 07:24 AM	#81
DaVe yeah nah good mate Posts: 1,499	Sure, if you watch an AJ Styles match or a Christopher Daniels match or a Sabu match you're going to see spot after spot after spot. But that's their style, and some people, myself included, have taken it as a breath of fresh air from the WWE's boring, pedantic style of scripted matches. Who are your top wrestlers in TNA (Styles and Daniels?)? Compare their matches to a HBK or Angle match. They don't overly use any sort of spot - it is good wrestling. How is watching Sabu hit his usual spots every match any different from a fucking Undertaker match? Taker dominates to start - opponent cheats to get the heads up - opponent has the advantage - Taker comes back with a flying clothesline - Taker does his tight rope walk thing - Taker hits the Chokeslam or Tombstone and wins. Yeah, usually Undertaker dominates at the start. Although it may seem like it, versus any decent opponents the rest is never in that order, and sometimes it all doesn't happen. To be honest, Sabu's usual spots don't bore me, it is just the style of wrestling TNA is as a whole. Or a WWE tag team match: Evenly matched to start - faces get some offense in - heels divide the ring and work over one of the faces - face gets the hot tag - hot tag leads to a face victory, or the heels win by cheating. Every time like fucking clockwork. WWE is beginning to pick up a little in its tag division so this isn't always the case, but yeah, that is usually the case. #1 wrestling promotion in the US today has a lot of spotfests too For example? You're comparing spots to Undertaker, who nobody gives a shit about? Anyway, basically... To conclude: It's not that good wrestling can't have spots, it's that you can't use spots instead of good wrestling. TNA tends to be spotfests, which are not conducive to a good match. CZC tends to rely on spots and "hardcore" shit to get it done.

11-28-2005, 10:58 AM	#82
Kane Knight Ron Paul 4 EVA Posts: 152,467	Awwww...Poor Dave...You gonna pretend that Undertaker is a relavent and contemporay superstar?

11-28-2005, 05:04 PM	#83
Fox "Ask him!" Posts: 10,075	Who are your top wrestlers in TNA (Styles and Daniels?)? Compare their matches to a HBK or Angle match. They don't overly use any sort of spot - it is good wrestling. Good wrestling is a subjective term; it means different things to different people. You compare the styles of Styles(no pun intended)/Daniels to HBK/Angle, and that's pretty easy to do since both pairs of men wrestled 30 minute iron matches against each other in the same month, with Styles/Daniels at Bound for Glory and HBK/Angle at the RAW Homecoming. In my opinion, the Styles/Daniels match was by far the better encounter. It was quick, the wrestling was sound, and the moves performed perfectly. The psychology was good too: the history of these two was hyped by Tenay, about how Daniels and Styles have always shadowed each other, which spilled into the 30 minute frantic battle to score a single pinfall. Both men were tired and bruised (Styles especially) after the encounter and with less than 10 seconds to go, Styles hit the Styles Clash to win. HBK/Angle was good, there's not doubt about that: but it was only good by WWE wrestling standards. The big-time indies like TNA and ROH feature fast paced, unscripted and highly entertaining matches, and Daniels/Styles was the peak of that style. The WWE wrestles slow paced, methodical and planned out matches: watch them from 1999-2001 and now and you will see a difference. The fact that cruiserweights have been told to tone it down is a perfect example of this. HBK/Angle was both more slowly paced and faster than Styles/Daniels: in the same 30 minutes it took AJ to score one pin, HBK and Angle scored four (five if you count HBK's running out of time). In this way, it was faster than Styles/Daniels. In every other way it was slower: more rest holds and submissions, and more brawling. Of course, all of this was done as well as it can be, as Angle and HBK are both masters of the mat. Still, it did not have the same explosive quality of the Styles/Daniels match. #1 wrestling promotion in the US today has a lot of spotfests too For example? I was referring to the way that they style their matches, as their "spots" are slower and less exciting, yet they are usually the same every match. Take any wrestler: Chris Jericho for example. He hits his few "spots" every match: the dropkick off the apron, the enziguri, the attempted Walls of Jericho, the winning move (Walls or Lionsault). The rest is usually just filler. The same goes for RVD: he's been limited to the split-legged moonsault, rolling thunder, and the spinning kick from the apron. The rest is usually filler. If you look closely, this can be applied to a lot of the wrestlers. Granted, they do have great matches every now and then, but they're less often than more. It's not that good wrestling can't have spots, it's that you can't use spots instead of good wrestling. TNA tends to be spotfests, which are not conducive to a good match. CZC tends to rely on spots and "hardcore" shit to get it done. The TNA wrestlers use all styles of wrestling: technical, brawling, high flying, lucha libre, martial arts, and they encompass them into one style. They do not leave out a storyline. Take this quote from an interview by Jason Levett of SLAM Wrestling with AJ Styles: "For many fans, it is talent like Styles, Daniels, Petey Williams, Chris Sabin and others that are the reason they order the pay per views. It is flattering for Styles to hear that. "It makes us feel important, I hope that TNA realizes that as well. We try to do something that you don't see anywhere else, its not just high spots its psychology and people forget that. It separates us from other wrestlers is we know how to put on a match with a bit of everything." And people love to see it. I've had friends who hate wrestling watch an AJ Styles match and want to see more of it. He and the rest of the X-Division wrestlers are innovative, fast paced, all encompassing athletes with great skill. They are exactly the types of wrestlers that the WWE isn't allowing to shine on their own shows, because they tell the cruiserweights to slow down.

11-28-2005, 05:11 PM	#84
Sadistic Posts: 1,079	Fox you, unlike most of the board, are 100% right.

11-28-2005, 05:16 PM	#85
redoneja Posts: 5,629	WTF??? Have people forgot how to use the quote button??? And WWE is still better than TNA, which is still better than CZW. Sorry but its true.

11-28-2005, 05:23 PM	#86
Xero He's Here Posts: 60,735	Do you TNA marks know what a spotfest is? A spotfest isn't just someone's normal arsenal. It's pulling off spots for the sake of pulling off spots. Hitting five top rope moves just to say that you've hit five top rope moves in one match. Getting a chair and hitting someone over the head with it for the sake of hitting someone over the head. Throwing someone into barbed wire and then hitting them with a light bulb for the sake of violence. They (usually) don't tell a story, they're just nonstop flashy moves, sometimes a shit load of violence, and a finish. The X Division, except for a few, are all high flying risk takers who risk it all for what, to say that they can pull off a flipping piledriver or risk snapping someone's neck off with a Styles Clash?

11-28-2005, 05:30 PM	#88
Sadistic Posts: 1,079	I have a pretty far out idea: If you don't like spotfests, don't watch them.

11-28-2005, 05:34 PM	#91
Sadistic Posts: 1,079	WWE can put on a good match.

11-28-2005, 05:36 PM	#92
redoneja Posts: 5,629	So can TNA. Just not very often.

11-28-2005, 05:40 PM	#95
McLegend Temporary Posts: 15,617	Yeah about everyone ignores Sadastic because this isn't going anywhere nor will it ever.

11-28-2005, 06:07 PM	#96
Sting Fan Blander Than Ever Posts: 3,092	Jesus no one can accept that both feds cater to different ideals and fans. How hard is it just to accept that because you dont like it doesnt mean its shit. Oh I know because no one here is ever wrong, my bad I will go back to my cave.

11-28-2005, 06:09 PM	#97
Loose Cannon I'm all there is Posts: 31,811	shut the fuck up and clean up my shit in the corner

11-28-2005, 06:55 PM	#99
DaVe yeah nah good mate Posts: 1,499	Awwww...Poor Dave...You gonna pretend that Undertaker is a relavent and contemporay superstar? Nah, I'm just being pedantic: You're comparing spots to Undertaker, who nobody gives a shit about? Quite obviously PEOPLE DO care about the Undertaker. Just not most of the smarks. WTF??? Have people forgot how to use the quote button??? Haha, no. It is just that copying and pasting parts and using italics is easier. I was referring to the way that they style their matches, as their "spots" are slower and less exciting, yet they are usually the same every match. So basically, just read what Xero Limit said.

11-28-2005, 08:55 PM	#104
Kane Knight Ron Paul 4 EVA Posts: 152,467	Also, even Sadistic admits garbage wrestling isn't wrestling. I just figured I'd point out that the definition of good wrestling isn't subjective when it ISN'T WRESTLING.