Modern wrestling, and what makes wrestling modern

WWE, TNA, and all U.S./Canada based graps talk
User avatar
Bix
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 1:33 am

Re: Modern wrestling, and what makes wrestling modern

Post by Bix » Mon May 30, 2016 9:51 pm

Joe Lanza wrote:
mlev76 wrote:
rovert wrote:
And consider who he is, whose ear he has and the level of respect he's earned.

Doesn't mean that everyone has to like certain matches-including THE MOST DIVISIVE MATCH IN WRESTLING HISTORY-but when important people recognize their value, it should give some people pause before trashing its place in wrestling.
What's odd about all of this, is this match isn't really all that divisive. I don't see many people at all trashing it, aside from weirdos tagging Vader to get his approval. This match is getting a ton of "not my style of match but it was good and I can see why people loved it" from people that would often bury a match of this ilk.

There are more people trashing the opening sequence gif than the match itself. That has spurred the debates more than the actual reviews of the bout, which most people have enjoyed.
For sure. People have blown this out of proportion. Hell, I enjoyed the time I spent watching it (it was so physically impressive it would be hard not to), I just didn't think it was close to as transcendent as people were making it out to be, even as far as selling-light spot heavy matches go. It wasn't as good a a "pro wrestling match" as Volador Jr. vs. Liger earlier in the card but it was most certainly more memorable.

That said I really think they could have changed very little and made up for the match's faults. End the opening sequence before the double flip, no weird letting go of submissions, sell (or at least register) the big spots more, etc. There's really not much they needed to do differently to make it a more "fundamentally sound" match. Which is part of the frustration, I feel like. They could have "slowed it down" without really slowing it down.

User avatar
RobViper13
Posts: 384
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2015 2:37 am

Re: Modern wrestling, and what makes wrestling modern

Post by RobViper13 » Tue May 31, 2016 1:27 am

Buzz Sawyer wrote:
ayaashm wrote:
Buzz Sawyer wrote:I think that moves aren't put together for the most part anymore and guys are more interested in getting their moves over then anything else. No one works a body part anymore like the Andersons. Teams like the young bucks bore the fuck out of me with their high spots for the sake of having a high spot. Make the move mean something.

On the contrary, I am a relatively newer wrestling fan. My first ever match that I remember watching was CM Punk x Brock Lesnar. To me, Young Bucks are the most entertaining team in wrestling. I can not pull my eyes away from the screen when they're on. It's like their stomps,back rakes,taunts mean so much more than any other wrestler's. I feel that they are a true example of a team who have the "music between the notes".
I'll give you 2 words about the Young Bucks. They blow.
The self-awareness on this guy is something to behold.

Bucks have made more money so far & accomplished more in this business than your namesake ever did. They're about to both outlive him too & will be great dads who get to see their kids grow up.

But yeah man, they "blow" (whatever that means...).

Keep fighting the good fight old-timer.
"Whoa is me" - BuzzSawyer

User avatar
mprentice84
Posts: 182
Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2015 9:25 am
Location: Rochester, NY
Contact:

Re: Modern wrestling, and what makes wrestling modern

Post by mprentice84 » Tue May 31, 2016 1:31 pm

There are plenty of wrestling things that I don't get or plain don't like. Most of those things are very successful regardless of my personal tastes. Somebody not digging what the Young Bucks or Ricochet do is one thing, but not recognizing that they're some of the most successful and lucrative independent acts in pro wrestling today is complete and utter denial of the world around you.

User avatar
Joe Lanza
Site Admin
Posts: 2732
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:00 pm

Re: Modern wrestling, and what makes wrestling modern

Post by Joe Lanza » Tue May 31, 2016 4:58 pm

Bucks & Ricochet are making real livings in wrestling without ever collecting a dime to this point from WWE.

This is where wrestling psychology sort of merges with this modern/old discussion, particularly in the case of the Bucks. Their act clearly gets over with fans, and isn't that what psychology is about? There are many ways to "tell a story", no?

User avatar
mlev76
Posts: 2576
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:32 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Re: Modern wrestling, and what makes wrestling modern

Post by mlev76 » Tue May 31, 2016 8:30 pm

Joe Lanza wrote:Bucks & Ricochet are making real livings in wrestling without ever collecting a dime to this point from WWE.

This is where wrestling psychology sort of merges with this modern/old discussion, particularly in the case of the Bucks. Their act clearly gets over with fans, and isn't that what psychology is about? There are many ways to "tell a story", no?
I always notice that most, if not all, the criticism from those in the business come from those whose relevancy or influence is generally on the decline or nonexistent. Those who still matter tend to either accept it as part of modern wrestling or are secure enough in their position to not care.

And just to be clear, this is not in reference to any poster in this thread. Should go with out saying, but it actually does have to be made clear.

User avatar
Rich Kraetsch
Site Admin
Posts: 2174
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 7:12 pm
Location: Wheaton, IL
Contact:

Re: Modern wrestling, and what makes wrestling modern

Post by Rich Kraetsch » Tue May 31, 2016 9:00 pm

I think the best example in this thread came from ayaashm. To him, all wrestling came after Punk/Brock. We're far too often (for better or for worse) judging wrestling from when we came in or when we got a true appreciation for it. I came into the Attitude Era but ended up quickly rewatching everything I could get my hands on so I consider a lot of my glory years wrestling coming in the late 80s and early 90s. Others have different periods, whatever. Trying to define what wrestling "is" is a worthless endeavor because it means very different things to many different people. Buzz, Bix and a few others in this thread may not be caught dead paying to see The Young Bucks in person but I've gone out of my way to watch/buy tickets to see the Bucks when they've come to town. I also see the massive lines nearly out of the door for their merch table when they come to town with ROH. Say what you want, but they are delivering what THEIR fanbase wants and as others have said, isn't that all that matters?

User avatar
Bix
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 1:33 am

Re: Modern wrestling, and what makes wrestling modern

Post by Bix » Wed Jun 01, 2016 12:01 am

Punk-Brock is an interesting example.

I was at Barclays Center when they shot the angle on Raw for that match, and it was easily the most heated thing I've ever seen as a WWE show. That includes being in attendance at SummerSlam '98 and Survivor Series '11, which had incredibly raucous crowds. But while Austin's entrance vs. Undertaker got a giant pop, as did HHH's IC title win and Punk's WWE title win at Survivor Series, none of those were close to the tension that the Punk-Brock/Heyman angle had with a beloved babyface and hated heels. It didn't necessarily come across TV, but it was electric and I can't think of anything like it from recent years other maybe than some of the Daniel Bryan stuff.

So I totally get why that program, especially with the fantastic match they put on, would hook someone.

As for the Bucks: I like them, and they're clearly 100% self-aware about what they're doing, which is good. My problem with them is less "no psychology" (though I do hate a few of their more elaborate spots like making an opponent tombstone his partner) and more that too many of their matches are the exactly the same. That gets grating when I'm supposed to be impressed by the flashiness...I am...the first time. Whether I'd go out of my way to see them depends entirely on their opponents. If JAPW had been able to pull off Bucks-Hardys last November like they had hopes...well, I was going to that show anyway, but I would have been more excited and you get the idea. Bucks vs. reDRagon...eh, but Bucks vs. Time Splitters is something I'd love to see live.

User avatar
ayaashm
Posts: 740
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2016 9:19 am
Location: Kashmir
Contact:

Re: Modern wrestling, and what makes wrestling modern

Post by ayaashm » Wed Jun 01, 2016 1:50 am

Bix wrote:Punk-Brock is an interesting example.

I was at Barclays Center when they shot the angle on Raw for that match, and it was easily the most heated thing I've ever seen as a WWE show. That includes being in attendance at SummerSlam '98 and Survivor Series '11, which had incredibly raucous crowds. But while Austin's entrance vs. Undertaker got a giant pop, as did HHH's IC title win and Punk's WWE title win at Survivor Series, none of those were close to the tension that the Punk-Brock/Heyman angle had with a beloved babyface and hated heels. It didn't necessarily come across TV, but it was electric and I can't think of anything like it from recent years other maybe than some of the Daniel Bryan stuff.

So I totally get why that program, especially with the fantastic match they put on, would hook someone.

As for the Bucks: I like them, and they're clearly 100% self-aware about what they're doing, which is good. My problem with them is less "no psychology" (though I do hate a few of their more elaborate spots like making an opponent tombstone his partner) and more that too many of their matches are the exactly the same. That gets grating when I'm supposed to be impressed by the flashiness...I am...the first time. Whether I'd go out of my way to see them depends entirely on their opponents. If JAPW had been able to pull off Bucks-Hardys last November like they had hopes...well, I was going to that show anyway, but I would have been more excited and you get the idea. Bucks vs. reDRagon...eh, but Bucks vs. Time Splitters is something I'd love to see live.

While your repetitive match ups and same-ish match structure are valid arguments,I can tell you this that no matter how many times I've seen their match with ReDragon,I absolutely cannot skip forward in their matches. I have done this for Punk matches,Daniel Bryan matches but Young Bucks almost never bore me or for that matter, my younger 15 yr old brother. They are his absolute favorite team because to him that is "fun" wrestling. He enjoys seeing them wrestle.
Lanza is a geek.
Twitter : https://twitter.com/drunkonchai/

User avatar
mlev76
Posts: 2576
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:32 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Re: Modern wrestling, and what makes wrestling modern

Post by mlev76 » Wed Jun 01, 2016 10:12 am

Watched 'the match' again last night and the thing that truly amazes me (and makes me a tad suspicious of the amount of critics who actually watched the whole match) is that if you continuing watching literally moments after the big sequence-and past the end of the gif-the match kicks into a highly competitive match with a good story. And, in fact, the mirror flip sequence serves as a catalyst for both guys getting agitated by not being the superior hotshot.

User avatar
kjharris
Posts: 57
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2015 3:16 pm

Re: Modern wrestling, and what makes wrestling modern

Post by kjharris » Wed Jun 01, 2016 10:58 am

I watched the match to see what the fuss was about and I didn't see it as this transcendentally great match, whilst also not thinking the viral GIF sequence was that bad in context, but it still elicited a LOL from me. It was definitely a fun match to watch, but left me thinking they had a better one in them.

User avatar
BoxingRobes
VOW Staff Member
Posts: 1502
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 1:02 pm

Re: Modern wrestling, and what makes wrestling modern

Post by BoxingRobes » Wed Jun 01, 2016 12:30 pm

Joe Lanza wrote:Bucks & Ricochet are making real livings in wrestling without ever collecting a dime to this point from WWE.

This is where wrestling psychology sort of merges with this modern/old discussion, particularly in the case of the Bucks. Their act clearly gets over with fans, and isn't that what psychology is about? There are many ways to "tell a story", no?
On a previous podcast, you mentioned Brian Cage as the ultimate meta-wrestler...while I agreed to a point, the Young Bucks are the ultimate meta-Indie workers. They do have a level of psychology to their work and they do tell stories, but you need to get past the cheap pops at the beginning of a match to get to it. I actually enjoy how their matches tend to go from pandering exhibition to serious, hard hitting, high spot wrestling. They've mastered that.

User avatar
ScorpioCorp
Posts: 370
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2015 4:49 am
Location: Cypress Creek

Re: Modern wrestling, and what makes wrestling modern

Post by ScorpioCorp » Wed Jun 01, 2016 2:24 pm

The thing about the Bucks as Chuck Taylor would say, "they have become cartoon characters" (that is probably why they gel so well with anime super villain Kenny Omega). They are zany, energetic & full of cliches. They are almost a comic satire of professional wrestling & I don't mean that in a bad way. It is also why they are such incredible & unique wrestlers. However, there are always going to be people who are going to hate those characters.

User avatar
Bix
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 1:33 am

Re: Modern wrestling, and what makes wrestling modern

Post by Bix » Wed Jun 01, 2016 3:06 pm

mlev76 wrote:Watched 'the match' again last night and the thing that truly amazes me (and makes me a tad suspicious of the amount of critics who actually watched the whole match) is that if you continuing watching literally moments after the big sequence-and past the end of the gif-the match kicks into a highly competitive match with a good story. And, in fact, the mirror flip sequence serves as a catalyst for both guys getting agitated by not being the superior hotshot.
A highly competitive match where Ricochet lets go of painful-looking submissions for no reason like he's playing a video game and the game made him let Ospreay out? ( know what the real life reason for bailing on submissions is but it's not an established convention in pro wrestling psychology outside of some very specific lucha libre contexts.

Outside of the end of that opening sequence and the bailing on submissions, yes, you're right, though. The biggest problem with the match all the way through was just how little they sold or even registered a lot of big spots. Obviously the whole thing with the death valley driver on the apron was the most egregious example of that; it was the Kobashi delayed selling spot without giving it the thin veneer of credibility Kobushi gave it. It only really works on a move where it looks like you're rolling to your feet and you stay in a sell mode when you hit your own move.

And honestly, in general, that's what held the match down and kept it in the "enjoyable spotfest" tier for me. And what do I mean by "a sell mode" there? Well...

I successfully nagged Brian Elliott into posting my Ricky Steamboat "Training Ground" interview from last year on the FSM website because a lot of what he says is on-point, but he's totally not a "all flips are choreographed tumbling" guy. The big things that are directly relevant to this match are his comments about staying in a sell mode and how you can do as many big highspots as you want as long as they're properly contextualized.

Even outside of the context of this discussion it's a must-read; the guy is genius at working who's better at expressing it that anyone else I've ever seen. He explains it so well in ways you can visualize and get immediately.

User avatar
mlev76
Posts: 2576
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:32 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Re: Modern wrestling, and what makes wrestling modern

Post by mlev76 » Wed Jun 01, 2016 3:17 pm

Bix wrote:
mlev76 wrote:
Outside of the end of that opening sequence and the bailing on submissions, yes, you're right, though. The biggest problem with the match all the way through was just how little they sold or even registered a lot of big spots. Obviously the whole thing with the death valley driver on the apron was the most egregious example of that; it was the Kobashi delayed selling spot without giving it the thin veneer of credibility Kobushi gave it. It only really works on a move where it looks like you're rolling to your feet and you stay in a sell mode when you hit your own move.

And honestly, in general, that's what held the match down and kept it in the "enjoyable spotfest" tier for me. And what do I mean by "a sell mode" there? Well...
I actually found the selling to be a whole lot better than people give it credit for especially Ospreay's back selling (it helps to know he has legit back issues to understand 'why' that would be the target of Ricochet's offense).

And I'll have to disagree with the idea that this was a spotfest. There was most certainly selling, a good storyline and the match built as it went along.

User avatar
ayaashm
Posts: 740
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2016 9:19 am
Location: Kashmir
Contact:

Re: Modern wrestling, and what makes wrestling modern

Post by ayaashm » Wed Jun 01, 2016 4:04 pm

Bix wrote:
mlev76 wrote:Watched 'the match' again last night and the thing that truly amazes me (and makes me a tad suspicious of the amount of critics who actually watched the whole match) is that if you continuing watching literally moments after the big sequence-and past the end of the gif-the match kicks into a highly competitive match with a good story. And, in fact, the mirror flip sequence serves as a catalyst for both guys getting agitated by not being the superior hotshot.
A highly competitive match where Ricochet lets go of painful-looking submissions for no reason like he's playing a video game and the game made him let Ospreay out? ( know what the real life reason for bailing on submissions is but it's not an established convention in pro wrestling psychology outside of some very specific lucha libre contexts.

Outside of the end of that opening sequence and the bailing on submissions, yes, you're right, though. The biggest problem with the match all the way through was just how little they sold or even registered a lot of big spots. Obviously the whole thing with the death valley driver on the apron was the most egregious example of that; it was the Kobashi delayed selling spot without giving it the thin veneer of credibility Kobushi gave it. It only really works on a move where it looks like you're rolling to your feet and you stay in a sell mode when you hit your own move.

And honestly, in general, that's what held the match down and kept it in the "enjoyable spotfest" tier for me. And what do I mean by "a sell mode" there? Well...

I successfully nagged Brian Elliott into posting my Ricky Steamboat "Training Ground" interview from last year on the FSM website because a lot of what he says is on-point, but he's totally not a "all flips are choreographed tumbling" guy. The big things that are directly relevant to this match are his comments about staying in a sell mode and how you can do as many big highspots as you want as long as they're properly contextualized.

Even outside of the context of this discussion it's a must-read; the guy is genius at working who's better at expressing it that anyone else I've ever seen. He explains it so well in ways you can visualize and get immediately.

Letting go of submissions to plant Ospreay on his back in the ring. Might have seen Ospreay and Rico go for submissions. The game of one-upsmanship. Ospreay does a flip, Rico does two, Ospreay does two with a corkscrew. Ospreay does the Octupus Hold? , Rico with double armbar and then the Quackenbush Special. Not to submit him but to show Ospreay "hey dude,these submissions; I know them as well and can do better than you".
Established Convention in pro-wrestling.Tom Lawlor on Filthy 4 Daily said he had a match where his opponent took him down, Tom took it to heart and then the entire time spent all his energy in taking the other guy down with force. It was a pissing contest he said and compared it to what these guys were doing in the ring here. An example from Tom who works for the website you also work with.

hey, you thought they didn't sell it as well as Kobashi did . Me too! Hardly any one in the world sells as good as Kobashi did.But, as Joe pointed out you can clearly see that Ospreay goes limp after he gets hit with the DVD. It's not like he pops up and hits the reverse rana. It's when Ricochet pick him up and throw him in the ring when Ospreay counters and hits the reverse rana.

I don't what to tell you but I have seen far,far worse examples of not selling properly and the two blokes did an amazing job in the ring , they sold well and told a beautiful story where the young upstart defeats the established veteran high flier. It will probably lead to a re-match between them as the post match hinted and If this match is any indication, It will be amazing as well.
Lanza is a geek.
Twitter : https://twitter.com/drunkonchai/

Post Reply