SmartMuffin posted... Let's not forget that The Rock has a move that literally requires more theatrics than anything in the history of wrestling.
The Worm?
See, I was thinking the Worm, too, but I think the People's Elbow requires more elements for it to be completed. And it's a bunch of little things that add up.
He has to stand over his opponent and pose. He has to kick the right arm over. He has to slooooooooooooowly take off his elbow pad and toss it into the crowd. He has to cross his arms. He has to run to both sides of the ropes while jumping over his opponent. He has to do a little leg kick.
And then he can deliver the elbow.
Not that the Worm isn't as contrived, but I think The Rock requires more.
From: Lopen | #098 1. Cena didn't have Punk beat 2. That's a standard issue Cena taunt moment that Punk could have planned for
Seriously I mean, you can disagree with me if you want but... really. I don't see why you can't, or choose not to, distinguish between "trademark midmatch taunting" and "taunting when you could make the pin right then and win the match which Cena has never done"
Like I said earlier, Rock had just kicked out of an AA. Unless you think another pin would have got him? Which I think is kind of a stretch because I can't remember the "PIN HIM AGAIN AND AGAIN AFTER A BIG MOVE" spot ever working, you usually need something more. So Cena would either have to get the Rock up for another AA, or do something else. Simply pinning him would not have done the trick, and it was pretty well established that Rock would rather pass out than tap.
From: Lopen | #103 The 5KS is showboating but it's showboating you can plan for by studying the tapes.
Like I said it's all about whether the wrestler can plan for something or if it just randomly falls on their lap.
Fair enough
I am still confused as to how you think, in kayfabe, "manipulation" actually affects your talent as a wrestler. That affects your ability to win matches, but it does not affect your actual in-ring ability at all.
A win isn't tainted because your opponent screwed up. Every single matchup of anything every has had a screwup somewhere, because otherwise both teams would have played faultless games.
And yes, that is all it is - a screwup. Cena showboating is as much an indictment of his ability in the ring as him failing to lift Rock for an AA or not being able to execute his leg-drop bulldog from the top.
--
"oh my god oh my god a spider just crawled INTO MY KEYBOARD" -pxlated "It just wants some web access." - Ness26
From: SmartMuffin | #105 Better men than Rock have tapped out of the STF at WM before.
That's what Cena should have gone for.
Rock literally would rather have passed out, as had already been shown in the match, and it takes a lot of effort to get Rock to fade like that. During the match, Cole actually sold how difficult it would be for Cena to keep the STF in for that long. He would have to do that again to win. The STF should absolutely not have been an option at that point.
Eh I think planning is important in wrestling and comes in a lot of forms. It's not all about making connections or cheating, either. Like the Bret Hart vs Diesel match I was talking about... it was very common for Diesel to "play with his food" when he felt he had the edge, so for Bret Hart to possum him into a small package was excellent planning on Bret's part. I mean, yeah, it doesn't prove Bret is the stronger wrestler or anything, but he used tactics to make up for that and that's why he wins.
Heels with managers or allies and using them as their plan rather than the opponent's weakness is a similar thing to me. And if it's further allowed by the rules of the match so there was no technical cheating going on? Clean win-- the face should've been able to account for that or just brute through all of it if he's really the better man. I mean, would you consider a guy abusing the hell out of the lumberjacks and repeatedly tossing a guy into his rival at ringside to win a lumberjack match a tainted win? It's the same thing in that you're using interference you planned for to further your goals and said interference is allowed by the rules.
Wrestling is a thinking man's sport Bobby The Brain Heenan told us this all the time.
-- No problem! This is a cute and pop genocide of love!
The big reason Rock's looks so bad is because he doesn't sit down. He sorta like, stands up with a slightly wider base with the other guy's legs curled in a 4. Gotta cinch it down deep. Owen sits down-- the leg pretzeling is probably on the same level as the Rock's which is another problem and why Bret/Sting did it better than Owen, but the big thing is sitting down.
-- No problem! This is a cute and pop genocide of love!
The big reason Rock's looks so bad is because he doesn't sit down. He sorta like, stands up with a slightly wider base with the other guy's legs curled in a 4. Gotta cinch it down deep. Owen sits down-- the leg pretzeling is probably on the same level as the Rock's which is another problem and why Bret/Sting did it better than Owen, but the big thing is sitting down.
I was looking at pictures where Owen didn't even pretzel the legs.
Like it just ended up looking like a weird Boston crab.
Well at least a weird boston crab still looks straining on the back
Rock just sorta stands there in a very slight squat holding their legs
To be fair to Owen though I think he the leg curling sloppily to make their two spins on the sharpshooter distinguishable, personally, not because he can't do it better.
-- No problem! This is a cute and pop genocide of love!
Hey, remember when I compared Ziggler to Billy Gunn but Ziggler is more talented?
Former WWE Superstar Billy Gunn was backstage at WrestleMania XXVIII as he posted a photo online of himself with the WWE Superstar most often compared to him, Dolph Ziggler.
Gunn is very high on the "Show Off." He said of the Raw wrestler last November in an interview: "I think he's got great potential, and I think he's one of there best talents WWE has. A little bit longer and he will be a big star, I think he is extremely talented."
Gunn agrees! Except for the whole "more talented" part.
From: Lopen | #115 Eh I think planning is important in wrestling and comes in a lot of forms. It's not all about making connections or cheating, either. Like the Bret Hart vs Diesel match I was talking about... it was very common for Diesel to "play with his food" when he felt he had the edge, so for Bret Hart to possum him into a small package was excellent planning on Bret's part. I mean, yeah, it doesn't prove Bret is the stronger wrestler or anything, but he used tactics to make up for that and that's why he wins.
Heels with managers or allies and using them as their plan rather than the opponent's weakness is a similar thing to me. And if it's further allowed by the rules of the match so there was no technical cheating going on? Clean win-- the face should've been able to account for that or just brute through all of it if he's really the better man. I mean, would you consider a guy abusing the hell out of the lumberjacks and repeatedly tossing a guy into his rival at ringside to win a lumberjack match a tainted win? It's the same thing in that you're using interference you planned for to further your goals and said interference is allowed by the rules.
Wrestling is a thinking man's sport Bobby The Brain Heenan told us this all the time.
Heenan also said Jannetty tried to dive through the window to escape "lol"
And I'd actually say Bret doing that proves he was the better wrestler on that night. He used tactical planning in a one-on-one match, no outside interference or weapons, exploited a flaw in his opponent's personality and won. Now if, in a rematch, Diesel excised that part of his personality and went strictly for the win, Diesel would be the better man.
If you beat somebody one-on-one with no weapons, outside interference or other shenanigans (like using the ropes or pulling the trunks), then it doesn't matter about the circumstances, you were better on that night. Doesn't matter if the opponent showboated, that's his fault, a flaw that cost him the match and that you exploited.
If there are no DQs and you bring a buddy with you, like I said, it makes you smarter and more manipulative outside the ring. But it doesn't make you better than the other guy as a wrestler. If anything that is an implict acknowledgement that you're NOT as good as him. So it might get better results, but it doesn't make you the better man. That's like, the whole point of a heel. They're (mostly) inferior where the wrestling gets done, so they get other stuff to make up for it.
You can say the face should have prepared for it and maybe you're right but that doesn't make it clean - because a match (even a no DQ match) is supposed to be about deciding who the better man is. Outside interference in a no DQ isn't "wrong", but it's an admittance that you needed it, which makes you inferior.
...Unless the no DQ is put in place by some kind of heel authority figure, but then the whole point of that is that it makes a mockery of the sport for the sake of their own personal goals.
--
"The great fallacy is that the game is first and foremost about winning. It's nothing of the kind. The game is about glory." - Danny Blanchflower
The Rock I look forward to your return one day to challenge whomever the WWE Champion is at that time and becoming an eight time WWE Champion! Take care of yourself until then! Thank you for gracing us with your presence for the past year.