agent817
Fry's dog Seymour
Doesn't Know Whose Ring It Is
Posts: 21,156
|
Post by agent817 on Apr 19, 2014 15:54:20 GMT -5
Has there ever been a stigma to submitting to "pass out" submission holds? Like a Sleeper Hold, Cobra Clutch or a Rear-Naked Choke? I could use the Taz-Mission as an example but not many have passed out to the hold and that was more of a hold that you can just tap out to.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2014 17:18:13 GMT -5
Speaking of submissions, they seem rather ineffective and pointless now. They only seem to serve as "filler" in the match rather than something that is used to hurt/incapacitate opponents or win matches.
|
|
|
Post by Wolf Hawkfield no1 NZ poster on Apr 19, 2014 18:20:24 GMT -5
Because the WWE has made that way. When you tell the audience that when Heels tap out they are a pussies who quit well the same logic would have to apply whenever a babyface does it.
Which is stupid because in real life MMA has shown what a submission can do to a limb when a fighter has too much pride and won't tap.
|
|
|
Post by Cela on Apr 19, 2014 19:03:08 GMT -5
Because apparently no one in WWE can do a proper submission hold. Normally in MMA, a perfect submission move brings about an instant tap. These WWE ones are apparently of a lesser quality, and therefore, tapping to them is a sign of weakness.
|
|
|
Post by angryfan on Apr 19, 2014 19:06:50 GMT -5
Because apparently no one in WWE can do a proper submission hold. Normally in MMA, a perfect submission move brings about an instant tap. These WWE ones are apparently of a lesser quality, and therefore, tapping to them is a sign of weakness. Or, they're influenced by the Gracie method of submitting, which had that one nice little moment of "snap my arm and I still won't tap".
|
|
|
Post by Cela on Apr 19, 2014 19:08:54 GMT -5
Because apparently no one in WWE can do a proper submission hold. Normally in MMA, a perfect submission move brings about an instant tap. These WWE ones are apparently of a lesser quality, and therefore, tapping to them is a sign of weakness. Or, they're influenced by the Gracie method of submitting, which had that one nice little moment of "snap my arm and I still won't tap". Nah, the Gracies always had poker faces, but a good theory.
|
|
|
Post by angryfan on Apr 19, 2014 19:15:38 GMT -5
Or, they're influenced by the Gracie method of submitting, which had that one nice little moment of "snap my arm and I still won't tap". Nah, the Gracies always had poker faces, but a good theory. Oh, I was mostly being a smartass lol. Truth be told, I think it's more having to do with the old way of submitting which is verbally giving up. The "hero" never says "I quit" and used to be via submission that's how it ended unless you passed out.
|
|
|
Post by Cela on Apr 19, 2014 20:20:23 GMT -5
Nah, the Gracies always had poker faces, but a good theory. Oh, I was mostly being a smartass lol. Truth be told, I think it's more having to do with the old way of submitting which is verbally giving up. The "hero" never says "I quit" and used to be via submission that's how it ended unless you passed out. Well yeah, 80s toughness hasn't evolved with the industry.
|
|
tenshi
Patti Mayonnaise
Probably more memorable than a Charlotte title reign
Posts: 33,916
|
Post by tenshi on Apr 19, 2014 22:01:36 GMT -5
Oh, I was mostly being a smartass lol. Truth be told, I think it's more having to do with the old way of submitting which is verbally giving up. The "hero" never says "I quit" and used to be via submission that's how it ended unless you passed out. Well yeah, 80s toughness hasn't evolved with the industry. Unless a wrestler does a "Brazilian tap", the act of tapping out briefly to fool the opponent into thinking they won by submission. This could work for a heel as he "taps out" to a face to get out of a hold but the match continues because he was on the ropes or something like that.
|
|
|
Post by Vice honcho room temperature on Apr 19, 2014 22:14:31 GMT -5
Has there ever been a stigma to submitting to "pass out" submission holds? Like a Sleeper Hold, Cobra Clutch or a Rear-Naked Choke? I could use the Taz-Mission as an example but not many have passed out to the hold and that was more of a hold that you can just tap out to. Being passed out is super bad for you. Or that's what at least Archer tells me.
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,032
|
Post by Mozenrath on Apr 19, 2014 22:16:49 GMT -5
Because it's "giving up." I think the easy workaround is to just have people pass out from the pain. Instead of tapping out, the ref sees the guy isn't moving and waggles his arms. Suddenly the bell rings, submission win, and so on. Even if it isn't passing out, they should do the MMA route of, if the ref sees someone has lost the ability to defend themselves, ending the match on TKO or whatever. Like, middle of the ring, absolutely impossible to get to the ropes, just ring the bell if they really won't have a tap finish.
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,032
|
Post by Mozenrath on Apr 19, 2014 22:18:58 GMT -5
i actually liked what Magnus did in TNA/Impact for a while when he had the belt. he'd be in a tag/non-title match and seconds after he's put in a submission hold he'd tap immediately. his partner would get mad at him and Magnus would be all "hey it's a non title match- why should i risk an injury that might cost me my title later when i don;t have to?" The best one is still when Chavo tapped out to a handshake in WCW to get out of a match with Stevie Ray, instead of risking getting worn out before facing Eddie.
|
|
Brood Lone Wolf Funker
Ozymandius
Got fined anyway. Possibly a Moose
James Franco is the white Donald Glover
Posts: 61,770
|
Post by Brood Lone Wolf Funker on Apr 19, 2014 22:32:27 GMT -5
1. Because Stone Cold didn't tap, and WWE made that "the standard" to live up to. 2. Because in WWE submission holds aren't portrayed as being able to break bones (with the possible exception of Lesnar's Kimura). Undertaker's Hell's Gate originally had people bleeding from not tapping
|
|
|
Post by tigermaskxxxvii on Apr 19, 2014 22:39:59 GMT -5
Tapping out should be presented as a guy preserving his career by preventing further injury. There shouldn't be any shame in it considering these guys have to stay as healthy as possible. I remember on ECW TV from House Party '98 Jerry Lynn beat Chris Candido by submission with a cross armbar. After the match Joey Styles doing one of his on camera wraparound segments put over Candido's decision to submit as smart rather than cowardly since Candido had suffered a torn tricep and was sidelined for a while and even missed Barely Legal because of it and tapping out might've saved Candido both from further injury and premature retirement. Well yeah, 80s toughness hasn't evolved with the industry. Unless a wrestler does a "Brazilian tap", the act of tapping out briefly to fool the opponent into thinking they won by submission. This could work for a heel as he "taps out" to a face to get out of a hold but the match continues because he was on the ropes or something like that. This could also work in either a tag match or three way dance. Someone is in a submission hold and is about to give. So his tag partner/the third man in the match lies next to the victim of the submission hold and starts frantically tapping to trick the person applying the hold to think it's his victim so he'll release it thinking he won the match. Also I think it would be funny to watch someone finish a referee's three count by slapping the mat to fool someone into breaking a pinfall attempt prematurely.
|
|
|
Post by Gimpo Commando on Apr 20, 2014 7:32:41 GMT -5
Because the WWE has made that way. When you tell the audience that when Heels tap out they are a pussies who quit well the same logic would have to apply whenever a babyface does it. Which is stupid because in real life MMA has shown what a submission can do to a limb when a fighter has too much pride and won't tap. That's an odd comparison because MMA is legitimate and the fighters don't want to halt their careers due to losing one match. If losing the match meant their career would be stalled for years automatically they probably wouldn't do it as often, but most fighters in MMA have less than stellar records and can still make it to the top with a string of good fights, and the important caveat about that is that they know that better than anyone, which is why they're not as willing to risk their careers with potentially crippling submission holds. At the same token, the average MMA viewer also realizes that too, and yet you still have images, reactions and gifs about people getting knocked the F out, or choked out like a bitch. MMA is not immune to that. The WWE didn't invent masculinity, they're just using what they know to about male competitiveness to tell a story, a competitiveness that all sports have in their very foundation, which is if one man (or team) wins, then the other lost. What better way to make the other lose, especially if they wronged you in some way, than to make them voluntarily give into your supremacy over them? That's gratifying. What better way to make a person hate you if you did that to another, especially if it's not done in a fair manner? That's vilifying. It's social but it's also biological, even if the product you see doesn't explicitly reflect why we gravitate towards that line of feeling naturally, it's still there, fitness and such. Does that mean we aren't capable of appreciating higher level story telling? Of course we are, but the moment we deny our basal impulses and instincts, we become inhuman I think, or at the very least no longer wrestling fans.
|
|
|
Post by Starshine on Apr 20, 2014 9:46:50 GMT -5
Because the WWE has made that way. When you tell the audience that when Heels tap out they are a pussies who quit well the same logic would have to apply whenever a babyface does it. Which is stupid because in real life MMA has shown what a submission can do to a limb when a fighter has too much pride and won't tap. That's an odd comparison because MMA is legitimate and the fighters don't want to halt their careers due to losing one match. If losing the match meant their career would be stalled for years automatically they probably wouldn't do it as often, but most fighters in MMA have less than stellar records and can still make it to the top with a string of good fights, and the important caveat about that is that they know that better than anyone, which is why they're not as willing to risk their careers with potentially crippling submission holds. At the same token, the average MMA viewer also realizes that too, and yet you still have images, reactions and gifs about people getting knocked the F out, or choked out like a bitch. MMA is not immune to that. The WWE didn't invent masculinity, they're just using what they know to about male competitiveness to tell a story, a competitiveness that all sports have in their very foundation, which is if one man (or team) wins, then the other lost. What better way to make the other lose, especially if they wronged you in some way, than to make them voluntarily give into your supremacy over them? That's gratifying. What better way to make a person hate you if you did that to another, especially if it's not done in a fair manner? That's vilifying. It's social but it's also biological, even if the product you see doesn't explicitly reflect why we gravitate towards that line of feeling naturally, it's still there, fitness and such. Does that mean we aren't capable of appreciating higher level story telling? Of course we are, but the moment we deny our basal impulses and instincts, we become inhuman I think, or at the very least no longer wrestling fans. I'd think self preservation is more biological and instinctive in us than macho bravado. Most people know when to quit.
|
|
|
Post by sunnytaker on Apr 20, 2014 12:32:57 GMT -5
i actually liked what Magnus did in TNA/Impact for a while when he had the belt. he'd be in a tag/non-title match and seconds after he's put in a submission hold he'd tap immediately. his partner would get mad at him and Magnus would be all "hey it's a non title match- why should i risk an injury that might cost me my title later when i don;t have to?" The best one is still when Chavo tapped out to a handshake in WCW to get out of a match with Stevie Ray, instead of risking getting worn out before facing Eddie. i think he did the same thing with dean malenko. except in that case i believe they both wanted to prove they could beat dean but eddie got chavo to go first. knowing if he went all out win or lose he'd just tire dean out and make it easier for eddie to beat him so chavo tapped to the handshake so eddie had to fight him fresh (and lost so chavo and eddie were still even were still even)
|
|
|
Post by Gimpo Commando on Apr 20, 2014 13:18:43 GMT -5
I'd think self preservation is more biological and instinctive in us than macho bravado. Most people know when to quit. You calling it macho bravado and using self preservation as some sort of antagonist towards that is misplaced, they're both equally important biologically to the survival of our species. Fitness in evolutionary theory includes the ability to reproduce, which is one of the cornerstones of male competition regardless of whether or not you choose to reproduce. Asserting dominance over other males in order to prop yourself as an alpha (desirable) male specimen is done by most complex species of animals. A submission hold in professional wrestling is about asserting a kind of dominance, one that forces your opponent to either yield, or in some cases lose consciousness or control of a limb (in kayfabe). Both instances can result as a sign of weakness on the afflicted, and as a sign strength towards the applier, which is exactly what wrestlers and wrestling bookers want. Those reactions can be valuable tools to any storyteller. You don't just turn that part of you off if you're a man, you can control it through discipline, or dull it through lack of competition, but the moment it goes away, so does an essential part of what it means to be a man (our telos as Aristotle would put it). I couldn't disagree with you more on that end, you don't compare one or the other, they're both important. WWE uses that male competitiveness in their story lines all the time. Whether you like that or not, they didn't invent that line of thinking, they merely use it to push their product. Also that knowing when to quit crap is one of the foundations of superhero building (another storytelling device). John Cena has more "I Quit" match victories than any other wrestler because he never gives up, no matter the odds(!) stacked against him or terrible blade jobs he puts on himself. You learn when to quit by experiencing failure, either directly or by proxy. This can deter you from continuing or encourage you to persevere, neither of which is necessarily conducive to weakness or strength on their own, both can aslo be seen as strategic or futile respectively.
|
|
agent817
Fry's dog Seymour
Doesn't Know Whose Ring It Is
Posts: 21,156
|
Post by agent817 on Aug 27, 2014 20:54:38 GMT -5
When Shawn Michaels tapped out to the ankle lock, nobody gave him any grief for submitting, at least not that I can recall. I remember him selling the injuries after the match as well as the following night on Raw.
The thing I wonder why toughing out through pain seems more admirable than being smart and saving yourself from injury.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2014 21:27:00 GMT -5
I hate tapping out and wish they'd reintroduce formal submission. Saying "I give up" is far more an emasculating experience for a heel than the act of tapping on the floor. It also leads to an unfortunate situation a lot of the time where the person in the submission manoeuvre is motionless. They SHOULD be banging on the floor in pain, but instead a lot of the time they're just...there, because doing that would look to similar to actually tapping out. That's why "I Quit" matches mean more and would mean more than a "Tap" match. The act of verbalising your surrender is much more meaningful. I agree, and wish theyd just bring back nodding the head "yes."
|
|