|
Post by HMARK Center on May 31, 2021 13:19:16 GMT -5
Ok, so maybe this is because there was just a pay per view last night a lot of people watched, or perhaps I'm exaggerating a bit for effect, but man, I really don't care if the "right guy" wins a wrestling match or not anymore, and I really wish we'd get away from that kind of criticism. tl;dr version of this - if you're more worried about who won instead of whether you simply enjoyed the show or not, then you're probably watching a promotion you don't really enjoy that much.
I've said this before, but I really feel like too many western fans are just burned by years of shoddy booking from a lot of mainstream US promotions and are convinced that "the wrong guy" winning can do everything from instantly derail someone's push or career to outright destroy entire wrestling promotions. But this seems to manifest into saying that a particular show is higher or lower quality based on who wins the individual matches, rather than the overall performances or the larger stories possibly being told. It feels like a very unhappy way to watch pro wrestling...so rather than subject yourself to that, why not just watch wrestling from some place else?
Don't get me wrong, I did say I'm exaggerating a little for effect here; promotions can earn bad booking reputations, and sometimes it's at least in part a result of booking "wrong" winners too much. There's a reason a lot of people gave up on WCW once it seemed like the nWo would never be bested, and why the WWE Current section here has a "(insert name here) is a bitch!" thread. And hey, occasionally there are moments where it feels like a particular wrestler needs to win to get the right cathartic moment for the audience - see: Steve Austin at WM 14, Sting at Starrcade '97, etc. It can happen. But judging shows based on match outcomes just feels waaaaaay too commonplace to me right now; it's not being reserved for those big moments, it's applied all up and down an entire show. But this is a result of those shows not being booked well, overall, not because the "wrong" or "right" people won most of the time.
When I was in college and watching a ton of ROH from around 2004 through 2008, or when I've watched NJPW over the past few years, there have definitely been outcomes I've watched that have made me wish they had gone a different way, but I recognized those as my preferences, not as indicative of a problem within the booking itself. Those promotions were/are entertaining to me, full stop; I watch them with faith that even if the outcomes aren't what I always want, I still feel secure that the end result I'll get will be worthwhile, regardless. Yet back around 2004, the last time I watched WWE on a weekly basis, I spent too much time genuinely worried that Triple H would win the belt back, and thus make the show less entertaining or end up burying somebody. Watching TNA from around 2004-2010 or so felt very similar: I was often afraid that if they booked the "wrong" winners, it'd lead to TNA failing as a promotion, or would be a sign that they weren't going to push someone like Joe or AJ the way they should.
This wasn't a fun way to watch pro wrestling. End result? I stopped watching WWE, and gave up on TNA until they got the boat somewhat righted. I gave my focus to promotions that encouraged me to feel more "Ooh, what's next?" and not "Oh no, the show's ruined!" based on who won a fake fight.
I'd also say that some people seem to use "wrong guy" criticism as a way to just mask that they simply like or dislike certain wrestlers more than others, and rather than just admit that they try to justify themselves by saying "it's not just my preferences, it's bad booking if so-and-so wins/loses!" Again, outside of rare occasions, this just isn't how wrestling works. Again, it's why it just strikes me as lazy wrestling criticism; either embrace that you're just cheering your favorites and booing those you dislike, which is fine, or consider whether you want to continue watching a particular show/promotion if they're always leaving you viewing each match outcome as a marker of show quality, or a life and death decision that'll impact your ability to enjoy the show at all.
|
|
|
Post by kingoftheindies on May 31, 2021 13:30:41 GMT -5
I was watching Brian Zane review DoN and he made the point that sometimes people get mad at predictability, but predictability shouldn't matter it should be how you got from point A to point B.
If the story told makes the payoff worth it that's all that matters. I think the Wrong Guy Won argument can be valid at certain times though as I think sometimes promoters try to go with the idea "the title makes the man" and they hope that making someone a champ will get them over rather than building up the man.
|
|
Captain Stud Muffin (BLM)
FANatic
You can either sink, swim, or be the captain....Long live the cheif
Posts: 113,336
Member is Online
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on May 31, 2021 13:38:18 GMT -5
Nothing wrong with predictability but I see nothing wrong with the argument
When people call them a bitch and so so is going overboard but for example yesterday Christian would been the wrong guy to win the Battle Royale over JB. JB was over and the fans were behind him and the people backstage understood that and booked the end perfectly. I can like or dislike a wrestler and understand the decision. Shit I don't like is one off things that make no sense. For example Cody being PENTA a few weeks ago despite the bad arm made no real sense. I did not like Moxley beating KENTA to keep the IWGP US title but I understood it
End results can matter sometimes but it isn't the end all be all. Shit yesterday like Cody beating Ogogo did factor in my enjoyment of the show. That was a legit downer from a shitty feud. Ogogo will be fine but vanity time with Cody is played out imo and it really served no purpose other then to ape Daddys name. I get it but I don't care it
Can't really wave a brush over everything but if people have a legit criticism to why they don't like it than it is fair game
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on May 31, 2021 13:40:18 GMT -5
I was watching Brian Zane review DoN and he made the point that sometimes people get mad at predictability, but predictability shouldn't matter it should be how you got from point A to point B. If the story told makes the payoff worth it that's all that matters. I think the Wrong Guy Won argument can be valid at certain times though as I think sometimes promoters try to go with the idea "the title makes the man" and they hope that making someone a champ will get them over rather than building up the man. I think even then, though, it's still possible to say "Let's see what story is being told here"; you can have a story where a less credible person wins a major title, but hey, maybe that'll be factored into the story being told, how their character changes, the psychology of their next few matches, that sort of thing. Again, it's not to say a promotion can't earn a bad reputation if they have a history of shoddy booking, but I guess that's kind of my point: if the promotion you're watching books like crap so much, why keep watching it? When people call them a bitch and so so is going overboard but for example yesterday Christian would been the wrong guy to win the Battle Royale over JB. JB was over and the fans were behind him and the people backstage understood that and booked the end perfectly. I will say, for Double or Nothing last night that was the clearest case to me of a "yeah, there's a right and a wrong outcome, here" situation. First big crowd back, JB is hugely over, he's gotten so close to winning battle royals before but almost always falls just short, and Christian is, fairly or unfairly, the guy in that "older dude who's got WWE scent on him" to the audience, so him winning would feel kind of TNA-ish...but Jungle Boy won, the audience got to have a huge pop, and Christian doesn't have to turn heel or anything because it wasn't so much him they were booing as it was the crappy booking a lot of us put up with for years from places like old school TNA. With Cody and Ogogo, I separate the pageantry around the match from the actual match itself. The former had plenty for people to feel annoyed by, but the latter was pretty much fine, complete with Ogogo's punches being protected due to his own inexperience factoring into why he didn't put Cody away right after hitting the body blows he did - he's good enough to win, but Cody's experienced enough to capitalize on a mistake, which was pretty much what the announcers were hinting at all along. If this gives us an Ogogo who's now obsessed about upping his overall wrestling game and not just getting by on his strikes, it gives him a nice option for another step in his character's evolution. Doesn't change that Cody looked like Homelander and that "USA!" chants in pro wrestling feel outdated in 2021, but that's what I meant by separating the two.
|
|
RKTaker
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 16,306
|
Post by RKTaker on May 31, 2021 13:47:24 GMT -5
the thing is with having the "wrong guy winning" can sometimes kill someone's momentum or moment like Ogogo getting the win last night would have been a great moment for him, match quality aside. I was expecting Cody to win but I was still disappointed by the result. or nexus vs team WWE Cena winning is pretty much the epitome of wrong guy winning there
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on May 31, 2021 13:52:16 GMT -5
the thing is with having the "wrong guy winning" can sometimes kill someone's momentum or moment like Ogogo getting the win last night would have been a great moment for him, match quality aside. I was expecting Cody to win but I was still disappointed by the result. or nexus vs team WWE Cena winning is pretty much the epitome of wrong guy winning there That's kind of my point, though: who says Ogogo is derailed now? Dude just had his third match, it was a loss, but he was protected in it and likely evolves from here. He's working in a promotion where a high profile loss rarely means you're in line for a de-push or anything like that. Again, it's fine to have preferred him winning over Cody, but I don't see how him not winning actively makes the show worse, given that context (again, this is different from saying the angle itself was something you didn't like). With Cena and the Nexus, I'd say you can make a better case for that insofar as, again, WWE has shown over the past 10-20 years that losses like that can lead to basically being erased from TV; it's a promotion where people fall off the radar seemingly all the time. Given that track record, I can see the criticism, but again it just leads to me asking "why keep watching something with such a bad track record?"
|
|
MolotovMocktail
Grimlock
Home of the 5-time, 5-time, 5-time, 5-time 5-time Super Bowl Champion 49ers-and Wrestlemania 31
Posts: 13,958
|
Post by MolotovMocktail on May 31, 2021 13:52:38 GMT -5
They were doing a US vs. UK angle on Memorial Day Weekend. No way the American was going to lose.
|
|
Captain Stud Muffin (BLM)
FANatic
You can either sink, swim, or be the captain....Long live the cheif
Posts: 113,336
Member is Online
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on May 31, 2021 13:55:36 GMT -5
When people call them a bitch and so so is going overboard but for example yesterday Christian would been the wrong guy to win the Battle Royale over JB. JB was over and the fans were behind him and the people backstage understood that and booked the end perfectly. I will say, for Double or Nothing last night that was the clearest case to me of a "yeah, there's a right and a wrong outcome, here" situation. First big crowd back, JB is hugely over, he's gotten so close to winning battle royals before but almost always falls just short, and Christian is, fairly or unfairly, the guy in that "older dude who's got WWE scent on him" to the audience, so him winning would feel kind of TNA-ish...but Jungle Boy won, the audience got to have a huge pop, and Christian doesn't have to turn heel or anything because it wasn't so much him they were booing as it was the crappy booking a lot of us put up with for years from places like old school TNA. With Cody and Ogogo, I separate the pageantry around the match from the actual match itself. The former had plenty for people to feel annoyed by, but the latter was pretty much fine, complete with Ogogo's punches being protected due to his own inexperience factoring into why he didn't put Cody away right after hitting the body blows he did - he's good enough to win, but Cody's experienced enough to capitalize on a mistake, which was pretty much what the announcers were hinting at all along. If this gives us an Ogogo who's now obsessed about upping his overall wrestling game and not just getting by on his strikes, it gives him a nice option for another step in his character's evolution. Doesn't change that Cody looked like Homelander and that "USA!" chants in pro wrestling feel outdated in 2021, but that's what I meant by separating the two. That's fair I think the match worked well enough to show Ogogo has skill but watching the fallout will be interesting to see if they continue to go this route or they go their own ways. It would work best for Ogogo to get in more time with Dark. The biggest problem is the match should have been the feud itself with inexperience being the turning point against him with Cody being the savy vet. Their biggest fault is trying to add more juice to a match that did not need it but Ogogo is so young in his career this will be forgotten about while Cody def needs some type of basic feud or a break Outside of that match, everything went the way it should have went. My next big thing is Shida and how they do with her. She always has the match quality and she needed to take that L but after a year of being champ where do they go with her. The right person won but the person who lost is probably the person who needs the most help
|
|
RKTaker
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 16,306
|
Post by RKTaker on May 31, 2021 13:58:59 GMT -5
the thing is with having the "wrong guy winning" can sometimes kill someone's momentum or moment like Ogogo getting the win last night would have been a great moment for him, match quality aside. I was expecting Cody to win but I was still disappointed by the result. or nexus vs team WWE Cena winning is pretty much the epitome of wrong guy winning there That's kind of my point, though: who says Ogogo is derailed now? Dude just had his third match, it was a loss, but he was protected in it and likely evolves from here. He's working in a promotion where a high profile loss rarely means you're in line for a de-push or anything like that. Again, it's fine to have preferred him winning over Cody, but I don't see how him not winning actively makes the show worse, given that context (again, this is different from saying the angle itself was something you didn't like). With Cena and the Nexus, I'd say you can make a better case for that insofar as, again, WWE has shown over the past 10-20 years that losses like that can lead to basically being erased from TV; it's a promotion where people fall off the radar seemingly all the time. Given that track record, I can see the criticism, but again it just leads to me asking "why keep watching something with such a bad track record?" sure but just compare it to Archer he lost to Cody and then kind of floundered aimlessly for months he wasn't really given something to do until the Kingston/pac feud. will Ogogo do that? obviously it's way too early to tell who knows maybe there will even be a rematch between the two with Ogogo winning idk
|
|
|
Post by kingoftheindies on May 31, 2021 13:59:25 GMT -5
On the Ogogo match, I think the issue was also that the idea for the story works best if you really show that the win was fluky and Cody got lucky because Ogogo was either too cocky or too inexperienced. Instead it came off too clunky and that is without the angle. So that to me was more execution.
The most obvious issue with wrong guy winning was Matt Taven for ROH at MSG when he was the least over guy in the match and the fact that Taven had a pretty forgettable title run makes it worse.
But the wrong guy won argument is something I think has been magnified by WWE in recent years in that they didn't know how to book matches for Cena or Reigns for whatever reason. So you'd have situations like the Elimination Chamber where you'd have Braun get super over by being a beast to be put away so easily with a spear? It deflates a crowd.
TNA had a history of bad finishes too... like way too many to count just in 2010 when Hogan came in
|
|
FinalGwen
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Particularly fond of muffins.
Posts: 16,428
|
Post by FinalGwen on May 31, 2021 14:10:17 GMT -5
I think there is a point where a bad storyline can be somewhat redeemed by the right outcome, but if you double down it gets even worse. The prime example: Triple H vs Booker T. It was never going to be a *good* angle, but if Booker had won it would be remembered very differently than it is.
|
|
MrBRulzOK
Wade Wilson
Mr No-Pants Heathen
Something Witty Here.
Posts: 26,719
|
Post by MrBRulzOK on May 31, 2021 14:12:46 GMT -5
Predictability isn't the worst aspect, but at the same time if you can always predict what is going to happen ninety-nine percent of the time then I feel that is an issue. Sometimes you do need to have a curve ball thrown your way every now and then. Otherwise you risk things becoming outright boring. That doesn't mean said curve ball shouldn't be set up properly or make sense in the grand scheme of things, but at the same time you shouldn't be able to read the mind of the booking team.
While I agree that this stance can definitely be a lazy argument, there are times where it is genuinely the best one you can make. And there are definitely instances where the wrong man won a match and it completely killed their momentum dead. Certainly not always, but it has happened.
|
|
RKTaker
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Posts: 16,306
|
Post by RKTaker on May 31, 2021 14:25:32 GMT -5
Predictability isn't the worst aspect, but at the same time if you can always predict what is going to happen ninety-nine percent of the time then I feel that is an issue. Sometimes you do need to have a curve ball thrown your way every now and then. Otherwise you risk things becoming outright boring. That doesn't mean said curve ball shouldn't be set up properly or make sense in the grand scheme of things, but at the same time you shouldn't be able to read the mind of the booking team. While I agree that this stance can definitely be a lazy argument, there are times where it is genuinely the best one you can make. And there are definitely instances where the wrong man won a match and it completely killed their momentum dead. Certainly not always, but it has happened. a lot of wrestling is predictable honestly if you were to show any wrestling fan a match card for wrestlemania Backlash, Double or nothing, or any MLW card most of them could probably guess who won/is going to win. with a company like AEW or MLW I don't care as much because most of the time the Matches are good. But it does pay off when a surprise does happen like Brian Cage beating Hangman Page on Dynamite, or Jungle Boy winning the cassino battle royale at least to me was a surprise. Even MJF beating Cody at Revolution last year was a surprise to me cause I really thought Cody was gonna win. so overall I don't think predictability in wrestling is as bad as some people think
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on May 31, 2021 15:21:46 GMT -5
Predictability isn't the worst aspect, but at the same time if you can always predict what is going to happen ninety-nine percent of the time then I feel that is an issue. Sometimes you do need to have a curve ball thrown your way every now and then. Otherwise you risk things becoming outright boring. That doesn't mean said curve ball shouldn't be set up properly or make sense in the grand scheme of things, but at the same time you shouldn't be able to read the mind of the booking team. While I agree that this stance can definitely be a lazy argument, there are times where it is genuinely the best one you can make. And there are definitely instances where the wrong man won a match and it completely killed their momentum dead. Certainly not always, but it has happened. Oh, yeah, I've got nothing against predictability in wrestling; while like all things it has its limits, I think wrestling's well served by having defined tiers of characters and expectations, so it counts for more when they're subverted, that kind of thing. To me the bigger issue is declaring a show or character hurt or even ruined based on outcomes, expected or otherwise. Again, yeah, there are some instances where an outcome can really make or break an angle - e.g. I still remember a lot of us around here giving up on old school TNA when Bobby Roode didn't beat Kurt Angle at Bound for Glory...yeah, it led to Roode's strong heel champ run, but people had been burned too often by TNA at that point. But I keep seeing people rate entire shows based on that as a metric, and I just don't get doing that unless you're actively scared that the outcomes will lead to worse shows going forward, in which case, again...why keep watching a promotion that makes you feel like that?
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on May 31, 2021 16:49:21 GMT -5
Every company needs a top star, and the top star needs to be fed. To me, that’s a universal truth in wrestling.
A smart wrestling company, even ones with distinct identities, will have enough variety on their show and in their roster to where they can thrive, even if they aren’t going over the ace, so the “wrong wrestler won” sentiment won’t be as prominent. That way, when it’s time for the Ace to lose and give someone else a run, it’ll have more meaning and the upper midcarder will become a bigger deal.
I’m not arguing for “top star above everyone else” booking like Hogan in 1994/1995. But every company needs wrestlers who are positioned as the toughest to beat, and the stars who go over the most always draw the biggest gate. Yeah, you also need a decent storyline and the wrestler needs charisma, but do you really think the win record connection has just been a funny coincidence over the years?
|
|
|
Post by rnrk supports BLM on May 31, 2021 16:57:37 GMT -5
I strongly disagree. An integral part of pro wrestling is building the audience's investment into the outcomes of the matches. People should be elated/angry over who wins and loses. If you take that away, all that's left is an athletic exhibition, which raises the question of why even have storylines or distinct characters at all.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on May 31, 2021 17:44:41 GMT -5
I strongly disagree. An integral part of pro wrestling is building the audience's investment into the outcomes of the matches. People should be elated/angry over who wins and loses. If you take that away, all that's left is an athletic exhibition, which raises the question of why even have storylines or distinct characters at all. Excited and invested in your favorites winning and losing? Yes, we absolutely want that. My argument is about people saying an entire show or a company's overall booking is bad because "the wrong person" won. Like I said in the first post, it's distinguishing between our preferences ("I'd rather see the people I like win and the people I don't like lose") and what constitutes a good or bad show all around, as I think "my favorites didn't win, ergo this show is bad" is lazy criticism. The former is rooted in kayfabe and suspending your disbelief, the latter wraps itself up in talk of real life backstage stuff and not what's just on the show.
|
|
fw91
Patti Mayonnaise
FAN Idol All-Star: FAN Idol Season X and *Gavel* 2x Judges' Throwdown winner
Tribe has spoken for 2024 Mets
Posts: 38,930
|
Post by fw91 on May 31, 2021 18:14:37 GMT -5
Thing is imo, except for a few occasions (any part timer winning a world title) I really don't think it's fair to claim "the wrong guy won" until the storyline plays out afterwards.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2021 18:30:26 GMT -5
This entire thread is just one giant, "No true Scotsman!" Maybe it doesn't ruin the show for you but saying that anyone who does take issue with booking doesn't really like the show is an unbelievably broad statement.
|
|
|
Post by Starshine on May 31, 2021 19:25:42 GMT -5
In itself, the phrase "the wrong guy won" probably is a cop out excuse, because it by and large is typically based on nothing but bias and expe3ctation, While it tends to ignore the bigger picture. But I do think if elaborated on, there's a fair argument depending on its basis.
For example, I think everyone who's familiar with ROH circa 2007-2009 would agree that they completely missed the ball on crowning Tyler Black as their franchise guy while he was at his peak. He had multiple matches that seemed to set him up as their next top player, and they kept having him fall short. This also lasted around 2 years, before they finally got behind him, only for him to then sign with WWE almost immediately after. Retrospectively, you can look at those various title matches and probably come to a fair conclusion that "the wrong guy won," and I wouldn't disagree since the alternative was their end goal, and they dragged it out too long to the point he'd both lost the crowd connection, and had one foot out the door when it finally happened.
So yes, I agree with this take that it's lazy, but am also willing to hear people out if they're willing to go the extra step in elaborating on it. Especially if it's something qualitative and not just along the lines of; "too many heels won," or "this guy always wins," or "it was too predictable," et al; which aren't genuine criticisms in their own right.
|
|