Ultimo Gallos
Grimlock
Dreams SUCK!Nightmares live FOREVER!
Posts: 14,407
|
Post by Ultimo Gallos on Sept 27, 2022 10:13:59 GMT -5
One of the things I enjoyed most about the Monday Night wars is that fans, and wrestlers to some extent, didn't care as much about workrate. This isn't to say that a stinker of a match couldn't hurt the crowd, or the wrestlers were just phoning it in. However, to me, it felt like fans just wanted to see the wrestlers they liked, and the wrestlers weren't so worried about their star ratings. When do you think workrate became more of a concern for fans and wrestlers alike? I noticed it becoming a bigger thing when more people got online. Back in the late 90s in RSPW there was a group called the Workrate Krew who were all about workrate. But as more fans got online and got exposed to wrestling that wasn't WWE stuff I saw the rise of the workrate fan. For me I judge a match on if it entertained me. Sometimes it will be a total comedy match. Sometimes it is a match that is nothing but moves. Just depends on how well it is done.
|
|
Dr. Bolty, Disaster Enby
Grimlock
Blanket burrito season is back, and I never left the blankets
Posts: 12,834
Member is Online
|
Post by Dr. Bolty, Disaster Enby on Sept 27, 2022 11:09:25 GMT -5
I just have no patience whatsoever for the line of argument that says that because wrestling was a bigger thing in the 80's and late 90's, therefore anything in modern wrestling that isn't just like those time periods is a deficiency and the reason wrestling is less popular.
There's a lot in wrestling that's ignored by that argument, like the fact that the 00's is when Wrestlemania became sustainable as an annual stadium show, like that Raw and Dynamite are still #1 shows on cable most weeks, like that John Cena has become a cultural icon in a different way and continues to live on in memes that penetrate outside wrestling.
But the part where I can't take it seriously is that no other form of entertainment works like that.
80's X-Men comics written by Chris Claremont were the best-selling comics of their day. They sold better than any comic sells today, by a very wide margin. These comics had a very distinctive style that's unlike today's lesser-selling comics, with the four-color printing, the mandatory exposition that made them more accessible to new readers, the catchphrases that would stick in readers' minds, the art style that blended the smoothed-out realism of the 70's DC house style and the crackling square-jawed energy of the 70's Marvel house style.
You cannot make a comic that sells like 80's X-Men today by replicating the traits of those comics. Even if you bring back Chris Claremont himself and he writes exactly the same way he always did (which, yes, has been tried, many times), you cannot make it happen again. It won't even be the best-selling comic in today's market - Claremont's comebacks have always (or close to always) sold less than whatever new writer is working on X-Men.
The numbers on 80's X-Men happened for a lot of reasons on top of the traits of the comic: it was innovative, it was better and fresher than most anything else out there, comics were still sold primarily on newsstands rather than in comic book stores, the overall baseline for comic sales was much higher, and most importantly, it was new at the time. A Claremont X-Men comic in 2022 is not innovative, it's tired; it's not better and fresher than its competitors, which have more sophisticated ways of conveying information to their readers and the benefit of easily obtained paperbacks of past issues to catch the reader up; it is not sold on newsstands and wouldn't benefit it if were because newsstands are barely a thing and certainly not something kids notice anymore; and it's not new, and anyone who wants to read a Claremont X-Men comic or something like it can just buy a reprint of the original instead of a retread.
Comics won't magically do 80's or 70's numbers if Marvel and DC went back to four-color printing and house styles and exposition captions and national stereotype characters and sold them on newsstands. Computer-coloring is here to stay, Japanese-influenced art styles and visual storytelling are here to stay, national stereotypes have changed since then and aren't looked on so kindly, and the newsstand is not where anyone would hope to find success for a media property now.
Every single part of that applies to wrestling. TV isn't what it was, even if it's still bigger than newsstands. DVDs and streaming archives of old shows exist for anyone who wants the old material, so there's little demand for a retread of it. New styles (often from Japan, as it happens) have propagated and succeeded for a reason, and their presence changes the context for the older styles. Most of the new innovations, like high flying offense, can co-exist alongside what the previous era did right - the same way that computer coloring can co-exist with the kinds of character development and political themes that made X-Men a going concern in the first place.
The genie can't be put back in the bottle. 80's Hogan in 2022 would not do 80's Hogan numbers because the context would be different, not the least because 80's Hogan already happened. It would fail the same way a four-color Claremont X-Men comic would fail, the same way the G1 Transformers cartoon would fail if it hit the airwaves alongside Owl House and its like, the same way a Flock of Seagulls synth track would fail if released as a single in a post-Spotify let along post-90's world.
|
|
thecrusherwi
El Dandy
the Financially Responsible Man
Brawl For All
Posts: 7,656
|
Post by thecrusherwi on Sept 27, 2022 11:24:04 GMT -5
I don't have an answer as well thought out as some already posted, but I will say that I believe that next to Vince McMahon, there is no one in the last 40 years of wrestling more influential than Dave Meltzer. After the rise of the internet, the simultaneous death of kayfabe, and the WWE's opening of the history vault after it's victory over it's last major competitors in 2001, more and more fans began appreciating pro wrestling as an artform that went beyond being a fake sport where you watch to see who wins or loses the matches. If it's fake, the matches themselves can be appreciated and ranked regardless of who wins them or how it impacts the story. Like scenes in a movie. More and more fans began to appreciate the craftsmanship. Well Dave Meltzer had been doing that long before that was popular and when that great awakening happened, he had an infrastructure built and decades of archives for people to access as they uncovered old wrestling though the internet. Fans who wanted to learn about how things worked behind the scenes and what wrestling of the past or elsewhere in the world was worth watching gravitated toward Meltzer and his network because he was the biggest fish in this small, growing pond. Because of this, the wrestling that Dave Meltzer likes became very popular among the most hardcore wrestling fans. And many of these hardcore fans grew up to be wrestlers.
I'm leaving out lots of detail, but that's a general theory I've had for a long time. Meltzer was very well positioned when the wrestling business stopped resisting the curtain being pulled back on it's secrets and it's history, and as a result the style of wrestling Meltzer likes became the de facto correct opinion of what good wrestling is sometime in the mid 2000s and that's carried over into the way wrestling is presented and consumed today.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2022 11:30:08 GMT -5
All of this talk about how workrate doesn't matter (and I don't even want to touch what workrate actually means, because no one can give a straight answer on that despite us all sort of knowing what it is) is just flat out wrong.
Yes, the characters, the story, the angle, the drama... that's what gets people in the building. That's what sells the match. Even in matches that don't have a "personal issue" to them (like, I dunno... two guys who are the best submission grapplers in their promotion are finally gonna lock horns, or something), it's almost always the past stories that built the characters that makes the matchup intriguing, if that makes any sense at all. I totally, 100% get that, and the alleged "Buddy Murphy wants out of AEW" thing is living proof that being just a great worker isn't going to do it.
But... you gotta deliver the match in the ring eventually. And you have to deliver it well. And you have to deliver it competently. and you have to sell the drama, you have to sell the impact, you have to just.. sell. Period. THAT'S working. That's workrate.
|
|
|
Post by "Evil Brood" Jackson Vanik on Sept 27, 2022 11:32:27 GMT -5
Because once you see a great match, it makes you want to see more of them. It's no surprise in my eyes that it began to matter more as more and more fans became exposed to wrestling from around the world. When you see what they can do elsewhere, you expect more. Obviously things like character and storylines matter but they're not in conflict with workrate so it's led fans to want both.
|
|
lucas_lee
Hank Scorpio
Heel turn is finished, now stripping away my personality
Posts: 6,707
|
Post by lucas_lee on Sept 27, 2022 11:45:03 GMT -5
It was always important even in the 50s you'd hear audiences catcall a bad match. The WWF used crowd sweetners for a lot of their shows (Prime Time Wrestling, Superstars, etc) so they'd get the WWFs desired reactions instead of the chants of boring or such. So that may have a skewed perception on us as kids as well.
|
|
lucas_lee
Hank Scorpio
Heel turn is finished, now stripping away my personality
Posts: 6,707
|
Post by lucas_lee on Sept 27, 2022 11:47:51 GMT -5
Your argument was that workrate doesn't sell tickets. Nothing about personality. The false dichotomy of workrate and personality is a really pointless and inaccurate one people use mostly just to try and underplay what other people like more, but there's really no way of knowing how many people weigh match quality over personality, how many people believe both are greatly important, how many people will buy a ticket for a show they expect will be good in-ring first and foremost. Workrate is icing on the cake for you, but you aren't making personal claims about what you like to see in wrestling, you're making big, sweeping claims about what draws and what people overall like more, and that's not really something you have the proof to back up. Like, in this thread right now where someone is just asking "How did fans end up caring so much about workrate?" a stance of "They don't, it's not important and nobody cares" needs a lot more support than it's actually getting. The claim people want to pretend workrate matters is some real "I can read minds and know what people really think" junk. I get what you're saying. But let's look at the biggest draw of all time: Hulk Hogan, despite what some sections of the Fandom might think of him now, he is the biggest star in the sports history. He wasn't known for his "workrate". He instead had a routine. And it drew. Huge. Even if you think Austin or the Rock are bigger draws, they to were more about personality. But Hogan had a good workrate, I dont care what the IWC says, Hogan was adept at changing up his style and playing to the crowd. He also was a great seller that made people sympathize with him. So to me hes a good worker.
|
|
FinalGwen
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Particularly fond of muffins.
Posts: 16,434
|
Post by FinalGwen on Sept 27, 2022 11:55:39 GMT -5
I think saying that Kurt Angle worked because of his character and not his workrate ignores the balance that both gave his character. The whole premise of his character work was that he could be that ineffectual goofball yet also be a guy who could wrestle circles around you and tear you apart in the ring. If he'd wrestled on the standard of like, Road Dogg, he wouldn't have been anywhere near as compelling no matter how many funny moments you give him.
|
|
|
Post by This Player Hating Mothman on Sept 27, 2022 12:18:45 GMT -5
One day we're gonna have a thread on this topic where the same few posters who are strong on one side of the issue don't talk past the points of the other to instead argue points nobody is making, Made Up Guys, weird deflections, and arguing dichotomies that aren't there.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 27, 2022 12:34:32 GMT -5
I get what you're saying. But let's look at the biggest draw of all time: Hulk Hogan, despite what some sections of the Fandom might think of him now, he is the biggest star in the sports history. He wasn't known for his "workrate". He instead had a routine. And it drew. Huge. Even if you think Austin or the Rock are bigger draws, they to were more about personality. But Hogan had a good workrate, I dont care what the IWC says, Hogan was adept at changing up his style and playing to the crowd. He also was a great seller that made people sympathize with him. So to me hes a good worker. Yes. All personal feelings about the man aside, the Hulkster was an A-grade worker. He didn't do a whole lot, but he also didn't have to. When he was expected to do more (Japan), he did. I'm definitely more of an AEW guy than anything else, but you gotta call a spade a spade here, so I'll use this as an example of what I think "Workrate" means: Hulk Hogan knows how to work, even though he doesn't have an expansive moveset. Kurt Angle knows how to work, and he can do a lot. Bryan Danielson knows how to work, and he's arguably a walking encyclopedia of wrestling maneuvers. Sammy Guevara, on the other hand, is the living embodiment of what I call a spotmonkey who really doesn't know how to work, in my opinion. There's this weird-ass disconnect where some are thinking that those of us who value the in-ring work are fussy people who don't embrace wrestling's character-driven side of things, and this just isn't true. I mean, hell, my favorite guy in wrestling right now is friggin Danhausen who is about as pro-wrestling of a pro-wrestling character as it gets.
|
|
|
Post by GodzillaIsMyMonster on Sept 27, 2022 13:17:21 GMT -5
I get what you're saying. But let's look at the biggest draw of all time: Hulk Hogan, despite what some sections of the Fandom might think of him now, he is the biggest star in the sports history. He wasn't known for his "workrate". He instead had a routine. And it drew. Huge. Even if you think Austin or the Rock are bigger draws, they to were more about personality. But Hogan had a good workrate, I dont care what the IWC says, Hogan was adept at changing up his style and playing to the crowd. He also was a great seller that made people sympathize with him. So to me hes a good worker. Oh yea. He's amazing. But I was operating under the assumption that in this thread "workrate" meant technical and/or flippy stuff.
|
|
pinja
Unicron
Posts: 2,999
|
Post by pinja on Sept 27, 2022 13:39:02 GMT -5
I'm not familiar with indie wrestling at all, never have been. I was always under the impression that most indies wouldn't have angles because they didn't really have rosters, but just wrestlers they booked. So indies had to rely on workrate. Fans came, may have been familiar with the wrestlers, but there was no long term engagement to tell big stories and a lack of production value to make wrestlers seem larger than life. So them being impressively athletic helped to make the show worthwhile anyway.
|
|
|
Post by This Player Hating Mothman on Sept 27, 2022 13:49:28 GMT -5
I'm not familiar with indie wrestling at all, never have been. I was always under the impression that most indies wouldn't have angles because they didn't really have rosters, but just wrestlers they booked. So indies had to rely on workrate. Fans came, may have been familiar with the wrestlers, but there was no long term engagement to tell big stories and a lack of production value to make wrestlers seem larger than life. So them being impressively athletic helped to make the show worthwhile anyway. It can vary a lot by the indie in terms of its scope and its success. A lot of the smaller indies out there don't have "rosters" necessarily, but they consistently have their guys, often the local scene, and they'll absolutely run angles with those wrestlers and tell stories long term. There's a fair lot of touring dudes who have some name value, whether bigger indie stars or guys who used to be on TV, who do get used more like special attractions. I'd compare that style of indie to an old school NWA territory, where you've got the NWA champion making his rounds, coming in to face the promotion's top star, and then there's an undercard with all the stalwarts and everyday guys having their stories. There's definitely also indies that work a more "f*** it, just do matches" style. PWG tends to be lighter on actual story for instance, although feuds absolutely do happen there, because PWG is very much an indies supershow kind of promotion and the entire conceit of BOLA is just "watch good match". Classic ROH had lots of feuds but it also had lots of 'here's this guy from Japan who's going to work a banger match with an ROH guy'. It can vary, and some indies really pare things down--Ultimo Gallos who's been in this thread has talked a lot elsewhere about deep south indies that are very much not havens for mega smarkitude--but that all becomes a matter of different regions and identities and tastes all having their places and being draws for different reasons. But I will sincerely give you major kudos for admitting you don't know a lot about something while making your informed guess, instead of gassing around like an expert with definitive wisdom on the subject. Thread needs more of that.
|
|
|
Post by tntchamp on Sept 27, 2022 14:48:47 GMT -5
Workrate doesn't matter unless you have a personality and a character. No one wants to watch two guys work a 5 star match if they don't care about the story or the people doing it. It's like the difference between an independent movie at the Sundance Film Festival and a superhero blockbuster. The indie film might be better acted but Iron Man is bringing in way more money. It draws better. Now if you have a movie that's wonderfully acted and has big stars, then it's one of the top movies of all time. Wrestling is the same, ROH might put on a technical masterpiece between two guys you've never heard of but Hogan vs Andre is the blockbuster. If you can mix a high workrate match with huge stars then you have some of the best matches of all time. And by the same token no one wants to see the same tired match and spots over and over week to week. Hogan and post injury Austin would never last in todays WWE where the big stars are always there and always having matches. WWF had a strong mid and undercard so their biggest stars could just come on to cut a promo week to week. With a squash match here and there. And you had to wait for a SNME, PPV, or house show to see Hogan hulk up or Austin to stomp a mudhole. And you were happy with the same old thing because it was rare. Look at the biggest stars over the last decade. Cena, Styles, Moxley, Rollins, Reigns, Bryan, Lashley, Drew. All big personalities who can work. Can't say I quite agree there that Hogan or Austin post injury wouldn't last in todays WWE. Regardless of how they you view there work rate (though personally Hogan was serviceable enough in terms of wrestling style for what he had to do and Stone Cold adapted a great style that worked for his character at that point), their charisma was always going to ensure their star power. Really work rate can help to the extent you certainly have to be capable of working a decent enough match but natural charisma is going to carry wrestlers a lot further. I can't honestly seeing guys like Bryan, Rollins or Drew being bigger stars these days over a Hogan or Austin if they were all around at the same time because the latter two just naturally have more charisma regardless of what you think in in ring. work.
|
|
Ultimo Gallos
Grimlock
Dreams SUCK!Nightmares live FOREVER!
Posts: 14,407
|
Post by Ultimo Gallos on Sept 27, 2022 15:17:40 GMT -5
I'm not familiar with indie wrestling at all, never have been. I was always under the impression that most indies wouldn't have angles because they didn't really have rosters, but just wrestlers they booked. So indies had to rely on workrate. Fans came, may have been familiar with the wrestlers, but there was no long term engagement to tell big stories and a lack of production value to make wrestlers seem larger than life. So them being impressively athletic helped to make the show worthwhile anyway. Depends on the indie. Using two of my local ones for examples. Battlezone has been running since the late 90s. They were running weekly at one time,now they do monthly shows. But they have storylines. But that is also cause they have the same roster most shows. So out of the 10 wrestlers on a BZ show 8 or 9 of them were on the last show. BIW-Runs once or twice a month and always has storylines. Right now the big storyline is how Southern Royalty,the big heel faction,is doing all they can to get the belt off champ Apoc. But the other storyline is between current Deep South Heritage champ Danny Chance and the guy he won the belt off of Frankie THomas. These two feuded for a year before Danny won the belt. So 2 shows ago after Danny beat someone Frankie ran out beat up Danny and smeared makeup all over his face. So Danny challenged Frankie to a Loser wears a dress match. This match happened last month. Frankie lost and he put on the dress and has to wear the dress in November when Danny is defending the belt in a 4 way match. Now not every indie has storylines. YOu got indies that just have matches.Where it is face vs heel. But most indies that run often will have a storyline going on with at least their top title. I think another reason why BZ and BIW have storylines is the bookers know that at least half the crowd is at every show. So they want to give those loyal fans something special. And storylines will bleed over into feds. For example before the loser wears a dress match in BIW,we were at a BZ show. Danny doesnt work for BZ,mostly cause BZ doesn't pay that much and Danny lives 14 hours away. But Frankie Thomas is part of BZ's big heel stable. Frankie was coming out at the start of the show with the heels to cut a promo. A buddy with us had brought his Danny Chance bandana,black with gold letters saying TAKE A CHANCE. He held this up as Frankie was walkign around the ring. Frankie grabbed it pretended to wipe his ass with it and threw it back to my friend. Then once Frankie got the mic he cut a promo on Danny. "And I see we got some Danny chance fans here front row. Hope you are ready to see your hero in a dress in a week." Was suprised that a good amount of the crowd knew who Danny was and reacted to this.
|
|
|
Post by thegame415 on Sept 27, 2022 17:32:57 GMT -5
Didn't know this would generate so much debate...thanks everyone. I think what matters most if you enjoy something, just enjoy it, don't ruin it for others, and vice versa.
|
|
|
Post by Cyno on Sept 27, 2022 23:33:33 GMT -5
Workrate has been important to pro wrestling since the days of The Great f***ing Gama.
|
|
|
Post by LiamMcDuggle on Sept 27, 2022 23:36:29 GMT -5
One of the things I enjoyed most about the Monday Night wars is that fans, and wrestlers to some extent, didn't care as much about workrate. This isn't to say that a stinker of a match couldn't hurt the crowd, or the wrestlers were just phoning it in. However, to me, it felt like fans just wanted to see the wrestlers they liked, and the wrestlers weren't so worried about their star ratings. When do you think workrate became more of a concern for fans and wrestlers alike? I mean, the matches today are very similar to the matches in ROH from 2008. Maybe a little more psychology
|
|
Ultimo Gallos
Grimlock
Dreams SUCK!Nightmares live FOREVER!
Posts: 14,407
|
Post by Ultimo Gallos on Sept 28, 2022 2:00:46 GMT -5
Didn't know this would generate so much debate...thanks everyone. I think what matters most if you enjoy something, just enjoy it, don't ruin it for others, and vice versa. That is my thing. If I find myself not enjoying a fed I stop watching. I dont have enough time to hate watch something I don't enjoy. Which is why I havent kept up with WWE in years. And why I don't watch AEW. Most years since AEW started I will give it a shot. Watch 2 or 3 weeks ,realize it isnt for me and stop watching. But all over online for years I saw people hate watching WWE and TNA.
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Order Inferno on Sept 28, 2022 5:10:27 GMT -5
People got burned out by the Catchphrase Promo + 5 moves and a whole lot of punches style. People forget that only once in a generation performers could ever make that style work, Hulk Hogan, Austin and Rock were upper echelon talents in terms of charisma, and the WWE burned fans out trying to replicate them with talent who aren't on that level or can't work that style so the fans got behind people who more closely resembled them rather than comic book supermen and were putting on a better all round show.
|
|