Most Guys In The Ring During A Royal Rumble Match?

[sungod2020]

Just wondering if anyone knew? You'd think this would be a commonly circulated statistic. Off the top of my head, I believe the 2006 and 2009 Royal Rumbles had up to 15 guys at once, but given I haven't watched the WWE full time in years, it might've been more. Anyone have an idea?

[CeilingFan]

I hate it when there is more than 10 at anytime during the Rumble. It slows things down.

[koreycaskets]

Once there is more than 6 they just lay arlund the ring.

[Celexa Bliss 54]

My grandmother hated when the ring would fill up lol once you had like eight or so people in there, she'd start complaining they needed to get rid of people.

[Celexa Bliss 54]

Dec 23, 2022 8:15:52 GMT -5 sungod2020 said:

Just wondering if anyone knew? You'd think this would be a commonly circulated statistic. Off the top of my head, I believe the 2006 and 2009 Royal Rumbles had up to 15 guys at once, but given I haven't watched the WWE full time in years, it might've been more. Anyone have an idea?

To answer the original question, I'd say those are both up there. It feels like every Rumble eventually filled up near the middle/end. 1994 and 1999 had long sections with zero or one guy in. 1997 didn't really get loaded until the end. 2001 and 2010 were brilliant matches that let the action breathe without crowding the ring.

1996 definitely had around thirteen guys in at one point. It took ages for one elimination and nothing mattered until Vader, Michaels and Diesel came in.

1992 might have gotten there near the end, not sure. 1993 was definitely crowded in the back half to put Yokozuna over. But I think the correct answer is certainly a 2010's Rumble. 2011, possibly?

[CeilingFan]

The ring got too crowded at the 1991 Rumble.

[XIII]

Whenever it fills up with long shots you can almost guarantee that a main eventer is about to come in and rack up some eliminations. lol

[ThankGodForSidJustice]

I remember the ring always being really crowded in 91, 98, 2009, and 2017. Sometime in one of those would be my guess. In 2009 when the Big Show entered at #30 there was thirteen guys still in the match. So almost half of the participants. If I had to guess that would probably be it.

That was such a weirdly booked Rumble as they had so many guys with numbers in the first half put in a lot of time. Mysterio, Triple H, Orton, Dibiase, Jericho, Mike Knox, Finlay, Rhodes, and Undertaker all were in for 30 minutes or more. Then they had a bunch of the guys who entered late get tossed super quick with three comedy in and out eliminations in a row from #26-#28 with Ziggler, Kendrick, and Santino. Then you also had three entrants in a row from #19-21 with Henry, Regal, and Benjamin all failing to last even last five minutes despite all being pretty credible guys at the time. I think that Rumble would've flowed better if they spread out the eliminations better. I get Dibiase and Rhodes staying in a while as they were a big part of the Legacy story with Orton. However I don't really get the point of having guys like Knox and Finlay stay in that long when they were booked to do nothing at all.

[sungod2020]

Dec 23, 2022 16:34:20 GMT -5 ThankGodForSidJustice said:

I remember the ring always being really crowded in 91, 98, 2009. In 2009 when the Big Show entered at #30 there was thirteen guys still in the match. So almost half of the participants. If I had to guess that would probably be it.

That was such a weirdly booked Rumble as they had so many guys with numbers in the first half put in a lot of time. Mysterio, Triple H, Orton, Dibiase, Jericho, Mike Knox, Finlay, Rhodes, and Undertaker all were in for 30 minutes or more. Then they had a bunch of the guys who entered late get tossed super quick with three comedy in and out eliminations in a row from #26-#28 with Ziggler, Kendrick, and Santino. Then you also had three entrants in a row from #19-21 with Henry, Regal, and Benjamin all failing to last even last five minutes despite all being pretty credible guys at the time. I think that Rumble would've flowed better if they spread out the eliminations better. I get Dibiase and Rhodes staying in a while as they were a big part of the Legacy story with Orton. However I don't really get the point of having guys like Knox and Finlay stay in that long when they were booked to do nothing at all.

What are you talking about? The Rumble was tailored made for the Belfast native because he loves to fight!

[Secret Clown]

I don’t know the answer but I do like how when the Rumble comes around they always show footage from the tag team battle royal at Wrestlemania 14 just to see multiple people in the ring at the same time.

[Hulkshi Tanahashi]

2009 had 15 guys in the ring at once. That's the record.

[David-Arquette was in WCW 2000]

Not a Royal Rumble but check out the New Blood/Millionaire's Club battle royal from the pre Slamboree Thunder. It starts with over 20 guys and more come out before any eliminations are made. It also goes on forever haha

[Eunös ✈]

Personally I like it when the ring gets crowded.

It's the Rumbles where the ring never exceeds 4 or 5 guys that disappoint me the most.. Probably why I dislike the 1999 Rumble and even though a lot of people liked it I don't consider the 2002 Rumble a personal favourite.

[Hulkshi Tanahashi]

I like the Rumbles where it gets crowded and then there's a big mass elimination halfway through. Also, the ones where the eliminations come fast and furious at the beginning and then fill up for the end.

[Jumpin' Jesse Walsh]

I like a crowded ring in the Rumble, provided it doesn’t go too long without an elimination.

[wildojinx]

I wonder if they've ever considered having the ring fill to 30 men and then start the eliminations.

[Mozenrath]

Dec 24, 2022 6:01:27 GMT -5 Eunös ✈ said:

Personally I like it when the ring gets crowded.

It's the Rumbles where the ring never exceeds 4 or 5 guys that disappoint me the most.. Probably why I dislike the 1999 Rumble and even though a lot of people liked it I don't consider the 2002 Rumble a personal favourite.

I think there's a merit to ring clearing times in the Rumble, like in 2000 where Rikishi faces a veritable gauntlet, like getting Bossman and Viscera in a row to have to deal with alone, but yeah, if the whole match is like that, it feels like a waste of the concept. You want at least one logjam, provided it's not like 8 guys laying on the mat or in the corner, visibly wasting time.

I also feel like a good use of the Rumble is unique interactions, which also probably works best when there isn't TOO many people in to focus on it, so yeah, a bit of both is great.

[Eunös ✈]

Dec 24, 2022 14:10:38 GMT -5 Mozenrath said:

Dec 24, 2022 6:01:27 GMT -5 Eunös ✈ said:

Personally I like it when the ring gets crowded.

It's the Rumbles where the ring never exceeds 4 or 5 guys that disappoint me the most.. Probably why I dislike the 1999 Rumble and even though a lot of people liked it I don't consider the 2002 Rumble a personal favourite.

I think there's a merit to ring clearing times in the Rumble, like in 2000 where Rikishi faces a veritable gauntlet, like getting Bossman and Viscera in a row to have to deal with alone, but yeah, if the whole match is like that, it feels like a waste of the concept. You want at least one logjam, provided it's not like 8 guys laying on the mat or in the corner, visibly wasting time.

I also feel like a good use of the Rumble is unique interactions, which also probably works best when there isn't TOO many people in to focus on it, so yeah, a bit of both is great.

Absolutely, A perfect example as well would be 94 where Diesel went through his Dominant streak.

Also I know it divides opinions but I actually quite liked Brock dominating the first half of the Rumble a few years back. But even then at least once he was gone the ring actually filled up a bit after.

Best of both worlds.

[Mozenrath]

Dec 24, 2022 15:22:31 GMT -5 Eunös ✈ said:

Dec 24, 2022 14:10:38 GMT -5 Mozenrath said:

I think there's a merit to ring clearing times in the Rumble, like in 2000 where Rikishi faces a veritable gauntlet, like getting Bossman and Viscera in a row to have to deal with alone, but yeah, if the whole match is like that, it feels like a waste of the concept. You want at least one logjam, provided it's not like 8 guys laying on the mat or in the corner, visibly wasting time.

I also feel like a good use of the Rumble is unique interactions, which also probably works best when there isn't TOO many people in to focus on it, so yeah, a bit of both is great.

Absolutely, A perfect example as well would be 94 where Diesel went through his Dominant streak.

Also I know it divides opinions but I actually quite liked Brock dominating the first half of the Rumble a few years back. But even then at least once he was gone the ring actually filled up a bit after.

Best of both worlds.

I didn't care for it with Brock, but I get what they were going for, plus it answered the question of "what if someone did that?", and showed that while there was a novelty to it, it is definitely something that should be a major rarity. If they tried the same thing within the next couple of years, it'd probably be too soon.

[Celexa Bliss 54]

Dec 24, 2022 6:01:27 GMT -5 Eunös ✈ said:

Personally I like it when the ring gets crowded.

It's the Rumbles where the ring never exceeds 4 or 5 guys that disappoint me the most.. Probably why I dislike the 1999 Rumble and even though a lot of people liked it I don't consider the 2002 Rumble a personal favourite.

I think there's a fine line between the ring getting too crowded and being too empty. I actually dislike the 1999 Rumble, because you get points where there are actually zero or one wrestlers in the ring, so you have two minutes of nothing happening. The idea being that we were supposed to be watching to see what Austin and McMahon were doing on the TitanTron. But it was dull. And one of the sequences where the ring actually does fill up, it's guys like Droz, Dan Severn, the Blue Meanie and Tiger Ali Singh, along with the not-yet-over Edge and Steve Blackman. And it was done to set up Mabel, of all people, destroying everyone.

My two favorite Rumbles, for the booking alone, are 2001 and 2010. 2001 has many points where it's just two guys in the ring, with a third guy feeding in, getting to do some shit, then getting eliminated. But then you also have the "hardcore Rumble" portion, the Kane vs. Rock stuff where the ring gets to fill again, then Kane and The Undertaker dominating into the final stretch, where the heavy hitters (and Billy Gunn lol) get to show off. Then 2010 is another great story, but only one significant portion where the ring gets to really fill up. You have the CM Punk sermon at the beginning, then Triple H feeds in and there's a long stretch of guys just fighting, before HBK comes in and launches the second story of the Rumble, his mission to win and get his rematch with The Undertaker. Michaels vs. Cena dominates the second half of the Rumble, until the final five. Then the big finish, Edge's return.

For me, the Rumble isn't so much about the spectacle of the ring being loaded with wrestlers, it's about the storytelling, especially as it's the only time of year storylines crossover anymore.