|
Post by deathwish on Oct 17, 2005 11:25:26 GMT -5
I'm not a Batista fan, his wrestling relies a hell of a lot on the other guy carrying him and doing a lot of the work. He squashes opponents and never has the stamina to have a long match. He's 40 years old, 'roided to the max and despite his impressive size I don't rate his work either in the ring or on the mic.
Saying that, I believe that most of what he said in this interview was brutally honest which is great to see. His comments about Hassan are a bit slanderous but apart from that he's on the ball (Although Brock vs HHH would be better than vs Batista).
|
|
|
Post by amsiraK on Oct 17, 2005 11:46:59 GMT -5
Over reacting much people? All he did was speak his mind (or not according to others). What did you want him to say about TNA: "I've seen very little of it. I saw their promo video........I totally MARKED OUT! Oh my God! Roxorz! I immediately went to Vince asked why we don't do that, bought a lucha mask and took a dump on his coat. TNA forever!" You have no idea how funny I would have found this! LOL! That would have made my week, just from a comedy standpoint. I don't think there was any dumping on Mark Copani, as it was clear that it was the storyline that had the problems. And the Copani-dissing is company line now. Vince said it was his fault and everyone else has to step in line, particularly the champ. Because it couldn't POSSIBLY have been the fault of anyone else, particularly creative where his daughter is in charge. [/sarcasm]
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Oct 17, 2005 12:21:49 GMT -5
On the subject of what makes psychology:
-I'd say it's based on a few different things. First off, there's the most basic psychology: the ability to work a body part over during a match, for the opponent to sell the injury, and for the injury to somehow factor into the progression and/or outcome of the match.
Then, there's the ability to tell a feud's story. Good example: for most of 2005 in ROH, Colt Cabana feuded with Nigel McGuinness. A lot of their matches seemed to have a resemblence to one another, but that was because they'd factor little things into each match to show that they both had learned from the previous matches. For example, Nigel may have hit a big move on Colt in their first match, but, in the second one, Colt was able to counter that move, and play it off that he learned from his past mistakes.
In the same vein, those two also managed to make their matches progressively more violent and anger-driven as their dislike for each other grew, culminating in a BRUTAL no rules match to finish the feud.
-Another basic aspect: being able to communicate through your actions alone what the purpose of a match is. The recent Samoa Joe vs. Kenta Kobashi match is a good example of this: there was no buildup to this match, but it was immediately apparent through the moves and selling that both men utilized that this was to be a "Clash of the Titans" kind of match, a "Young Lion vs. Immortal" type. To a lesser extent, I think this psychology was utilized in the Shawn Michaels vs. Kurt Angle matches (I almost feel like that match could've been better with less initial buildup, and allowing the match itself to communicate the feelings).
-There's also the basic "Heel vs. Face" dynamic matches. You know, heel tries to dictate the pace, face works to make his heroic comeback, etc.
-Of course, there's also the "violent match in a long feud" match, where there's less selling, since both men are supposedly driven by an unnatural hatred/competitive spirit/whatever to beat the other guy. Good example: the classic Misawa vs. Kawada matches.
There's plenty of other approaches to psychology, but those are a few off the top of my head.
|
|