What's Your Opinion of Iron Man Matches?

[Deleted]

As a whole, what's your opinion of the gimmick? Given the rumors that have been discussed in the Battleground thread about the subject and the brief back-and-forth there about it, I felt motivated to make a poll on the subject.

Personally, I strongly dislike them, though some more than others. Mostly Bret / Michaels and Cena / Orton, I absolutely hated both of those matches and have no intentions of seeing them ever again (though I've, for whatever reason, seen Michaels / Hart more than once). I guess I could qualify for that last option since the Angle / Michaels one... It wasn't good, but I was able to tolerate it. Still nothing I ever have any desire to see again, though if you're going to re-watch a match between those two it should really be their Mania one.

["Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay]

It entirely depends. One hour of two guys is a lot to tolerate. Some iron man matches are incredible though. Angle/Brock is a fantastic match and has some intriguing psychology and story turns.

[GuyOfOwnage]

I said it in the Battleground thread and I'll say it here - I don't understand the hatred for these matches. The usual reason I hear is "well, there's no emotional investment because you know it's going an hour no matter what". And that's a detriment? I have just been guaranteed 60 straight minutes of two of the best workers in the company going all out. Orton's already brought it before, and I know Bryan can bring it. I'm just going to sit back and enjoy myself.

[Deleted]

Sept 21, 2013 8:48:46 GMT -5 GuyOfOwnage said:

I said it in the Battleground thread and I'll say it here - I don't understand the hatred for these matches. The usual reason I hear is "well, there's no emotional investment because you know it's going an hour no matter what". And that's a detriment? I have just been guaranteed 60 straight minutes of two of the best workers in the company going all out. Orton's already brought it before, and I know Bryan can bring it. I'm just going to sit back and enjoy myself.

Personally, if it's all just meaningless action for the sake of it, it doesn't do a thing for me. It's all physically impressive, sure, but so would be an hour of Van Dam doing that split lifting thing of his. Still wouldn't particular want to watch it.

Sept 21, 2013 8:43:00 GMT -5 "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay said:

It entirely depends. One hour of two guys is a lot to tolerate. Some iron man matches are incredible though. Angle/Brock is a fantastic match and has some intriguing psychology and story turns.

I will give that one credit, that's the one time I've seen someone do the rational thing in one of them and just run up some DQs to beat his foe into a fine paste for later.

[Starshine]

I'm not a fan.

The problem isn't so much about the lengtho the match so much as it faces the same problems a lot of gimmick matches do. There's only so much you can do within the limitations of the rules to make the match actually engaging. The first half of the match never matters, becuase you always know it's going to come down to either a one point lead, or tie in the closing minutes. They can't do anything else, because then there's no drama, so it's a very predictable gimmick.

If you need to go the multiple falls route, I'd much prefer a 2 out of 3 falls match, because at least you can change things up by having a guy go two falls straight. Iron Man matches just tend to be a drag, because you can pretty easily predict the next step once the first few falls have occurred.

But even with that said, I don't hate the match. There are a small few that I really like. But as a whole, I don't see any appeal in the gimmick.

["Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay]

Have any of your favourite wrestlers had an Iron Man match? A great match isn't great just for its ending. It's as much about the journey.

[Magic knows Black Lives Matter]

Good idea in theory, just doesn't do anything for me in execution. If two guys are gonna wrestle for an hour, great! But don't tell me that they are going to wrestle for an hour. That sucks a lot of the drama out of the match for me because things don't start to get intense until the last five minutes or so. There's also the fact that there's only so much two guys can do to keep an hour long match entertaining.

[Eunös ✈]

I hate them personally.

Even if it's between 2 guys I'm big fans of. A match concept I wouldn't be upset to never see again.

[Crappler El 0 M]

I prefer old school matches that simply lasted 45 minutes to an hour. The Iron Man stipulation does guarentee a long match, but I prefer one-on-one or 2/3 falls matches that happen to go about an hour. I grew up on Steamboat/Flair and Flair/Sting matches which happened to go close to an hour, but they weren't Iron Man matches.

I really like the Shawn/Bret Iron Man match and the Lesnar/Angle one from SmackDown.

[Deleted]

I hate them. It's two dudes stalling for time so that they'll not be completely blown up for the finish. They're too long. There's too many falls. They stagnate easily.

[Jiren]

I prefer Natural long matches like Cena/Micheals.

[Deleted]

Angle/Benoit did a 30-minute one. Sure, they could easily go an hour, but 30 minutes is a good amount of time to get everything in.

Championship Scrambles, don't they have a set amount of time?

[Hit Girl]

I find them boring.

[arrogantmodel]

I was at Bragging Rights for Cena/Orton. I actually didn't mind sitting there because it was no DQ and had some fun spots. I had my nephew, who was four at the time, and even he enjoyed it because of the table spots and Orton trying to kill Cena with the pyro. The endings always suck because they rush a dramatic ending. The whole crowd is counting down, and Orton taps out at 4. Really? You can't hang on and keep your title? Lame.

[Jimichiro Likes Erick Rowan]

I don't really care for them, but I don't really care for longer matches in general.

[KAMALARAMBO: BOOMSHAKALAKA!!!]

I prefer War Machine matches.

[mizerable]

Sept 21, 2013 9:48:04 GMT -5 Jiren said:

I prefer Natural long matches like Cena/Micheals.

I'd rather this happen more often. There seems to be a given limit to most matches, usually 4 to 15 minutes, but hardly anything over.

But sometimes, I'd just wish they'd tell the story that neither guy can get one over on the other guy. It gets both guys over. You don't need to assign a time limit...just have them go an hour. People aren't going to be upset.

[The Baltimore Staircase]

If done correctly, by two world class story tellers who've mastered the psychology aspect, they are the perfect match.

Sadly all too often the participants aren't quite up to it and it becomes a bit messy.

The kind of match you could see Cena/Punk/Bryan being absolute masters of.

[Been burned too many times]

60 Minute Iron Man Matches-Please no.
15-30 Minute Iron Man Matches-Cool with me.

[Ecks Ecks Ringout Ecks Ecks]

Hour-long Iron Man matches are great when done well, but they need to be (A) booked few and far between, to preserve the match type as a "special attraction", and (B) only involve wrestlers with sufficient conditioning and understanding of ring psychology to make it through the match without too much blatant stalling.