Rate wrestlers using the Bret Hart System

[Amazing Kitsune]

"I have my own theory on the three qualities it takes to be a great pro wrestler. The first one is look or physical presence. On a scale of one to ten, Hogan, being such an awesome specimen, might rate a ten, for example... The secon quality is the ability to talk, to sell yourself; Hogan might score another easy ten, whereas a guy like Dynamite(Kid) would have the ability to earn a two. The third is wrestling talent, the ability to work. Here it would be just the opposite: Hogan would rate the two and Dynamite would get the ten. A score in the high twenties adds up to a great wrestler" --Bret Hart Hitman: My Real Life in the Cartoon World World of Wrestling

So, using his system Bret Hart appraised the following:

Hulk Hogan
Look: 10
Promo: 10
Workrate: 2


Total= 22


Bret Hart (Circa 1989)

Look: 7
Promo: 4
Workrate: 10

Total= 21


---

My contributions

Daniel Bryan

Look: 6
Promo: 3
Workate: 10

total= 19

Big Show

Look: 10
Promo: 8
Workrate: 3

Total= 21

Randy Orton

Look: 8
Promo: 6
Workrate: 6

Total= 20

[Kayfabe FAN don't want none]

Triple H
Look: 1
Promo: 2
Workratez: 1

Total: 4

[Starshine]

CM Punk
Look: 3
Promo: 8
Workrate - 9

Total: 20

[Tiger Millionaire]

Hogan's workrate was far better than a 2. Bryan is a better promo then a 4. Macho Man is the only 30. That is all.

[deancubed]

Nov 21, 2013 21:16:29 GMT -5 Kayfabe FAN don't want none said:

Triple H
Look: 1
Promo: 2
Workratez: 1

Total: 4/10

Fixed.


Also:

Sheamus:

Look: 1
Promo: 8
Workrate: 00
Total: FELLA

[Sparkybob]

Kevin Nash

Look=0
Promos=0
Workrate=0

Total: Go f*** yourself for calling me a mark.

[suave]

Bo Dallas

Look=10

Promos=10

Workrate=10

Total=30

[Capt. Internet Darling]

Shawn Michaels and Randy Savage will score highly.

[Deleted]

A misconception about this system is that "look" is solely based on looking unique or cool. That's part of it but size/build is also a big factor in how Bret rates a look. Not saying that's right or wrong, but seeing people rank Jeff Hardy or CM Punk a 10 in the look category is kind of missing the mark in terms of how Bret described it. It makes sense, since smaller guys are usually higher on the workrate scale, it sort of balances things out, and gives high marks to a big guy who can actually work.

[ededdneddy]

Nov 21, 2013 21:54:44 GMT -5 @lovehater said:

A misconception about this system is that "look" is solely based on looking unique or cool. That's part of it but size/build is also a big factor in how Bret rates a look. Not saying that's right or wrong, but seeing people rank Jeff Hardy or CM Punk a 10 in the look category is kind of missing the mark in terms of how Bret described it. It makes sense, since smaller guys are usually higher on the workrate scale, it sort of balances things out, and gives high marks to a big guy who can actually work.

Okay then taking this into account.

John Cena
Looks: 0
Promo: 0
Workrate: 6

Total = 6

[Boo!]

Hogan's 'work rate' is far higher than a 2. It's not the Olympics, you if you keep a live audience engrossed what you do, you're a great worker. Always amuses me how Hogan can have the crowd engrossed in a horrible match vs Sid or Slaughter and get called a bad worker, Bret and HBK and send the crowd to sleep for an hour and they get a '10'

[Deleted]

Hulk Hogan was always billed at 6'8" and 303 lbs and he would go out there every night and make one believe that he was fighting for his life until the big comeback. He may not have done 57 Stu Hart stretch holds, but that has to count for more than a 2 in workrate.

[Razor Gives It A 4/10]

I thought the Bret Hart system was rating everyone and everything 4/10

[BayleyTiffyCodyCenaJudyHopps]

If you have Hulk Hogan in his prime below 25, I'd start over. There's a huge difference between wrestling a fairly basic but crowd pleasing style and not knowing how to wrestle period.

[Deleted]

Everyone ever: 4/10

[Deleted]

Nov 21, 2013 21:16:29 GMT -5 Kayfabe FAN don't want none said:

Triple H
Look: 1
Promo: 2
Workratez: 1

Total: 4

Amazing post. A little overrated on the promo side but that's ok.

[Deleted]

I would like to introduce the Del Rio Paradox:

Look: debatable but it's at least a 7
Promo: I'll be generous and give him a 5(he's not terrible, he just doesn't really say anything interesting)
Workrate: I'll give him a 9(he's quite good in ring)

So this scores him at least 21 on the scale which is one off of Hogan and the same as 89 Bret apparently, and despite having a respectable score most arenas don't react to him.

[MolotovMocktail]

Nov 21, 2013 21:19:56 GMT -5 Tiger Millionaire said:

Hogan's workrate was far better than a 2. Bryan is a better promo then a 4. Macho Man is the only 30. That is all.

I'd say Angle is a 30.

What do we mean when we say "look?" Is it just the guy's size, or his overall presentation? Even Bret himself isn't clear on this. Jericho, HBK and Punk are easy 10's in the other categories, but if we're just going by muscle mass, they'd be 6-7 at best. Lesnar is a 10 in both look and ability, though I'd give his promo skills about an 8.

[Tiger Millionaire]

Nov 22, 2013 0:13:54 GMT -5 MolotovMocktail said:

Nov 21, 2013 21:19:56 GMT -5 Tiger Millionaire said:

Hogan's workrate was far better than a 2. Bryan is a better promo then a 4. Macho Man is the only 30. That is all.

I'd say Angle is a 30.

What do we mean when we say "look?" Is it just the guy's size, or his overall presentation? Even Bret himself isn't clear on this. Jericho, HBK and Punk are easy 10's in the other categories, but if we're just going by muscle mass, they'd be 6-7 at best. Lesnar is a 10 in both look and ability, though I'd give his promo skills about an 8.

I always took look as how much you would notice them just based on their look, not their muscular build.

[Boo!]

It's ironic in some ways that the Bret Hart ratings system doesn't include 'charisma', which is kind of important and something he struggled with a lot. Maybe this is why, he never thought about it.