Wrestling Observer Hall of Fame, class of 2022

[Crappler El 0 M]

Six acts have been inducted into the Wrestling Observer Hall of Fame class of 2022.

CMLL star Mistico, Legendary All Japan tag team Toshiaki Kawada & Akira Taue (The Holy Demon Army), modern New Japan stars Kota Ibushi and Tetsuya Naito, legendary lucha family Los Villanos, and UK legend Rollerball Mark Rocco were inducted.

To be inducted, candidates must receive 60 percent of the votes from their particular region (votes come from retired and current wrestlers and wrestling figures, historians, and reporters).

Here were the vote percentages of the inductees.
Kawada and Taue - 76%
Mistico - 76%
Kota Ibushi - 65%
Tetsuya Naito - 65%
Los Villanos - 63%
Rollerball Mark Rocco - 62%

Here are the wrestlers who came close, but were under the 60 percent threshold.
Argentina Rocca & Miguel Perez - 57%
Sgt. Slaughter - 57% 59%
Los Hermanos Dinamita 57%
Jack & Jerry Brisco 53%
Rick & Scott Steiner 52%
Dynamite Kid & Davey Boy Smith 52%
George Kidd 51%
Paul Orndorff 50%

The following will be dropped from the ballot due to receiving less than 10 percent of the votes: Adrian Adonis & Jesse Ventura, Shawn Michaels & Marty Jannetty, Blackjack Mulligan, Harley Race & Larry Hennig, Kinji Shibuya & Masa Saito, Mr. Wrestling I & II, Jerry Lawler & Bill Dundee, New Age Outlaws, Riki Choshu & Animal Hamaguchi, Naomichi Marufuji, Rito Romero, L’Ange Blanc, Ricki Starr, and Lord James Blears.


Rocky Johnson and Enrique Torres will be dropped from the ballor due to being on the ballot for 15 years and failing to get at least 50 percent of votes.

Big Daddy, Kendo Nagasaki, Jackie Pallo, and Sgt. Slaughter would fall off next year's ballot if they receive less than 50 percent of the votes.

Dave Meltzer plans to add Jon Moxley, Seth Rollins, the Young Bucks, and The Beauty Pair to next year's ballot.

["Playboy" Don Douglas]

I maintain this hall of fame is just as much of a joke as WWE’s, just for different reasons .

[cornettesracket]

My issue with this hall of fame is that if you want it to have legitimacy then it should hold to the standard in other legitimate sports hall of fame that only in special circumstances should a current and active wrestler be allowed to be considered for induction and other then that there should be a waiting period after the person stops wrestling full time(what that number is is up for debate imo) And also the fact that Rocco and Perez are not in despite them being a legendary two team is just baffling. Why weren’t they included in the original class ?

[The Summer of Muskrat XVII]

Dec 9, 2022 7:49:05 GMT -5 cornettesracket said:

My issue with this hall of fame is that if you want it to have legitimacy then it should hold to the standard in other legitimate sports hall of fame that only in special circumstances should a current and active wrestler be allowed to be considered for induction and other then that there should be a waiting period after the person stops wrestling full time(what that number is is up for debate imo) And also the fact that Rocco and Perez are not in despite them being a legendary two team is just baffling. Why weren’t they included in the original class ?

This comes up every year, and it’s a pretty simple explanation. High level pro athletes generally retire in the 35-40 age range, wrestlers often keep going well into their senior years (or retire and come back) hence using age or length of career as the marker for getting on the ballot. It’s to try and ensure those voting have seen the peak of the wrestlers careers first hand. If professional athletes routinely competed well into their 60’s or older, there’d likely be different criteria for pro sports HoF’s as well

[Feyrhausen]

Dec 9, 2022 6:55:26 GMT -5 "Playboy" Don Douglas said:

I maintain this hall of fame is just as much of a joke as WWE’s, just for different reasons .

Well lets see.

One has specific criteria for nomination, then is voted on by industry professionals.

The other comes down to one man choosing who goes in based on who kissed his ass, he found funny, or he can make a quick buck on.

Yep totes the same. Lemme guess, your favorite didnt get in?

[sungod2020]

Dec 9, 2022 6:55:26 GMT -5 "Playboy" Don Douglas said:

I maintain this hall of fame is just as much of a joke as WWE’s, just for different reasons .

I concur. Even though he has 100% of the power to remove him, Dave Meltzer held a vote that would require 60% to remove Chris Benoit. Instead, the voting came up just under that mark, thus keeping him in based on his WRESTLING legacy.

It's almost like the halo effect, good wrestler = good person. I remember one poster saying Benoit was just as much of a victim as Nancy and Daniel. I bet you if that was someone like say Ultimate Warrior(who didn't have the "workratez" and needed to be "carried" to a good match) did it, it would exceed the 60% mark, or Meltzer might even say "f*** it, I want nothing to do with this murderous asshole, he's out of my HOF."

[Push R Truth]

New Age Outlaws getting dropped and not even getting 10% of the vote is a freakin' joke.

And before I get called a fanboy I hate the New Age Outlaws.

[cornettesracket]

Dec 9, 2022 8:26:15 GMT -5 The Summer of Muskrat XVII said:

Dec 9, 2022 7:49:05 GMT -5 cornettesracket said:

My issue with this hall of fame is that if you want it to have legitimacy then it should hold to the standard in other legitimate sports hall of fame that only in special circumstances should a current and active wrestler be allowed to be considered for induction and other then that there should be a waiting period after the person stops wrestling full time(what that number is is up for debate imo) And also the fact that Rocco and Perez are not in despite them being a legendary two team is just baffling. Why weren’t they included in the original class ?

This comes up every year, and it’s a pretty simple explanation. High level pro athletes generally retire in the 35-40 age range, wrestlers often keep going well into their senior years (or retire and come back) hence using age or length of career as the marker for getting on the ballot. It’s to try and ensure those voting have seen the peak of the wrestlers careers first hand. If professional athletes routinely competed well into their 60’s or older, there’d likely be different criteria for pro sports HoF’s as well

Yes it does and I might be in the minority on this but I still think it’s not right. That’s why I said in my post that if a wrestler is wrestling full time then they shouldn’t be on the ballot. For example edge retired due to injury and I’d have no problem with that because the outlook was he was never going to wrestle again. 

[cornettesracket]

Dec 9, 2022 9:03:13 GMT -5 sungod2020 said:

Dec 9, 2022 6:55:26 GMT -5 "Playboy" Don Douglas said:

I maintain this hall of fame is just as much of a joke as WWE’s, just for different reasons .

I concur. Even though he has 100% of the power to remove him, Dave Meltzer held a vote that would require 60% to remove Chris Benoit. Instead, the voting came up just under that mark, thus keeping him in based on his WRESTLING legacy.

It's almost like the halo effect, good wrestler = good person. I remember one poster saying Benoit was just as much of a victim as Nancy and Daniel. I bet you if that was someone like say Ultimate Warrior(who didn't have the "workratez" and needed to be "carried" to a good match) did it, it would exceed the 60% mark, or Meltzer might even say "f*** it, I want nothing to do with this murderous asshole, he's out of my HOF."

If good person = good wrestler then why do I have to more often then not preface posts I make but clarifying I’m talking about someone wrestling career and not them as person, because the person behind the character is a utter scumbag. 
benoit was as much a victim as Nancy and Daniel ? Wow that’s some take to have and complete wrong.

[Crappler El 0 M]

I had not had time to look through the issue, so I had missed that Dave also inducted Lou Daro who had great success as a promoter of wrestling in the 1920s and 1930s, as well as promoter Johnny Doyle.

Dave sometimes inducts pioneer era figures after consulting with historians, rather than putting them on the ballot.

[The Summer of Muskrat XVII]

Dec 9, 2022 9:03:13 GMT -5 sungod2020 said:

Dec 9, 2022 6:55:26 GMT -5 "Playboy" Don Douglas said:

I maintain this hall of fame is just as much of a joke as WWE’s, just for different reasons .

I concur. Even though he has 100% of the power to remove him, Dave Meltzer held a vote that would require 60% to remove Chris Benoit. Instead, the voting came up just under that mark, thus keeping him in based on his WRESTLING legacy.

It's almost like the halo effect, good wrestler = good person. I remember one poster saying Benoit was just as much of a victim as Nancy and Daniel. I bet you if that was someone like say Ultimate Warrior(who didn't have the "workratez" and needed to be "carried" to a good match) did it, it would exceed the 60% mark, or Meltzer might even say "f*** it, I want nothing to do with this murderous asshole, he's out of my HOF."

Fairly certain Meltzer voted to remove Benoit. Obviously, Dave has the power to add or remove whoever he wants, but then why bother with a vote every year if he’s just gonna arbitrarily step in and do whatever the f*** he wants anyways?

[Jaws the Shark]

Dec 9, 2022 9:03:13 GMT -5 sungod2020 said:

Dec 9, 2022 6:55:26 GMT -5 "Playboy" Don Douglas said:

I maintain this hall of fame is just as much of a joke as WWE’s, just for different reasons .

I concur. Even though he has 100% of the power to remove him, Dave Meltzer held a vote that would require 60% to remove Chris Benoit. Instead, the voting came up just under that mark, thus keeping him in based on his WRESTLING legacy.

It's almost like the halo effect, good wrestler = good person. I remember one poster saying Benoit was just as much of a victim as Nancy and Daniel. I bet you if that was someone like say Ultimate Warrior(who didn't have the "workratez" and needed to be "carried" to a good match) did it, it would exceed the 60% mark, or Meltzer might even say "f*** it, I want nothing to do with this murderous asshole, he's out of my HOF."

Please can we not go down this road? I don't want to be an armchair mod, I'm just saying it as someone tired of the wrestling fan culture war. It never ends well and it's not fun for people who don't want to be involved in the inevitable slanging match that ensues.

Anyway, just an observation here, but it's interesting that Mark Rocco has made it in ahead of Big Daddy and Kendo and Jackie Pallo. I could understand maybe Big Daddy's divisiveness and pretty weak ability working against him, but he and Kendo are still synonymous with British wrestling for a lot of people over three decades after disappearing from TV, and Pallo was an absolute megastar in the sixties. Not complaining, it is what it is, just an observation.

["Evil Brood" Jackson Vanik]

Dec 9, 2022 9:09:33 GMT -5 Push R Truth said:

New Age Outlaws getting dropped and not even getting 10% of the vote is a freakin' joke.

And before I get called a fanboy I hate the New Age Outlaws.

I understand where you're coming from but it's hard to make a case based on the criteria. Voting criteria includes the length of time spent in wrestling, historical significance, ability to attract viewers, and wrestling ability. They didn't have really any longevity, didn't have good matches, and definitely helped bring in viewers but it could be argued they were not the top draw of their brief run (Austin, Vince, Rock, Foley, Taker, etc). You can be a significant and memorable figure in an industry or sport but not necessarily belong in a Hall of Fame. 

[Push R Truth]

Dec 9, 2022 10:04:59 GMT -5 "Evil Brood" Jackson Vanik said:

Dec 9, 2022 9:09:33 GMT -5 Push R Truth said:

New Age Outlaws getting dropped and not even getting 10% of the vote is a freakin' joke.

And before I get called a fanboy I hate the New Age Outlaws.

I understand where you're coming from but it's hard to make a case based on the criteria. Voting criteria includes the length of time spent in wrestling, historical significance, ability to attract viewers, and wrestling ability. They didn't have really any longevity, didn't have good matches, and definitely helped bring in viewers but it could be argued they were not the top draw of their brief run (Austin, Vince, Rock, Foley, Taker, etc). You can be a significant and memorable figure in an industry or sport but not necessarily belong in a Hall of Fame. 

According to that criteria there should be about 7 people in the Hall and that's it.


Once again, this is a freakin' joke.

["Evil Brood" Jackson Vanik]

Dec 9, 2022 10:15:59 GMT -5 Push R Truth said:

Dec 9, 2022 10:04:59 GMT -5 "Evil Brood" Jackson Vanik said:

I understand where you're coming from but it's hard to make a case based on the criteria. Voting criteria includes the length of time spent in wrestling, historical significance, ability to attract viewers, and wrestling ability. They didn't have really any longevity, didn't have good matches, and definitely helped bring in viewers but it could be argued they were not the top draw of their brief run (Austin, Vince, Rock, Foley, Taker, etc). You can be a significant and memorable figure in an industry or sport but not necessarily belong in a Hall of Fame. 

According to that criteria there should be about 7 people in the Hall and that's it.


Once again, this is a freakin' joke.

You don't need to meet every piece of criteria necessarily. It's what you should consider. The Rock got in with the class of 2007 despite having such short longevity because his drawing power was so off the charts that he had to get in (plus being a very good worker). And you see these debates with Hall of Fames in actual sports. Someone like Sandy Koufax got in to his Hall of Fame despite a somewhat short career because he was superhuman during his career. Others with shorter careers may not get in. 

[cornettesracket]

Dec 9, 2022 9:56:21 GMT -5 The Summer of Muskrat XVII said:

Dec 9, 2022 9:03:13 GMT -5 sungod2020 said:

I concur. Even though he has 100% of the power to remove him, Dave Meltzer held a vote that would require 60% to remove Chris Benoit. Instead, the voting came up just under that mark, thus keeping him in based on his WRESTLING legacy.

It's almost like the halo effect, good wrestler = good person. I remember one poster saying Benoit was just as much of a victim as Nancy and Daniel. I bet you if that was someone like say Ultimate Warrior(who didn't have the "workratez" and needed to be "carried" to a good match) did it, it would exceed the 60% mark, or Meltzer might even say "f*** it, I want nothing to do with this murderous asshole, he's out of my HOF."

Fairly certain Meltzer voted to remove Benoit. Obviously, Dave has the power to add or remove whoever he wants, but then why bother with a vote every year if he’s just gonna arbitrarily step in and do whatever the f*** he wants anyways?

Well I don’t think by f***ing Benoit out on his ear and burying him would set a precedent in the way you suggest. I mean hogan was removed from the WWE HOF page for his actions which weren’t the brutal murder of his family and was persona non grata for a number of years, so I don’t see how Meltzer removing Benoit for the HOF a should be a bad thing. Benoit imo forfeited his career recognition by being a complete monster, I mean I for a while when the network first launched couldn’t watch anything with him involved in it. That has somewhat changed but I still feel very uncomfortable watching his matches back. 

["Playboy" Don Douglas]

Dec 9, 2022 8:57:25 GMT -5 Feyrhausen said:

Dec 9, 2022 6:55:26 GMT -5 "Playboy" Don Douglas said:

I maintain this hall of fame is just as much of a joke as WWE’s, just for different reasons .

Well lets see.

One has specific criteria for nomination, then is voted on by industry professionals.

The other comes down to one man choosing who goes in based on who kissed his ass, he found funny, or he can make a quick buck on.

Yep totes the same. Lemme guess, your favorite didnt get in?

Or, you know, the fact that it constantly ignores people who had hall of fame careers by any metric in favor of people at or near the top of a the card currently because “more people are watching” or whatever. And let’s not pretend Dave doesn’t steer the ship.

So for different reasons, but yes “totes the same.” Lemme guess, you’re overly defensive when faced with a conflicting opinion?

["Evil Brood" Jackson Vanik]

Dec 9, 2022 10:31:54 GMT -5 "Playboy" Don Douglas said:

Dec 9, 2022 8:57:25 GMT -5 Feyrhausen said:

Well lets see.

One has specific criteria for nomination, then is voted on by industry professionals.

The other comes down to one man choosing who goes in based on who kissed his ass, he found funny, or he can make a quick buck on.

Yep totes the same. Lemme guess, your favorite didnt get in?

Or, you know, the fact that it constantly ignores people who had hall of fame careers by any metric in favor of people at or near the top of a the card currently because “more people are watching” or whatever. And let’s not pretend Dave doesn’t steer the ship.

So for different reasons, but yes “totes the same.” Lemme guess, you’re overly defensive when faced with a conflicting opinion?

Edge would be in and Sting would be out if Dave steered the ship. But the voters don't think Edge is a Hall of Famer and so he's not in. These aren't just random listeners to Observer Radio. It's folks with their own views and strong opinions that aren't just "hmm let me see what Dave is doing" Hell, Dave voted to remove Benoit and felt pretty strongly about it. But that wasn't enough. 

[eJm]

I feel like it’s weird to compare the WO HOF, a HOF voted by readers and people in the industry, to the WWE HOF, a HOF that, until next year, was voted by a single man who can hold grudges to the point of people only getting in after they die (Randy Savage, Vader etc).

Now, comparing it to the weirdness that is the Baseball HOF? Absolutely.

[Feyrhausen]

Dec 9, 2022 10:34:54 GMT -5 "Evil Brood" Jackson Vanik said:

Dec 9, 2022 10:31:54 GMT -5 "Playboy" Don Douglas said:

Or, you know, the fact that it constantly ignores people who had hall of fame careers by any metric in favor of people at or near the top of a the card currently because “more people are watching” or whatever. And let’s not pretend Dave doesn’t steer the ship.

So for different reasons, but yes “totes the same.” Lemme guess, you’re overly defensive when faced with a conflicting opinion?

Edge would be in and Sting would be out if Dave steered the ship. But the voters don't think Edge is a Hall of Famer and so he's not in. These aren't just random listeners to Observer Radio. It's folks with their own views and strong opinions that aren't just "hmm let me see what Dave is doing" Hell, Dave voted to remove Benoit and felt pretty strongly about it. But that wasn't enough. 

Exactly. Dave sets the criteria, nominates people when they fit that criteria, and lets the voters determine who goes in.

Only exceptions as mentioned above are historical figures who are jot familiar enough to todays voters to be voted on.

And really this HoF is not any more official than any others. Its like Daves match ratings. It only has importance if someone gives it importance. The fact that so many in this industry give it that importance gives it far more credibility than Vinces.