PDA

View Full Version : Int Region, Charlotte Subregion, First Round: (1) Undertaker vs. (32) Vince McMahon


klunderbunker
04-16-2012, 01:30 PM
This is a first round match in the International Region, Charlotte Subregion. It is a standard one on one match. It will be held at the Time Warner Cable Arena in Charlotte, North Carolina.

http://www.charlottearchitecturalphotography.com/images/TIME_WARNER_CABLE_ARENA003%282%29.jpg

http://www.wwewebsite.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/the-undertaker-in-long-black-coat-and-black-hat.jpg

#1. The Undertaker

Vs.

http://www.wrestling18.com/images/02/vince-mcmahon24.jpg

#32. Vince McMahon



Polls will be open for three days following a one day period for discussion. Voting will be based on who you feel is the greater of the two competitors. Post your reasons for why your pick should win below. Remember that this is non-spam and the most votes in the poll win. Any ties will be broken by the amount of posts of support for each candidate, with one vote per poster.

Also remember that this is a non-spam forum. If you post a response without giving a reason for your selection, it will be penalized for spam and deleted.

AnvilForever
04-16-2012, 01:54 PM
OK, let's get the debate started with an argument from a complete newbie: I'm going with Vincent Kennedy McMahon for the upset.

My mentality is that if a matchup appears in the tournament that has happened in real life, I'm going with the winner of that match. Vince has beaten Taker twice, once on Raw via DQ in 1999 and in the Buried Alive match that ended the American Badass gimmick. I see this match ending in a DQ win for Vince. Taker gets in most of the offense, but when he goes to apply the Hell's Gate, he does it too close to the ropes and Vince grabs on. Taker doesn't break the hold before the five count, giving Vince the victory.

Undertaker has had a history of not listening and/or attacking the ref in matches. He did it just two weeks ago at Mania. Sure, it was HBK, but it's not the first time it's happened. Combine that with McMahon's tendency to create a blind rage within his opponents because of his tyranny, and I think Undertaker knocks himself out of the tournament in the first round.

Big Sexy
04-16-2012, 02:12 PM
Undertaker has had a history of not listening and/or attacking the ref in matches. He did it just two weeks ago at Mania. Sure, it was HBK, but it's not the first time it's happened. Combine that with McMahon's tendency to create a blind rage within his opponents because of his tyranny, and I think Undertaker knocks himself out of the tournament in the first round.

If this was just some random match on a Monday Night RAW then you MAY have something but this is a much bigger stage then that. This is a kayfabe tournament to determine who the best wrestler of all time is. Undertaker isn't stupid and in a big match environment like this there is no way he would do anything to get himself disqualified.

The 1-2-3 Killam
04-16-2012, 02:20 PM
It is a standard one on one match.

Voting will be based on who you feel is the greater of the two competitors.

Achievement and Accolades: Vince McMahon has a pretty impressive set of accomplishments in pro wrestling, as well as outside of it. A former Royal Rumble winner, ECW and WWF Champion, and a slew of PWI and Observer awards. He even has his own star on the Hollywood and Madison Square Garden walks of fame! But let's face it, as far as accolades go the Undertaker is the man. 7 times a World Champion, 7 times a tag team champion, a Royal Rumble victory, and of course a perfect 20-0 streak at WrestleMania.

Winner: The Undertaker

Contribution to the Industry: The Undertaker might be one of the greatest, and most iconic wrestlers in the history of professional wrestling, but to be frank professional wrestling may have never made it to the spotlight without Vince McMahon. Sure there are a lot of oldschool fans that prefer the regional approach to the industry rather than the glitz and glamour of "sports entertainment", but that doesn't change the fact that Vince created what we know today as pro wrestling. WrestleMania, Hulkamania, the Undertaker's streak...what else might not exist had it not been for the creative genius of wrestling's most wealthy man? The Undertaker is great - hell he's a phenom - no doubt about it, but this isn't a real contest in my mind...

Winner: Vince McMahon

Kayfabe: Technically speaking, Vince McMahon has a positive record over the Undertaker. I know, take a minute to digest that information, and breath. McMahon beat the Undertaker in a Buried Alive match thanks to the help of Kane as well as helping many of the Undertaker's opponents to iconic victories over the Deadman. These two men actually have a very long and entertaining history, putting on some of the best feuds that include the Ministry, Steve Austin, Brock Lesnar, Kane and more. Still, no matter how many times the boss has used Taker to get him or another heel over, I have to believe that Undertaker would win in a final battle to end it all. Vince is a smart businessman, and he really only went over Taker if it was good for business (at least I would hope so...).

Winner: The Undertaker

In-Ring Ability: Undertaker.

This could end up being a very close race when all the polls and votes are calculated, but to be this is kind of a no-brainer. Vince McMahon revolutionized the industry, and has continued to do so until this very day. But as the rules of this tournament state, this MATCH is to determine the greatest of two COMPETITORS. The Undertaker is one of the all-time greatest pro wrestlers, and while Vince McMahon has stepped into the ring for some legendary battles, there's just no way to justify a non-wrestler going into the second round of this tournament. And if Vince can beat the Undertaker, where does it end? He may as well just win the whole damn thing at that point...

FINAL DECISION: THE UNDERTAKER

The Dragon Saga
04-16-2012, 02:25 PM
I'm going to be voting The Undertaker based off the fact Vince McMahon has never been a full-time wrestler and even though we're under the understanding that he is a former WWE Champion, Royal Rumble winner and ECW Champion it's still Vince McMahon and him gaining those accolades all involved the help of one or a number of different allies at the time.

However, I would state that basing an argument for Vinnie Mac is plausible due to the fact that as Anvil stated, The Undertaker has lost two separate times to Vince McMahon. Plus just to rebuttle Big Sexy's comment, Survivor Series 2003 was a pretty high stakes night in Kayfabe and although it took assistance from Kane, the records show that Vince McMahon defeated The Undertaker. I'll be voting for Taker, however Vince is a pretty plausible choice for debating.

Uncle Sam
04-16-2012, 02:32 PM
It's a shame that Vince has such a shitty win/loss record.

I think we're all posting in here because this is, y'know, 'the easy one'. Sure, Vince's ACME package could arrive just in time and he could defeat The Undertaker with an anvil and a giant magnet. It just wouldn't happen though, would it?

Mr. McMahon looks like he's been in a bad car accident and The Undertaker keeps on rolling.

Rolling.

Rolling.

Big Sexy
04-16-2012, 02:32 PM
Plus just to rebuttle Big Sexy's comment, Survivor Series 2003 was a pretty high stakes night in Kayfabe and although it took assistance from Kane, the records show that Vince McMahon defeated The Undertaker. I'll be voting for Taker, however Vince is a pretty plausible choice for debating.

Only one problem there. Survivor Series 2003 was a Buried Alive match where Vince got his ass handed to him for the majority of the match until heavy interference from Kane led to the Vince victory. The match we have here is a standard one on one contest with no gimmick. That means no heavy interference for Vince without a dq.

Cenation™
04-16-2012, 02:37 PM
Vince McMahon should win..

He owns the company and therefore pays the referee, if the referee has any sense and wants to keep his job then he'll let McMahon win

That is all.

Davi323
04-16-2012, 02:42 PM
Vince McMahon's chances at being a Royal Rumble winner and WWE Champion certainly wasn't hurt by the fact that it's his damn company, and his final say in all booking decisions, does it? Nope. Not at all.

This really comes down to one key factor for me: I don't think there are going to be too many that would be shocked if the Undertaker won the entire thing, he has that kind of resume. Not that he will win, but that you wouldn't be surprised. If you can't say the same thing about Vince McMahon, you probably have to vote for the Undertaker, if only because it's flat out more believable.

stillboy21
04-16-2012, 02:48 PM
Vince McMahon should win..

He owns the company and therefore pays the referee, if the referee has any sense and wants to keep his job then he'll let McMahon win

That is all.

But Undertaker sees that the ref is being biased and chokeslams him and essentially knocking him out, then Taker puts McMahon in the Hells Gate or pins him and another ref comes out that hadn't been payed off who calls the 3 count.


Yes McMahon is shifty but I think back to WrestleMania 24 when Undertaker beat Edge and the whole La Familia. Undertaker isn't easily out witted.

Diet Soda
04-16-2012, 02:50 PM
Vince McMahon is a businessman first, and a wrestler second.

Can you think of an instance where McMahon has been in a standard one-on-one match against a wrestler (i.e. not Divas or midgets) and won cleanly?

Chokeslam, Tombstone, 1, 2, 3. Undertaker.

Cenation™
04-16-2012, 02:53 PM
But Undertaker sees that the ref is being biased and chokeslams him and essentially knocking him out, then Taker puts McMahon in the Hells Gate or pins him and another ref comes out that hadn't been payed off who calls the 3 count.


Yes McMahon is shifty but I think back to WrestleMania 24 when Undertaker beat Edge and the whole La Familia. Undertaker isn't easily out witted.

Yeah but Vince pays ALL the referees and therefore they would all help him if they wanted a job.

Taker goes to chokeslam a third referee but is stopped by the rest of the locker room, why? because Vince pays all of them aswell

They beat the shit out of the Undertaker and Vince gets the pin.

stillboy21
04-16-2012, 02:56 PM
Yeah but Vince pays ALL the referees and therefore they would all help him if they wanted a job.

Taker goes to chokeslam a third referee but is stopped by the rest of the locker room, why? because Vince pays all of them aswell

They beat the shit out of the Undertaker and Vince gets the pin.


But there's also those guys who are fair like your boy Cena who would help out Undertaker and there are enough guys like that to even things out.

FitFinlay4Life
04-16-2012, 03:29 PM
I'm taking this as old school WCW, so Vince has no sway and therefore - no chance. The Dead Man takes this and takes it quick - Diesel / Bob Backlund quick.

Theo Mays
04-16-2012, 03:40 PM
Yup these one is easy, can't see Taker losing here. If this was the WWE region it could be a different story as Vince has a lot of sway in that matter. As for this, Taker brings it and brings it hard. Vince does what Vince does best and that's get his ass kicked. Taker is "the guy" in big time situation and always steps up when it matters in terms of that big match feel. This whole tournament is pretty much filled with that big match feel and Taker should win here and do well throughout.

Shocky
04-16-2012, 03:49 PM
It's funny to try to speculate anything but a Vince McMahon loss here. The Undertaker should dominate this match, but it might end up closer based on guys trying to fuck around a little bit.

As far as executives getting in the ring, Vince McMahon has easily been the best guy. His son was nothing more then a spot monkey, Heyman was Heyman, and Bischoff was too busy pretending to be the Karate Kid. Vince could go in the ring and take an ass whooping better then almost anyone I can recall. He should get used to it, because Taker moves onto round 2.

Big Nick Dudley
04-16-2012, 04:40 PM
If this were the final round of a prestigious tournament, I'd make an argument for Vince. No bullshit.

But, it's not. No way Taker loses this early in a tournament like this. This is the type of match where Vince wouldn't even compete (think Bret Hart/WM26). Undertaker would beat him for a solid fifteen minutes, within an inch or two of his life. In the final round of this sort of thing, Vince would find a way to be competitive (cheating, probably). First round? Nah.

Taker wins.

#hamler
04-16-2012, 06:49 PM
I'll base my vote on te fact that Vince has never been a full time wrestler while The Undertaker has been; for the better part of 20 years. It's fairly easy decision to make for me. Vince has always been there to make his opponents look good. Whether he was facing Steve Austin or Shawn Michaels, Vince is best at losing to his employees. That's what everyone wants to see - the asshole boss get his ass handed to him. That's what happens here; Undertaker dominates the match until he Tombstones Vince for the win.

The Brain
04-16-2012, 07:21 PM
The only reason Vince ever wins anything is to advance a storyline for a bigger purpose. In the WWF nothing is bigger than WrestleMania and he's 0-4 at that event. Vince loses when he is supposed to. This tournament is supposed to be the biggest thing going so there's no way a guy as popular as Undertaker goes out in the first round. There really shouldn't need to be an explanation but I'll state the obvious. Taker is one of the most dominant and most beloved characters in wrestling history. Vince is a middle aged business man. Vote Taker.

SuperSteve16
04-16-2012, 09:54 PM
Even with Vince McMahon trying to cheat his way to victory, there's no way the Undertaker is losing this match. Vince has never been a full wrestler and while he has changed wrestling forever, the Undertaker is one of the greatest superstars of all time and will beat Vince convincingly. My vote goes to The Undertaker

PsychoBlack
04-17-2012, 12:04 AM
I have all faith in the Undertaker here. This is the type of match that Vince would get his ass kicked for a good 15 minutes in before going down for the tree count. Sure Vince is a smart guy and very good at getting out of bad situations and all however, When it comes down to it Vince is more often than not getting his ass kicked.

Johnny Scumm
04-17-2012, 01:21 AM
The Undertaker. 20-0 at Wrestlemania. Former World Heavyweight Champion, the "Deadman" of WWE & all around bad-ass. Let's face it, he may be going up against a pretty strong man in the form of Vince McMahon, but there's no way Taker's losing here.

In your standard 1v1, where Vince doesn't get the upperhand through some sort of sly, cheating manoeuvre, then Undertaker can beat him over & over again. You cannot let this slip into the hands of Vinnie Mac, please.

Chokeslam/Tombstone, followed up by a Hell's Gate and then;

JS votes for Undertaker

NSL
04-17-2012, 10:07 AM
This would be ugly. I can imagine it being as quick as some people think, but 'Taker would drag this out, and enjoy it. Vince has his share of wins, but he is smart enough to lose when he stands to profit from the outcome, so forget about him "paying off refs".

After a half hour of whipping Vince from pillar to post, I'd bet he ends it with a Hell's Gate, leaving Vince lying on his back with blood dripping from his mouth.

Hollywood Naitch
04-17-2012, 10:48 AM
If this was a storyline, then its quite logical that Vince would find a way to come out on top. After all, he has beaten Undertaker before....

But obviously we are picking the better wrestler here, and for that reason I do not even have to justify the decision to pick Undertaker to go for the win here.

A true legend of the grappling world, Undertaker to win this and possibly go all the way in this tournament.

Hulk Hogan's Brother
04-17-2012, 11:20 AM
Vince would have had some chance had this been in the WWE region. However, this is WCW's arena, the company Vince killed and everyone official is going to enjoy fucking with Vince here. Refs would count a pinfall slow, maybe the timekeeper will not ring the bell even after Vince has tapped out in the Hell's Gate. It would be a fun match if this actually happened. I know Undertaker has lost twice to Vince but this is just the type of match in which the face takes revenge against the sneaky heel, a match in which the heel is out of his element. Undertaker would maul him here.

Winner: Undertaker.

JGlass
04-17-2012, 11:53 AM
Anyone arguing for Vince McMahon clearly isn't paying attention to what KB said: WHO IS THE BETTER WRESTLER.

Vince McMahon has never won at WrestleMania. Taker has never lost.

Vince McMahon has won one WWE Title, and one Royal Rumble. Taker has won the WWE title four times, the WHC three times, and a Royal Rumble victory.

Vince McMahon is most famous for owning the WWE and getting his ass kicked by his own wrestlers. Taker is famous for owning his opponents, and getting his ass kicked by nobody.

In a wrestling match, there's no way Vince McMahon walks out of this match. The referee may as well not even be in the match, because Taker is going to be dead set on ending Vince McMahon.

And this whole "Vince owns the company" argument is moot, because this is in the WCW region. If anything, Vince is at a disadvantage because of his relationship with WCW.

Uncle Sam
04-17-2012, 12:00 PM
Anyone arguing for Vince McMahon clearly isn't paying attention to what KB said: WHO IS THE BETTER WRESTLER.

I'd be careful with that one - Vince's good to bad match ratio is infinitely better than The Undertaker's. The key here is that Vince's matches, good or bad, normally end up in him getting beaten to a pulp and pinned.

JGlass
04-17-2012, 12:06 PM
I'd be careful with that one - Vince's good to bad match ratio is infinitely better than The Undertaker's. The key here is that Vince's matches, good or bad, normally end up in him getting beaten to a pulp and pinned.

It helps when you only work a few times a year, and you only work with the best talent. Except that little stint with the cheerleaders.

dakikko049
04-17-2012, 03:31 PM
I'll say the Undertaker because at the end of the day he is a full time wrestler, has one of the most illustrious careers of all time and possibly one of the greatest angles ever- the streak. Vince...OK he owns the show but at the end of the day, Taker isn't going to lose to Vince. I mean the is probably the most prestigious tournament of all time, the Wrestlezone tournament. There can only be one winner in this one.

jtolliver23
04-17-2012, 03:31 PM
Have to go with the Undertaker here. He has more in ring experience and every time him and Vince have been in the ring together, he has dominated. Based purely on a talent level, it has to go to the Deadman.

peterpib2
04-17-2012, 03:42 PM
This is determining who the greatest wrestler of all time is. Maybe if it was the promoter, Vince. But no, its gotta be Taker. If he can still take Triple H and HBK 20 years on, he can outdo Vince easy!

TheHeartbreakPunk
04-17-2012, 03:56 PM
This is undertaker, hands down. He would have the crowd, no doubt about it. If it were a no dq match match where vince could say, beat the hell out of him or youre fired, he would win, but in a standard match environment, undertaker has him beat.

IHW
04-17-2012, 04:05 PM
Undertaker would pick up the win. It is a wrestling match, and Undertaker is simply a straight up better wrestler. 'Taker wouldn't only win, but he would annihilate Vince. First a Chokeslam, then a Last Ride, then a Tombstone, then the Hells Gate.

pumpkinking8987
04-17-2012, 04:21 PM
Vince shouldnt be a 32 seed.(THE FACT THAT WE CAN EVEN ARGUE THAT HE COULD WIN PROVES THIS)

Vince would have some tricks up his sleeve, but even when he does he still ends up losing most of the time... Taker wins

AwesomePunk
04-17-2012, 04:57 PM
Taker for sure but VKM was really good in the ring!! But Taker is hands down the better wrestler!!

ShreddedWheat
04-17-2012, 04:59 PM
128 wrestlers and there isn't one guy with more in-ring significance than Vince McMahon? Well, either way, I don't see how any amount of trickery would unseat the Deadman, who is zombie-like in his relentless ability to get back up. And let's face it, shenanigans are the the way McMahon would even have a prayer with someone of Undertaker's calibre. No way Vince would have an answer for any of Taker's vast arsenal. Undertaker wins in quick fashion.

Tastycles
04-17-2012, 05:07 PM
While it would be funny to see Vince go far in this tournament and infuriate the people that take it too seriously, he shouldn't really beat the Undertaker, should he?

Looking at the facts, it's simple. Vince McMahon has beaten hardly anyone in a straight up 1-1 fight. Most of his famous wins have been in no-DQ, street fight, Special Referee handicap type situations. Given that this match has none of those things and is being held in WCW, he really doesn't stand a chance against a man that has lasted longer as a consistent main eventer in his promotion than anybody for about 40 years.

It's not cool, provocative or edgy to vote for a 60-something billionaire, so don't.

Kelso1ftw
04-17-2012, 05:49 PM
If anyone has seen his passed 4 wrestlemania matches I believe everyone should be picking the Undertaker as those have been some of the best matches in wrestling over the last 4 years

Adalam
04-17-2012, 06:39 PM
The Deadman vs The Chairman... Deadman all the way. The Undertaker in his prime, and even now is one of the better big men wrestlers around. McMahon is a pseudo-wrestler who pulls a Russo and gives himself the belt, even disregarding any possible prestige or dignity the belt may have had before he booked himself to win (i.e. the ECW World Title, which lost World title status some time afterwards I believe.)

god-soldier
04-17-2012, 06:49 PM
One fist one chokeslam and a tombstone R.I.P. McMahon Undertaker wins!!!!!!

VinceHatesWrestling
04-17-2012, 07:59 PM
Hate to say it but Undertaker would win, but Vince would be way more entertaining, actually a rotting giraffe corpse covered in White Chocolate frosting would be more entertaining the the Underseller.

guhboy12
04-17-2012, 10:06 PM
Taker is and always has been my favorite. Even though he hasn't been lucky in previous match-ups with McMahon, at this point in time since he is nearing the end of his career, I can only believe that with this being 15yrs in the making...

The Undertaker > Vincent Kennedy McMahon

Brian O'Regan
04-18-2012, 09:53 AM
Despite the tendancy to screw peple on air this is a competition where we pick the best wrestler or so i assume,

Undertaker wins

e72882
04-18-2012, 01:16 PM
Undertaker vs Vince McMahon. This goes to the Undertaker for all of the normal reasons, but it also goes to him because this is under WCW rules and Vince McMahon would lose simply for this reason. Ted Turner wouldn't put Vince over and neither would Bischoff. Besides the Undertaker would be more over in WCW than Vince ever would.

GI Cake
04-18-2012, 01:20 PM
How can anyone make a valid case for Vince fucking McMahon to win over the Undertaker in a WCW setting? Then again, how can anyone make a sound debate as to Vince McMahon going over the Undertaker, period. Taker is an absolute monster in the ring. He has beaten anyone and everyone who is a name in his career. He has taken on armies of goons and wiped the floor with them, he has been buried alive, but come right back up. I don't see how Vince McMahon will be able to come away with beating the Deadman.

Poop Master Flex
04-18-2012, 02:20 PM
If it wasn't a standard 1 on 1 match I may have taken Vince for the major upset but because its standard one on one it makes it a lot harder for Vince to get help and cheat his way to victory.

Vince does hold a victory over The Undertaker but when you got Kane helping you it makes it easier. Vince would have to win this match on his own acumen and there is no way he would be able to match up to Taker in any way.

This match would probably be a while but it would mostly be Undertaker pounding the living crap out of Vince throughout most of it. Vince would probably try and get help but it can only go so far in a 1 on 1 match, you can't have a 5 minute beatdown of Taker using outside interference in a standard match. He may get someone big to get some shots in with Taker but it wouldn't be enough and Taker would finish Vince off with a tombstone for the 3 count.

CrissSpades
04-18-2012, 03:39 PM
Vince McMahon was only a wrestler for storyline reasons. Unlike Undertaker who has worked the full time schedule from 1990 until he slowed it down around 2010. That's 20 years of full time service (minus the injuries). Vince McMahon will only be remembered for two things: Being CEO and Chairman and mainly responsible for bringing the WWE to levels Vince McMahon Senior would not have imagined. And his rivalry with Stone Cold Steve Austin. So, without a shadow of a doubt, its The Undertaker who is my pick.

Natural Selection
04-18-2012, 04:38 PM
Yeah but Vince pays ALL the referees and therefore they would all help him if they wanted a job.

Taker goes to chokeslam a third referee but is stopped by the rest of the locker room, why? because Vince pays all of them aswell

They beat the shit out of the Undertaker and Vince gets the pin.

This is a standard non gimmick match, there is no way in hell Vince wins. This is Kane/Chavo quick. Like Nick said if this was the final round I might be compelled to put together an argument for Vince, but its not. This is the first round and thus not important enough for Vince to pull out all the stops to beat Taker(I.E The Buried Alive match) He used heavy interfernce in that after a substantial build Kayfabe: Thus giving him enough time to recruit the help he needed(Kane) In the first round he wouldn't have enough time to recruit anyone strong enough to stop the Deadman. Sure maybe a ref or two. Hell maybe HHH, but in the end not enough to stop Taker.

Natural Selection
04-18-2012, 05:31 PM
Hate to say it but Undertaker would win, but Vince would be way more entertaining, actually a rotting giraffe corpse covered in White Chocolate frosting would be more entertaining the the Underseller.
Vince would be more entertaining in the ring? Are you fucking serious? Did you see the buried alive match? Vince's most believable match to me is either against Stone Cold at St. Valeintines Day Massacre or against Shane at WM17 and both of those are for story line purposes only. If this was a legit head to head Vince would be about as entertaining as he was against Bret where he literally just laid there.

Finish: Kick to the gut then tombstone 1-2-3, match duration 9seconds.


How do you manage to get red rep with five post? By being a fucking spamming ass troll that's how. Seriously do us a favor and take a step back and literally fuck your face.

Coco
04-19-2012, 09:07 AM
Throwing out kayfabe silliness for a second, I don't think anyone's really given Vince a fair shake here. When talking about the greatest professional wrestler, I don't think one has to wrestle consistently or even win to be one of the greats. Vince is the real top villain and half of the winning equation in one of WWE's most successful eras ever. He's a bigger star than Taker could ever dream of being. For all intents and purposes, he's one of the hottest entities professional wrestling has ever known. If we're looking at wrestling as a television show and see Vince as the great character that he is, it would take a Hogan or an Austin to overcome him. As great as Taker is, he's not on that level.

Vote: Vince McMahon

Jaffa
04-19-2012, 07:45 PM
There is no situation where old man McMahon could beat the Taker as any argument that Vince would get his goons to attack Taker is non nonsensical as he has his own enemies who would be attacking him. But this doesn't even matter due to the fact that Taker no sells and its a non stip match. This would be a Rock Bossman 98 survivor series speed match.