Better World Heavyweight Champion: The Undertaker Or Batista?

[Mitch Henessey]

Since it's highly likely Batista will be put back into the world title picture, and The Undertaker is the current world champion, I thought it would be time to compare and contrast the two as World Heavyweight Champions over the years, since they have been two of the most decorated champions on Samckdown since the title came to that brand. I'll start with The Undertaker.

The Undertaker- Taker is a three time World Heavyweight Champion, and first won the title at Wrestlemania 23 against Batista. Taker went on to feud with Batista for a while, and ultimately lost the the title to Edge on an episode of Smackdown, after he cashed in his MITB. This came after Taker had a steel cage match with Batista, and was beaten down by Mark Henry.

Fast forward to 2008, Taker wins the Elimination Chamber at No Way Out, and goes on to defeat Edge in the main event at Wrestlemania 24 for the WHC. Taker would continue to feud with Edge after Mania, until he was stripped of the title by Vickie Guerrero for his then illegal "Hell's Gate" submission hold. Edge, with the help of La Familia, defeated Taker at One Night Stand for the vacant WHC. After this, Taker was kayfabe banished from WWE.

Upon his return at Summerslam 2009, Taker begun feuding with then WHC CM Punk. He would go on to defeat him at the Hell In A Cell ppv, and is set to defend his title against Rey Mysterio at the Royal Rumble.

Notable feuds For The World Heavyweight Championship:Batista,Edge,CM Punk, Big Show and Chris Jericho, Rey Mysterio

Batista is a four time World Heavyweight Champion, and won his first World Heavyweight Championship at Wrestlemania 21 against Triple H in the main event. Batista would go on to feud with The Game for a while, beating him at two straight ppvs in a row.

Batista was drafted to Smackdown after his feud with Triple H, and began feuds with JBL and Eddie Guerrero. Batista would suffer an injury, and had to relinquish the title.

After his return from injury, he would feud with Finaly, Mark Henry, and King Booker. He beat Booker for the world title at Survivor Series 2006.He would then go on to lose the title to Taker at Wrestlemania 23. Later on in the year, he won the WHC in a triple threat match against The Great Khali and Rey Mysterio.

Notable Feuds as World Heavyweight Champion: Triple H,JBL,Eddie Guerrero,Edge,The Undertaker,The Great Khali,Rey Mysterio,Chris Jericho,CM Punk,Mr.Kennedy

Now before some of you flood this thread with the "Batista is shit in the ring" comments, I would like to say I think he's average, nothing more, nothing less. Anyway, who do you think has been the better World Heavyweight champion over the years? The Undertaker or Batista?

I left some of Batista's feuds out because they really weren't worth remembering, or they were really short. I loved his feud with Triple H back in 2005/2006. Those tow put on some great brawl style matches, especially their Hell In A Cell form 2006. His feud with Taker back in 2007 was pretty good also.

The Undertaker's feud with Batista was probably his best as champion in my opinion. These two actually put on some pretty damn good matches. His feud with Edge was presented to us as a BIG time feud, but it never really did it for me. The whole "strip him of the title" storyline was just a bummer for me. His current reign as WHC has been boring at times. His win at Bragging Rights was over shadowed by the start of the Mysterio/Batista feud.

I'm probably going to receive a ton of crap for this, but I'm going with The Undertaker. I know both men had title reigns cut short by injuries, but the streak VS the title is an awesome aspect of Taker's reigns, and it's something Batista can never have.Although Batista did have something Taker didn't have as champion.....that one defining feud that makes a champion a champion, and that feud was with Triple H.

Who's your pick? The Undertaker or Batista?

 

[Dagger Dias]

Batista's only great World Championship reign was after defeating Triple H at Wrestlemania 21. He had all the momentum from the Evolution storyline and it was great to see him become World Champion. I enjoyed that entire reign.... but his other ones have ranged from average to terrible.

The Undertaker, on the other hand.... has had more interesting title reigns with the World Championship. His feud with Batista for Wrestlemania 23 where he won the title was a good one, but I preferred the feud against Edge a year later. Taker won the title from Edge at Wrestlemania 24 and their feud continued all the way to Summerslam, it was an awesome feud! Taker and Edge both had great world title reigns during that feud. His feud recently with Punk wasn't bad either.

What it comes down to for me is this.... The only time I ever looked forward to Batista's matches/segments/etc when he was World Champion was during his first reign in 2005-2006, it was a long and entertaining reign, but I haven't liked his others much. Undertaker has entertained me week in and week out during the times when he has been World Champion.

There is only one problem with Undertaker as World Champion. He hasn't shown up enough during his current reign. That is only one issue though, Batista has several. He's gotten stale over the years, is bad on the mic, and the heel turn last semester didn't do much to make him more interesting. I don't hate the guy, I just don't like him as a champion.

My choice is The Undertaker because he's always great. All he needs to do is show up on Smackdown more often, if he can't make an episode then he should tape a promo. That solves his biggest problem.

 

["Cool Guy" Jensen]

I gotta agree with Dagger to some extent. The only good or great World Heavyweight Championship reign that Batista has had was his first one. He won the title against Triple H at Wrestlemania 21. He then defeated Triple H to retain the title at the next two ppvs, Backlash and Vengeance. When he gets drafted to Smackdown, he immediately fueds with J.B.L. Retains the title against him at Great American Bash and Summerslam. He then gains a friendship with Eddie Guerrero, defeating him at No Mercy, at Eddie's final ppv. He then represents Smackdown during the SD! vs. Raw fued, wins the WWE Tag Team Championships with Rey Mysterio, and then is forced to relinquish the title due to injury. That 9 month title reign itself was just... amazing.

His title reigns since then just gets worse and worse, with each getting shorter and shorter. His 2nd reign, he defeats King Booker, fueds with him and Finlay, then defeats Mr. Kennedy to retain before losing the title to The Undertaker at Wrestlemania 23. His 3rd title reign, he wins a triple threat match against Great Khali and Rey Mysterio, defeats Khali in the rematch, defeats The Undertaker in two title matches, before dropping the title to Edge. His 4th reign lasted just 8 days and shouldn't have happened.

While, Batista reigns just get less interesting. The Undertaker's title reigns are all different and special in their own way. His first title reign at Wrestlemania 23 was a nice change since it was Taker's first title reign since 2002, he retains in two no-contests against Batista, before losing the title to Edge. His 2nd one, he defeats Edge at Wrestlemania 24, successfully retains at Backlash, before being stripped by Vickie. His 3rd and current reign is his longest, but I hear a lot of people complaining about it.

The Undertaker is the type of champion who despite not appearing on Smackdown every week, still comes at his best when he does. Batista was always a fighting champion, but if he were to be champ now, as a heel... he'd just be your typical heel champion that runs at every opportunity he sees. That is not when The Undertaker is about. So, I'll have to say that Undertaker is a much better champion that Batista.

 

[maar130]

For me is pretty clear, THe Undertaker is a better champion, dispite his runs being shorter, is more dominant and is never the Underdog. On the character side, he is almost Undestructible and remains being the one character who can handle the belt without even being there.

On the wrestler side, Taker is also better, dispite his current reign not being really spectacular he has had good matches with the Likes of Jericho (Too many commercials made it less than what it was) and Rey Mysterio, who the Undertaker made look like a real treath for a change, not just lightheavywight battling for his life.

His Second reign unfotunately (The one Edge Ended) got cut short because he was Injured, but would have been fun to see what would have come out of it.

 

[RKO18]

I guess Im in the minority, but Im definitely going with Batista. His Mania 21-Jan 06 reign speaks for itself. He seemed unstoppable during this time and may have went through Mania 22 as champ if not for the injury. Dont get me wrong he has had some bullshit reigns, but so has Taker. But at least right now they are trying something new with Batista and I believe his new character could hold the title very well if placed in the right feuds. He is a solid heel and a lot more interesting than Taker right now and Taker has the belt. And the title should never be on a guy that might show up on every other SD taping. They have to ADVERTISE his appearances on SD for crying out loud. Imagine if they had to do that for Cena or HHH at a Raw show.

Taker has been the same character for over 5 years now. I know some people out there worship him and I can understand why. I just think he was better putting champions over than being a champion himself.

 

[Miko]

I think they're both pretty shit champions, Batista's best reign was his first one no doubt, only problem with that is as a performer he was pretty damn shit during that time, over the years he's improved into (in my opinion) one of the best wrestlers on the roster today, but for one reason or another he's not had another long reign, although the short ones he's had have been fairly entertaining.

Undertaker, well, dunno what to say except I still find him pretty boring, he's had reigns cut short due to injury, same as Batista, he's had good matches as champ, same as Batista. He's benefitted from better booking and less injury, so that's in his credit. I'd say they're about the same. Nothing special from either to be honest.

 

[Garvanko]

Undertaker as a champion is always credible and even more so for Smackdown who really need a credible champion to carry the show, especially with Edge injured and Jericho away from the title picture. I also think Smackdown needed a face champion after a lengthy spell of heel champions in Punk and Edge.

I do wonder whether we may see Undertaker turn into some kind of despot champion. His promos have been excellent of late but they all cut the sound of a man becoming more and more obsessed with keeping the gold.

Finally, I think Undertaker has elevated the WHC to a greater level than the WWE belt and that is solely down to the dead man himself. His presence is being felt on Smackdown and Raw and you get the feeling the main event is his at Wrestlemania (provided he stays injury free).

 

[zephyrs]

Geez.. that's like asking a prisoner if he'd prefer death by hanging or electrocution. I'm not a fan of either guy. Batista is so one-dimensional in the ring and his mic work sucks to boot. And the Undertaker, what can I say about him. He's old and I can't stand his gimmick; I never could. WWE has turned him into this invincible force and it irks the shit out of me. His promos are all about stealing souls and other silly shit and always leave me wondering if this is the early 90s or something. Larger than life, super hero gimmicks are dead, but I guess 'Taker never got that memo. To his credit, he did try the American Badass gimmick but that was horrible too. Maybe the problem is that Mark Callaway sucks?

 

[The Mark of Zur-En-Arrh]

Why is Chris Jericho not an option?

Because every time he's been the champion in the last 3 years he's dropped the belt less than a month later nearly every time. He's been the WHC 2 times, the first time he defended it succesfully against HBK and then lost it to Batista. The next week he won it back, and then dropped it straight back to Cena. He's no more than a transitional champion who you can barely say has even had an actual reign with the belt, compared to someone like Batista or Taker who usually win the belt for a number of months at a time minimum.

Geez.. that's like asking a prisoner if he'd prefer death by hanging or electrocution. I'm not a fan of either guy. Batista is so one-dimensional in the ring and his mic work sucks to boot. And the Undertaker, what can I say about him. He's old and I can't stand his gimmick; I never could. WWE has turned him into this invincible force and it irks the shit out of me. His promos are all about stealing souls and other silly shit and always leave me wondering if this is the early 90s or something.

See this isn't comparing title reigns, this is just you slagging off wrestlers you don't like. If you were comparing how often they got injured, or how many defences or listed their opponents or something, THEN you'd be giving us something relevant. Right here, you're just Taker/Batista bashing.

Larger than life, super hero gimmicks are dead, but I guess 'Taker never got that memo. To his credit, he did try the American Badass gimmick but that was horrible too.

Vince picks the gimmicks, so sending that 'memo' to Taker would have been a waste of time, wouldn't it?

Maybe the problem is that Mark Callaway sucks?

Maybe the problem is that you suck. You've given no evidence or argument towards the subject matter, all you've done is moan a little bit about Batista and a lot about Taker, but done nothing to compare them or their title reigns, which was the whole point of the thread.

I personally would say that Taker has been a better champion based on the fact that he had a couple of lengthy fueds with both Batista and Edge after beating them both at WM, and the only reason those fueds ended was due to injury on Taker's part, because when he returned from injury, he was placed in fueds with either Edge or Batista immediately. In fact Taker's year long fued with Batista, transformed into an 8 month fued with Edge. That one title win in '07 sparked 2 long, drawn out, fueds featuring the Undertaker and 2 other ME talent from April '07 to Summerslam of '08. Yes, there was time off in between for all 3 men, but i think that if all 3 had remained healthy during 2007, we'd be talking about those fueds in the same breath as HBK/Jericho.

Plus the fact that Batista's best work as champion was when he fueded with either Taker or Edge, whereas Taker's best work was with Edge but not Batista, suggests to me that Taker's the better champion overall.

 

[Mr. TM]

Both men are always favourites to carry around the strap on Smackdown, even when they aren't even on the brand sometimes. But if I were to pick one, it would be The Undertaker. The Undertaker always makes his matches seem like they are big game matches, possibly because the hardly ever wrestles. That is Batista's saving grace against the Undertaker, he will take the belt to a lot more shows and put it up. Other than that, he is a bore, and I never get excited for his matches, unless he is up against someone with a great personality.

 

[dafeman]

nothing against taker but he has earned his spot in the hall of fame and is one of the best but he never has a good run with the world title. always him chasing it is the bigger story. Batista is the better option out of the two but neither should be it honestly. i would rather see edge or jericho or even punk who i dont not care for but still should be champ over the taker or Batista. the can stay off the injured list more and also fight against all comers but in my opinion christian should be given the ball on smackdown and see how far he can go with it before giving another shot to one of the others who have had there shot the past year or two.

 

[the undertaker 3]

By far Undertaker because Undertaker was more exciting when he had the world heavyweight championship belt. Batista only cried like a baby when he first had it. Undertaker is the best wrestler and the best world heavyweight champion. Undertaker has the best finishers. Chokeslam, last ride, and the best one TOMB STONE! Yeah and it only takes 1 of those finishers to make him win a match and be new world heavyweight champion. I know that some of the matches Undertaker and Batista were in Batista won most of them but it doesnt matter because the Undertaker is and always be a better world heavyweight champion. It would be better if Kane and Undertaker were tag team champs and Undertaker was world heavyweight champion. Batista and Rey could fight them for the titles if Batista and Rey were still friends! But nevermind that Undertaker is a better world heavyweight champion.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

I'm going with Batista. He had a great feud with HHH culimnating in one of the top three HIAC matches ever. Everyone likes to point to Undertaker's reign in 2007. Undertaker had a below average 2006 and Batista actually got something out of him before Taker got injured again. Undertaker's match with Edge at WM 24 was good but not a classic and the following matches were just about the same. Honestly, I'll take Batista vs. HHH over any Undertaker feud while he was world champion.

 

[Dr_Madico]

Undertaker is the better WHW Champion due to the fact it is said he is the best pure striker in the WWE, he has the experience Batista doesnt and wont have since he quit the WWE, I believe that Taker has another title reign coming soon (when he returns). So my answer is Undertaker.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

Undertaker is the better WHW Champion due to the fact it is said he is the best pure striker in the WWE, he has the experience Batista doesnt and wont have since he quit the WWE, I believe that Taker has another title reign coming soon (when he returns). So my answer is Undertaker.

So just because Undertaker is called "the best pure striker in the WWE", that makes him a better world champion? Batista may not have more experience in years but he's had more experience in terms of being champion. Batista's first reign was just as long as Undertaker's first six combined. As I've said before, Batista has had good feuds with HHH and I'll take Batista beating Undertaker twice while champion and the fact that Undertaker has never beaten Batista while champion.