STF - Not what John Cena does, but a hold which in the words of the same site that you are using as a credible source "The wrestler then pulls back stretching the opponent's back, neck, and knee." Knee is a part of the leg. After common sense 101, you might want to try biology. How many superheavyweights have won ladder matches? Zero. How many submission specialists have won ladder matches? Also zero. Oh wait Now, when you say everyone do you actually mean everyone except Ric Flair? Or do you mean everyone except Ric Flair and Hulk Hogan? Or do you mean everyone except Marvellous Marc Mero? Or are you just completely wrong? 1) I addressed diving splash when I said he wouldn't have the necessary leaping ability. If he falls, as with all his other aerial moves (notice how he never hits moves very far away from the turnbuckle), then he's going to twat his shins on the ladder. Don't mention the moonsault, he doesn't have a great leap on that either, and springs off the ropes, like just about everyone who uses that move does. 2) Vader never hit a diving splash in his lif. If you are adding that move to his repertoire, I am adding the Lou Thesz patented existential ladder toss to his. Basically, Thesz is capable of throwing a ladder at such a force that it opens on impact, knocking his opponent down and then pinning them in such a manner that they cannot retaliate before strolling up the ladder for the win. Of course, he's never done it, but why should that matter? Fictitious diving splash aside, this is ridiculous. The Vader argument is getting increasingly reliant on the idea that he decimated everyone he fought. History dictates otherwise, hence why Sting is the only high profile American wrestler he has clear cut victories over. It's not that he didn't face the likes of Hulk Hogan and Ric Flair, it's just that he didn't beat them. Flair is probably the most old school guy Vader ever thought, and he repeatedly and decisively beat Vader. If that's not reason enough to see Vader cannot always do what is required to beat major stars, I don't know what is. Thinking that a man who lost half of the matches he ever wrestled would beat Lou Thesz is not only dismissive of Thesz, but of basic wrestling history. How does that show more about Vader? In the modern game, stiffness is popular in Japan, it's why Vader wrestled there. However limited Hansen was at restraint and protecting his opponent, somebody who is legitimately trying to break bones is going to be hitting you harder. Surely that's obvious to anyone with eyes, whether or not they are hanging out the socket. It's a pretty standard Vader argument, and I'm neutralising it before it happens. But more to the point here, I am demonstrating the persistent toughness that Thesz would have had to and did have. I assume you mean what's the point in Thesz coming back? It's because he was one of the most popular wrestlers of all time and because the people wanted to see him, something that doesn't happen to Big Van Footnote. When is Vader's prime then? The defeats mentioned mostly happened in the first year of his WWF career. If he was never in his prime there, we can look to WCW were he was getting caned by Ric Flair regularly and losing to Davey Boy Smith. If we're looking at Japan, we can look at his defeats to Riki Choshu, a 6 foot tall legitimate wrestler turned professional wrestler. Face it, Vader has lost wherever he's been as much as he has won. I mentioned those people because I assumed Vader wasn't finished at 40 years old, but apparently, he was. Is professional wrestling divided into weight classes? No. Did I say that Thesz was as as strong as Vader? No. I said that he was stronger than their weight differential suggests. Right. The faster wrestler (Thesz) is more likely to hit with the ladder first. Why is a fat man more resilient than a honed athlete? This is where their typical match length is noteworthy. If Vader gets to 15 minutes without winning, he almost always loses, because he cannot recuperate very well. If Thesz goes past 15 minutes, as he almost always did, his conditioning helped him to win. That conditioning will help him recover better than Vader could ever hope to. IC brought it up, not me. It's what happens when you're clutching at straws, as anyone supporting Vader has to be. Remember when I showed brutality doesn't help in a ladder match? It wasn't very long ago. Experience in gimmick matches is meaningless. If it was a match where previous experience helps, maybe, but it's not. Very few gimmicks give any real benefit to people that have done them before. The cell and chamber are perhaps the only ones. Edge and Benoit are not particularly brutal in their style, far more methodical, you rarely see either being ruthless. I've addressed Taker and Triple H, Abyss has lost more ladder matches than he has won. Or is it because it is irrefutable evidence that the basis of your argument is flawed? Didn't say it did. I didn't bring brutality into this, that was a Team Vader argument, and it I showed why it is a shit one. Not to mention that most of the brutal wrestlers you list to have won a match are either not brutal or did so with mitigating circumstances. Is zero more than zero? There's one for the mathematical philosophers to ponder. For now, lets say neither has experience in this kind of match. No it isn't. Firstly, Jeff Hardy was not billed predominately as a hardcore expert, always as an agile quick wrestler. Secondly, the fact that Mick Foley lost a ladder match to the Big Bossman should probably indicate that hardcore experience doesn't help. Only one of which has won a ladder match. He is however, quite similar in size and arguably style to CM Punk, who has won three of his four ladder matches. Well, no, actually do they not teach Physics in America or something? That means if either man pushes the other one, they are likely to lose their own footing. Now, could Vader throw Thesz off the ladder if they were both on it? Yes. Would Vader be able to reach the top of a ladder Thesz was already on before Thesz uncoupled the object? No. Would Thesz climb a ladder Vader was already on when he could easily push it over as we have seen? No, so that ability is useless. [YOUTUBE]EMBngZOr6VY[/YOUTUBE] Sting + Christian Cage = Vader, in terms of weight roughly speaking. If a battered, bruised and tired Earl Hebner can push over a ladder with that weight at the top over without any difficulty, I think we can consider this point officially wrong. He's been just under 300 for most of his career, even if he was over, it would be by an insignificant amount, not as much as Vader. Not including MITB, Big Show and Malice were both pretty sizeable, as was Tor Kamata. They all lost. The main reason men like this don't have ladder matches is because nobody would buy something where they have to move quickly up a ladder to win. On the rare occasions that they do have matches like this, they lose. Because the laws of physics are constant. Also, The Big Show is bigger than Vader and has lost ladder matches. Not very many in the top bracket of wrestlers. This is such a shit argument it is untrue. The fact you think it helps you actually makes me feel sorry for you a little bit, seriously. If this was a real tournament, that would be the outcome every year, because that is what the paying audience would want to see. Guys like Vader would probably go deep into the tournament, squashing insignificant faces until they met a huge star like Thesz or Cena or Hogan or even Flair, at which point they would lose. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centre_of_gravity Jesus Christ. Firstly, you aren't lifting, you are pushing. Secondly, this should be pretty intuitive to everyone. An object falls over when its centre of mass is no longer over its base. A heavier man up a ladder is going to have a higher centre of mass, which means that you only have to push it a little bit so that it is no longer over the centre of its mass. I direct you again to the Earl Hebner video. A weedy gimp who had just taken a shot easily pushes a ladder with a lot of mass on it over. I haven't got my mechanics notes with me, but hopefully this will suffice and you will stop denying physics. The centre of mass is determined by integrating the total mass over the entire area of the structure and finding the midpoint. For something like a straight line, this is easy, but I am not good enough at maths to work the full equation out in my bedroom at 4 o'clock in the morning for a complicated system. The point at which it is no longer over the point of contact is a simple case of determining the angle of tilt. This is determined using the co-sine rule - you know the distance to the mid point and up to the centre of mass, so you can determine the angle. Look, this is true, face the fact it is true, and take your head out of the sand. To prove it to yourself, balance something that can reasonably easily be stood on its side. Now attach some blu tack to the top and try and balance it again. It will be harder, because of exactly the same principals. I'm not going to discuss something that has been commonly known for hundreds of years any further. None where it's completely incapacitated them, but plenty where it is a part of a gradual weardown. Jericho on Benoit at Royal Rumble 2001 was a good example of how a big submission move can help. John Cena's move is called STF because STFU is a funny name. The move is not an STF. This is so wrong and so stupid it's attrocious. Non-impactful? Are you ******ed? How is stiff hits and suplexes non-impactful, whatever impactful means. If Thesz's repetoire is non impactful, then so is Bret Hart's, Chris Benoit's and Chris Jericho's. All of whom have won ladder matches. The fact you are trying to use the word impactful in a scientific discussion is putting you onto a loser. The fact you think a backdrop implies no force implies you know nothing about wrestling or physics.