Championship Region, Fifth Round: (3) Shawn Michaels vs. (4) Bret Hart

Discussion in 'Championship Region' started by klunderbunker, Apr 16, 2015.

?

Who Wins This Matchup?

  1. Shawn Michaels

  2. Bret Hart

Multiple votes are allowed.
Results are only viewable after voting.
  1. klunderbunker

    klunderbunker Welcome to My (And Not Sly's) House

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    17,857
    Likes Received:
    3,359
    This is a fifth round match in the Championship Region. It is a standard one on one match, held at Levi's Stadium in Santa Clara, California.

    [​IMG]

    Rules: This is the first round of a three round, one night tournament. Damage taken will carry over to the next round and will be based on the margin and score. For example, if the match is 40-39, it was a back and forth war. If the score was 59-2, it was a squash.

    [​IMG]

    #3. Shawn Michaels

    Vs.

    [​IMG]

    #4. Bret Hart



    Polls will be open for six 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.
     
    #1
  2. jazzua

    jazzua Pre-Show Stalwart

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2007
    Messages:
    133
    Likes Received:
    11
    Bret couldn't even beat HBK in a match that Bret thought he was beating HBK;)

    In all seriousness though, this is basically a who do you prefer match. Two title matches between them during their primes. Shawn wins WM and technically at SS 97. I'll vote Shawn simply because I like him better, which will most likely be why people vote how they vote for this match. There isn't really a wrong pick. Neither guy was a huge draw and both kind of sit in that second level of wrestlers because of that. However, I've always considered Shawn the better all around performer and the best of that second level.
     
    #2
  3. rbv13

    rbv13 Championship Contender

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2013
    Messages:
    726
    Likes Received:
    418
    Two of the biggest d bags in the business. They each came into prominence during arguably the worst period in modern pro wrestling. During that time they fought like two middle school bitches over some sense of fake pride. Both were extremely talented in ring but would have you believe they were the greatest ever. Hart and Michaels were the original Total Divas.

    HBK seems to have chilled these days while Hart is still his own biggest mark. That almost sways my vote but HBK's over all body of d bag work takes the cake.

    Vote Hart.
     
    #3
  4. George Steele's Barber

    George Steele's Barber Advertise Here $9.95/month

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2010
    Messages:
    2,901
    Likes Received:
    2,525
    I'm voting for HBK because I'm too cheap to buy KB a wedding gift. For anyone that is willing to spend, my understanding is that no one has purchased him the red leather but less chaps that he has on his registry.

    Oh, I am also voting for HBK because Bret Hart was the catalyst that got me to stop watching wrestling in the early 90's and because pink and black is stupid.

    2,000 non-spams posts!!!! Let's see if this one gets deleted.
     
    #4
    HBK-aholic likes this.
  5. klunderbunker

    klunderbunker Welcome to My (And Not Sly's) House

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    17,857
    Likes Received:
    3,359
    I'm not going to get into the details of this one as people have been arguing this point for twenty years and they're going to argue it for twenty years at a time for the rest of eternity. You can argue classic matches, titles or just overall skill and I still don't think I can see any definitive proof why one guy is better than the other.

    However I'm going to vote for Shawn for one reason: he had two different great careers with two different styles in two different eras. That's something very few wrestlers ever have done and Shawn is one of them. It doesn't make him better than Bret, but it's so impressive that I'll put him over Bret as a result.
     
    #5
  6. Dmbfantomas

    Dmbfantomas Bald Billy was Better

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2011
    Messages:
    455
    Likes Received:
    302
    This is pretty much just voting on preference. I like Bret a lot more than I like HBK so I'll be voting for him. I was always engaged watching Bret, and I usually find myself bored when I watch HBK matches. He's never done it for me.
     
    #6
  7. Pay Per Ghost

    Pay Per Ghost squashed Disco Inferno to become

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,651
    Likes Received:
    985
    YES YES YES YES!

    Fuck you Bret Hart, his record in big matches against Shawn doesn't favor him and this is pretty much unanimous.
     
    #7
  8. Hollywood Naitch

    Hollywood Naitch The current reigning and defending

    Joined:
    May 27, 2010
    Messages:
    5,099
    Likes Received:
    3,003
    This is how I think exactly. Both Bret and Shawn were fantastic performers and the argument will always exist as to who was better. Bret was the more technically sound while Michaels was the more exciting, extravagent performer. However, Shawn was able to adapt with the times more, and be a key player before, during (he helped kickstart it with DX) and after the Attitude Era, having amazing longevity and putting on great, showstealing matches until the day he retired. While I enjoyed Bret's heel work in 1997, I think HBK was far more entertaining.

    There aren't too many guys in wrestling I have enjoyed watching more than Shawn, and his record in big matches against Hart have earned the Heartbreak Kid my vote in this one.
     
    #8
  9. nightmare

    nightmare ...7, 8, Better stay up late...

    Joined:
    May 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1,271
    Likes Received:
    1,060
    I liked Bret more than Shawn back in the day. Then HBK started to grow on me & as years went by I became more entertained by his matches and segments. I believe Bret is one of the most talented, technical & crisp guys to step in the ring, but honestly he was a bit boring. He was intense & did have some great moments as both a face & heel, but overall I look back and realize he was kinda dull.


    HBK was anything but dull & he certainly was no slouch in the ring. KB pointed out his longevity & adapting his style over time & that is why I enjoyed him more over the years. I look at Shawn & remember the good times\matches, but when I see Bret I just think more about what could have been.


    Bret was definitely great & a badass in the ring, but IMO Shawn was a bit better all around. Two different ring styles for sure, but in terms of the whole entertainment package HBK wins that one. Plus.....that superkick.... damn good stuff right there.
     
    #9
  10. Bdubbs

    Bdubbs All Hail Crossfit Jesus

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2010
    Messages:
    54
    Likes Received:
    19
    The toughest decision of this round for me. As KB stated, this rivalry has been debated into the ground, and it will continue to be debated for years to come.

    Even though WWF was getting folded by WCW during this rivalry, I quite enjoyed their feud due to the legit heat/raw emotion between the two. Both were idiots at times: Hart because of his "I'm invincible/nobody can touch me" self-advocating schtick, compared to Shawn pushing the attitude card and making dumb decisions due to his life choices.

    I think the Ironman match at WM12 is overrated. No doubt it was a good showing for both of them, but I don't view it as one of the all-time "classics" like many do. We all know about Montreal, so there's no need to hammer the dead horse.

    In the end, I'm voting HBK for 3 main reasons:

    1. He came back from a serious back injury in 2002 and had a pretty stellar run for many years. I don't think any of us thought this would ever be possible for HBK back in 1998.

    2. HBK's matches are more exciting in my opinion. Even though Michaels doesn't have the greatest WM record, he was on an absolute roll with the quality of many of his matches. Regardless of the show, Michaels had a shot at match of the evening, something I don't see as a consistent feature of Hart's matches. Plus, I prefer HBK's finish over Hart's. SCM was usually done after tuning up the band, but Michaels often hit it unexpectedly when it looked like the chips were down.

    3. Bret Hart to this day is still very much full of himself. Was he a great technical wrestler? Yes. However, his "I'm the greatest thing since sliced bread" demeanor that he's portrayed in interviews over the years is tiresome. Shawn admits he was a douche back in the day because of being in a dark place. However, I give HBK style points for being humble, admitting his faults, and making the best of his comeback.
     
    #10
  11. Dragon Chief

    Dragon Chief Exodus 3:14

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2014
    Messages:
    127
    Likes Received:
    20
    Voting for Bret Hart, found him to be the better wrestler overall and just a bigger fan of his.
     
    #11
  12. Spidercanrana

    Spidercanrana Should've Reinstated The Fox
    Staff Member Moderator E-Fed Mod

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2010
    Messages:
    1,756
    Likes Received:
    1,454
    Shawn Michaels has personality. I'd argue Bret did too but holy shit does HBK eclipse it. I consider their wrestling skills very on par with one another, but I enjoy being entertained not by all the grappling and kicking alone. Vote for Shawn Michaels. Vote for a guy that can make you laugh and cry.

    I'm sorry. I love you. Smack.
     
    #12
    nightmare likes this.
  13. Cereal Killer

    Cereal Killer Boy Better Know

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    359
    Likes Received:
    175
    I'm not really sure on this. Both have fought only twice. We'll not talk about Survivor Series '97 but if you look at their Iron Man match, Bret would have won via submission had there been no time limit. If you watch the match and look at those last few moments, HBK really looked like he was going to submit until the 60 minutes had passed.

    On the other hand, Michaels has had such a successful career, thrown on the better matches and has been involved in some of the best feuds in the past decade. The question is, how does this all help him inside of the ring against Bret Hart?
     
    #13
  14. MrMojoRisin

    MrMojoRisin Championship Contender

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2011
    Messages:
    965
    Likes Received:
    297
    They fought more than twice.

    Hart and Michaels had well over 100 matches with each other over the years. TV matches. House show matches. PPV matches. Singles, tag, six man, eight man... you name it. The two were one of each others most common opponents over their careers.

    And Hart... was the winner roughly 70% of the time. You had a lot of no decisions between the two also. To be honest, Michaels rarely ever won when he was in the ring with Bret Hart, and the bulk of his wins actually happened in 3 way matches that also included Sycho Sid.

    So if we're voting kayfabe here... then the guy that almost always won between the two seems to be the obvious choice to win again.

    You mentioned that Michaels has had such a successful career, had the better matches, and been involved in some of the best feuds of the past decade?

    Hart's career was every bit as successful as Michaels was. People can have their preference between the two guys, but anyone that says that one guys career was unequivocally better than the others is just being biased.

    Better matches? That's obviously subjective. Both put on countless, amazing matches. Both were considered to be a guy that it was impossible to have a bad match with, and guys who their opponents would bring their A game for just because they didn't want to let them down or be known as the guy that couldn't have a good match with them. I'm a bigger fan of Hart's matches... but I liked what I consider to be the smarter, more physical style of Hart's to the showier, more dramatic style of Michaels.

    Been involved in the best feuds? Yes HBK was... then again, so was Hart. Again it all comes down to preference, but I might argue that the Hart versus the United States feud was bigger and better than anything that Michaels was exclusively involved in. Yes, Michaels was a part of that feud, but the beauty of it was that it was Hart and the Hart Foundation against EVERYONE, and that feud carried the company when it was on.

    This is a match we've seen many, many times... and it's always been a good one. People are going to vote based on which side they sympathized with during their decade long feud... and honestly on this board, Michaels will get more support, simply because he's younger and wrestled more recently. He's the recent memory, whereas Hart isn't. More people on this board can relate to Michaels better for that reason... and that's why he'll likely win here.

    My vote is for Hart though... because he was my preference, and as history showed... when they got in the ring, Hart almost always had his hand raised in the end.
     
    #14
  15. Pay Per Ghost

    Pay Per Ghost squashed Disco Inferno to become

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,651
    Likes Received:
    985
    ^To this muppet;

    Dont be that guy who just twists words to show off how much he knows. Yes we all know they have wrestled numerous times on house shows, they even had the first ladder match. so shut the fuck up and stick to the PRIMES coz thats what we are doing

    Shawn's beaten Hart twice when both men were top dogs, so ye fuck him he is outta here.
     
    #15
  16. SSJPhenom

    SSJPhenom The Phenom of WZ

    Joined:
    May 8, 2007
    Messages:
    1,802
    Likes Received:
    399
    This match should have been Rock vs Warrior. Instead we get this match. I would've loved to have argued the Rock/Warrior match, however, I digress.

    Folks, we've seen this movie before and we know how it ends. Whether its to a super kick because this match goes into overtime somehow or the ref just calls for the bell because he can, Hart is going to lose. HBK has won every major match that the two of them have had and I don't see this one being any different.

    Vote HBK.
     
    #16
  17. Bernkastel

    Bernkastel Reaper of Miracles
    E-Fed Mod

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2006
    Messages:
    4,288
    Likes Received:
    1,692
    There was at least some justification for voting Shawn over Rock last round due to the match stipulation, but what was the reason for voting Hart over Warrior? Please Hart supporters regale me with tales about how Hart would somehow defeat a guy who was damn near unbeatable in his prime, because we all used that argument to vote Warrior over Flair. So much for consistency.

    Fuck Bret Hart. Michaels wins this match because not only was he better in basically any category a pro wrestler can be measured, he has the kayfabe advantage too. Good riddance.
     
    #17
  18. MrMojoRisin

    MrMojoRisin Championship Contender

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2011
    Messages:
    965
    Likes Received:
    297
    Well then.

    The guy makes a false statement (they only fought twice). I simply correct it. And you get your panties bunched up because of it... while admitting that the guy made a false statement?

    Stick to their primes? You're kidding right? How many people have actually done that in this thing? If people were sticking to primes, we wouldn't have such an embarrassing final 8.

    You want me to stick to their primes though? Fine. Bret had a better one. Bret fought everyone and anyone in the WWF in his prime, and beat them all. Shawn spent 90% of his prime fighting his boys in the Kliq, forfeiting titles and losing his smile. And when they fought for real, Bret was barely off crutches and still beat Shawn bad enough that he cried to Vince about a hostile work environment and tried to quit.

    Bret was the better wrestler. Period.
     
    #18
  19. Pay Per Ghost

    Pay Per Ghost squashed Disco Inferno to become

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,651
    Likes Received:
    985
    Coz you are an idiot, wrestlers have faced each other months in advance before their showcase ME to get the feel of the audience. See Hogan, Flair who when The Nature Boy was in WWF. We talk here of significant televised meetings, not live show events you dingbat.


    Oh why, why embarassing because geezers like Hackenschmidt and Karl Gotch didnt make it. Fuck them, they started something but other people made it better or some carried it better than they could. People naturally assume oh big television came in, oh he wasn't selling out when there was no TV.

    Hey bud, wrestling was bigger than boxing when Gorgeous George was prancing around; why? Sports Entertainment thats why! This phrase is more apt for what is pro wrestling than anything. Here was a theatrical take on wrestling that inspired the likes of Dylan and Ali, there was much less to do and enjoy in recreation and in lieu of the side show acts, theatre this was the bee's knees back then. Mainstream wrestlers post cable had to compete with a lot more distractions.

    Bret was a an excuse to get away from the steroid trial, whose murmers were rumbling before the trial itself. Go listen to Nash on Austin's podcast, go listen to Austin on his podcast when he talks about the era and you will know. Were the fans behind Hart, at one point yes. When Luger was being forced on them, they chose Hart. And you bringing up real life tussles makes your kayfabe argument look that much weak. Stop clutching straws.
    Shawn was a dick, but in that ring he was the smoothest wrestler, and fuck me if I have the same preference as the likes of Flair, Austin, hell have you heard Hart gush about Shawn?

    Bret was the better wrestler. Period.[/QUOTE]

    Except Shawn was better
     
    #19
  20. MrMojoRisin

    MrMojoRisin Championship Contender

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2011
    Messages:
    965
    Likes Received:
    297
    I'm the idiot, yet you're the one who can't make an argument without making it personal.

    Gotcha.

    And we only talk about significant televised meetings here? Sounds convenient enough for you.

    I was under the impression we could use whatever criteria we wanted... and that has been exactly what everyone has been doing. Thanks for telling me the correct way to participate in a fake tournament.

    BTW, believe it or not... there was a time that even included the 90's where 'house shows' were every bit as much of the ongoing story of professional wrestling as the 'significant televised shows' were. In fact "GASP", once upon a time, TV was just used as advertising for the 'house shows', and if you ever wanted to see anything significant... you had to buy a ticket.




    Yeah, and 'I'm' the idiot.:disappointed:

    If I have to explain why this final 8 is disappointing... then you're one of the reasons it is disappointing.


    That's great.

    Wrestling was bigger than boxing and inspired some truly legendary people.

    Yet to you, somehow it was all shit back then, and the stuff that's barely watchable and losing millions of dollars of today is better than ever?


    And Shawn got away with everything he did because Vince was scared to death that he'd leave for the NWO, and Shawn knew it.

    Yes Bret got his first title run because of the steroid trial. That doesn't explain the next 4 though.

    Were fans behind Hart? A lot more than you obviously realize (I'm guessing you were a little young back then to watch a lot).

    Bringing up the fact that Bret beat Shawn in a real life fight makes my argument weak? Sure... if you're just looking for reasons to say I have a weak argument. Otherwise... that makes literally no sense whatsoever.

    Yes guys like Austin, Flair and Bret have gushed about what a great wrestler Shawn was. Many, many more have as well. But you know what?

    So have all the same guys about Bret. They were BOTH great wrestlers. You would have maybe understood that if you actually read my first post here.

    Which one was greater? It's completely subjective and depends on what you like better. As I said, I liked the smarter, more physical style of Bret. You obviously like the showier, more dramatic style of Shawn. Which was the better style?

    Neither. They were both pretty damn good.
     
    #20
  21. Pay Per Ghost

    Pay Per Ghost squashed Disco Inferno to become

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,651
    Likes Received:
    985
    Convenient for me?! :lmao:

    What the fuck, so now Heat and Velocity matches count!

    HEY EVERYBODY LETS LET CENA WIN AGAINST BRYAN COZ HE WON THAT ONE TIME THEY WENT ON VELOCITY!

    Fucks sake man, fucks sake.

    Oh its fake now? Awww whats the matter, kayfabe hit you hard.







    Ye ya dingaling, this 8 is brilliant, Brock is doing great, Shawn made it far and its fresh. Been following this shiznit for a while so you can wail in a bucket somewhere about the final 8. Its pretty for me.



    No its because assholes like you come here spewing how 'back in that day shit smelled like daisies and Attitude Era is all poop and boobies'. It is, it was great.

    Losing millions of dollars?! Hahaha WWE is a publicly traded company and is the main reason why wrestling even exists today. They have changed with the times and thrived. I I need to explain that to you, I am surprised you know how to use a computer.



    He believed in Shawn, he listened to him because Shawn was great in the ring and had some value whereas Bret's time on top was done. No matter how much someone politics why would a boss put him ontop unless he thinks that man can make money?

    He dumped Shawn for Austin later because Austin would make him more money, just like when he thought Shawn would make him more money than Bret. He was right both times

    Bret's last reign was to hand it over to HBK, watch the DVD bro


    So Bret beat him in a scuffle in Hartford, so he should win this match...


    [​IMG]


    Are those the rules in your
    tournament?


    You said Bret is better I said he isn't. Understanding the concept of subjective would aid you in life.


    And you finally redeem yourself.


    Yes it is, but you are bringing up shit stuff like dark matches and real life scuffles to weaken your case. You want Bret to win? Stop posting here, you are not helping him.
     
    #21
  22. MrMojoRisin

    MrMojoRisin Championship Contender

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2011
    Messages:
    965
    Likes Received:
    297
    How about Survivor Series '92 for one? Considered one of the forgotten classics of all time. Champion versus Champion. I really suggest you look it up.

    I don't think they ever fought on Heat or Velocity though. Sorry, I guess that's just the asshole in me responding to the asshole in you.


    You mean this WZ tournament is happening for real? Klunderbunker got himself a time machine, brought all 64 guys from their prime to present day, and I could have been watching this damn thing on PPV the entire time?

    Because if you're crying now about me calling a fantasy tournament fake (fantasy isn't real... neither is fake)... then you must be saying this thing is real?

    Or words confuse you?







    This 8 is boring... just like every year we pretty much get a similar combo of these same guys at the end.

    There were A LOT more interesting matchups... if you didn't start watching wrestling in 1998.




    Such hostility? All over a bunch of guys saying what old wrestler they like better. That's actually pretty sad.

    You should look at my sig though... since you clearly don't read enough of what I write here to have a clue what my tastes are. Attitude Era is all poop and boobies? I saw more Attitude Era shows live than any other time in my life. I never missed a PPV, a RAW or for a while even a Nitro during the Attitude Era. I loved it. Wrestling was fun back then.

    I just simply have roots that go back further than that, and a very healthy respect for everything that came prior to that. Sorry that seems to offend you so much.

    Losing millions of dollars?! Hahaha WWE is a publicly traded company and is the main reason why wrestling even exists today. They have changed with the times and thrived. I I need to explain that to you, I am surprised you know how to use a computer.




    Not completely true. He was torn between the two, and as their personal problems got to the point and beyond of being able to keep them both, he had to make a choice. At the time, he was still losing to WCW. It's complete conjecture on me, you or anyone to say what exactly he was thinking, but my conjecture is that he was more afraid of Shawn in the NWO than Bret in WCW.

    Did Shawn make him more money?

    PPV's he headlined didn't exactly set the world on fire, and actually performed worse than PPV's Bret headlined during that time.


    Are you seriously using the screwjob as a valid example of who would win this match? Is Earl Hebner the referee? Did Vince McMahon threaten Earl's job, and get Dave to have a car running at the top of the ramp for him?

    You say I'm reaching? That's a real reach right there.



    No, but it's a hell of a lot more valid than saying HBK would win because of the screwjob.




    So you have unequivocal proof that Shawn was better than Bret? This should be good. Let's hear it.



    And finally you let your smark rage go for a second and pay attention.

    I bring up a won loss record of 80-12-17 against Shawn Michaels for Bret Hart http://wrestlingdata.com/index.php?befehl=bios&wrestler=25&bild=1&details=10

    I bring an apparently greater understanding of how wrestling worked back then, since you seem to have little to no grasp of the differences in the business back in the 90's. (again, me being that asshole you hate)

    And I bring my personal preference... EXACTLY like you are.

    You seem to have a real hate for Bret Hart. That's fine. I'm not the biggest Shawn Michaels guy myself. The only difference between us (besides me not having your smark rage)? Is that I can at least respect that Shawn was great at what he did. You don't seem capable of showing that same respect for Hart.

    Kid, I hate to break it to you, because you seem real enthusiastic... but you don't know everything. It's alright to admit that. I don't either. But I do have some knowledge here that you simply don't. If you like this business as much as you seem to, it doesn't hurt you one bit to actually pay attention to that.
     
    #22
  23. The Brain

    The Brain King Of The Ring

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2009
    Messages:
    2,579
    Likes Received:
    1,666
    I figured as time went by HBK would start to distance himself from Bret. As the years go by Bret becomes more forgotten while WWE continues to sing the praises of HBK. Not that Michaels doesn't deserve it but 62% to 38% is kind of disappointing.

    Of course a lot of people point to HBK's win at WM12. That's reasonable but those that pointed out how Michaels was beat as time expired have a very valid point. There was no mention of sudden death going into that match. Had sudden death started immediately Bret would have won at about 60:20. What's more interesting to me is WM13. HBK decided to forfeit the world title and skip out on WrestleMania because he knew he would lose to Bret Hart. Come to think of it Hulk Hogan skipped out on SummerSlam 93 and left the WWF entirely to avoid Bret Hart. That's two pretty big names that didn't want to get in the ring with Bret and take a loss. May as well count those as wins in Bret's career.
     
    #23
  24. ServantofTwilight

    ServantofTwilight Pre-Show Stalwart

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Messages:
    216
    Likes Received:
    53
    I don't really care one way or another who wins this one but I found the conversation interesting enough to want to put my 2 cents in.

    For starters those saying that all the matches Hart and Micheals had in house show should not count are way off. You have to remember back in 1992 there where only 4 PPVs and no Raw. Often wrestlers who were feuding would build heat through interviews on TV to get people into the arenas to watch the matches. Hart and Micheals feuded over the IC title between WM 8 and SummerSlam 92 without ever having the chance to meet on PPV. The only reason to discount these matches is because it hurts ones argument.

    Now, as for the 2(?) PPV matches these two had. First, as MrMojoRisen has pointed out they actually met three times. They met for the first time at Survivor Series 92. Hart defended his World title against IC champ Micheals. The match closed the PPV and saw Hart defeat Micheals by submission in the middle of the ring to the sharpshooter. Clean. I can't imagine why this match isn't taken into consideration except, of course, because it hurts an argument for Micheals.

    After this come there Ironman match at WM 12. We all know Micheals won but lets not pretend it was all on the up and up. The rules stated, as told in the prematch instructions by Hebner, that it was for 60 minutes and the wrestler with the most decisions would by the winner. They wrestled to a draw, with Hart in control at the end. In fact, Micheals was trap center ring in the sharpshooter. It was only after Hart released the hold, started to leave, was called back by Monsoon who made the on the fly overtime decision, that Hart lost.

    You know, lots of sports have overtime rules, but they are known and agreed to in advance. If a football game is tied the teams don't then work something out. Micheals pinned Hart clean, but if you don't admit the ending was a little squirrelly then you are not being honest with yourself.

    So finally we come to Survivor Series 97. The Montreal Screwjob. Screwjob. There is no way anyone can make a credible argument that this match should count in favor for Micheals because it was, you know, a Screwjob. Hart was not pinned, he did not submit, was not DQ'd or counted out. To argue this match should count for anything, kayfabe or otherwise is ridiculous.

    So if we look at it honestly, in kayfabe, since that seems to be the prevailing thought this year, we have Hart dominating a feud over the IC title, causing Micheals to tap at a PPV, and losing in a controversial manner at WrestleMania. By that logic Hart should win.

    Now, if we go by personal choice then obviously anything goes. But just say that and we could all move on.

    I was going to mention is also. Micheals ran away rather then defend against Hart. Gotta count for something.

    Off topic it has been mentioned and then argued that the final 8 are disappointing. Obviously that is opinion but I would like to weigh in as to why I am less then thrilled.

    First, we have four previous winners, including one wrestler who has won this three times. Clearly, once we get near the end it begins to get somewhat repetitive.

    Second...here is a quote I made two years ago about the tournament.

    What I was discussing here was that all the winner at that point were stars of the attitude era. I felt that we would continue to see this trend and that the wrestlers would start getting younger. I mentioned Cena here and CM Punk in another post as possible winners in the near future. Punk left but we now have three current wrestlers and five left from the attitude era. Why have the older guys at all.

    Third and final I think it is the current guys going over a lot of legends that bothers me the most. Cena I could kinda see over Thesz but Bryan and Lesner should not be here. Lesner is this far off of one year more or less and Bryan off of one match( WM 30 ). How can they possibly be the best ever when so much of their careers is yet unknown and ahead of them? At a previous tournament Slyfox actually suggested not including current stars. That might be the fairest way to do this.

    Anyway, back to point, Hart should win this. The only reason to vote Micheals is personal preference, and that is the last reason anyone should use to vote.
     
    #24
  25. Pay Per Ghost

    Pay Per Ghost squashed Disco Inferno to become

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,651
    Likes Received:
    985
    Oh looky! Match suggestions. Seen it, loved it, NEXT!



    Good lord isn't it like a little bitch to start throwing the word 'fake' once things aren't going your way pal.

    Your mindless babble befuddles me. Your belief in your babble makes me lose hope in common sense.





    Again subjective isn't it? I find it fresh, I have been here awhile and seen a few top 8s and this is a nice change.

    I started circa 93, thanks for asking.




    Typical smark losing an argument on the internet, why did you even bother to debate if these are just 'what old wrestler they like better'? Coz your dumb thats why.


    Yes it was, it was damn fun, but it was tough to make it in the era too. The olden wrestlers had the advantage of less media exposure and the business not being exposed as it got. From the AE kayfabe was gone, and still guys like Austin, Rock had us hooked.

    As do I, I just detest people like you who come in here touting how old times were the besties. I have watched wrestling from 70s, documentaries because I love the heritage and how it used to be.

    Sorry if THAT offends you



    They still wanted to work, but Shawn offended Bret by saying 'Just so you know I wouldnt do the same for you' (in lieu to Hart saying he was ok passing the torch to HBK)

    Then he should have kept the belt on Bret, as it is VKM couldnt pay the money for that 10 yr contract, he could have negotiated and let him stay champ, but times were changing and DX was hot. They needed to change the guard because Bret didnt work in that era.
    Again yes all conjecture till he says so himself.




    WCW nWo caught fire like a house full of gasoline, its sad because there were some great matches Shawn had, and good stories told. Yes I know about the politics but some of his feuds deserved their accolades. He ditched Bret and the Shawn coz Vince is a businessman.


    My be all end all is the Iron Man Match and Shawn came out victorious. This was when both men were at the top of their game.




    Never said that, try to keep up.





    Havent, I have just called you out on your bullshit argument of real life scuffles and dark matches as a factor here. They are not, not when they wrestled each other in the pinnacle of their careers.

    I
    :lmao:

    Sure ye real life shoots factoring into a kayfabe tournament are some of the things you have brought to the table. Your personal preference is fine, but you are using asinine arguments.


    No I just think he is up his own ass a lot. He was a great wrestler, master of understanding what goes next, but a poor attitude at times and really didnt appeal to me much.

    And what knowledge would that be; quoting obscure dark matches to show off your big smark dick to the IWC, give it up son, you are trying too hard, and HBK has won and rightfully so.
     
    #25

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"