Championship Region, Fifth Round: (3) Triple H vs. (12) Brock Lesnar

[klunderbunker]

This is a fifth round match in the Championship Region. It is a standard one on one match, held at the Super Dome in New Orleans, Louisiana. One week has passed since the third round, so some injuries or fatigue may be a factor.

NOTE ABOUT THE FINAL ROUNDS: The remaining three rounds are a one night only tournament in the style of King of the Ring. All damage from this round carries over to the next round and is based on the margin of victory. If someone wins a close match, they took a severe beating but survived. If someone wins a blowout, they didn't suffer as much damage.

#2. Triple H

Vs.

#12. Brock Lesnar
​

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.

 

[GI Cake]

Game. Set. Match.

At the top of his game, HHH is the figurehead heel of the WWE. At the top of Brock's game he breaks his neck at the top rope then gets a dick plastered onto his chest. HHH is a staple in Professional Wrestling, Brock Lesnar is a passing fad that gets far more hype than he deserves.

Do what's right for business and vote Triple H. Don't get a dick tattooed onto your chest.

 

[Bythedockofthebay]

What's truly sad about this is I see Lesnar going to the finals. In truth, he shouldn't have made it this far but here we go. Of the four men left in this region, Triple H, the Rock, Ric Flair, and Brock Lesnar. The Rock has lost to Lesnar and Trips, Trips has lost to at least Rock and Brock. Flair has lost to all three, and the only guy Lesnar has lost to here is Triple H.

The problem is historically, Brock Lesnar owns Triple H. Brock has beaten him 2 out of 3 times. He's snapped Triple H's arm multiple times, and the only one on one match they've had with rules, was at Summerslam 12. Triple H hit Lesnar with everything he had and could keep him down. Lesnar ended up making the Game tap.

Winner- Begrudgingly Lesnar.

 

[Dmbfantomas]

Lesnar gets to do the finals rounds of this tournament in the building he broke The Streak in? All of these stars keep aligning for Brock.

He's 2-1 against Trips, was able to conquer in one try what Mr. H's obsessed over and couldn't get done in three (breaking The Streak), and it would frankly be weird for Lesnar to lose to HHH after beating Hogan a round earlier.

Eat. Sleep. Beat the Game. Repeat.

 

[nightmare]

Well this should be obvious. Lesnar. He may have been in a war with Hogan but we dont for sure know he was banged up more than HHH who was in a TLC with Shawn last week. Add in that Lesnar has whooped Hunters ass around & made him tap- it gives Brock the nod with a 2-1 record.


But I feel a bit illogical & have to go with my boy Hunter. Plus I made the campaign thread- so I have to stick to my guns.


The Game is played & Trips plays dirty. Ref is going down & here comes the sledgehammer. HHH hits the pedigree to seal it up as the ref comes to & counts the 3.


King of Kings advances to the next round in this legends tournament. A tournament that will have a very exciting final.

 

[Dragon Chief]

Easily Brock Lesnar here, not only does he have two notable wins over Triple H but Triple H has a habit of putting over young talent the WWE wants to push to the next level. Batista, John Cena, Daniel Bryan, The Shield fall into this category. Triple H also has a habit of putting over older talent who are popular amongst the fans, Chris Benoit, Hulk Hogan, Goldberg all fall into this category. I don't see anyway Brock Lesnar loses this match. Not during the first encounter anyways.

Vote: Brock Lesnar

 

[Rayne]

Lesnar is the same archetype as Warrior, and Warrior beat HHH.

Apparently.

 

[DarksideEric]

Lesnar is the same archetype as Warrior, and Warrior beat HHH.

Apparently.

HHH has a better legacy, draws more money, better on the mic, etc, etc.

Am I doing this right?

 

[Rayne]

HHH has a better legacy, draws more money, better on the mic, etc, etc.

Am I doing this right?

If you were quoting someone who isn't me, then yes. Otherwise, no.

All the people who think you're an idiot aren't making the same arguments, people think you're an idiot for many varied reasons.

 

[Pay Per Ghost]

HHH draws better? I mean has he drawn better, well maybe better than Brock in his prime?

So many questions. Then again someone can use the WM 29 match as an example of how a Vet H beat an MMA monster that is Brock right?

Divided.

 

[DarksideEric]

If you were quoting someone who isn't me, then yes. Otherwise, no.

All the people who think you're an idiot aren't making the same arguments, people think you're an idiot for many varied reasons.

Oh no, people think I'm dumb. No, not that, nooooooooooooooooo

Does it wound you so that Hogan lost?

To be on topic, since you can't seem to be and would rather still act like a child about an online fantasy wrestling tournament...

This match can actually be a complete toss up. Triple H has the legacy, but Lesnar has wins over Triple H, though not in Triple H's prime.

 

[Bythedockofthebay]

HHH draws better? I mean has he drawn better, well maybe better than Brock in his prime?

So many questions. Then again someone can use the WM 29 match as an example of how a Vet H beat an MMA monster that is Brock right?

Divided.

If Triple H was allowed to hit Lesnar in the head with a sledge and Pedigree him on the steel steps I'd think about it. But since he really can't.,

 

[Rayne]

To be on topic, since you can't seem to be and would rather still act like a child about an online fantasy wrestling tournament...

This match can actually be a complete toss up. Triple H has the legacy, but Lesnar has wins over Triple H, though not in Triple H's prime.

I believe the apex of your previous argument was "this poster doesn't understand the specific way Archetypes and Alignments are used in Dungeons & Dragons". which you then claim to have sigged, and apparently changed your mind on the importance of that. Your comments regarding my maturity are received with that as perspective.

Fortunately, the logic you used in the previous round applies directly to this round, except we don't have to ask if HHH can cell. If Archetypes are the defining big deal in professional wrestling, are suitable for A to A comparisons between wrestlers, and you aren't just making the logic up as you go along to fit the decision you reached without it, you should have Lesnar going over here in a stomping.

Warrior is the same Archetype as Lesnar. Warrior beat HHH. Totally valid MMAth then tells us it's entirely reasonable that Lesnar goes over HHH.

 

[DarksideEric]

I believe the apex of your previous argument was "this poster doesn't understand the specific way Archetypes and Alignments are used in Dungeons & Dragons". which you then claim to have sigged, and apparently changed your mind on the importance of that. Your comments regarding my maturity are received with that as perspective.

Once again you failed at any sort of reading comprehension, especially since I never once brought up Dungeons & Dragons, you did.

And I did sig it, but KJ asked me to take it down because it could be considered "advertising" and thus against the rules. What was your reason from removing your link from you post?

Fortunately, the logic you used in the previous round applies directly to this round, except we don't have to ask if HHH can cell. If Archetypes are the defining big deal in professional wrestling, are suitable for A to A comparisons between wrestlers, and you aren't just making the logic up as you go along to fit the decision you reached without it, you should have Lesnar going over here in a stomping.

Nope, I have no decision yet as to who would win, especially since these two have already fought.

Warrior is the same Archetype as Lesnar. Warrior beat HHH. Totally valid MMAth then tells us it's entirely reasonable that Lesnar goes over HHH.

Except your shallow attempt at using the "archetype" logic against me falls short for one fairly good reason:

HHH has beaten Lesnar.

Besides, if you don't understand by now how much I enjoyed messing with you in that discussion, you may want to rethink how well you understand the written word.

This match between Lesnar and Triple H is a toss up for me, perhaps Rayne you'll find time outside of chasing people in the Prison to provide to me a valid argument as to who I should vote for.

(Note: That Prison comment, I'm messing with you.)

 

[Rayne]

For the love of God. Learn to respond to people more than a line break at a time. I am absolutely not going to be combing through your posts, multiquoting line by line, because you have a one sentence attention span. If your aim is to win through attrition, you will. This argument style works great for people who are full of shit for 99% of their argument, but can pull out and quote that 1% to keep things going.

Which is how we ended up talking about archetypes.

If your logic carries over, Lesnar has beaten HHH twice. You're a fan of MMAth as shown through your archetype argument, and any MMAth practicioner understands that whoever wins two out of three between a pair of fighters is always the better fighter. That's MMAth 101.

And we've gotten to the 'I was just playin', yo' part of the argument, which in life always does seem to follow the 'do you even cell, bro?' argument. Hey, *I* was just playin'. Don't take this tournament thing too seriously, bro, you don't understand how much I was messing with you.

As far as why I edited the post, two minutes after I posted it, I realized I had mistaken the words 'archetype' and 'alignment'. Since it was so completely unimportant to the argument, I erased it thinking it was unimportant bullshit and we could actually focus on the discussion at hand, but it was important enough for you to sig and celebrate over, apparently.

 

[DarksideEric]

For the love of God. Learn to respond to people more than a line break at a time. I am absolutely not going to be combing through your posts, multiquoting line by line, because you have a one sentence attention span. If your aim is to win through attrition, you will. This argument style works great for people who are full of shit for 99% of their argument, but can pull out and quote that 1% to keep things going.

Yeah, it's super tough to discuss this way. Takes so much time and effort, totally broadcasts "bullshit" across the board. Y'know what argument also works for people who are 99% full of shit? Complaining about quoting each section of a discussion individually.

Which is how we ended up talking about archetypes.

Actually we ended up talking about archetypes because I stated that since two bruisers/monsters defeated Hogan, another one should have a chance especially since that one not only has beaten Hogan (post Prime) but is also better than 99% of the bruisers/monsters Hogan faced in his prime.

If your logic carries over, Lesnar has beaten HHH twice. You're a fan of MMAth as shown through your archetype argument, and any MMAth practicioner understands that whoever wins two out of three between a pair of fighters is always the better fighter. That's MMAth 101.

Unfortunately for you, I've never dabbled in whatever you're dubbing "MMAth" to be, so it's hard to be a fan of it.

And I see you ignored much of my reasoning in the last discussion, about removing the "Immortal Hero" factor. Triple H has no such factor that needs to be removed.

And we've gotten to the 'I was just playin', yo' part of the argument, which in life always does seem to follow the 'do you even cell, bro?' argument. Hey, *I* was just playin'. Don't take this tournament thing too seriously, bro, you don't understand how much I was messing with you.

I'm sorry you couldn't see a switch in gear during a discussion? After a while with so many people arguing against me, was I supposed to stay serious the entire time? Although apparently the discussion tickled you enough to harp for a while in the Bar Room and now again in here.

Once again:

Give me a logical reason as to who I should vote for instead of acting like one of the wee kids that sing to Cena. I'm sorry Hogan lost for you, I am, truly. I'm also sorry you keep harping on a discussion about a fantasy wrestling tournament because it didn't go the way you thought it should.

 

[Rayne]

No, I couldn't see a switch in gear in your arguments. They all sounded insane. Apparently we're only now allowed to use your logic in other discussions when you tell us you meant it for real.

The reason why people play quote wars is that it *doesn't* immediately broadcast "bullshit" all over the boards. If it did, people wouldn't play it. It doesn't change the fact that the debate tactic is still bullshit, which eventually results in two people arguing one sentence at a time with each other about topics which are completely out of context to the original discussion. Something something alignments/archetypes. If you read the whole post first, then go back and respond to it, you'll find you no longer have to play quote wars.

You may now proceed to multi-quote the hell out of this post, because that'll show me.

 

[Spidey Revivey]

[YOUTUBE]txkWLSmeM-Q[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]VBiHuzduzQA[/YOUTUBE]


Observe that neither man have a truly masculine scream about them, but only one does this scream enough to earn a compilation video.

Vote Triple H. Don't let a soprano win this.

 

[DarksideEric]

No, I couldn't see a switch in gear in your arguments. They all sounded insane. Apparently we're only now allowed to use your logic in other discussions when you tell us you meant it for real.

No, you should use my logic... when you're actually correct and know what exactly you're talking about.

The reason why people play quote wars is that it *doesn't* immediately broadcast "bullshit" all over the boards. If it did, people wouldn't play it. It doesn't change the fact that the debate tactic is still bullshit, which eventually results in two people arguing one sentence at a time with each other about topics which are completely out of context to the original discussion. Something something alignments/archetypes. If you read the whole post first, then go back and respond to it, you'll find you no longer have to play quote wars.

Huh, so then you're suggesting that Ech's argument, who voted for Hogan, is 99% bullshit since he started "quote wars" with me. Interesting. And it's good to see that you still don't understand why I brought up archetypes in the first place and how they are relevant. But I'm sure you noticed though, that Ech for example made the point that Hogan was known for defeating the big bad monster heels, and therefore he'd defeat Lesnar. That's... and maybe you can follow this, a nod to the fact that Hogan was known for defeating a particular type of opponent every time. Golly, I wonder what that could reference to... a "particular type," y'know... an opponent that fit a certain "mold."

You may now proceed to multi-quote the hell out of this post, because that'll show me.

You may proceed to bitch in the Bar Room again, I mean, that makes you look like the bigger man amirite?

And I'm still not sure who'd win Lesnar/Triple H, to stay on topic of this thread since you can't seem to manage that.

 

[Rayne]

Free advice.

On the Internet, when you get really excited about being right, you drive home the point to other people that being right isn't a regular experience, and the extent to which that point is driven home is based on how important the subject at hand is and how emphatic the celebration is. (See: Posters who sig other posters saying that they're right.)

On the Internet, when you're arguing with someone and you tell them how childish they are, you drive home the point about how childish you're acting.

On the Internet, when you accuse someone you're arguing with of trying to be a big man, you drive home the point about how you're trying to be a big man yourself.

Do with that, what you will.

The fact that you are able to drag people into quote wars does not mean that they are full of shit; it means you are capable of taking discussions and turning them into bullshit. Getting sucked into quote wars with you isn't a reflection of someone's bullshit levels, but incessantly starting them in order to avoid addressing or presenting coherent arguments usually is. Once one person gets started with quote wars, it's pretty damn near impossible to start having collective coherent arguments from that point.

That mold, you're referring to by the way, would be "good" and "evil". Which would sound an awful lot like an alignment according to you, which is incredibly cute that NOW you're trying to connect that to your archetype argument. Different thread, different logic.

 

[Tastycles]

Hmm... I can't really say any more than this. Lesnar is shit. He always was shit. And he always will be shit. When he was the main draw the WWE lost half its audience. That has literally never happened before, and certainly not when there was no competition. Lesnar did to WWE what WCW never could. Then he walked out before his schtick was shown up to be completely lacking in longevity. Honestly, ask yourself where would Lesnar have gone after that Goldberg match if he wasn't leaving?

The WWE knew that they couldn't replace like for like with Austin and Rock, so they tried something new. A heel face of the company. It didn't work, at all, and after trying all sorts of shit in 2004 they reverted to Warrior and Hogan in Batista and Cena (that's an actual example of a comparison between wrestlers of different eras based on a number of criteria beyond 'he's a big guy who doesn't do flips', for the record).

Of the 8 men left in the tournament, Triple H is probably the 7th most significant in the history of wrestling. Fortunately for him he's against a flash in the pan that failed in just about every measurable aspect of professional wrestling.

 

[DarksideEric]

Free advice.

On the Internet, when you get really excited about being right, you drive home the point to other people that being right isn't a regular experience, and the extent to which that point is driven home is based on how important the subject at hand is and how emphatic the celebration is. (See: Posters who sig other posters saying that they're right.)

On the Internet, when you're arguing with someone and you tell them how childish they are, you drive home the point about how childish you're acting.

On the Internet, when you accuse someone you're arguing with of trying to be a big man, you drive home the point about how you're trying to be a big man yourself.

Do with that, what you will.

The fact that you are able to drag people into quote wars does not mean that they are full of shit; it means you are capable of taking discussions and turning them into bullshit. Getting sucked into quote wars with you isn't a reflection of someone's bullshit levels, but incessantly starting them in order to avoid addressing or presenting coherent arguments usually is. Once one person gets started with quote wars, it's pretty damn near impossible to start having collective coherent arguments from that point.

Free advice.

Give it up. I care 0% about your internet etiquette Disney story because it's 0% meaningless, especially from someone who is taking a discussion about a fantasy wrestling tournament this seriously. Oh no, you thought I was dumb. Oh no, you thought my logic was dumb. Let me go talk about him in the Bar Room for a little bit and then continue to harp on him in this thread when it has no relevance to the thread.

You're little "On the Internet" blurbs would look nice on those like "keep up the good work" posters, perhaps a nice moral ending to some episode of 90's ReBoot or a Sword Art Online. Further than that, I think the amount of people that care may be less than 1, other than yourself.

Another nod to your inability to read: Ech started the "quote war" with me. Do you understand what that means? It means, he started breaking down what I said in smaller quoted sections of what I said first. Therefore, under your logic, that shows that 99% of his argument in favor of Hogan was bullshit.

So, with that said, perhaps you should go back to pestering people in the Prison section instead of spending time with normal posters up here, especially since you can't even seem to stay on topic about the thread at hand.

Triple H vs. Brock Lesnar. I've no idea who would win this match, so if it's at all possible for you, please give me a logical discussion to pick one.

As for your edit...

Fucking wow.

 

[Rayne]

Another nod to your inability to read: Ech started the "quote war" with me. Do you understand what that means? It means, he started breaking down what I said in smaller quoted sections of what I said first. Therefore, under your logic, that shows that 99% of his argument in favor of Hogan was bullshit.

Oh, that's not an inability to read, that's me doubting you know what you're talking about. Your argument was read and discarded. You're definitely the type of obnoxious little twat who will do a thing, then accuse someone else of doing the same thing immediately after.

More free advice:

On the Internet, making sure you tell someone how little you care (also, how seriously they are taking it) demonstrates to people the level to which you do care. These blurbs might come in handy for you after all.

Here's another archetype example, surely this applies as much as Batman losing a fight once- you've already stated Brock is Warrior, and HHH is billed as an Assassin. In a straight one-on-one match without stipulation, anyone who's ever played any RPG tells you that the Assassin loses when he can't use tricks.

Thank you for getting the point about quote wars.

 

[DarksideEric]

Oh, that's not an inability to read, that's me doubting you know what you're talking about. Your argument was read and discarded.

More free advice:

On the Internet, making sure you tell someone how little you care (also, how seriously they are taking it) demonstrates to people the level to which you do care. These blurbs might come in handy for you after all.

More free advice: Your Disney story is still being read and discarded, no matter how much you think I actually do or do not care. That's not me actually caring, that's me doubting you know what you're talking about.

Here's another archetype example, surely this applies as much as Batman losing a fight once- you've already stated Brock is Warrior, and HHH is billed as an Assassin. In a straight one-on-one match without stipulation, anyone who's ever played any RPG tells you that the Assassin loses when he can't use tricks.

Unfortunately for your argument Triple H is not just an Assassin in terms of archetype. Never mind the fact that there are no "Assassin" archetypes in wrestling. You still continue to talk about a subject, and the context, when you have zero understanding of the meaning that was behind it or in the subject in general.

Thank you for getting the point about quote wars.

Thank you for giving me a reason to "quote war" again.

It's fairly fitting your sig has a shovel in it, since you keep digging away at this argument like it has gold hidden in it or something.

 

[Rayne]

It's fairly fitting your sig has a shovel in it, since you keep digging away at this argument like it has gold hidden in it or something.

This is coming from the person who last night made several posts, replete with rolling smiley faces, signatures and LOL's, about how he was right about someone using the term "Archetype" to refer to D&D's "Character Alignment" system.

Logic to you is like a condom. You make a mess out of it, throw it away when you're done, and never use the same one twice.

I think Lesnar would go over in this match, but for someone who's at pains to tell me how they're just playin', you don't seem to see how I'm using your bullshit arguments from the last thread to both support my own position and mock you at the same time.