This has been a fun tournament, and I've enjoyed it immensely. I'm going to make this my last post of it. Should I automatically defer then, seeing how I'm "only" 30? Except the voting says otherwise, which you're ignoring. 82-35 says Cena dominated Flair, not the either way around. It was a virtual landslide. He still lost multiple gimmick matches during that time, didn't have the accomplishments or achievements to match, and didn't demonstrate the same wrestling ability or repertoire that he did later on. And that's the Undertaker you want to use that almost defeated Hogan? Was it the 'B' World Title when it was main-eventing multiple PPV's, including WrestleMania 24? I was using the percentage by which they defeated their opponents. That is much more indicative of damage done. For example, Hogan only got 53% of the vote, as opposed to 47% for Undertaker. That's a 6% difference, indicating a much closer match then the 70% for Cena as opposed to 30% for Flair, which indicates a 40% difference between the two. That's a much larger gap, and much more indicative of damage done. I'm not sure how this is relevant. Wrestling history doesn't mean much when the face squashes the heel, as Cena did to both Flair and Andre. Cena gets 70% of the vote over Flair, and 75% over Andre. It doesn't matter what the 'dastardly heel' did, Cena obviously was virtually unaffected by it. Hogan gets 53% of the vote, and 62%. Damage carries over so it's 17% more damage for Hogan in the first, and 13% more for Hogan in the second. Add, divide, it's semantics. It's a considerable amount more damage to Hogan either way. How can you argue exhaustion here? Using your analogy, Hogan went an extra 34 minutes in one night. And having essentially squashed both Flair and Andre, it's preposterous to argue that he's more injured then a Hogan who went to war with Undertaker, and had a hard fought match with Bruno as well. It's simple, and it's also a very silly one. What about a Brock Lesnar, who I believe has won the tournament before? He had a 4 year wrestling career in his prime, essentially, so would you only argue for the best 4 years of Hogan's career if he opposed Lesnar? The comparison is their prime, not the time spent in it. There's nothing unfair about it. Again, it's their prime, not their time. My question was to why John Cena, who's superior to the Ultimate Warrior, wouldn't beat Hogan, when Warrior did? Not really, as I showed. Even so, 14% would be significant. So he went longer and unquestionably took more damage, how does this favor him, pray tell? It never was, and I didn't say it was. I simply pointed out how the biggest matches of Hogan in his prime that went long he lost, where the shorter matches were to his favor. It's not arguing that Hogan has poor cardio, it's that he lost big matches that were longer form. This most certainly is a big match, Hogan comes in damaged and exhausted, and Cena virtually unscathed. It's advantage Cena. Uh....Hogan was billed from Venice Beach, not New Jersey. This is relevant to the Hulk Hogan argument. You just have the wrong time frame. Simply put, the comparison to Elway is relevant to Hogan's full-time tenure in the WWE, 2002-03. Those are comparable to Elway's final two years. Hogan was a shell of himself in the ring, yet he won the Undisputed Championship, and the Tag Championships. If I was trying to argue that Hogan as being in his prime, the analogy would fit perfectly. But that's not the Hogan I'm arguing. I'm arguing the one who actually was still in his prime. It makes the equation as to how Elway's last two years as a full-time player were comparable to Hogan's last run in WWE. Both winners of the biggest title in their industry when they were past their primes and shells of their former self. I would love to sit here and say that John Cena is the greatest ever, and that's why he should win. In good conscience, I cannot. However, this is not an "all things equal" match. Hogan comes in with significantly more damage then Cena, and Cena's matches combined to be far shorter then Hogan's. In a standard, one on one match, I believe a prime Hogan would defeat a prime John Cena. However, this isn't that match. The greatest of all-time comes in exhausted and beat up against a relatively fresh John Cena, who's one of the all-time greats already. Cena has shown he can counter virtually any leg move into the STF. Who uses a leg both to set-up and deliver their finisher? Hogan may come close, and even hit the boot once. But that wouldn't put Cena down, and a second attempt would be countered into the STF, and just like Piper made Hogan pass out in the sleeper, Hogan would pass or tap out to the STF after a great fight. I don't fault Hogan supporters or those who support him. I just believe that with all the variables involved, Cena would win this match.