Int'l Region, Fargo Subregion, First Round: (3) HBK vs. (30) George Hackenschmidt

[klunderbunker]

This is a first round match in the International Region, Fargo Subregion. It is a standard one on one match held under International Rules. It will be held at Fargodome in Fargo, North Dakota.

#3. Shawn Michaels

Vs.

#30. George Hackenschmidt

​

Polls will be open for three 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.

 

[Bernkastel]

I've thought about this match and how to approach it. Simply put Hackenschmidt was a monster. The public revered him the same way that we do Brock Lesnar today. As someone that could simply not be stopped. He had power and technique. On top of being the most popular and most recognized sports star in the world, who sold out venues and arenas everywhere he went. He was making the 2015 equivalent of $50,000 a week at his peak.

Hack was dedicated to fitness, and was actually a philosopher who had a best selling book. Even though his physique was huge he was extremely agile and had ridiculous speed and endurance. He was regarded as the strongest pound for pound man in the world. So he was similar to Antonio Cesaro, where he did not look nearly as strong as he was. Hack once slammed a man so hard he broke his arm. And he didn't do it to be an asshole; he just didn't know his own strength.

Hack became the first undisputed champion of the world after defeating Tom Jenkins. Jenkins was considered the US's top star after defeating Frank Gotch several times. Jenkins taught hand to hand at West Point for 30 years after his retirement, so he knew what the fuck he was doing in the ring. After Hack won he was considered unbeatable. Like when Lesnar blew Cena out of the water at Summerslam.

Hack was world champion for 3 years and had never lost a single match in his entire career. Frank Gotch had surpasses Tom Jenkins as the US's top star, and nobody thought Gotch stood any chance at all. But before I get into that let me point something about Michaels out...

He doesn't do well against highly skilled technical wrestlers. Losing to Bret Hart, Kurt Angle, and Chris Benoit. Hack was as technical precise as they came.

... Frank Gotch defeated Hack by simply outsmarting him and forcing the big man to play his "game." Forcing him to the match numerous times, outmaneuvering him so that he couldn't use his power. Eventually Hack got tired and was submitted.

The question is could Michael's have outsmarted Hack? With pure skill alone absolutely not. Gotch was probably the only man that could ever do that. But what about cheating?

When Hack lost the first time nobody believed it as considered it a fluke. When Hack lost the second time fans STILL didn't believe it. Gotch was dead by the 1910's while Hack lived until the late 60's. So writers began to spin all sorts of shit about how Gotch cheated to win. That he used illegal holds and tactics and even went as far as oiling himself up so that Hack couldn't hold him. None of that was historically true. Gotch simply outwrestled him. But fans for years afterwards believed that hack could only be beaten if someone cheated. And soon that wasn't enough.

After the second match where Gotch won in record time, which shocked even the promoters when he took both falls, fans were pissed. After Gotch's death stories emerged about how Gotch had paid hooker Ad Santel to injure Hack before the second match. So being able to defeat Hack by cheating was no longer enough. The Ad Santel story has been verified as truth by Lou Thesz, but was it? There's no documentation of Santel ever training with Hack, and Hack knee had been ex-rayed and he was medically cleared to wrestle that day.

So in the eyes of fans for decades to come Hack could not have been defeated fair and square or by cheating. Scumbag Gotch had to pay someone to hurt Hack before the match. And that's the force Shawn Michaels now faces. A man that truly defined what it means to be a juggernaut in pro wrestling. For a modern take if prime Michaels were to face Lesnar at Mania, using any dirty tactic, in 2 weeks would he win? Surely not right? What about Hogan during the peak of Hulkamania? Probably not right? What about Goldberg when he was destroying everybody? Probably not right? What about Lou Thesz who remained undefeated for as long as he wanted to be? Probably not right? Even against Bret Hart, Michaels had a losing record. And Hart had to be screwed over by the promoters to get the title off him.

So how does he defeat Hack, when the only wrestler to ever do so was the man often considered by most historians to be the greatest wrestler of all time? And even then, according to lore, Gotch literally had to go as far as paying to have Hack injured to ensure a win.

From an objective standpoint Michaels was not a bigger star than Hack; no where close. He was not more important to the industry, and was no where near as dominant. He;s resilient as they come, but so were allot of men Hack defeated. Like Tom Jenkins. So my gut tells me Michaels is hitting the showers early because there's way for him to win this match.

Vote Hackenschmidt.

 

[MrMojoRisin]

For modern day times, let's liken this to Michaels versus Lesnar.

When Lesnar fought Triple H at Wrestlemania, Michaels was in the Game's corner to 'watch his back' in case Brock tried anything during the match.

HBK was such a tough, renowned shooter that his mere presence kept the former UFC Heavyweight Champion in line.


I kid, I kid.

Hackenschmidt had everything over Michaels... except for the showmanship, and let's face it. If anyone displayed Michaels level of showmanship in Hack's era, they would have been lynched.

Hack would win this one by forfeit. Michaels hurts his knee a week before the match.

 

[Bernkastel]

I see nobody discussing this match, when means people have already made up their minds or are still on the fence. So let me give you a better idea of who Hack really was. The fans, the press, even Frank Gotch his greatest opponent were in awe of his physique. Believe it or not Hackenschmidt in his prime had comparable body measurements to Brock Lesnar in college despite Lesnar being larger, so comparing the two to each other wasn't much of a stretch. On top of that Hack was handsome, so Michaels pretty boy appeal is lost here. Hack = Man. Michaels = Boy.

He reportedly wrestled 3,000 matches [a mix of both legit and pro] and his only loss of real note was to Gotch.

One of his admirers had this to say about Hack...

"If I weren't President, I'd want to be George Hackenschmidt."

That was Teddy Roosevelt. Who was a fan of both Gotch and Hack. Do you think George Bush or Obama or any other president would want to be Shawn Michaels? Probably not.

Hack defined what it meant to be nearly invincible. It took an exceptional skilled opponent to beat him, and someone with a losing record to technical wrestlers in general [Michaels] isn't going to have a chance here. He'd oversell like a motherfucker, have a great match, and then take the pinfall...

...less he'd want to get assaulted by Taker who would probably be waiting in the Gorilla with taped up fists again.

Vote Hackenschmidt.

 

[Tastycles]

Hackenschmidt last wrestled almost 100 years ago and in his hey day Austria-Hungary was a global power. In short, he's from a bygone era and he didn't really compete in the same sport that Shawn Michaels did. Should we revere these old timers? Absolutely, but in the context of a professional wrestling tournament its comparing apples to oranges and given more people are interested in Michaels and Jeff Hardy, I'm voting for them over Gotch and Hackenschmidt - there's no point in comparing them directly.

 

[Bernkastel]

Hackenschmidt last wrestled almost 100 years ago and in his hey day Austria-Hungary was a global power. In short, he's from a bygone era and he didn't really compete in the same sport that Shawn Michaels did. Should we revere these old timers? Absolutely, but in the context of a professional wrestling tournament its comparing apples to oranges and given more people are interested in Michaels and Jeff Hardy, I'm voting for them over Gotch and Hackenschmidt - there's no point in comparing them directly.

Except Hackenschmidt is labelled as a pro wrestler because quite a few of his matches were works. Some were legit, but his big matches [against Jenkins and Gotch the second time] were works. So I fail to see how Michaels and Hack cannot be compared.

The argument that you presented in the Londos/Savage match does not make any sense because it's comparing what we know as an audience today compared to what the audience did not know back then. You say Savage can't be compared to Londos because the latter worked in an era where matches were legit. He didn't. If the match was legit it was a double cross. Which were common. That continued well into Thesz's post WW2 television era as well.

Fans of Hack didn't know some of the matches were fixed until decades later. Same with boxing fans of fixed boxing matches at the turn of the century. The difference is that boxing continued on being legit, while pro wrestling continued on being fixed. And the definition of a pro wrestler at is core is participation in worked matches. And that's what Hack did.

The ignorance on the Hack/Gotch era, as well as the pre-WW2 era is mind blowing.

 

[MrMojoRisin]

The ignorance on the Hack/Gotch era, as well as the pre-WW2 era is mind blowing.

Dude, the ignorance on the territories era is mind blowing. Forget about anything before that.

Michaels would do one of his over exaggerated bumps exactly once in this match. Then Hack would politely show him exactly why you don't do that, and HBK wouldn't be able to get out of the building fast enough.

 

[Pay Per Ghost]

HBK and I know what Hackenschmidt has done for the business, I still take HBK. This is a hard matchup to envision with HBK pinging a lot but HBK has beaten his share of indoitablle men by hook or crook. He would do it here too.

 

[Dmbfantomas]

The thing Hackenschmidt was best at: Winning.

The thing HBK was best at: Losing.

Seems pretty cut and dry here. Vote Hackenschmidt or die, bitches.

 

[Bockwinkel's Class]

I see nobody discussing this match, when means people have already made up their minds or are still on the fence. So let me give you a better idea of who Hack really was. The fans, the press, even Frank Gotch his greatest opponent were in awe of his physique. Believe it or not Hackenschmidt in his prime had comparable body measurements to Brock Lesnar in college despite Lesnar being larger, so comparing the two to each other wasn't much of a stretch. On top of that Hack was handsome, so Michaels pretty boy appeal is lost here. Hack = Man. Michaels = Boy.

He reportedly wrestled 3,000 matches [a mix of both legit and pro] and his only loss of real note was to Gotch.

One of his admirers had this to say about Hack...

"If I weren't President, I'd want to be George Hackenschmidt."

That was Teddy Roosevelt. Who was a fan of both Gotch and Hack. Do you think George Bush or Obama or any other president would want to be Shawn Michaels? Probably not.

Hack defined what it meant to be nearly invincible. It took an exceptional skilled opponent to beat him, and someone with a losing record to technical wrestlers in general [Michaels] isn't going to have a chance here. He'd oversell like a motherfucker, have a great match, and then take the pinfall...

...less he'd want to get assaulted by Taker who would probably be waiting in the Gorilla with taped up fists again.

Vote Hackenschmidt.

Don't think 'Taker would have been needed: Hack was more than capable of dealing in-ring with someone trying to double-cross the booked finish.....and it wouldn't be pretty