Intl. Region, Leeds Subregion, First Round: (4) Chris Benoit vs. (29) Mark Henry

[Nate DaMac]

You tell me, you're the one bringing up the consistency argument which doesn't mean anything in a battle between these guys at their primes. And the fact of the matter is, a booker WOULD put Prime Henry over Prime Benoit. Why? Because Benoit is exactly the kind of guy that would be added to the Hall of Pain. He was nothing more than an upper-midcarder in his own right. I'll think I'll choose the guy that was the guy on Smackdown for 6 months than a guy that was overshadowed by HHH, HBK, Evolution and Eugene during his title reign.

Do you not see how ridiculous you sound? Benoit may have been overshadowed by Hunter and Shawn, but at least he was a champion on the brand that mattered. Mark Henry was Champion on Smackdown in 2011, meaning Benoit was Champion on a show with twice the audience. If Benoit was overshadowed, Henry DEFINITELY was overshadowed. And Orton was still the man on Smackdown, Henry never came close to his popularity.

 

[Dan Severn's Moustache]

Do you not see how ridiculous you sound? Benoit may have been overshadowed by Hunter and Shawn, but at least he was a champion on the brand that mattered. Mark Henry was Champion on Smackdown in 2011, meaning Benoit was Champion on a show with twice the audience. If Benoit was overshadowed, Henry DEFINITELY was overshadowed. And Orton was still the man on Smackdown, Henry never came close to his popularity.

Neither guy shifted the ratings in one way or the other though as their time as champion, it was the stuff that happened in between that changed the ratings. What matters is that Henry had established himself as #1, above guys like Sheamus, Orton and Big Show, while Benoit had considerable difficulty outshining a ******ed character that hadn't been around for 6 months at that point.

Orton went onto feud with Cody Rhodes afterwards, the IC Champ at the time. In fact, Henry's two victories dethroned him from the main-event scene until 2013.

 

[Danger Burger]

Consistency matters. I'm not talking five-star match consistancy, I'm talking three-title-reigns-in-18-years vs titles-in-every-company-you-work-for kind of consistency. There is a reason companies continuously put titles on Benoit and not on Henry. Its not luck of the draw when it happens that often. The company gets behind you if the people get behind you, if the people get behind you, you are higher on the ladder. Even as the WORLDS STRONGEST MAN it took forever for Mark Henry to get anywhere in the business.

Name one thing Henry has done that Benoit hasn't done better? Has Henry done sixty minutes in a Royal Rumble? Has he main evented 'Mania? if you think the focus of that match was not on Benoit you are paying too much attention to this:

Spoiler

and not paying enough attention to how that night actually ended:

Spoiler

Both guys have beaten the other, so there's little to suggest either couldn't do the same, but in the business Benoit has totally overshadowed Mark Henry. Especially in the International region, where this is set, if that tickles anyone's fancy.

I see plenty of arguments saying Benoit should lose, he killed his family, ratings dipped, HHH was more important than him (no duh), but very few reasons why Henry should win. Henry didn't fix any ratings, didn't win many titles, didn't last long on top, and was certainly never more important that HHH, if that is somehow a relevant factor. Vote Benoit, because he did more than Henry, did it faster, did it better, and did it everywhere he went.

 

[Con T.]

You know what Chris Benoit is at his best doing?

Having really great matches, that he winds up often losing, and making the other guy look like gold.

You know what Mark Henry is at his best doing?

Kicking ass, and looking like an absolute monster.

If you don't pick Mark Henry, you really don't understand either character, or booking in general. It's that simple.

Mark Henry. That's what I do!

Did you miss this post, when I made it?

Because it's still true, and it's still very much the case. No one seems to have acknowledged how much this was Benoit's lot in life. And for as much as everyone is talking about Henry's six months... Mark Henry knew how to play a character, far better than anything Benoit could have.

In the world of professional wrestling, both guys go out, and do the job their best at.

Mark's is destroying fools. Benoit's is making the opponent look great, and losing.

 

[Dan Severn's Moustache]

Consistency matters. I'm not talking five-star match consistancy, I'm talking three-title-reigns-in-18-years vs titles-in-every-company-you-work-for kind of consistency. There is a reason companies continuously put titles on Benoit and not on Henry. Its not luck of the draw when it happens that often. The company gets behind you if the people get behind you, if the people get behind you, you are higher on the ladder. Even as the WORLDS STRONGEST MAN it took forever for Mark Henry to get anywhere in the business.

The fact of the matter is though, Benoit was consistent. And that's another reason why he'll lose. He was consistent, but because of that, he never became the top guy of his show. Mark Henry did it with plenty of competition, Benoit was used as a tool to put a comedy character over. If this was a tournament on who was more consistent, then Benoit would win. But it isn't. It's not about choosing who had the biggest impact in the business because Hogan, Sammartino, Thesz and Austin would be the final four every time. That's why we have stipulation rounds. It's to determine who would win in a fight against one another in their primes. Benoit's submission holds were broken in his prime by Kane, who not only isn't the World's Strongest Man, but was in one of his worst years ever. If Kane could do it, why couldn't Henry do it in his peak?

Name one thing Henry has done that Benoit hasn't done better? Has Henry done sixty minutes in a Royal Rumble? Has he main evented 'Mania? if you think the focus of that match was not on Benoit you are paying too much attention to this:

Spoiler

and not paying enough attention to how that night actually ended:

Spoiler

But this isn't the Royal Rumble match. And this is a match where Benoit is psychologically equal with Henry, unlike the triple threat match where he was at an advantage. Main eventing Mania is big, but remember, he was the sleeper candidate that won because of his psychological advantage. The focus on HHH and HBK. Why do you think HBK was added to the match?

Both guys have beaten the other, so there's little to suggest either couldn't do the same, but in the business Benoit has totally overshadowed Mark Henry. Especially in the International region, where this is set, if that tickles anyone's fancy.

When did Benoit ever do anything in Leeds? This is Big Daddy, Haystacks and Davey Boy town, not Benoit town. Don't look into the region, look into the home town. The home town is of neutral ground. If it was in Canada, then Benoit would have a slight advantage, but it isn't. Also, the reason Benoit's reign is more talked about is because Benoit is dead, it happened before Henry's, and it's talked about as being a FAILURE.

I see plenty of arguments saying Benoit should lose, he killed his family, ratings dipped, HHH was more important than him (no duh), but very few reasons why Henry should win. Henry didn't fix any ratings, didn't win many titles, didn't last long on top, and was certainly never more important that HHH, if that is somehow a relevant factor. Vote Benoit, because he did more than Henry, did it faster, did it better, and did it everywhere he went.

Just because he won the WHC title first doesn't make him better at all. And there's plenty of reasons as to why Henry will win, most notably HIS PRIME WAS BETTER THAN BENOIT'S PRIME.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

The fact of the matter is though, Benoit was consistent. And that's another reason why he'll lose. He was consistent, but because of that, he never became the top guy of his show. Mark Henry did it with plenty of competition, Benoit was used as a tool to put a comedy character over. If this was a tournament on who was more consistent, then Benoit would win. But it isn't. It's not about choosing who had the biggest impact in the business because Hogan, Sammartino, Thesz and Austin would be the final four every time. That's why we have stipulation rounds. It's to determine who would win in a fight against one another in their primes. Benoit's submission holds were broken in his prime by Kane, who not only isn't the World's Strongest Man, but was in one of his worst years ever. If Kane could do it, why couldn't Henry do it in his peak?

Benoit couldn't get the hold on Kane successfully at Bad Blood, but guess what? He still beat him. What happened two weeks later on Raw? Kane was tap, tap, tapping out. Why couldn't Kane break it then? All I saw was Kane losing to Benoit twice. Benoit doesn't need to make big guys tap to win, although he's done it.

But this isn't the Royal Rumble match. And this is a match where Benoit is psychologically equal with Henry, unlike the triple threat match where he was at an advantage. Main eventing Mania is big, but remember, he was the sleeper candidate that won because of his psychological advantage. The focus on HHH and HBK. Why do you think HBK was added to the match?

Because HBK was a whiny bitch who was mad that he had two chances to get the job done against HHH and failed?

When did Benoit ever do anything in Leeds? This is Big Daddy, Haystacks and Davey Boy town, not Benoit town. Don't look into the region, look into the home town. The home town is of neutral ground. If it was in Canada, then Benoit would have a slight advantage, but it isn't. Also, the reason Benoit's reign is more talked about is because Benoit is dead, it happened before Henry's, and it's talked about as being a FAILURE.

You do know that Benoit has wrestled in multiple continents? Henry never did shit in Leeds, either. So this boils down to who the better wrestler is and it's Benoit by a country mile. Is anybody talking about Henry's reign now? Nope.

Just because he won the WHC title first doesn't make him better at all. And there's plenty of reasons as to why Henry will win, most notably HIS PRIME WAS BETTER THAN BENOIT'S PRIME.

Three decent months of a shit career trumps consistency and great matches over two decades? Puh-lease.

 

[Dan Severn's Moustache]

Benoit couldn't get the hold on Kane successfully at Bad Blood, but guess what? He still beat him. What happened two weeks later on Raw? Kane was tap, tap, tapping out. Why couldn't Kane break it then? All I saw was Kane losing to Benoit twice. Benoit doesn't need to make big guys tap to win, although he's done it.

That's not changing the fact Benoit struggled to apply his finishing move where it mattered the most and where Kane was the most relevant during his feud. When Kane lost at Badd Blood, he lost relevance as a challenger, so there was no harm in letting a far from prime Kane tap out.

Because HBK was a whiny bitch who was mad that he had two chances to get the job done against HHH and failed?

And HHH would have beaten Benoit too if it wasn't for Eugene's interference.

You do know that Benoit has wrestled in multiple continents? Henry never did shit in Leeds, either. So this boils down to who the better wrestler is and it's Benoit by a country mile. Is anybody talking about Henry's reign now? Nope.

I never implied Henry was at an advantage because of that, I in fact said it was neutral ground. Also, read above about how this isn't about crowning the best wrestler ever, it's putting the best wrestlers ever into a tournament environment and seeing which ones have the advantages in their respective rounds. Austin is better than Vader, but Vader could beat him in a bullrope match. Benoit is more consistent than Henry, but Henry could beat him in a normal one on one match with both at their primes.

Three decent months of a shit career trumps consistency and great matches over two decades? Puh-lease.

Read above.

 

[ProWrestlingFan]

And HHH would have beaten Benoit too if it wasn't for Eugene's interference.

Oh really? Then you need to watch this match.

Chris Benoit defeats Triple H clean

[YOUTUBE]7JttScqLuYc[/YOUTUBE]


And for your information, Benoit has wrestled Triple H 4 times in one on one matches, Benoit won 3 of them and the only time Triple H won, it was because of interference.

Benoit is 3-1 against Triple H in one-on-one matches.

 

[Dan Severn's Moustache]

Oh really? Then you need to watch this match.

Benoit defeats Triple H clean

[YOUTUBE]7JttScqLuYc[/YOUTUBE]

And for your information, Benoit has wrestled Triple H 4 times in one on one matches, Benoit won 3 of them and the only time Triple H won it was because of interference.

Benoit is 3-1 against Triple H in one-on-one matches.

Eddie's Tribute Show. That says it all really. Storyline advancement didn't matter on that day, it was just a means to entertain the fans coping with the grief of Eddie's sudden and tragic death. It would beyond fucking stupid if they gave Triple H, a heel the win over Eddie's best friend on that day.

Also, where's the third?

 

[Dowdsy McDowds]

I know that most of the emphasis on this match up is being placed on whose prime was best but what swayed me with Benoit was how good his non-prime was.

The ladder match with Jericho at the 2001 Royal Rumble is easily in the top 10 ladder matches of all time.

Any match with Angle is joyful to behold.

Austin and HHH losing the tag-team titles to the two Chris' lives long in the memory.

Henry's retirement promo was very good but his actual matches outside of his Hall of Pain stint are incredibly hard to recall and while technically it wasn't his match, an abiding memory is that of him struggling with a cage door.

This and LJL's comments are what made me go for Benoit in the end.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

The main argument I see is that we're comparing primes - mainly when Benoit and Henry won titles since everyone keeps bringing up Benoit's title reign. I think that argument is silly since there have been numerous wrestler who didn't win titles in their prime. I suppose the same people who are arguing for Henry are going to use the same rationale for Kane and say that his prime was in 2010. I guess I can play along.

If we're going off of the argument that Benoit's prime was 2004, he sure did a lot before his prime. He beat Rock, HHH, and Angle before his prime. He beat HHH, HBK, and Kane during his prime. He defeated Henry by submission and Big Show by submission and pinfall before his prime. He did Kane the same way during his prime. I'll stop right there.

If Benoit's prime is 2004, he is pretty accomplished before then and all that is still better than what Mark Henry did for three months.

 

[Dan Severn's Moustache]

The main argument I see is that we're comparing primes - mainly when Benoit and Henry won titles since everyone keeps bringing up Benoit's title reign. I think that argument is silly since there have been numerous wrestler who didn't win titles in their prime. I suppose the same people who are arguing for Henry are going to use the same rationale for Kane and say that his prime was in 2010. I guess I can play along.

If we're going off of the argument that Benoit's prime was 2004, he sure did a lot before his prime. He beat Rock, HHH, and Angle before his prime. He beat HHH, HBK, and Kane during his prime. He defeated Henry by submission and Big Show by submission and pinfall before his prime. He did Kane the same way during his prime. I'll stop right there.

If Benoit's prime is 2004, he is pretty accomplished before then and all that is still better than what Mark Henry did for three months.

Do you think Benoit's prime was 2004, or another period? I'm willing to embrace a new idea of Benoit's prime if you give some good reasoning, but I believe most people accept his time as WHC his prime.

And if that's a gibe at me, Kane's prime was his original 97-98 run.

I'll respond to your arguments when I'm not tired as fuck.

 

[Con T.]

The main argument I see is that we're comparing primes - mainly when Benoit and Henry won titles since everyone keeps bringing up Benoit's title reign. I think that argument is silly since there have been numerous wrestler who didn't win titles in their prime. I suppose the same people who are arguing for Henry are going to use the same rationale for Kane and say that his prime was in 2010. I guess I can play along.

If we're going off of the argument that Benoit's prime was 2004, he sure did a lot before his prime. He beat Rock, HHH, and Angle before his prime. He beat HHH, HBK, and Kane during his prime. He defeated Henry by submission and Big Show by submission and pinfall before his prime. He did Kane the same way during his prime. I'll stop right there.

If Benoit's prime is 2004, he is pretty accomplished before then and all that is still better than what Mark Henry did for three months.

Chris Benoit beat The Rock twice.

Chris Benoit lost to The Rock ten times in one on one matches.

Oh, and he never beat Austin.

Oh, and he still has a losing record against Angle.

Let's not make Chris Benoit anything more than he is; he's a mid card guy who scored victories from time to time. But his main job in the world of professional wrestling was to make his opponents look great, before jobbing.


There's certainly nothing wrong with that. But guys like that come a dime a dozen, and they rarely last that long in the main event. See; Jericho, Chris.

Benoit always has been, and always will be, that guy. So in a match with the ass kicking monster, he makes the ass kicking monster look good.

Or do you still not get how Chris Benoit's one character worked throughout his 21 year career?

 

[The Brain]

I definitely didn't expect this match to get so much attention. A lot of people are trying to diminish the career of Chris Benoit. I understand if you think he's overrated. That's fine. I get it if you consider him a career midcarder who occasionally made it to the main event. That's fine too. I won't argue that, and I shouldn't have to because even if that is 100% accurate it's still a better career than Mark Henry. At the beginning of his career Mark Henry was a joke. For the first ten years the term midcarder that you use to insult Benoit would be giving Henry too much credit. Up until 2006 Mark Henry was well below the mid card and even between 2006 and his peak in 2011 Henry would still disappear for months at a time. But none of that was his prime, right? Ok fine. Henry has had an 18 year career and a six month prime. Why does everyone put so much stock into such a small percentage? And what happened after Henry lost the title? Disappeared for a while again as usual and hasn't come close to being what he was during that short six month span in 2011. If Mark Henry was the man he was during the second half of 2011 for a few years I may have given him my vote. The small sample size just doesn't cut it for me.

I'm glad this thread was completely dominated by discussion of the Benoit murders but it has come up a lot. I don't think that is relevant at all and I think people are using their personal feelings about that in this poll. You have the right to vote for who you want for whatever reason you want but I wish that wasn't a factor.

Based on only their careers Benoit was the better wrestler. Pretend Benoit retired in June 2007 and he and his family were still alive and living a normal life. Who would get your vote then?

 

[ProWrestlingFan]

Chris Benoit beat The Rock twice.

Chris Benoit lost to The Rock ten times in one on one matches.

Oh, and he never beat Austin.

Oh, and he still has a losing record against Angle.

Let's not make Chris Benoit anything more than he is; he's a mid card guy who scored victories from time to time. But his main job in the world of professional wrestling was to make his opponents look great, before jobbing.


There's certainly nothing wrong with that. But guys like that come a dime a dozen, and they rarely last that long in the main event. See; Jericho, Chris.

Benoit always has been, and always will be, that guy. So in a match with the ass kicking monster, he makes the ass kicking monster look good.

Or do you still not get how Chris Benoit's one character worked throughout his 21 year career?

Mark Henry was playing second fiddle to Jeff Jarrett and D'Lo Brown in 1999. Then he was sent to OVW for 2 years because he couldn't wrestle for shit. Then in 2003 he was put in a mid-card tag team with Rodney Mack and occassionally jobbing to guys like Brock Lesnar.

Then he got failed push in 2006 when he was fed to Angle, Undertaker, Lashley etc. Spent the next 4 years as a comedy jobber.

Very "badass ass-kicking monster monster" huh?

Then after 15 year of being in the company he was given a run with the mid-card title and a gimmick called "Hall of Pain". Big Deal.

Benoit always has been, and always will be, that guy. So in a match with the ass kicking monster, he makes the ass kicking monster look good.

Correction : Mark Henry always has been, and always will be, that guy. So in a match with the ass kicking monster, he makes the ass kicking monster look good.

 

[Dan Severn's Moustache]

I'm too tired, but I want to nip this stupidity in the bud ASAP.

Correction : Mark Henry always has been, and always will be, that guy. So in a match with the ass kicking monster, he makes the ass kicking monster look good.

Oh wow, it's too bad that NONE of those guys are Chris Benoit or anyone similar (don't bother posting the 2004 match, we've deemed it irrelevant), and that those guys would kick prime Benoit's ass too. Not to mention Henry wasn't in his prime in either of those encounters.

Also, it's cute you're posting pictures outside of Henry's prime. Maybe show me Henry being jobbed out in his prime, and we'll talk. While Benoit was having his finishing move broken and being helped by a comedy character.

 

[Con T.]

Did you enjoy your trip to Wikipedia, PWF?

All you've shown me is that Mark Henry is much better at being a full rounded character than Chris Benoit ever was. Chris Benoit's funniest moment was burying Orlando Jordan. Woo. TNA did that, too, and TNA isn't funny. At least, not intentionally.

But yeah, Mark Henry could do comedy. He can pull at your heart strings (see; his retirement promo). I guess what I'm getting at is that Mark Henry could emote.

Oh, and Mark Henry pinned Kurt Angle. Beat him by count out, too. And all of the names you mentioned soundly bear Chris Benoit, as well.

Seriously, leave this to the real posters.

 

[ProWrestlingFan]

Make lame excuses all you want.

"Oh we don't count the match you showed where Mark Henry tapped out because that was before his prime"

"Oh we don't count him jobbing to CM Punk, Sheamus, John Cena etc etc in 2012/2013 because that was after his prime"

When a guy's prime is only 2 months out of a 15 year career, the guy is joke.

But of course some of you lamebrains will keep making BS arguements because you were backing the joke called Mark Henry from the beginning.

Benoit's career > Mark Henry's joke of a career and thats the bottom line.

 

[Nate DaMac]

PWF is a moron, but he's right. Both guys were nothing as main eventers. If you're trying to say that Henry was a big deal, you're wrong. They're both career mid carders with a cup of coffee in the main event. Even if we pretend that their main event runs were equal (they're not, Benoit's was objectively better in every regard) it's a wash and that just leaves their mid card runs for comparison. If anyone here wants to try and say that a mid card Mark Henry is better than a mid card Chris Benoit, you need mental help.

 

[FitFinlay4Life]

Mark Henry's career stats:
1 vs. 1 Matches:718 Wins:377 Win%:52.5 Losses:320 Loss%:44.6 Draws:21 Draw%:2.9

Chris Benoit's career stats:
1 vs. 1 Matches:1148 Wins:738 Win%:64.3 Losses:350 Loss%:30.5 Draws:60 Draw%:5.2

Even in 2011 - the alleged 'prime' Henry era, his 1 vs. 1 record from his transfer in April 2011 to SmackDown until his injury in April 2012 was W:39 L:46 D:7 (and many of those wins were against 'greats' like Yoshi Tatsu, Zack Ryder, John Morrison, Great Khali, Zeke, Johnny Curtis, Vladimir Kozlov, Bobby Heller and Chavo Jnr).

From January - December 2004 - Benoit had the following 1vs. 1 record: W81 L:15 D:3.

So much for the 'prime' argument!

 

[nightmare]

Putting stock into a prime argument that consists of a small time span is one thing if the wrestler has had a short career. When someone has a career of 15 yrs + being mediocre at best, then that small time frame considered 'prime' needs to be pretty epic. People are talking about Henry's prime as if he was Goldberg or something. He was a good monster heel for the 'B' show, but epic it was not.


So I am supposed to put more stock in his little run than an entire consistent career by Benoit? No.


The run that everyone considers Henry at his prime was not really all that impressive. His most credible threat was actually Orton who they used to help legitimize the push by dropping the title. Show was used just like he usually is. Act like a giant but remember to make the other guy look good. Ultimately even that wasnt working too terribly well because they kept adding someone else into the picture for most of his feud with Show. (ex: Daniel Bryan & Sheamus) Plus they even re-used the Lesnar superplex spot with Henry\Show basically saying "Hey, this guy is a monster. No, really. Forget all the years of comedy- he's scary now."


The Hall of Pain was a great catchphrase. It really was, because without it this whole push would not have been the same. Problem is who he was running through as they built Henry up. Not exactly the biggest names. Kozlov, Khali, Big Zeke, Johnny Curtis, Morrison, etc. Along the way they fed him Christian & a few others but mostly in random Tag matches to offset things till Show came back to continue the feud. Then we are back to the Daniel Bryan thing & well, we all know the rest.


So what we have are 2 guys who never necessarily set the world on fire with their main event title runs, but one got WM & one did not. One who has been as solid of an upper mid card competitor you can get -vs- one who had potential, but never really did much other than being a good comedic 'hand'. One is an international wrestling star with a dark ending & one is a weightlifting star who transitioned to a mediocre wrestling career.


Since we are somehow throwing out the fact Benoit actually beat Henry, then we are just left with comparing career accomplishments. Benoit still wins regardless.

 

[LSN80]

The only big push Mark Henry ever got was in 2006 and even then he was constantly booked to lose to Kurt Angle,Undertaker,Batista etc.

It was???

Does the 'Hall of Pain' ring a bell to you? That was established in 2011, when Henry was destroying opponents left and right. It got to the point where no one wanted to face him until Sheamus stepped up, and Henry destroyed him at Summerslam. He beat up and put out the Big Show, and did the same to Kane, Pillmanizing them both after clean victories over each. Then there's that match he had with Randy Orton, the face of Smackdown in 2011, at Night of Champions. Henry tossed Orton around like a rag doll, gave him a World's Strongest Slam, and won the World Heavyweight Title.

When Henry and Benoit fought in 2006, Henry not only came out on top, he injured Benoit in the process. Those other wrestlers you mentioned, Batista, Undertaker, and Angle? Henry beat them up too, and put all three out of action for significant amounts of time.

Benoit's title reign was a joke, while Henry was established as a monster heel who could not only defeat, but also, injure anyone in the process. Benoit took weekly beatings from Evolution before dropping the title to Randy Orton in his first try. It took Big Show three tries to finally win the title from Henry, and it was a chairs match at that.

This is a one-on-one, standard match. Benoit is seeded far too high here, and he's gotten a bad draw on top of that. Henry wins this with a WSS, or by countout after he rag-dolls Benoit into the post or through the ring-side barrier.

Either way, Mark Henry in his prime wins this match.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

What happened in 2004, you know, 2 years before 2006? Again, Henry lost to Benoit in less than 3 minutes. What was Henry's excuse then? I must have missed Angle being out for a significant amount of time. I know the reason why. It never happened.

Against Big Show, the ring broke the first time and Henry was a coward and got himself DQ'd the second time. Benoit didn't need to get disqualified to beat Big Show twice.

Undertaker has been put out of action 30 times over the past decade. Is that supposed to impress me?

All Henry's title reign amounted to was beating Orton two times and Daniel Bryan who was losing left and right before cashing in MITB. What has happened since then? Being made Brock Lesnar's bitch and the occasional sidekick to Big E. Langston. Bravo, Mark.

 

[El Rev sXe]

What was at first a hard decision, it eventually became clear that Benoit got this. Why? There is one reason, and it isn't the fact that he made tap out Henry in 3 minutes (or Big Show, or Kane or any other "big monster" the WWE has to offer), but the fact that Chris Benoit not only won the WHC at the biggest PPV wrestling has to offer, but he did it by defeating (making tap out to be exact) two of the BIGGEST names WWE has, Triple H and Shawn Michaels.

Now that's three impressive accolades, to wich Henry only shares one: being WHC: He didn't headline any Wrestlemania and he didn't defeat two of the greatest wrestlers two PPV in a row. Sure he did defeat Orton to win the WHC, but he wasn't/isn't a the same high as "Mr. Wrestlemania" or HHH.

 

[Nate DaMac]

It was???

Does the 'Hall of Pain' ring a bell to you? That was established in 2011, when Henry was destroying opponents left and right. It got to the point where no one wanted to face him until Sheamus stepped up, and Henry destroyed him at Summerslam.

Won by countout. Not impressive.

He beat up and put out the Big Show, and did the same to Kane, Pillmanizing them both after clean victories over each.

... in 2011. Nearly a decade since either guy's prime.

Then there's that match he had with Randy Orton, the face of Smackdown in 2011, at Night of Champions. Henry tossed Orton around like a rag doll, gave him a World's Strongest Slam, and won the World Heavyweight Title.

This is like, page 13 of this thread. Don't you think we've been over this by now?

When Henry and Benoit fought in 2006, Henry not only came out on top,

No he didn't.

he injured Benoit in the process. Those other wrestlers you mentioned, Batista, Undertaker, and Angle? Henry beat them up too, and put all three out of action for significant amounts of time.

He's never beaten Batista or Taker.

Benoit's title reign was a joke, while Henry was established as a monster heel who could not only defeat, but also, injure anyone in the process.

How exactly is Mark Henry's run of beating past their prime giants, Christian, and a not yet prime Daniel Bryan anywhere near Benoit beating Triple H, Michaels, and a Kane that is still relevant? At least Benoit main evented PPVs during his reign.

Benoit took weekly beatings from Evolution before dropping the title to Randy Orton in his first try. It took Big Show three tries to finally win the title from Henry, and it was a chairs match at that.

... You're smarter than that, LSN. First of all, unless you're trying to convince us that the match would end in Mark Henry getting DQ'd or counted out, all of this talk of beatdowns is meaningless. Second of all, you're trying to show a weakness in Benoit while masking Henry's. Benoit lost to Orton in a straight up one on one fight. It was a clean loss. Henry and Show had a draw and Henry got DQ'd in his 2 prior matches with Show. He was scared of Show. The same Big Show who was more than a decade past his prime. The same Big Show who Benoit beat in what some consider Show's prime.

This is a one-on-one, standard match. Benoit is seeded far too high here, and he's gotten a bad draw on top of that. Henry wins this with a WSS, or by countout after he rag-dolls Benoit into the post or through the ring-side barrier.

Either way, Mark Henry in his prime wins this match.

Benoit in 2004 was the ultimate underdog. He won the Rumble from the number one spot and then went on to win a Wrestlemania match against two of the biggest stars of the best 25 years.

Mark Henry, in 2011, was built as a monster heel.

Common sense tells us that the underdog babyface goes over the monster heel. Do you not see how this works? Does anyone here understand elementary booking or has everyone lost their fucking minds?