You're shitting me here, right? We're going to really use career lows? Fine, let's use Deacon Batista, when he was D-Von's bitch on the road, and was really damn close to being released before he cozied right up to Triple H. Yeah, sorry, not buying this. As for trying to devalue his victory over Andre... Erm, what? So let me get this straight. Now we should completely marginalize beating perhaps the second biggest name in wrestling at the time, and doing so in a squash? Literally, The Warrior clotheslined Andre a few times, hit his splash, and that was it for Fezzik. You really want to marginalize that? And since you're the one that brought up Hogan, riddle me this; when did Batista ever defeat the company's face? Don't give me Triple H, you know exactly what I'm talking about. When did Batista ever beat John Cena, in his prime, in a one on one match. Oh, that's right. It never fucking happened. Actually, yeah, he was pretty damn near it. An entire career, and never beaten clean once. Never. That's pretty damn near invulnerable to me. Also, sod off with that whole no selling shit. Warrior was big because people loved him, and because he made money for Vince, period, end of story. At the end of the day, that's what it's all about, and Warrior did it far better than Melina's Mistress. You really think we care how many matches someone has had? Really? It matters that much? You know who's had more matches than The Ultimate Warrior, probably? You sure as shit wouldn't use that in a debate as to why Brawler should go over Warrior, and you shouldn't use it here. The rest is some mumble about Batista's moves being more effective, which is a load of hogwash. If they were, then riddle me this; why has Batista never gotten that win against John Cena. Hell, has he even beaten The Undertaker, even though he's had like a million tries before? Face it, Warrior went over some of the best in the industry, including the face of the company. Batista, on the other hand, never has, and never will.