So, I was thinking. It's widely known that the main event of Wrestlemania 13 was going to be Shawn vs Bret II, where Bret would defeat HBK for the WWF Championship. HBK goes into the Rumble as the challenger against Sid and he wins. That means that Bret Hart was going to win the Royal Rumble right? Nope. Steve Austin wins, after he gets eliminated, but comes back in the ring and eliminates Bret. Given that we now have Austin vs HBK for Mania. Was the original plan to have Bret challenge Austin at In Your House 13 for the Rumble spot then? Of course at that time I think a HBK vs Austin main event is unlikely, so from what I understand, Austin won only to get a push and would later lose to Hart at In Your House 13, a match that would send Hart at the main event of Wrestlemania. Am I right? Then, HBK loses his smile. And the rest of the build-up becomes a train wreck. It's said that HBK got injured during the match with Sid so I won't ask why didn't Sid win that match if HBK was going to leave. However my real question here is: Why did Bret Hart became champion only to lose to Sid one night afterwards? The entire build-up to this Wrestlemania seems like a worked shoot. Bret becomes the champion but then loses, which makes him deliver his "shoot" promo. Btw, was that an actual shoot? Also, another thing is, that Austin never got to the main event of Wrestlemania, despite winning the Rumble. Was that because he was in the fatal-4-way at IYH13? Wouldn't normally Sid be in Austin's place, with the winner facing Austin at Wrestlemania? I'm confused. Can someone explain what happened back then in detail?