2016 WrestleZone Tournament Live Draw

[klunderbunker]

Are you taking the piss?

No not really. As many others do, I think the seedings this year are more than enough proof that something needs to be changed. I wanted this thing to be the one serious event we have every year and that's been abused by the likes of people who feel the need to "shake it up a bit" or whatever other reasons they give to put Scott Norton or Essa Rios or whoever else high up on their lists.

Next year we'll be having a list of X amount of names (likely 150 or so) and having them ranked by various people. This was the original plan before Sly and I decided to hand it over to the All-Stars a few years back. Now that the All-Stars have turned it into this kind of a mess, we'll be trying this instead.

 

[Lee]

The reason we put it on as it it makes it more fun for us, even if it's just one round, to get round a wrestler we like who may not be regarded as the top of all time.

It's fun, entertaining and makes more sense than what you do.

 

[klunderbunker]

The reason we put it on as it it makes it more fun for us, even if it's just one round, to get round a wrestler we like who may not be regarded as the top of all time.

It's fun, entertaining and makes more sense than what you do.

That's where this got out of hand. It's stopped being something that's supposed to be taken seriously and has turned into "who can we get in this year." Putting someone like Steven Richards in may be fun for you but it's basically handing someone a first round bye and making it look goofy.

I'm far from innocent on this as I let it go on for too long. This change needs to be made and if it bombs then we'll come up with something else.

 

[Lee]

Would you rather change things? Drop people down a few places than they should be?

People like an underdog tale and that was obvious last year with Yokozuna.

You can't say you want the tournament to be taken seriously when you rig the thing.

 

[klunderbunker]

Would you rather change things? Drop people down a few places than they should be?

People like an underdog tale and that was obvious last year with Yokozuna.

You can't say you want the tournament to be taken seriously when you rig the thing.

I'd hardly call what I did rigging the thing. Rigging the thing would involve going through and making sure Shawn had the easiest path possible and I hardly did that.

Yokozuna, a two time World Champion, is a little different than the kind of underdogs that have been making it in here. Crash Holly almost made it this year. That would be near the same level as Santino Marella being involved.

 

[Bernkastel]

Would you rather change things? Drop people down a few places than they should be?

people like an underdog tale and that was obvious last year with Yokozuna.

You can't say you want the tournament to be taken seriously when you rig the thing.

That was nothing more than people voting out a #1 seed for the sake of the novelty of a #128 seed beating a #1 seed. Bryan beating HHH, Bruno, and very nearly Cena was more of an underdog run.

 

[Uncle Sam]

Given that you had Sasha Banks, Bayley and Sami Zayn among others on a list of the greatest of all time, I'm really not worried about this. It would have been nice to have one thing around here be serious but hey, you all felt oh so strongly about Shawn Michaels beating Lesnar in the tournament (this time at least. Why this wasn't an issue when he beat him twice before isn't clear to me) that you had to make sure to do the exact thing you were oh so offended by me doing: making sure one person was as damaged as you could make him in protest or whatever you called it.

This tournament turned into a joke long before last year's finals and the new voting format is going to fix a lot of that.

The reason it caused an uproar was because the previous two times it wasn't accompanied by you fannying about, then bragging about it, then chasing off decent posters (which you'll notice was the only time I even bothered with anything surrounding it), then holding your hands up and admitting it was wrong. Then flitting between each position depending on your mood ever since.

I'll put it in plain English: it wasn't about Michaels or Lesnar, it was about your ridiculous behaviour.

I honestly don't care how you faff about with this shit - you can self-******e and see whose names the semen hits on a Best of AWA boxset for all I care. I do care when you fuck about with the outcome of the lists and then blame others for the seedings (I'll be interested to see how many more synonyms for "playing about with the outcome of the lists myself and then playing victim" you use), I do care when you chase away good posters like Gelgarin, I do care when you decide to get shirty with me for simply stating the truth. If that upset you, perhaps ask yourself why.

 

[klunderbunker]

The reason it caused an uproar was because the previous two times it wasn't accompanied by you fannying about, then bragging about it, then chasing off decent posters (which you'll notice was the only time I even bothered with anything surrounding it), then holding your hands up and admitting it was wrong. Then flitting between each position depending on your mood ever since.

Yeah I did something I probably shouldn't have. I'm far from the only person to do this and you know it.

I honestly don't care how you faff about with this shit - you can self-******e and see whose names the semen hits on a Best of AWA boxset for all I care. I do care when you fuck about with the outcome of the lists and then blame others for the seedings (I'll be interested to see how many more synonyms for "playing about with the outcome of the lists myself and then playing victim" you use), I do care when you chase away good posters like Gelgarin, I do care when you decide to get shirty with me for simply stating the truth. If that upset you, perhaps ask yourself why.

I chased away Gelgarin? First of all you say that like it's a bad thing.

Second, Gelgarin left because this place wasn't some kind of a temple for Lou Thesz and all things before 1983. He claimed that I was making this place all about myself and left. If he doesn't like me running this place, that's on him and not me.

You stating the truth doesn't upset me. It upsets me when a handful of people who felt all upset had to protest what I did. By protest, I mean doing something that changes the tournament into how they see fit.

The Shawn seeding this year isn't the main reason I'm changing it. I'm changing it because this thing has turned into what the All-Stars want and as would happen to anyone, it starts getting too nuts. There's no reason for that to happen, especially when it's making this look more like a joke every year.

 

[Uncle Sam]

Yeah I did something I probably shouldn't have. I'm far from the only person to do this and you know it.

To do what, specifically? Admit guilt and then hedge it and back out of it at every opportunity? Or spam PM people, get caught out and them create a thread to brag about it as a preposterous double-bluff? Just because other people do something, doesn't make it alright. That's something four-year-olds are taught.

I chased away Gelgarin? First of all you say that like it's a bad thing.

Considering Gelgarin quietly gave you his reasons in private and then left without a fuss, I'd have expected you to be more mature.

Second, Gelgarin left because this place wasn't some kind of a temple for Lou Thesz and all things before 1983. He claimed that I was making this place all about myself and left.

Which is it? Hint: it's not the one you invented out of thin air.

You stating the truth doesn't upset me. It upsets me when a handful of people who felt all upset had to protest what I did. By protest, I mean doing something that changes the tournament into how they see fit.

You were explicitly told people would rank Lesnar first and Michaels last. Any further sabotage is your imagination because lists didn't mesh with your personal tastes (e.g. Crash Holly).

The Shawn seeding this year isn't the main reason I'm changing it. I'm changing it because this thing has turned into what the All-Stars want and as would happen to anyone, it starts getting too nuts. There's no reason for that to happen, especially when it's making this look more like a joke every year.

I'm sure that's why you waited until someone pointed it out rather than saying it at the outset.

 

[klunderbunker]

To do what, specifically? Admit guilt and then hedge it and back out of it at every opportunity? Or spam PM people, get caught out and them create a thread to brag about it as a preposterous double-bluff? Just because other people do something, doesn't make it alright. That's something four-year-olds are taught.

Caught? I'm pretty sure I said I did that from the beginning.

Aren't four year olds also taught that if someone does something, you don't have to retaliate? Say by putting someone last on your list or leaving them out all together?

Considering Gelgarin quietly gave you his reasons in private and then left without a fuss, I'd have expected you to be more mature.

How was I immature? I didn't like him, he didn't like me, he left on his own accord and I said I wasn't going to miss him.

Which is it? Hint: it's not the one you invented out of thin air.

I'd say the same thing I say to anyone who asks us to delete their accounts: no one is keeping you here. He didn't like it and left. If you want to blame me for that, go right ahead.

You were explicitly told people would rank Lesnar first and Michaels last. Any further sabotage is your imagination because lists didn't mesh with your personal tastes (e.g. Crash Holly).

Yep. Found it petty then and found it petty now.

I'm sure that's why you waited until someone pointed it out rather than saying it at the outset.

I pointed it out after spending eight hours putting this list together and seeing the same joke entries over and over from people who went nuts over me screwing something up and then trying to screw it up themselves.

Various people didn't like what I did, I don't like what you did. That's what this boils down to.

 

[Lee]

I spent 2 hours on mine yet you called it a joke.

 

[klunderbunker]

I spent 2 hours on mine yet you called it a joke.

Far less now, mainly due to the Bulldog bit.

 

[Bernkastel]

I spent 2 hours on mine yet you called it a joke.

I spent 6 months on mine.

 

[nightmare]

Having a few people ranked higher than others feel they should be isnt a big problem. Goldust is a head scratcher, but other than that whats the big deal? If someone great is ranked lower then it can make for a few tougher matchups in the early rounds & possibly get a legit winner we have not seen before without having essentially the same guys at the end just in different places. Considering that anyone truly left off the lists are either not well known by the majority of fans or they were not a huge deal as a whole.

Having the same handful of guys winning seems to take a lot of the fun out of this. Besides the shenanigans last year, what is such a big deal about including guys finally like Owens, Sami, etc? They have accomplished tons on their way to bigger things now. Most of the applauded talents like Perfect and Razor never got above the mid card belt on the big stage & we love them for it. So why get pissy when some new blood is added that have essentially accomplished the same & also have a big fan base?

Whatever you decide to do may look like a way to right a ship you think is sinking, but you also run the risk of losing people that help keep it afloat. Maybe the idea works, but maybe it causes people to vote more ridiculously or not vote at all. If you admit you did wrong, then people react and you decide to take them out of the loop or restrict them to fit your design it seems like that could do more damage than good.

This tournament is sometimes taken too seriously, when at the end of the day it is just a fantasy tournament. We can have a bit of fun and still get a credible winner. It isnt like anyone is trying to crown R Truth as the #1 guy, they just were trying to take a bit of wind out of your sails for how you played the game last year.

 

[BestSportsEntertainer]

What is the big deal about this?

 

[Khalifa]

What is the big deal about this?

From what I am understanding coming from both sides. KB feels a bit disrespected (not the right word but something along the lines of that, maybe an expansion of fed up) and thinking a bit of what's the point because guys didn't take their lists seriously and he and sly are doing a lot of work setting up this tournament.

From Sams and Lees point they are saying well you gave an unfair advantage to HBK last year so don't be angry, plus that's what some of them are are actually thinking.

I could be wrong as I wasn't here last year but this is what I'm picking up at the moment.

 

[klunderbunker]

From what I am understanding coming from both sides. KB feels a bit disrespected (not the right word but something along the lines of that, maybe an expansion of fed up) and thinking a bit of what's the point because guys didn't take their lists seriously and he and sly are doing a lot of work setting up this tournament.

From Sams and Lees point they are saying well you gave an unfair advantage to HBK last year so don't be angry, plus that's what some of them are are actually thinking.

I could be wrong as I wasn't here last year but this is what I'm picking up at the moment.

Unethical would be better than unfair.

 

[Khalifa]

Unethical would be better than unfair.

Yeah, probably alot of my describing words could be changed.

 

[Vega]

IMO, the placement of Owens, Neville, Balor, Zayn, Rhodes et al. is the most embarrassing thing of this ridiculous seed. It looks like someone tried to think of great wrestlers and when they hit a blank after 80 or so they just listed midcarders they saw last week. Well, aside from the Top 30 or whatever that is. People listing duplicates is just as embarrassing, as it shows they just dropped in who came to their mind and didn't care about actual ranking.
And yes, it hurts the credibility of the tournament at least as much as last year's "special interest" campaigning. Peeking through this thread one can see that (almost) only people who submitted lists were interested in the seeding. Compare that to about five years ago.

As for next year's idea, 150 candidates seems a bit small a pool. Make it 256 and give out Excel / OpenOffice sheets. That way you have a standardized naming format and can easily automatically compile the points (if you know the right formulas). I could compile the lists next year if it helps.
Oh, and restrict submission to people who can tell Backlund from Gagne and Ultimo Dragon from El Santo, but that's a given.

 

[MCMG]

By the tournament's conclusion, Roman will have main-evented the two most watched and highest grossing PPV's of all time. Also the largest attendance in WWE history. Moreover, he has also barely ever (if at all) lost clean in his prime. Hope everyone is on board with Roman winning.

 

[The Brain]

By the tournament's conclusion, Roman will have main-evented the two most watched and highest grossing PPV's of all time. Also the largest attendance in WWE history. Moreover, he has also barely ever (if at all) lost clean in his prime. Hope everyone is on board with Roman winning.

I'll be voting against him in the first round.

 

[Bernkastel]

By the tournament's conclusion, Roman will have main-evented the two most watched and highest grossing PPV's of all time. Also the largest attendance in WWE history. Moreover, he has also barely ever (if at all) lost clean in his prime. Hope everyone is on board with Roman winning.

The Miz beat John Cena and main evented one of the most successful Mania's ever. He makes it to at least round 4.

 

[nightmare]

Rollins has a better shot at this than either Miz or Roman.

Lets not get too crazy.

 

[Coco]

I spent 6 months on mine.

And Milo of Croton was on your list. Yeah, we get it.

 

[Shocky]

I had Lesnar as my number 1 last year, before it was cool.