Austin Region, New Orleans Subregion, First Round (8)Chris Benoit vs.(25)Dean Ambrose

[The Brain]

I can honestly say he wouldn't get my vote either. Maybe I'm the worst wrestling fan ever because I watch wrestling to be entertained, and Benoit was boring. Some say he's the best technical wrestler ever to enter the ring, I say okay, but he has no charisma, promo skills weren't there, and that's my biggest complaint with Reigns who I love, and he'll be a three time world champion next week.

So yea I find Dean Ambrose wacky, funny, does things that only he can get away with, and makes me want to watch him to see what he'll do next. As Jon Moxley his in ring work was much better than it is now, that I'll blame on the WWE.

Benoit went as far as he was going to go, with Ambrose the sky is the limit it they let him. But then I'm the kind of person who goes to the track and bets on a horse because of it's name so make that of it what you will.

I agree that Benoit went as far as he was going to go. That's further than where Ambrose has gotten. If this match comes up again a year or two from now I might pick Ambrose. As of now though he hasn't accomplished anything that warrants a vote over Benoit. But I get it that you weren't entertained by him. That's fine. I think you are very much in the minority there but I can't say you're wrong for not being entertained.

 

[NSL]

So yea I find Dean Ambrose wacky, funny, does things that only he can get away with, and makes me want to watch him to see what he'll do next. As Jon Moxley his in ring work was much better than it is now, that I'll blame on the WWE.

If you're saying Ambrose was at his best in CZW, then there is absolutely no way you can say his in-ring work was anywhere near on par with Benoit. Benoit worst match in ECW, is better than any of the "greatest" matches in CZW history. I'd say it's better than maybe the best two put together.

Benoit went as far as he was going to go, with Ambrose the sky is the limit it they let him. But then I'm the kind of person who goes to the track and bets on a horse because of it's name so make that of it what you will.

"The sky is the limit" sounds a whole lot like you're betting on what he will do, and not what he has done. This argument made no sense in the Owens/Goldust match, and it holds no water here. We can only talk about where they're at right now. And the booking for Ambrose in WWE tells me that he's going to lose a lot more than he wins, and never quite get to the top.

People want to mention how Benoit won because there were no other options. There were no other options for WWE for the last few months, and what did they do, besides give Ambrose the belt? Bring HHH out of semi-retirement and put him in the main event of WrestleMania.

 

[Navi]

"The sky is the limit" sounds a whole lot like you're betting on what he will do, and not what he has done. This argument made no sense in the Owens/Goldust match, and it holds no water here. We can only talk about where they're at right now. And the booking for Ambrose in WWE tells me that he's going to lose a lot more than he wins, and never quite get to the top.

No it's not hope, I've seen his ring work before the WWE. I know he's better than what they're showing right now. I'm looking at him as a whole and it's hard to forget what I've seen in the past. And I will reiterate. Ambrose entertains me on a level that Benoit never did, so it's easy to cast a vote for someone who is entertaining, than for someone who I found quite boring.

People want to mention how Benoit won because there were no other options. There were no other options for WWE for the last few months, and what did they do, besides give Ambrose the belt? Bring HHH out of semi-retirement and put him in the main event of WrestleMania.

They had to bring HHH out of semi-retirement to continue the push of Roman Reigns, and that's not even working. If they had put the belt on Ambrose, then all the effort over the last two years of Reigns push would have gone down the drain. There is no way he would ever have gotten over with the fans if he had beat Ambrose for the title. Ambrose is in the position they want Reigns to be in, the most over guy on the roster. They have to keep him away from the title in order for Reigns to have any shot at getting over. Even though I think that ship has sailed.

So saying Ambrose didn't get the title because he wasn't good enough is unfair. He's better in the ring and on the mic than Reigns is, but Reigns is the guy they want, and he's already held the title twice.

 

[Jeff Deliverer of Mail]

I'm shocked to see Ambrose winning this. Benoit really is erased from people's minds.

 

[Pay Per Ghost]

I'm shocked to see Ambrose winning this. Benoit really is erased from people's minds.

They are partially doing this because they are biased by the enormous fact that said man killed his wife and kid.

I think they'll do fine in life. Dean Ambrose is on his way up and looks set to have a good career. He deserves the vote here.

 

[justtxyank]

I generally try to keep what happened outside of the ring, or any other sport, out of my view of the performer. I don't ding Barry Bonds for being a jerk.

However, some things I can't set aside. I can't look at Benoit and see anything else other than the fact that he murdered his wife and kid, no matter what circumstances (such as CTE) may have been at work.

I can't vote for Benoit, but I won't vote against him in this matchup either, recognizing that my own inability to be objective would lead to making a "bad vote." I will abstain, courteously.

 

[Deoxyribonucleic A.C.I.D.]

Ambrose turning the tables against Chris Benoit when Reigns and Rollins have already lost is simply.. meeh.

So Chris Benoit, a 2-time World Champ, 5-time US Champ, 4-time IC Champ, 6-time Tag Champ, Royal Rumble winner, one of the most over babyfaces in the last decade, a true veteran. Problably one of the greatest in the ring of all time is going to lose to.. Dean Ambrose?

If that arguement isn't strong enough, then how about this:
Dean Ambrose is facing Brock Lesnar at Wrestlemania. Dean has no chance in hell of beating Brock Lesnar. Do you know who has beaten Brock Lesnar? Multiple times, if my memory serves me correct. Chris Benoit. I think he also made him tap in 2003.

So please put Benoit in front of Ambrose here. In 2 years, Ambrose will probably be a possible finalist, but right now? He shouldn't pass from Benoit.

 

[Coco]

Ambrose turning the tables against Chris Benoit when Reigns and Rollins have already lost is simply.. meeh.

Reigns and Rollins were facing worthy competition. Go figure.

So Chris Benoit, a 2-time World Champ, 5-time US Champ, 4-time IC Champ, 6-time Tag Champ, Royal Rumble winner,

If we want to put world titles and Rumble wins on pedestals without considering context, ADR should be a real contender in this tournament. Sheamus too.

one of the most over babyfaces in the last decade,

Benoit's been in the ground for nearly a decade.

But if you are referring to him as one of the most over babyfaces of the last decade (ie: 2000-2009), then you're really being generous. Rock, Austin, Cena, Batista, DX, RVD, Chris Jericho, Rey Mysterio, and Jeff Hardy are among the many, many people to outdo Benoit during the first decade of the new millennium. Benoit as a performer is a footnote.

a true veteran.

Same could be said of Hardcore Holly.

If that arguement isn't strong enough, then how about this:
Dean Ambrose is facing Brock Lesnar at Wrestlemania. Dean has no chance in hell of beating Brock Lesnar. Do you know who has beaten Brock Lesnar? Multiple times, if my memory serves me correct. Chris Benoit. I think he also made him tap in 2003.

Benoit got the upperhand over Lesnar a couple times in questionable circumstances, not unlike Dean.

Want to know what happened when it mattered and Brock's title was on the line? Lesnar hung Benoit up like he was a slab of meat in a Rocky movie.

The arguments for Benoit over Dean are flimsy at best because outside of a small window (where he was still an afterthought), Benoit's always been cannon fodder.

And the arguments against Benoit? Well I don't think I need to repeat myself.

 

[Poop Master Flex]

I've never understood the love for Ambrose he's really nothing to write home about. Benoit however is one of the most technically sound wrestlers I've ever seen, arguably one of the top 5 ever in such a category. Benoit got over enough to be heavyweight champ, in the main event of Wrestlemania no less which is a lot more than Ambrose has accomplished up to this point. Benoit held damn near every title he could ever hold and actually made it to the top of the card. All his issues as champ came down to the fact that WWE for some reason wanted HHH, a guy who was literally a cancer to WWE television at the time (02-04) to be on top when he really had no right to be at that point in time.

I get Ambrose is popular, I get he plays a better character than Benoit ever did (which admittedly is very important) but at NO point in his career was he better than Benoit and he probably never will be. Ambrose at his height wasn't half as popular as Benoit was and from an in ring perspective he isn't half the wrestler Benoit is. I don't care for Ambrose, I don't hate him but he has no business winning this match and it's truly headshaking that he's actually winning this match right now because he has no business doing so.

 

[Coco]

All his issues as champ came down to the fact that WWE for some reason wanted HHH, a guy who was literally a cancer to WWE television at the time (02-04) to be on top when he really had no right to be at that point in time.

Yes. It's difficult to understand how WWE would want a charismatic, hated villain as the crux of their flagship show as opposed to a vanilla technical marvel with passionate fringe popularity but zero breakthrough potential.

I have no idea why WWE would make such an unfair choice.

Even when the roster was as paper-thin as it was in 2004, WWE still failed to fully commit to Benoit. Meanwhile, Dean Ambrose has been gently nudged towards the top of the card since day one because there's obvious "it" factor there.

The difference is night and day.

 

[Poop Master Flex]

Yes. It's difficult to understand how WWE would want a charismatic, hated villain as the crux of their flagship show as opposed to a vanilla technical marvel with passionate fringe popularity but zero breakthrough potential.

I have no idea why WWE would make such an unfair choice.

You mean that charismatic, hated heel that on top was drawing less people and less ratings than the B-show Smackdown? You mean that charismatic guy who couldn't even draw more than a guy who hadn't even been in WWE a full year? You mean that top heel who made the 1st 2 years of brand extension Raw absolutely unbearable to watch?

Even when the roster was as paper-thin as it was in 2004, WWE still failed to fully commit to Benoit. Meanwhile, Dean Ambrose has been gently nudged towards the top of the card since day one because there's obvious "it" factor there.

The difference is night and day.

Ambrose has NEVER been as over as Benoit got, it's not even close, it's not even up for debate. Between Royal Rumble '03 - Wrestlemania 20 Benoit was easily the most over guy on the WWE roster, everyone wanted that guy to become champ and it wasn't just because they didn't want Reigns to be the guy either (like Ambrose).

You talk about how Ambrose is slowly being nudged up the card, well he ain't there yet. You know who else slowly got nudged up the card and actually MADE it to the top? Benoit. When Ambrose gets to the top of the card (and actually deserves such a spot) give me a call, until then just admit you're either a mark for Ambrose or you just don't like Benoit, I can at least respect that decision but don't talk about how Ambrose deserves this win because he doesn't.

 

[Coco]

You mean that charismatic, hated heel that on top was drawing less people and less ratings than the B-show Smackdown? You mean that charismatic guy who couldn't even draw more than a guy who hadn't even been in WWE a full year? You mean that top heel who made the 1st 2 years of brand extension Raw absolutely unbearable to watch?

So not being able to sustain Rock and Austin's ratings means Trips is a worse choice than Chris Benoit?

So a phenomenon on SmackDown (not as much of a B-show at the time) means that Trips is a worse choice than Benoit?

Your comparisons don't change the fact that Triple H was better for business than Benoit.

Ambrose has NEVER been as over as Benoit got, it's not even close, it's not even up for debate.

A guy whose merch outsold Cena for a small stretch can't be compared to the almighty Chris Benoit?

Yeah. Okay.

Between Royal Rumble '03 - Wrestlemania 20 Benoit was easily the most over guy on the WWE roster,

No. He really wasn't. He was very over. But compared to the likes of Eddie, Goldberg, Angle, RVD, Jericho, HBK, etc, it's highly debatable that he was THE MOST over. I don't buy the story.

You know who else slowly got nudged up the card and actually MADE it to the top? Benoit.

As a warm body for a few months before falling back down to earth again?

That's not making it.

 

[Poop Master Flex]

So not being able to sustain Rock and Austin's ratings means Trips is a worse choice than Chris Benoit?

So a phenomenon on SmackDown (not as much of a B-show at the time) means that Trips is a worse choice than Benoit?

He couldn't sustain Smackdowns rating either so there were obviously better choices than Triple H on top and yes, Benoit was one of those better choices at the time. I'm not saying Triple H never deserved to be on top but not during that stretch of time.

Raw was still the flagship show, it was still the show that was most advertised and it was also the show that was in a proven time slot for wrestling. The only reason it wouldn't be on top is because the show sucked and Triple H was a major reason for that.

Your comparisons don't change the fact that Triple H was better for business than Benoit.

Then why did Benoit get better ratings as champ than Triple H did in 2004 if Triple H truly was best for business?

A guy whose merch outsold Cena for a small stretch can't be compared to the almighty Chris Benoit?

Yeah. Okay.

That's pretty impressive on Ambrose's part but last I checked Benoit did pretty well too and he had a lot more people to contend with in the merch department, even with those ugly ass shirts his name was shelling.

No. He really wasn't. He was very over. But compared to the likes of Eddie, Goldberg, Angle, RVD, Jericho, HBK, etc, it's highly debatable that he was THE MOST over. I don't buy the story.

He was definitely more popular than Golderg, Jericho, RVD and HBK at that time, no question he was. I wouldn't put him over Eddie and Angle but he was definitely the most over guy on Raw when he got there and he was arguably the most popular guy on Smackdown for the last 6 months he was on that roster as well.

As a warm body for a few months before falling back down to earth again?

That's not making it.

Even if that's the case that's still more than Ambrose has ever accomplished in the building. They thought enough of Benoit to give him the title in the main event of Wrestlemania 20 (which was in the garden BTW). I'm just saying they obviously thought very highly of Benoit to give him the title of their flagship show at their biggest event of the year, in the main event and in their home arena to boot.

I'm not saying Ambrose will never get to that level but he sure as shit isn't there yet and as such he shouldn't have won this match. Since he did though there's no point to keep this debate going.

 

[X]

Wow, so that actually happened, huh? Guess I should have gotten involved while the poll was still open. I sincerely hope every person that decided not to vote for Benoit because of his crimes consistently votes against people for things that happened in their personal lives through out the tournament. Sid stabbed a man TWENTY times with a pair of scissors, better not see you vote for him. Scott Hall killed a man in a bar fight, guess he's out. Dynamite Kid was an All-Star caliber woman beater whose wife once locked herself and her children in their home with the plan to kill herself and them just so they wouldn't have to live with him anymore. Carlos Colon covered up the murder of Brusier Brody and then pushed the murderer as his country's biggest babyface months after. I could keep going here. Point is that's some ass-backwards logic to use. Roman Polanski fucked a 13 year old girl, yet that doesn't mean we all just pretend like Chinatown isn't a good film, that's not how it works. If you can't separate the person from the performance, that's on you man.

If you want to vote against Benoit because of his lack of mic skills or charisma, that's fine, that makes sense (I mean, it's wrong and if you watch the intensity of his 2000 promos you'd realize that, but whatever floats your boat).

And to whoever said Ambrose was better in the ring as Moxley, no, he wasn't. I watched a lot of Moxley on the indies before he came to the WWE, and his main work was always CZW where, you guessed it, he worked garbage hardcore matches with very little in the way of matwork or technical prowess. I feel like you didn't actually watch Moxley on the indies if you say something like that. Ambrose is probably one of my favorites in the WWE right now and I see big things for him but there's no fucking way he beats Benoit. Benoit can put away Triple H and HBK clean in the most famous arena in the world in the main event of what was the biggest Mania ever at that point, but he can't put away Dean Ambrose? The fuck out of here with that nonsense.

 

[Coco]

I've been very clear about the standard I used, X. So I can see myself voting for many of the people you mentioned.

All things being equal, I like Benoit more than Ambrose. But the rules of the tournament make it clear that Ambrose is the winner.

Then why did Benoit get better ratings as champ than Triple H did in 2004 if Triple H truly was best for business?

I expect it has to do with the things which were pushed more prominently at the time. The intense final stretch of Triple H vs HBK and the controversial rise to prominence of Eugene were at the very least given spotlight on par with that of Benoit at the time.

That's pretty impressive on Ambrose's part but last I checked Benoit did pretty well too and he had a lot more people to contend with in the merch department, even with those ugly ass shirts his name was shelling.

You should check again. Because Benoit never outsold a Cena-level star.

He was definitely more popular than Golderg, Jericho, RVD and HBK at that time, no question he was.

You're completely divorced from reality. I have nothing more to say on this matter.

Even if that's the case that's still more than Ambrose has ever accomplished in the building.

Wait, you're talking about MSG specifically?

LOL. Who cares? WWE hardly ever runs TV there anymore. There's no basis for comparison.

 

[Navi]

And to whoever said Ambrose was better in the ring as Moxley, no, he wasn't. I watched a lot of Moxley on the indies before he came to the WWE, and his main work was always CZW where, you guessed it, he worked garbage hardcore matches with very little in the way of matwork or technical prowess. I feel like you didn't actually watch Moxley on the indies if you say something like that. Ambrose is probably one of my favorites in the WWE right now and I see big things for him but there's no fucking way he beats Benoit. Benoit can put away Triple H and HBK clean in the most famous arena in the world in the main event of what was the biggest Mania ever at that point, but he can't put away Dean Ambrose? The fuck out of here with that nonsense.

I'm the one that said that. I've been watching him for years and yes he has had garbage matches, but then so have almost every wrestler out there. Not all matches can be 4-5 stars.

And I was also very clear as to why I voted for him, bottom line is I find him very entertaining as a wrestler, always have. He can get into character better than almost anyone else and he is almost believable. Last night he has one of the best segments on RAW and all he did was walk out pulling a wagon. He didn't have to say a word, just filled it up with what he wants to use in the match this weekend and left. Didn't acknowledge Lesnar or anyone else and it worked.

Those that voted for Benoit, well kudo's to them, but no everyone thinks the same and have different reasons for who we think is better. If anyone thinks my excuse is a bad one, then that's fine as well, but when given the choice I didn't think twice.

 

[Poop Master Flex]

I've been very clear about the standard I used, X. So I can see myself voting for many of the people you mentioned.

Your standard is for shit. The fact you voted for Ambrose proves that.

All things being equal, I like Benoit more than Ambrose. But the rules of the tournament make it clear that Ambrose is the winner.

Maybe if you can't get over what Benoit did in his real life or you're high out of your mind.

I expect it has to do with the things which were pushed more prominently at the time. The intense final stretch of Triple H vs HBK and the controversial rise to prominence of Eugene were at the very least given spotlight on par with that of Benoit at the time.

HHH vs. HBK drew shit at the beginning to the point they were being outdrawn by Smackdown by a full rating point so I highly doubt that. Eugene could be given some credit but considering the ratings went up over half a point immediately after he won the title and he was the only champ to get a rating of over 4.0 that year I would say he deserves a lot of credit for that.

You should check again. Because Benoit never outsold a Cena-level star.

I said he did pretty well, I never said he outsold anyone.

You're completely divorced from reality. I have nothing more to say on this matter.

Because I recognize by late '03 he was more popular than Goldberg, Jericho, HBK and RVD? Benoit was most certainly more popular than those guys by the end of '03. How are you even debating this? Were you even paying attention at that point in time?

Wait, you're talking about MSG specifically?

LOL. Who cares? WWE hardly ever runs TV there anymore. There's no basis for comparison.

I'm talking about in general. At this point Benoit has easily accomplished more than Ambrose and by late '03-mid '04 he was more over than Ambrose is now. Benoit put a lot of people over but if we're talking about when both were at their height Benoit would win that match, no question he would. If we are comparing careers then Benoit would still win. All Ambrose does is lose big matches, when he actually wins one some day let me know.

 

[JGlass]

Because I recognize by late '03 he was more popular than Goldberg, Jericho, HBK and RVD? Benoit was most certainly more popular than those guys by the end of '03. How are you even debating this? Were you even paying attention at that point in time?

In the immortal words of Action Saxton, "Sucka please."

He MAY have been more popular than RVD in 2003. But not the other three. Benoit was definitely hot in 2003, but the kind of hot that is when a small piece of oil hits your skin when you're frying bacon. HBK, Goldberg, and Jericho were the kind of hot that is submerging your hand into near boiling water and hold it there while you slowly count to three.

Analogy complete and anywhere to 75%-80% accurate.

 

[Poop Master Flex]

In the immortal words of Action Saxton, "Sucka please."

He MAY have been more popular than RVD in 2003. But not the other three. Benoit was definitely hot in 2003, but the kind of hot that is when a small piece of oil hits your skin when you're frying bacon. HBK, Goldberg, and Jericho were the kind of hot that is submerging your hand into near boiling water and hold it there while you slowly count to three.

Analogy complete and anywhere to 75%-80% accurate.

I'm talking about during a very specific point in time (as in '03 Benoit,'03 Jericho, '03 Goldberg, ect.) not overall. At the end of '03 he was easily more popular than Goldberg and Jericho. I'm not saying he hit the height of Goldberg back in '98 but during the end of '03 when Benoit was getting his world title push? Yeah he was more popular than Goldberg at that point. Jericho wasn't doing much in '03 after Wrestlemania 19, he was pretty much just floating around until him and Christian started feuding so being more popular than him (once again just for that specific amount of time) wasn't much of a feat. HBK at the end of '03 is debatable but I'd give Benoit the edge.

 

[Nate DaMac]

Chris Benoit spent the entirety of 2003 on Smackdown. You know, the show that has always been pretaped and overloaded with cannon pops?

You're grossly over-rating Benoit if you think he was ever white hot in the WWE.

 

[Poop Master Flex]

Chris Benoit spent the entirety of 2003 on Smackdown. You know, the show that has always been pretaped and overloaded with cannon pops?

You're grossly over-rating Benoit if you think he was ever white hot in the WWE.

He was hot enough to win the title in the main event of Wrestlemania 20 (which was a huge Wrestlemania at the time) and that's hotter than Ambrose has ever been. In a year that could very well change (hell, that may change by Sunday) but as of today that's not the case at all. I'm not even saying he was the hottest thing at the time (I even said guys like Eddie and Angle were hotter because they were) but he was the most popular guy on Raw when he got there after the Rumble, by summer time that clearly wasn't the case.

At the end of the day though when he was hot he climbed higher than Ambrose ever has and for this thread that's all he needs to be.

 

[X]

I've been very clear about the standard I used, X. So I can see myself voting for many of the people you mentioned.

Please, you think I took the time to read every post in this 3 page long thread (I always opt for the most posts per page option of course)? Hell no. I skimmed and saw the basic arguments and the ones I mentioned were the ones I saw, basically being "Fuck Benoit cause he's a murderer", "Benoit wasn't good on the mic", and "Ambrose was way better in the indies". Which is why they're the only things I touched on, no offense mate I just can't be bothered to read three pages of a thread anymore at this point. Which is why I didn't single out anything you said personally obviously.

All things being equal, I like Benoit more than Ambrose. But the rules of the tournament make it clear that Ambrose is the winner.

This is where I'm lost. Did I miss something in those last few pages that I skimmed that explained this? As far as I'm concerned and have known the rules to be since day one (I should know, I was here for day one) is that the only criteria is who you think the better professional wrestler is. If you believe Ambrose is, than by all means I could never fault you for your vote. If you're docking Benoit points for his personal life and obviously heinous crimes, I can't give you any leeway on that one.

I'm the one that said that. I've been watching him for years and yes he has had garbage matches, but then so have almost every wrestler out there. Not all matches can be 4-5 stars.

Of course not, I literally rate every wrestling match I watch for my blog and have for about 6 years and I totally underrate a lot of matches others on here go crazy for, simply because I've watched such a massive amount of wrestling and seen so many outstanding matches that if someone puts out a solid 10 minute match on Raw my reaction is usually somewhere between "Meh" and "Just about *** (out of *****)". I watched a shit load of indy wrestling from 2008-2013 and chief among those was CZW, where Moxley was the main guy. I'm telling you right now, absolutely nothing he did in CZW or the indies compares to his WWE work. I've seen him in EVOLVE and every other indy he worked and the man's work on the indies doesn't touch his WWE work. Please go ahead and name me a few matches of Moxley's where he showcases this otherwise never before seen top of the charts technical wrestling. Because I've watched a shitload of his indy work before he came to the 'E and the vast majority were CZW matches that he was frankly handicapped in because he was booked into hardcore matches. He works well in the hardcore environment but never really shone in CZW. It was obvious he had talent but it was also super obvious his talent was not being used right. There's plenty of reasons to vote for Ambrose (well, really only one: you like him more than Benoit) but acting like he was some Bryan Danielson level wrestler before his WWE run is silly. Plenty of guys the 'E has picked up off the indies did their best work before the WWE. Bryan being the main example. But Ambrose/Moxley ain't one of 'em. His WWE work has by FAR been the highlight of his career.

And I was also very clear as to why I voted for him, bottom line is I find him very entertaining as a wrestler, always have. He can get into character better than almost anyone else and he is almost believable. Last night he has one of the best segments on RAW and all he did was walk out pulling a wagon. He didn't have to say a word, just filled it up with what he wants to use in the match this weekend and left. Didn't acknowledge Lesnar or anyone else and it worked.

I have no problem with that logic. You like him more than Benoit, boom, that's literally the only reason you need. I just questioned the idea of Ambrose/Moxley being so much better as an indie guy because he really, truly was not. His promos were more unhinged, uncensored, and uncensored but that's the only thing he did better on the indies.

 

[Rayne]

As far as I'm concerned and have known the rules to be since day one (I should know, I was here for day one) is that the only criteria is who you think the better professional wrestler is.

I looked over the rules for this shindig, and I couldn't find word one concerning which criteria people are expected to use to place their votes. Maybe it was a rule in the past; to that extent, the UFC used to allow eye gouges and dick punches. It's also possible that I've overlooked it, as I've only looked through the stickied threads.

 

[Deoxyribonucleic A.C.I.D.]

I don't think Smackdown in 2002-2003 was the B show. Triple H and Vince might wanted it to be the B show, but Smackdown was better in every aspect. And Chris Benoit, along with Kurt Angle, Undertaker and Brock Lesnar were their leaders.

Chris was way over. That was why they sent him over to their "A show", RAW where he defeated HHH and HBK at the main event of Wrestlemania 20 to become the World Heavyweight Champion. Even after that title run, he still continued to have an impressive career. He became the US Champion and was leading the midcard and then he was about to win another World title in 2007, the ECW Championship.

Even back in his WCW days, long before he came into the WWF, he was a WCW Champion. The company made him a WCW Champion in order not to lose him. That's how much importance Benoit had.

He has wrestled all over the world. Dean Ambrose can't even reach Benoit's accomplishments at this point.

IMO, peak Benoit vs peak Ambrose, which is 2004 Benoit vs 2016 Ambrose, Benoit wins. Isn't this tournament supposed to look at talents going against each other, in their peak? There's no way Ambrose as he is right now, would beat Benoit in his top form.

Also why hasn't anyone mentioned that Ambrose got his ass kicked by Triple H recently, when Benoit has defeated Hunter multiple times during his peak run?

 

[Deoxyribonucleic A.C.I.D.]

I disagree that Benoit's murders are irrelevant to the conversation; it asks people to place Chris Benoit the professional wrestler in a vacuum. That's all well and good if we're measuring the speed of light, but I don't believe that a man can be measured in a vacuum; that is, without making a mess.

Is really Benoit the one to blame for the murders? As the Brain said, Benoit's tests showed that he had the brain of an 85-year old with Alzheimer's. Sure Benoit has a blame, noone can deny that, but I'd blame the doctors around Benoit, the WWE and the whole system of pro-wrestling back then as a whole, before I'd blame Benoit.