Best 'Big Man' Wrestler of All Time.

[Davi323]

The only reason the Undertaker's Wrestlemania streak is intact is because he never had to worry about being booked against Andre. Hypothetically If Andre and Undertaker were both in their primes, and they were booked to wrestle each other at Mania, Andre would certainly get the win. I am not talking about the old, slow, injured Andre that was in the WWF during the 80s, I am talking about the Andre the Giant of the 70s, before his health issues took over his life. Andre the Giant was an absolute monster. Don't get me wrong, I am not bashing the Undertaker. He has had an amazing career. But, he has done it without having to worry about being overshadowed by Andre. Had they been contemporaries, he would have constantly lived in the shadow behind the one and only Giant. Every wrestling fan can can identify who the Undertaker is, but would someone who never watched pro wrestling? Andre was more than a wrestler, he was a culturally significant personality. Even people who never watched a wrestling match in their life could identify who Andre the Giant is.

 

[UltimateHitman]

AAAAArrrrrgggggggggggghhhh, I'm torn! Thanks, Phenom and IC for torturing me this way. I was initially thinking of, and voted for, Taker. I mean, like everybody says, he's versatile in a way no other big guy has really ever been. Sure, other big guys have been versatile, but not quite on the level that Taker has shown himself to be. And let's be fair, the no-selling and stuff at the beginning was the gimmick, like you said. If you watched "Mean Mark" before the Taker gimmick he did sell offense. But anywho....
Then I heard IC's argument for Vader (who I have always liked btw and also hated how WWE jobbed him out). And you definitely can't take away his accomplishments outside of the 'E. Plus, there was just so much passion in the argument I almost broke out of my Taker love fest.
But I still have to give the nudge to Taker. He's proven to be more of a mainstay and IMO is much more versatile. Plus, like IC said, he's been overshadowed before and not been top draw, but unlike Vader (in the E) he managed to keep his spot and not become a "Kevin Nash" (for lack of a better example). He didn't end up getting phased out, and ended up coming back on top and giving people their money's worth, whether they initially paid to see him or not.
On a side note, I do like the inclusion of Vader and Bigelow in the poll. They were both very notable big men.
Andre is just a given, that part is clear. However, while I loved Andre, he didn't have the range of motion other guys have had. (And I know, a lot of that had to do with his physical condition). But one name that got left out of the mix was Big John Studd. I think he was actually a great big man as well, and was a little more fluid in the ring at the time than Andre. I know he wasn't as popular, but I have to give a shout out to Mr. Studd for his contributions to the "big man" niche.

 

[Hollywood Naitch]

I think the most impressive thing about Taker, to go along with all of that, is his agility in the ring for a man of his size. How many other people on that list would you see doing a suicide dive through the ropes? Or a top rope splash through an announce table? None of them, I can guarantee that.

That was one of the main reasons I voted for Undertaker. Noone on that list can do the things he can.

Yes Vader can do a moonsault, and Big Show used to be able to throw a dropkick, but look at their physiques, and also the physiques of Bam Bam, Andre and the rest. Undertaker was an athlete, he could move around the ring better than anyone. He didnt get the chance to show as much in his early days, due to his gimmick. But in his later years he could still do it. Imagine how he could have performed had he been allowed to wrestle the faster pace in his early days.

Andre is probably more famous and recognisable, but almost everyone has heard of the Undertaker too. Andre was bigger and more impressive size wise, and may have been booked to beat Taker if they were both around in their primes, but they would never have been booked to clash at WM, as it would have ended the streak before it began, and Vince obviously planned to make this streak somethign special.

In the ring, Andre cannot even come close to Undertaker. On the mic he couldnt come close, and as a gimmick...well the Giant is a cool gimmick, but again the Undertaker wins, his is the best gimmick of all time

 

[Hulk Hogan's Brother]

Vader is probably the better in ring worker and as popular as Undertaker is, I think Andre was more popular than him. Andre was like the Hogan of the generation before Hogan and even non wrestling fans have heard of him. But I think that the only big guy who is a close second in both those departments and hence a better overall package is the Undertaker.

I have said this before and I will say this now, The Undertaker was not that great in the ring in the early part of his career. At that point Vader was tearing the house down with phenomenal matches against Sting and Mick Foley. But Undertaker has improved with age and has put on matches in the latter half of his career which are comparable with any match that Vader has ever had. Andre was more popular than Undertaker but he was not that great in the ring and probably would have found it harder to be as popular in this era as he was in his era, his charisma notwithstanding.

Another point worth mentioning is that Undertaker has played two distinct characters in his career ie The Deadman as well as The American Badass. Niether Vader nor Andre have done that. So taking into account in ring skills, mic skills, popularity and longlevity, Undertaker wins hands down. Funny thing is that apart from longlevity Taker is not a first in any of the other departments.

 

[Notorious KJE]

I'm going with Vader. While Undertaker was a bigger star, Vader IMO was more skilled because he had great matches throughout his career. While I like and respect Taker, he was really only good when in the ring with someone else that was good as well. Vader wrestled good matches with everyone he ever competed against.

I absolutely HATED how the WWE jobbed Vader out. I think it's because Vince didn't like him (as is the case with the majority of good wrestlers who were jobbed out in the WWE)I think Vader would have been just as huge in WWE as he was in WCW and Japan if he would have been used properly.

So I have Vader at the top of my list, with Taker a close 2nd.

 

[Dusty Roids]

Undertaker is the most succesfull, although I would say that Andre comes close. Taker's career spanned over 20 years, and almost always in the spotlight.
he had some great matches and fueds throughout his career.

But wrestlingwise, i would say Vader is the best. He had great matches in wcw, njpw, ajpw, and even in wwf who buried him he had good matches. He was very popular in Japan, where they actually respected his ability. I hated it how they used him in the wwf.

 

[The Eighties]

It depends how you look at it, Taker's mobility at his size is unmatched, his technical level is good and he's worked a variety of guys of all shapes and sizes.

Interestingly though his size has never defined him in the way it does most big men. In his early years it was the zombie like ability to feel no pain that was the hallmark of his character and then as he went face Vince put him against men that were often bigger or were crazy freaks so his size wasn't a factor.

In these later years it has been his work as a Striker with some submissions thrown in that has been his stock in trade, with the odd bits of goofy magic power here and there.

Vader on the other hand was an out and out big man, his size was key to how he was booked. What set Vader apart from other Super Heavyweights was his agility, mobility and work, his stiff striking style was so viscous looking that unlike a lot of monsters he actually took the fearsome act into the ring, where a lot simply never looked as deadly once the bell rang.

Vader had classics with Sting, Foley and Flair in WCW, worked with Hogan and had one of Hogan's best 5 matches at Superbrawl V IMO, he was for half a decade the best monster int he business. His WWF stint was fairly poor after mid-97 but that was down to booking.

Vader was one of the few gaijin's to make it huge in Japan and to my knowledge the only one to hold both the IWGP title and the Triple Crown. He had two great spells in Japan, one in the early 90's where he battled NJPW legend Antonio Inoki and also had the memorable AJPW vs NJPW match with Stan Hansen in the Tokyo Dome. Then in the late 90's where he wrestled the 4 corners of heaven (Kobashi, Misawa, Kawada and Taue) as the Triple Crown Champion. In between this in 93/94 he also did a set of pseudo shoot fights in the short lived UWFI where he had a rivalry with a great Japanese worker called Takada.

The Undertaker has worked a program with every major North American star of the last 3 decades bar Roddy Piper, Randy Savage and Sting, and for the most part has had good to great matches with them, he is perhaps the most famous persona in wrestling after Hulk Hogan and has maintained a top spot in the biggest pro wrestling company in the world for 2 decades.

Both men have great legacies that took different paths and have different qualities, very hard to split them in terms of greatness unless you use stardom as the deciding factor. I voted for Vader due to his dual continent success, but it's a coin toss.