Cena's basic moveset VS CM Punk's basic moveset

[braveh]

This sunday, as I had the opportunity to watch Punk and Kane back to back to Cena and Big show I noticed something.

As both wrestlers faced bigger opponents who didn't really sell well I noticed how much better Cena does all the basic moves. The punches, the elbows, tackles, it all looked solid even though Big Show didn't sell that much

When Punk was doing those moves against Kane it just looked really shitty.

 

[Dr. Awesome]

This could be down to many things for example:

1. Punk has a bigger move set thus he has less time to practice "punches, the elbows, tackles". This isn't a "5 Moves of doom joke". This is down to Punk being more technical.

2. Punk concentrates on his kicks more than the other stuff. It's a known fact.

3. Kane sold even less than Show did. (I haven't seen the PPV. I heard it was crappy and so I didn't get the replay). So somebody can prove this point wrong as this is just down to assumption.

 

[Richard Blonoff]

I think their in ring style plays into it as well. Cena is more of a power brawler. He has those moves that look good in a short 5 or 6 minute match. He can expand his arsenal in longer matches but not many guys look better in short matches than Cena.

Punk is more of a technician and his moves typically work better in longer matches where he can build up to his bigger moves.

It should also be noted that Cena has a style better suited for big men. He has those power moves. Remember when Bryan and Show feuded late last year into the early part of this year? Bryan couldn't do much because of Show's size

 

[Dr. Awesome]

So if he has a bigger moveset that allows him to do sloppy and botchy moves?

No it doesn't. As said before I haven't seen the PPV so I don't know how bad it is but it sounds like they just were a bit Meh. If so then that's not okay but not everybody is perfect. You might not be able to fit time in all the time. If it is really bad i.e. "sloppy and botchy " then he needs to work on that most and then I am wrong in this case.

 

[TheHorndogSays]

This sunday, as I had the opportunity to watch Punk and Kane back to back to Cena and Big show I noticed something.

As both wrestlers faced bigger opponents who didn't really sell well I noticed how much better Cena does all the basic moves. The punches, the elbows, tackles, it all looked solid even though Big Show didn't sell that much

When Punk was doing those moves against Kane it just looked really shitty.

I'm not entirely sure what your question is here.

As far as the effectiveness of the moves, I think a lot of it has to do with the small vs big. A punch/kick/tackle from someone SHOULDN'T look as effective on a Big Show or Kane like it would on a Daniel Bryan or David Otunga. In other words, let's say you were to tackle Big Show and Daniel Bryan, who would take more "effort" to knock down? Big Show obviously.

With that said, Cena is a much bigger guy than Punk so his moves SHOULD look more powerful and the perception should be that his moves hurt more than Punks.

 

[Mustang Sally]

1. Punk has a bigger move set thus he has less time to practice "punches, the elbows, tackles". This isn't a "5 Moves of doom joke". This is down to Punk being more technical.

True; yet that sounds like a good argument for keeping things simple, doesn't it? I'd rather watch a performer who has less intricate moves, but does well with what he does have. Due to the events of last Summer, we're supposed to fall on our butts at the sight of Punk and his "best in the world" persona. Still, I never saw him as particularly charismatic despite his superior promo ability. He has a gimmick that's all his own, and that's great, but he's hardly a perfect ring technician.

Cena, on the other hand, possesses a moveset that's an extension of his overall personality; I find it impossible to watch anyone but him when he's in the ring with other people. He works hard at improving and expanding his repertoire, putting a premium on having less moves but delivering what he's got as effectively as he can.

Interestingly, many people on this forum have expressed disappointment with Punk's act since last Summer, during which time they were thrilled with it. Personally, I think it all points back to John Cena; in other words, Punk was a hell of a lot more interesting when Cena was his opponent.....and less interesting since then. Hmm.

As always, the Cena-haters will think he's a terrible wrestler, no matter what he does. There's no convincing those folks, and there's no need to try.

 

[arkady]

Some guesses as speculations as to why this is:

1. CM Punk makes a point of being a technical wrestler, John Cena is a brawler. Of course Cena's punches will be sold more - they're supposed to hurt more.

2. Kane is supposed to be some mad monster, who veers on impervious to pain sometimes. He would naturally sell a punch less than most, even Big Show.

3. Big Show is ~115lbs heavier than Kane and five years younger. He will be hurt less by a stiffer strike, and so John Cena can throw stiffer strikes.

4. CM Punk's technical style means he throws punches with more legitimate technique. They're therefore more (legit) damaging when thrown stiffly, and CM Punk can't work them as stiffly as if he used a more sloppy "brawler" technique.

 

[RD_21]

It is well known and accepted that while Cena has a limited moveset, what little he does, he does it well.

I just don't get why you made this topic. Why do you feel the need to oppose Punk to Cena. Is it because the people who hate Cena are behind Punk so you felt the need to stick it to them?

I didn't watch the PPV, but usually Punk's move are more than fine and I consider him the best wrestler with DBry in the WWE.

I just don't get why we should always use one to put the other down. Can't we love or hate them both, or praise one for what he did and not for what the other didn't do.

 

[TheFuture]

I'm not entirely sure what your question is here, but I happened to watch the PPV, and you're right about the fact that CM Punk wasn't at his best with making the basics look good that night. Unfortunately one of the main reasons why, as much as I have great respect for Kane as a worker I have to say he did a absolutely horrible job at selling the majority of the moves that night.

Cena's match on the other hand, with no "five moves of doom" joke intended was based around his move set being extremely limited in this match. For the majority of it Cena wasn't meant to do anything other then make Big Show look dominate, which he did a very, very good job at doing. However when he did have to lay out the basics, while he did better than CM Punk on this night, he still wasn't even close to his weekly standards with it.

So to sum it up, both of them had an off night, Punk more so then Cena. I wouldn't look to far into it since on a weekly basis they're still two of the most consistent workers that the WWE has to offer.

 

[justin71]

Two clearly different styles this is like a Brett Hart/Hulk Hogan comparison 20 years ago while we are at it lets do a apple vs orange comparison in how apples no-sell the citrus flavor. As a person who is indifferent to John Cena mainly because you would expect for his improvements to be greater within 7 years of the company being solidly behind him he should have matches the are on the level of Brett Hart & Shawn Michaels and with CM Punk we are a step close to that level of quality. I'm sure someone is going to yell "Cena hater!" at me, but in all reality he has gained allot of respect from me as the guy who goes the extra mile for the company...

 

[XXJJ]

Cena has always worked well with big guys.

Punk does attempt and do more different "moves", but he is very sloppy in the ring.

 

[Rampage Bentley]

This sunday, as I had the opportunity to watch Punk and Kane back to back to Cena and Big show I noticed something.

As both wrestlers faced bigger opponents who didn't really sell well I noticed how much better Cena does all the basic moves. The punches, the elbows, tackles, it all looked solid even though Big Show didn't sell that much

When Punk was doing those moves against Kane it just looked really shitty.

What the hell are you talking about? Have you seen John Cena throw punches? There are times he doesn't even connect... there's a reason the camera cuts away now whenever he does the five knuckle shuffle.

It's true that Punk doesn't do well against bigger guys, but Cena can be pretty atrocious.

 

[The 1-2-3 Killam]

It all comes down to size, and that Cena's basic move set is a LOT more basic. If all you did was sell for 90% of a match, hit a shoulder block, duck a clothesline, do a spin-out slam, and execute your special moves...you'd probably it down too! I'm a Cena fan (most of the time), but I won't really give him a lot of credit for the difficulty level of his basic arsenal of moves.

CM Punk is smaller, and has a harder basic move set to execute. His finisher alone is meant for smaller guys, and looks ridiculous when he tries to hit it on about bigger than say...John Cena. Even Rey Mysterio, who is incredibly solid in the ring, doesn't look as polished when he's got to face giants in the ring. And part of it is a show; you should make it look like your moves aren't as effective, and that you're struggling against a guy 3x your body weight. The other part is just logistics... There's a reason that Punk's competitors thus far in his title reign have been Alberto del Rio, John Cena, the Miz, Dolph Ziggler, Chris Jericho and Daniel Bryan. They haven't even done a straight Kane/Punk feud yet, because they know how it's going to look. Punk is fantastic against guys his size, and he's still entertaining against the giants. I loved his Big Show feud way back when on Smackdown.

 

[Workrate]

First of all: every wrestler has to adapt their skills to the WWE's methodology. It doesn't matter how creative you are or how many moves you might be able to pull off on the independent circuit, because the WWE wants you to wrestle a certain way. I'm not making any judgments as to whether or not that's a good or bad thing, just saying that it is what it is.

That said, I personally prefer Punk's style to Cena's because, as some people may describe Punk as "sloppy," I tend to view his style as more realistic. Whenever Cena runs through his normal pattern of moves, it all looks very mechanical to me. I don't know how to describe it other than synchronized wrestling (ironic, maybe, since wrestling is in fact synchronized). But it just looks like both Cena and his opponent are moving very deliberately within a formula. When Punk hits a move, even if it's that same running knee in the turnbuckle or Randy Savage elbow, it looks slightly different every time, especially against opponents of different shapes and sizes. It looks natural. We all know these guys aren't really fighting, but I also don't want it to look like they're performing a tandem dance number either, which is what I always feel like Cena's maneuvers look like.

I do think Punk needs to adopt a new finisher and reserve the GTS for smaller wrestlers who can adequately "take" the move. Kane should never have to take a GTS, if only because he's too big and awkward comparatively to execute it correctly. And Punk should know better than to try (he's extremely arrogant and I suspect he thinks he can make everyone and anyone look good, which he can't with that particular move).

 

[Headman]

Two clearly different styles this is like a Brett Hart/Hulk Hogan comparison 20 years ago while we are at it lets do a apple vs orange comparison in how apples no-sell the citrus flavor. As a person who is indifferent to John Cena mainly because you would expect for his improvements to be greater within 7 years of the company being solidly behind him he should have matches the are on the level of Brett Hart & Shawn Michaels and with CM Punk we are a step close to that level of quality. I'm sure someone is going to yell "Cena hater!" at me, but in all reality he has gained allot of respect from me as the guy who goes the extra mile for the company...

I'm not going to yell "Cena-hater!" but I am going to point out the irony in you sayin Cena and Punk are apples and oranges like Bret Hart and Hulk Hogan, then you go and say you expect Cena to have matches like Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels. Which is it? As for Punk being closer to those two than Cena? If you mean his style than yes, but you said quality and I couldn't disagree with that more. Cena has had great matches with terrible opponents. I can't think of one great match Punk has had with someone like Big Show, Kane, Khali, Batista or anyone like that. Punk works best with smaller guys who wrestle almost the exact same style he does. He's also way sloppier than Bryan and Jericho who would be the closest comparison. In short the OP is correct and here is why. CM Punk is very good at putting together a nice match. I would say in-ring story telling is his strong suit. Where he fails is the actual execution. His moves are sloppy. He botches constantly and while he usually saves it he's just not as good in the ring as everybody seems to think he is. Atleast not as far as technical ability goes.

 

[thedon2001]

Cena:
1. 5 knuckle shuffle
2. AA
3. Fishermen Suplex
4. Running Bulldog
5. STF
6. Leg Drop from top rope
7. Spinning Gut Wrench Suplex
8. Shoulder Blocks

Punk:
1. Swinging neck breaker
2. GTS
3. Vice
4. Elbow from the top rope (macho man)
5. knee in the corner with running bulldog
6. Springboard close line
7. Leg Lariat
8. Enzuigiri

Depending on the length of the match and the opponent you may see some other moves tested out, but for both wrestlers the move sets are pretty much set in stone. With Punk, you might see an "outside of the box" approach to new moves because of his personality and ability, but not to the extreme people are trying to make it. The reason for this is because Punk is a poor man's austin, used as crumbs to feed the cry babies of the left over attitude era. His character is geared toward pleasing that segment while Cena's fan base care more about the character and the match result rather than the performance. They pay the tickets to see the hero defeat the villain. they don't care how he does it, just that he does it.

 

[JGlass]

Ladies and gentlemen... a main page "journalist."

It all comes down to size, and that Cena's basic move set is a LOT more basic. If all you did was sell for 90% of a match, hit a shoulder block, duck a clothesline, do a spin-out slam, and execute your special moves...you'd probably it down too! I'm a Cena fan (most of the time), but I won't really give him a lot of credit for the difficulty level of his basic arsenal of moves.

CM Punk is smaller, and has a harder basic move set to execute. His finisher alone is meant for smaller guys, and looks ridiculous when he tries to hit it on about bigger than say...John Cena. Even Rey Mysterio, who is incredibly solid in the ring, doesn't look as polished when he's got to face giants in the ring. And part of it is a show; you should make it look like your moves aren't as effective, and that you're struggling against a guy 3x your body weight. The other part is just logistics... There's a reason that Punk's competitors thus far in his title reign have been Alberto del Rio, John Cena, the Miz, Dolph Ziggler, Chris Jericho and Daniel Bryan. They haven't even done a straight Kane/Punk feud yet, because they know how it's going to look. Punk is fantastic against guys his size, and he's still entertaining against the giants. I loved his Big Show feud way back when on Smackdown.

Ladies and gentlemen, a front page writer. Glad we put this guy that clearly understands wrestling better than the rest of us in a place where most people can read his stuff.

Cena's moveset is more basic? What does Punk really do that Cena can't/hasn't done? The kicks? Fair, but that's not where Punk looks sloppy. The elbow drop? Cena does a much more difficult top rope leg drop that looks great every time while Punk's elbow drop looks like garbage half the time he jumps from the top rope. The swinging neckbreaker? Cena's done neckbreakers before that look just as crisp as Punk's.

The depth of their move sets and/or alleged complexity has NOTHING to do with who looks better in the ring.

Size has more to do with the issue, but lots of little guys are incredibly crisp workers. There's a few guys some of you guys may or may not have heard of that were always some of the smaller guys on the roster but wrestled extremely crisp matches and executed some fairly complex moves perfectly. Their names are Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, and Chris Benoit. For a more modern examples, see Daniel Bryan.

So sorry Mr. Journalist, but almost nothing you said is valid. But here's the good news: the real reason for why Cena looks better in the ring is right in front of you, right on your TV screen.

Cena is more athletic. Punk is not a natural athlete, Cena is. Punk is skinny compared to most wrestlers, and he's not cut either. He doesn't have the endurance that a natural athlete has, and it shows in his matches. Cena, on the other hand, is one of the best athletes in the WWE. He's strong, he has great endurance, and he's resilient.

It's as simple as that, Punk might have a creative edge on Cena, and he can put on a hell of a show. But when it comes to execution, the odds go to the athlete. Cena's an athlete, Punk is not.

 

[Headman]

A lot of the main reason Punk botches his moves is a lack of upper body strength. He's not strong enough to do his finisher on a good bit of the WWE's roster. If we're talking ring psychology why would a guy of his size use a power move (GTS) as his finisher? Yet some how he works a more "realistic" style? It's not realistic, it's a gimmick. And you believe it's true because he says it's true over and over again. Is Punk a talented entertainer? Yes, he is. Is he a shitty champion? That's up for debate. Is he the top baby face that so many of you pretend he is? Not even close. As I've said before, Punk can have good matches, but he's not the technical guru that some of you seem to think he is.

I got to thinking the other day and it seems that his best two matches came against Samoa Joe and John Cena. Joe and Cena wrestle a similar style, so if they can keep finding guys like that for Punk to fight he'll look like gold. I'm just glad he didn't use the GTS back in ROH or Joe/Punk II would have lost a star for Punk not being able to get Joe up for it.

 

[YES!]

I think their in ring style plays into it as well. Cena is more of a power brawler. He has those moves that look good in a short 5 or 6 minute match. He can expand his arsenal in longer matches but not many guys look better in short matches than Cena.

Punk is more of a technician and his moves typically work better in longer matches where he can build up to his bigger moves.

It should also be noted that Cena has a style better suited for big men. He has those power moves. Remember when Bryan and Show feuded late last year into the early part of this year? Bryan couldn't do much because of Show's size

The moves are similar, but with the strength of Cena he can do most all moves on even the largest opponents.

Lets take a comparison.

Cena: shoulder block, back body drop, five knuckle shuffle, leg drop from the top, suplex, STF, AA

Punk: neck breaker, closeline, knee to the face, bulldog, variety of kicks, anaconda vice, GTS

Cena plays a "Rocky" or "Mohammad Ali" type character in his matches, which goes great with his resilient character, but at the same time is often boring for the fans. He'd be much more exciting if he'd have "close" matches that was more back and forth rather than get beat to death for 20 minutes then hit an AA out of nowhere.