ECW Region, Mex Subregion, Round 1: (10) Kane vs. (23) William Regal

[klunderbunker]

This is a first round match in the ECW Region, Mexico City Subregion. It is a standard one on one match held under ECW Rules. It will be held at the Arena Mexico, Mexico City, Mexico

#10. Kane

Vs.

#23. William Regal

​

Polls will be open for three days following a one day period for discussion. Voting will be based on who you feel is the greater of the two competitors. Post your reasons for why your pick should win below. Remember that this is non-spam and the most votes in the poll win. Any ties will be broken by the amount of posts of support for each candidate, with one vote per poster.

Also remember that this is a non-spam forum. If you post a response without giving a reason for your selection, it will be penalized for spam and deleted.

 

[Con T.]

Regal. Regal. Regal.

Listen, you can argue all you want that Kane is a dominant big man, that Regal can't win. I'll be just fine arguing that Regal is better in every way than Kane. As a worker, he's better, as a promo, he's better. He's not some nearly as one dimensional as Kane is; Kane has one role, the big monster. Regal plays a great smarmy heel, he can play a great buffoon in power, and when need be, he can play a very serious threat. Regal is so multi-faceted, that he can do just about anything. Kane can't; he can play the brooding monster, and it's the same thing he's been doing for years.

But that isn't just it, no. Plenty of wrestlers have gotten by with being one dimensional. But none of those characters have been involved in as much shitty, shitty television as Kane. Someone's going to argue the fact that Kane held the world title, and Regal didn't. Well, let's look back on that recent reign as champion. It involved a shitty angle with Taker, completely filled with inane swerves and bad matches, and an Edge angle where Paul Bearer was kidnapped, and Kane, the heel, played the good guy trying to save his father. It was such a shitty build, WWE decided they needed to add Rey Mysterio and Alberto Del Rio, just to make sure it would be less awful.

And no, this is not a rare occurrence for Kane. Or must I bring up;

Katie Vick
Kane wants to impregnate Lita
Kane does impregnate Lita, and they have a stillborn child
The resulting feud with SNITSKY (it wasn't his fault, which I'm sure countless Kane fans are going to argue)
May 19th!
My brother is in a vegetative state, and i'm going to solve the mystery!

I can go on, and on, and fucking on. And you can argue it's creative, but Kane is always the constant. Kane, the only seven foot monster in wrestling who gives these pseudo-intellectual promos, with awful jargon no one ever uses in real life. Kane, with bad matches that kill the crowd dead. In all of these angles, Kane is the constant with all of this shitty television. Or did everyone forget when as bitched two months ago when he was having the worst feud Of John Cena's career.

Look, if this sounds like I want Kane out... I do. Just too much bad television for me to ever forgive him. And at the end of the day, Regal is just better. So give me Regal

 

[Davi323]

While his title runs have been less than memorable, For the most part of his career, Kane has been at or near the top/main event level, while William Regal has been a mid-carder. It was true in WCW, and it was true in the WWE. If this were an actual WWE feud, there is absolutely no way in hell that Regal would be booked to win it.

Besides. The match takes place in Mexico City. Kane wears a mask, Regal doesn't. Non-masked wrestlers have a very difficult time getting over masked wrestlers in Mexico.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

While his title runs have been less than memorable, For the most part of his career, Kane has been at or near the top/main event level, while William Regal has been a mid-carder. It was true in WCW, and it was true in the WWE. If this were an actual WWE feud, there is absolutely no way in hell that Regal would be booked to win it.

Besides. The match takes place in Mexico City. Kane wears a mask, Regal doesn't. Non-masked wrestlers have a very difficult time getting over masked wrestlers in Mexico.

It's all well and good that you think Kane will win, but I think you may be exaggerating just a tid when it comes to the Big Red Machine. For a majority of Kane's career, he has been a midcarder. Just face it. Other than his first year and 2010, a cup of coffee with the likes of HHH and Benoit, Kane's been pretty much in the midcard.

 

[Con T.]

While his title runs have been less than memorable, For the most part of his career, Kane has been at or near the top/main event level, while William Regal has been a mid-carder. It was true in WCW, and it was true in the WWE. If this were an actual WWE feud, there is absolutely no way in hell that Regal would be booked to win it.

Besides. The match takes place in Mexico City. Kane wears a mask, Regal doesn't. Non-masked wrestlers have a very difficult time getting over masked wrestlers in Mexico.

If this were a feud, as you put it, Regal and Kane may just have the worst feud of that year. You wanna know why?

In Kane's career, Kane has won the Wrestling Observer's "Worst Feud of the Year" award six times! six! That means in a career that has lasted, what, fourteen years, Kane has been involved in the Worst Feuds in Wrestling for almost half of it. And that's not counting the Cena feud, which is gonna be pretty up there for Worst Feud of 2012.

Regal was a mid carder, but he was always entertaining. Always. His matched are routinely great, his promos always were entertaining, and even as a midcarder, he was still one of the highlights of a damn good program. I will sit here, and watch ten thousand Benoit an Regal matches before I watch one Kane feud.

Vote how you want, and I assume you're using kayfabe, which is perfectly fine. But if you're going to point out Kane was a main eventer and Regal a mid carder, at least be sure to point out who had the better segments

 

[Bernkastel]

Kane has regular wins over plenty of guys that are just as good if not better than Regal: Christian, Booker T, Big Show, Rey Mysterio, Lance Storm, Jericho, Benoit... And PPV wins over huge names that Regal can't even begin to approach: Stone Cold, Mick Foley, Undertaker, Randy Orton...

Call Kane whatever you want, say he can't work, that he's a poor big man, that he's a terrible promo guy... fact is that Kane has been around for nearly 15 years [that's pretty damn good for a character whom some people claim to be stale, boring, and terrible.]

Say what you will about Kane jobbing, but most of the men he he lost to in the past he gains wins over in the future. For example, Kane lost to Great Khali at Mania 23, but later beat him in a Singapore Cane match at Summerslam. Other wrestlers in this category include Triple H, Chris Jericho, and Undertaker. The only men to have definitive winning records against Kane to my knowlegde are Shawn Michaels, The Rock, Batista, and Umaga.

Over the course of his career, Kane has regularly been booked over 80 percent of the men on the roster, and when he's being pushed that number rises to at least 90 percent. About the only people that can beat him at that point are going to be the top two guys on either show, and even then sometimes Kane can't be stopped...

He upset Stone Cold in 1998, neither HHH nor Goldberg could pin Kane over the course of 2004, Kane just recently beat Randy Orton at Mania 28, and it took John "Superman" Cena two PPV's matches in order to beat Kane as he could not get the job done at the Royal Rumble.

Don't be ignorant and vote for Regal here, the man hasn't come anywhere close to matching the accomplishments of Kane. He hasn't won a world title, hasn't won a Money in the Bank, and doesn't have 3 consecutive PPV wins over the Undertaker with the world title on the line. Regal is the type of guy who would have been jobbed to Kane on an episode of Velocity ot Heat, or squashed during one of his heel runs [particularly the ones in 1997-1997, 2004, and 2010.]

 

[Bernkastel]

If this were a feud, as you put it, Regal and Kane may just have the worst feud of that year. You wanna know why?

In Kane's career, Kane has won the Wrestling Observer's "Worst Feud of the Year" award six times! six! That means in a career that has lasted, what, fourteen years, Kane has been involved in the Worst Feuds in Wrestling for almost half of it. And that's not counting the Cena feud, which is gonna be pretty up there for Worst Feud of 2012.

Regal was a mid carder, but he was always entertaining. Always. His matched are routinely great, his promos always were entertaining, and even as a midcarder, he was still one of the highlights of a damn good program. I will sit here, and watch ten thousand Benoit an Regal matches before I watch one Kane feud.

Vote how you want, and I assume you're using kayfabe, which is perfectly fine. But if you're going to point out Kane was a main eventer and Regal a mid carder, at least be sure to point out who had the better segments

It's nice that you think moves are great and all, but I look at William Regal like I look at Dean Malenko... chaotic... there's little point to anything the man is allowed to do unless he decides to start shooting on people. I watched a match between Regal and Bryan and after about the twelfth series of rapid fire European uppercuts I was about ready to turn the match off.

If anything Regal will always be remembered as a prime example why the strong style just doesn't work in the WWE.

 

[D-Man]

It's all well and good that you think Kane will win, but I think you may be exaggerating just a tid when it comes to the Big Red Machine. For a majority of Kane's career, he has been a midcarder. Just face it. Other than his first year and 2010, a cup of coffee with the likes of HHH and Benoit, Kane's been pretty much in the midcard.

I applaud your efforts on giving Regal his due but there is no way in any universe that Regal can out-muscle, out-pop, or out-do Kane. There are too many factors in Kane's favor here:

1. Regal has sustained many injuries in his career which would make him weaker to Kane who has been known to be one of the healthiest and most consistent upper-midcard -> main-eventers in the business.
2. Kane is more powerful.
3. Kane pairs that power with his uncanny agility.
4. His overall popularity stretches far beyond one country and his super stardom dwarfs Regal's.
5. Kane was world champion in two different eras and generations for a reason; he was THAT dominant at those particular periods.
6. Kane is sadistic enough that Regal's use of brass knuckles wouldn't be enough to keep him down.
7. Davi's point about Kane's mask is something I never thought of but definitely cannot deny in this bout.
8. Didn't Regal fall asleep in a PPV match against Kane once? Don't you think that would be detrimental towards Regal gaining a victory here? He has chronic insomnia... the guy is susceptible to just about ALL of Kane's attacks.
9. How about this:

Kane was DESTROYING Regal until outside interference happened.

EDIT: Here are some more facts that will cover more angles of arguments made on Regal's behalf:

9. Kane is more popular than Regal as a babyface AND as a heel.
10. Kane has sold more merchandise than Regal.
11. Kane is feared by more wrestlers than they are by William Regal.

Guys, you can sugar-coat it all you want but Regal doesn't stand a chance.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

Call Kane whatever you want, say he can't work, that he's a poor big man, that he's a terrible promo guy... fact is that Kane has been around for nearly 15 years [that's pretty damn good for a character whom some people claim to be stale, boring, and terrible.

Mark Henry's been around for fifteen years and up until last year, the consensus was that he's shit and a joke. Longevity doesn't impress me in this regard.

Say what you will about Kane jobbing, but most of the men he he lost to in the past he gains wins over in the future. For example, Kane lost to Great Khali at Mania 23, but later beat him in a Singapore Cane match at Summerslam. Other wrestlers in this category include Triple H, Chris Jericho, and Undertaker. The only men to have definitive winning records against Kane to my knowlegde are Shawn Michaels, The Rock, Batista, and Umaga.

I believe that Undertaker guy has a winning record against Kane. Kurt Angle does. Chris Benoit does. HHH does. Do I need to continue?

He upset Stone Cold in 1998, neither HHH nor Goldberg could pin Kane over the course of 2004, Kane just recently beat Randy Orton at Mania 28, and it took John "Superman" Cena two PPV's matches in order to beat Kane as he could not get the job done at the Royal Rumble.

Let's see. For one thing, HHH never faced Kane in 2004 and if you want to use Undertaker freaking Kane out as a reason to why Goldberg couldn't pin Kane, then go ahead.

Don't be ignorant and vote for Regal here, the man hasn't come anywhere close to matching the accomplishments of Kane. He hasn't won a world title, hasn't won a Money in the Bank, and doesn't have 3 consecutive PPV wins over the Undertaker with the world title on the line. Regal is the type of guy who would have been jobbed to Kane on an episode of Velocity ot Heat, or squashed during one of his heel runs [particularly the ones in 1997-1997, 2004, and 2010.]

If Billy Gunn can pin Kane, I'm certain Regal can and will.

 

[Con T.]

The kayfabe argument?

In an era where everyone "gets their win back", and wins and losses are passed around the table more than DDP's wife, I don't see why I should believe Kane is a better wrestler. As much as you can argue Kane gets his win over stars, he also loses to those same men just as quickly. Just a week after Kane beat Orton at Mania, he lost to him in a No DQ match, which admittedly was far better than their match at Mania.

We can argue wins and losses til we're both blue in the face, and it will be one large Cartesian Circle, and neither of us will get anywhere, especially in an era where wins and losses mean so little, and there's rarely, if ever, a decisive victor. I choose to focus on what entertains me more in wrestling, and for me, Kane has had such horrible television, I could just as easily include three videos of bad Kane tv for every post I make in this thread, as a matter of fact,maybe I'll do just that.

[YOUTUBE]26lJ14mJfec[/youtube]

[YouTube]XOlo7hfjKcE[/YouTube]

[YouTube]4tXJXJxkMqU[/YouTube]

Mind you, I never even mentioned these moments in my above list. And I have plenty more ammo from there. And you expect mento believe Kane's a better wrestler, and a better entertainer?

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

I applaud your efforts on giving Regal his due but there is no way in any universe that Regal can out-muscle, out-pop, or out-do Kane. There are too many factors in Kane's favor here:

1. Regal has sustained many injuries in his career which would make him weaker to Kane who has been known to be one of the healthiest and most consistent upper-midcard -> main-eventers in the business.
2. Kane is more powerful.
3. Kane pairs that power with his uncanny agility.
4. His overall popularity stretches far beyond one country and his super stardom dwarfs Regal's.
5. Kane was world champion in two different eras and generations for a reason; he was THAT dominant at those particular periods.
6. Kane is sadistic enough that Regal's use of brass knuckles wouldn't be enough to keep him down.
7. Davi's point about Kane's mask is something I never thought of but definitely cannot deny in this bout.
8. Didn't Regal fall asleep in a PPV match against Kane once? Don't you think that would be detrimental towards Regal gaining a victory here? He has chronic insomnia... the guy is susceptible to just about ALL of Kane's attacks.
9. How about this:

Kane was DESTROYING Regal until outside interference happened.

Guys, you can sugar-coat it all you want but Regal doesn't stand a chance.

1. This isn't a contest of who had the most injuries. If that were the case, Orton and Edge would lose every time.

2. Kane has lost to less powerful wrestlers plenty of times.

3. I'm pretty sure Kane has lost matches due to sledgehammers and steel chairs. Kane isn't immune to it.

 

[Davi323]

This is the same William Regal that lost to Christian in 8 seconds in an WWECW championship match?

I believe that Undertaker guy has a winning record against Kane. Kurt Angle does. Chris Benoit does. HHH does. Do I need to continue?

And how many big name wrestlers does William Regal have a winning record against? If you are going to use other wrestler's record against Kane as a knock against him, then surely, the same standard should be applied to William Regal. I am sure that if we got right down to it, the list of people with winning records against Regal would be quite a bit longer than the list of people with winning records against Kane...

 

[D-Man]

1. This isn't a contest of who had the most injuries. If that were the case, Orton and Edge would lose every time.

No but wouldn't being susceptible to injuries plague a man who's competing in a physical, athletic, pugilistic contest? Kayfabe or not, this weakens Regal's chances.

2. Kane has lost to less powerful wrestlers plenty of times.

And Regal hasn't?? Didn't he lose to Yoshi Tatsu?!?

3. I'm pretty sure Kane has lost matches due to sledgehammers and steel chairs. Kane isn't immune to it.

Yes but in the match I showed against Regal, he dominated. We're not talking about other matches but you can continue to give the generic, broad answer. It makes you look more incorrect here but if it makes you happy then go for it.

 

[Pay Per Ghost]

Kane even in his worst feud was working for the belt not like Regal who was staring at Show's schlong in the godamn bathroom!

I have no doubt in Kane going over Regal because he is more dominant, has worked much more years on top, has stayed relevant despite career-crippling angles, and is basically a bigger name than Regal. In an international venue where more recognizable will easy out-pop a 'worker', I see Kane's bigger stature and name take him over Regal. Kane will lose yes, but to someone bigger.

 

[Con T.]

It's nice that you think moves are great and all, but I look at William Regal like I look at Dean Malenko... chaotic... there's little point to anything the man is allowed to do unless he decides to start shooting on people. I watched a match between Regal and Bryan and after about the twelfth series of rapid fire European uppercuts I was about ready to turn the match off.

If anything Regal will always be remembered as a prime example why the strong style just doesn't work in the WWE.

Just like Kane's proof that a seven foot monster isn't nearly as intimidating as it used to be.

I'm sorry, did you miss the part where I also point out that I find his promos more entertaining, and that I find him as a character more compelling. You're trying to box me in as the snarky mark who jazzes himself over snapmares and collar ties. That isn't me, fella; I just don't like when I'm forced to watch horrible, horrible television.

Like, for example;


[YouTube]zs5gIW8y2j4[/YouTube]

[YouTube]DKvr1ZnZ9ac[/YouTube]

[YouTube]E6Ajff8mPtM[/YouTube]

Haven't even pulled out the big guns yet, my boy

 

[Bernkastel]

I believe that Undertaker guy has a winning record against Kane. Kurt Angle does. Chris Benoit does. HHH does. Do I need to continue?

My definition of winning record is that Kane hasn't beaten those 4 men at all, not on PPV nor regular TV. Kane hasn't beaten Angle or Beniot on PPV but he has on regular TV. Kane beat HHH for the IC title, and I already mentioned his feats against Undertaker...

Next argument please...

Let's see. For one thing, HHH never faced Kane in 2004

Goldberg vs HHH vs Kane - Armaggedon

and if you want to use Undertaker freaking Kane out as a reason to why Goldberg couldn't pin Kane, then go ahead.

Goldberg also couldn't beat Kane in the lumberjack match they had or in the Triple Threat. In fact Kane had Goldberg soundly beaten until Batista pulled him out of the ring.

If Billy Gunn can pin Kane, I'm certain Regal can and will.

The Rock was beat by the Hurricane, and Hogan lost to Billy Kidman. I guess that makes both of them shit in your book.

 

[Con T.]

The Rock was beat by the Hurricane, and Hogan lost to Billy Kidman. I guess that makes both of them shit in your book.

Wasn't part of your argument earlier that Kane had better wins over bigger stars? Shouldn't this really negate that theory of yours, then, if we agree that wins and losses mean so little in wrestling?

Again, it's the Cartesian Circle; we can argue wins and losses, but at the end of the day, as you just proved so well, they mean ultimately nothing. And when that comes into play, I have to vote on who entertains me.

And you know what doesn't entertain me?

[YouTube]G00V7z_VuAo[/YouTube]

[YouTube]3r-9f9mfvlk[/YouTube]

[YouTube]zypQDKOJToc[/YouTube]

 

[Bernkastel]

Just like Kane's proof that a seven foot monster isn't nearly as intimidating as it used to be.

I'm sorry, did you miss the part where I also point out that I find his promos more entertaining, and that I find him as a character more compelling. You're trying to box me in as the snarky mark who jazzes himself over snapmares and collar ties. That isn't me, fella; I just don't like when I'm forced to watch horrible, horrible television.

Like, for example;

Haven't even pulled out the big guns yet, my boy

I like the fact that you tried to juice up your argument with awards from the Wrestling Observer, these are the same people who named Hogan vs Andre at Mania 3 the worst worked match of the year. I take everything from them with a grain of salt.

Your big guns? Lulz... what are you going to do, mention Katie Vick? [which was HHH's doing BTW], Lita? Even when Kane was involved in horrible booking, he was still going over everyone on the roster aside from the world champ and number one contender. What about Rey Mysterio? I really liked that one match they had when Kane squashed him in a matter of minutes to win the World title.

 

[Diet Soda]

Seeing as I made a thread today for my boy Regal, suppose I should fly the flag for his Lordship in here too...

I know Regal's losses probably outweigh the wins, but let's just look at some of the names William Regal has victories over...

Edge
CM Punk
Chris Jericho
JBL
Booker T

All world champions, just saying.

 

[Con T.]

I like the fact that you tried to juice up your argument with awards from the Wrestling Observer, these are the same people who named Hogan vs Andre at Mania 3 the worst worked match of the year. I take everything from them with a grain of salt.

Your big guns? Lulz... what are you going to do, mention Katie Vick? [which was HHH's doing BTW], Lita? Even when Kane was involved in horrible booking, he was still going over everyone on the roster aside from the world champ and number one contender. What about Rey Mysterio? I really liked that one match they had when Kane squashed him in a matter of minutes to win the World title.

They're wrestling fans, just like you and I are. Discrediting them is all well and fine, but not much really separates people from the Wrestling Observer from people on this site. They're fans. Now, do I agree with everything that's said? No, not at all, but when there's a group consensus that something is bad, there's no way to avoid it.

Or, would you like to argue that this was good television?


[YouTube]Lh3f8MnLs7k[/YouTube]

[YouTube]4fwHOe_viSM[/YouTube]

[YouTube]EMeesm7uO6U[/YouTube]

As to your point about Triple H, I get that it was his doing. But in everything i've posted, Kane has been the constant, throughout this entire thing. It's been Kane's promos, Kane's characters, and when I feel up to posting them, they will be Kane's matches that kill crowds

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

My definition of winning record is that Kane hasn't beaten those 4 men at all, not on PPV nor regular TV. Kane hasn't beaten Angle or Beniot on PPV but he has on regular TV. Kane beat HHH for the IC title, and I already mentioned his feats against Undertaker...

Next argument please...

So only wins on PPV's count now? Good to know.

Goldberg vs HHH vs Kane - Armaggedon

1. It was in 2003.

2. HHH pinned Goldberg thanks to a Kane chokeslam and Batista pulling Kane out of the ring.

Goldberg also couldn't beat Kane in the lumberjack match they had or in the Triple Threat. In fact Kane had Goldberg soundly beaten until Batista pulled him out of the ring.

Key word being "had".

 

[Bernkastel]

So only wins on PPV's count now? Good to know.

I never said that, I don't know where you got that from. The only matches I'm not going to count are DQ and Count Out. Kane and Regal have only had two matches that I could find. One never get got started because Kane destroyed Regal before the bell, and the other ended in DQ.

The Unamerican angle was probably the only time I found Regal to be entertaining. His stablemates were Christian, Storm, and Test. Kane has beaten all 3 of those guys in the past, what makes you think that he wouldn't have been booked over Regal as well?

1. It was in 2003.

2. HHH pinned Goldberg thanks to a Kane chokeslam and Batista pulling Kane out of the ring.

You're right, but It doesn't change anything I said earlier.

 

[Shocky]

Kane, the career mid to upper mid carder with dabs here and there in the main event scene, vs. William Regal, a career curtain jerker to mid card wrestler that has never sniffed a world title?

I love William Regal. Dude is fantastic in the ring, fantastic on the microphone, just an all around interesting guy for me to watch. He's completely outmatched here. Kane might be shit (by shit he's over 6'4" and 250lbs, which in IWC terminology automatically makes Kane shit. Everyone ignores the fact that he's been a main player in the WWE for a decade and a half, was given a shitty gimmick yet made it work, and plays one of the best psychological heels ever) but he's just better then Regal overall.

Regal is a better "wrestler" in the purest sense of the word, but he's not a better pro wrestler.

 

[The Brain]

This one definitely goes to Kane. Has Kane been involved in a lot of terrible storylines over the years? Absolutely. Has he come out on the losing end more times than not against main event opponents? Without question. With that said, William Regal is not a main event opponent. The Real Man’s Man and first inductee to the Kiss My Ass Club has also been involved in his share of terrible angles. Regal is the type of guy that Kane would run through on his way to being built up before a better guy would tear him down. If you’re anti Kane that is fine. You’re better off voting against him in a later round. He easily beats Regal here.

 

[Bernkastel]

They're wrestling fans, just like you and I are. Discrediting them is all well and fine, but not much really separates people from the Wrestling Observer from people on this site. They're fans. Now, do I agree with everything that's said? No, not at all, but when there's a group consensus that something is bad, there's no way to avoid it.

Trying to make this a battle of preference is all well and good; however, you still haven't shown me nor anyone else that isn't buying your argument why Regal should be booked to go over Kane in a hypothetical match.

Regal in prime [KOTR] might have gone over Kane at his lowest point, but that's not quite fair is it?

As to your point about Triple H, I get that it was his doing. But in everything i've posted, Kane has been the constant, throughout this entire thing. It's been Kane's promos, Kane's characters, and when I feel up to posting them, they will be Kane's matches that kill crowds

So now you're dragging drawing power into the equation. Kane's world title reign lasted 5 months.... world champions that bore fans don't normally get reigns that last nearly half a year do they? I'm guessing WWE management didn't think that Kane was boring... looks like it was just you.