*sigh* Lets do this quick:
Not missing the point. You stated that in 85 his back was shot. I disagree. I have shown that thru 85 he wrestled some big men and tossed them around the ring. You stressed he could not lift 100lbs. I showed where he slammed Studd and took on both Hart and Neidhart at the end of a battle royal and dumped both over the top rope. If memory serves he threw Hart ontop of Neidhart. Also, in his prime his back was not an issue. It may have been weakening as he got bigger but it was not an issue when he was running all over the ring.
I stated that
the video said his back was shot by '85. Again,
the video stressed he couldn't
catch 100lbs. Again, someone asked how, based on
the video, someone could not vote for Andre. I simply answered the question.
His back as well as joints/bones were always an issue. The effect may not have be near what they would eventually become but being his size is always a source of great strength and a crippling weakness it's simple physics. In layman's terms "The bigger they are...
In some spots of course, but back then everone used 'rest holds'. Backland, Flair, Andre, anyone.
So the best you got is that others did it too therefore that makes Andre's cardio capabilities a non issue; ok gottcha. (Lets pay no mind to the fact that Acromegaly prevents the heart from pumping enough blood to oxygenate the body's soft tissue and bone or that the kidneys --the filters of the body-- can't filter the blood's waste products properly.)
Right, because Austin was not actually in match one. therefore he would not ba tired. Of course Andre would be tired. So would Austin. And Austin had to carry Andre's bulk in the match and, by everyones assumption, got hurt enough to be pinned so he is in a weaker state.
Right... even though I what I
actually said was:
"The point I was making was that everyone gets tired the longer they compete and someone of Andre's frame, and structural limitations, would surely tire faster and be more winded than his healthy normal sized opponent."
You claim I'm disregarding Austin. Wrong. Furthermore, I don't believe Austin would have to literally carry Andre's bulk, but I could see what you're saying.
That may have been other people's assumption, it wasn't everyone's, and it certainly wasn't mine. In fact I believe Austin might just give the 1st match to Andre via illegal moves that get him disqualified but ultimately sets up for long term advantages.
Can't say otherwise, its physiologically impossible.
O I c wut u did therez... clever.
So we agree, Austin gets tired and weaker from the beating Andre gives him. And in his prime Andre would last. Again, this is not a iron man match, both matches could really only take around 15 minutes. Or all three could last an hour. IMO Andre in his prime could go the distance.
No we don't agree. Let's try it again... I said:
"The point I was making was that everyone gets tired the longer they compete and someone of Andre's frame, and structural limitations, would surely tire faster and be more winded than his healthy normal sized opponent."
I agree Austin would not be as fresh as he was in round 1, but in relation to Andre he'd be more capable with regards to endurance and fatigue. The rest is all your own conjecture which I don't agree with.
Naturally immobilized giant? Not in his prime.
Nature i.e. his naturally acquired disease restricts, prevents, and lessens normal movement patterns. Even in his glorious prime --regardless of when it was-- Andre had movement limitations in his back hips and knees. Hence by nature he was naturally immobilized
Now, since you are insisting on useing Andre only after the effects of his illness have begun to take there toll then I call that the Austin everyone is refering to is the one that battled Mr McMahon, ergo the Ausin with a injured neck and a more limited moveset. So...Andre works the neck and the match is done.
I'm not insisting at all, in fact I agreed with IC25's post that his prime could be consider long before the late 80's. And even if I were, that you just go "since you did it I'll do it"... is weak.
While I was not making assumptions of you per se( notice I said voters ) I do think you are as you seem to be fixated on the Andre of the mid to late 80s rather then the younger, stronger, more mobile Andre of the 70s/early 80s.
I'm a voter, (I noticed you said voters) therefore you were talking to me as a part of the larger voting pool. You even wrote:
"...I was not making assumptions of you per se( notice I said voters ) I do think you are as you seem to be fixated on..."
But thanks for the clarification/backpedal.
I'm not fixated on any year. What I
am fixated on is a man who was between 7'4-7'2 and 300-500lbs who had a disease his entire adult life that cause a great deal of physical/internal complications and limitations. I fixated on the natural structural flaws such a being would posses. I fixated on the musculoskelatal complications that are chronic in such a man. I fixated on his enlarged and progressively weakened heart that couldn't possible be as strong as normal sized healthy athletic male's. I fixated on the man's natural weaknesses. None of these problems are exclusive to a specific year. They merely got worse as time went on. Austin's methods would be the same regardless; however the methods simply would have been even more devastating and effective year after year.