I mean, clearly this is a legit point and definitely something I didn't consider enough. I've watched a lot of WCW but not really sequentially - only watched retrospectively rather than at the time which means I've missed out a lot on the trends of the fed. My only point is that "6 time world champion" flatters regardless - three of his reigns lasted less than 12 days. That's half his world titles. Of the other three, one was 2 months, one just over a month, the other around four and a half. I mean your point is certainly valid, but regardless half his reigns were either transitional or trading titles back and forth with the champion. Modern WWE titles bounce around too so it's kinda irrelevant, just saying. Having Race obviously doesn't hurt. You can't deny how much of a threat Vader was booked as however, physically dominant. No-one could guess how results of pre-determined matches would change without a manager in the corner of the heel so it's pointless guessing. I just think Vader showed at least enough to be considered to have the advantage over Sting during that feud, with or without Harley. Faces have had to deal with heels and their managers for years now, it's kinda a cop out to say "yh but the manager made all the difference" - sure, it's a factor but not one that has dramatically helped heels win/loss records against faces over the years. It's just an inherent part of pro-wrestling angles - if a heel didn't have a manager, he'd find other ways to win the matches he is booked to win. i voted Sting, I do think he's got too much. I just think a lot of the "it took Henry years to find himself" is a pointless argument and entirely irrelevant to how this match would take place. Sting deserves to go through and would beat Henry at his best, concurred.