"Is Bret Hart The Greatest Versatile Wrestler Of All Time"

[andy zones]

Before starting this thread I will definitely say that I m a bret hart fan, but in recent days as I started watching more of bret hart matches I become even bigger fan of his. I mean the matches he had were always considered special but when I watch a match for at least 6 or 7 times I only left paused with his astonishing storytelling and versatility. I know many people have always said that bret did the same moves in every match and his matches were same all the time, but after watching his matches more closely I can definitely say that they are terribly wrong. There are many examples of that

1. Bret hart s match with Bulldog at summerslam was completely different from their match at In Your House 96.
2. Bret s match with Steve Austin at wrestlemania was completely different from their match at survivor series.(WM was a brawl while SS was technical masterpiece)
3. Bret s match with HBK at WM was completely different from their match at Survivor series 92 or 97 for that matter)
4. Bret s match with Owen at WM was completely different from the lumberjack match or the cage match they had
I can really go on and on but the point I m trying to bring here is that pound per pound do you consider Bret the greatest versatile wrestler of all time . For me he is the greatest Versatile wrestler who can wrestle in a match according to the story or the Circumstances he had with his opponent.
.

 

[ZEUS]

I think the greatest testament to Hart's greatness would actually be the fact that he could have a great match with any style of wrestler. Wether it was other great technical workers like Hennig, Benoit, HBK or Austin, superheavyweights like Kevin Nash, Yokozuna or Bam Bam Bigelow, or smaller guys like Owen and Sean Waltman (as 1-2-3 Kid), Bret could have a good match with everyone. And they were always different, despite what many Hitman Haters tend to say.

 

[It's...Baylariat!]

I'm not a hater of Bret Hart, but he's overrated. He had great matches, and his work/shoot promos in 96/97 were awesome. He can work well with anyone, and make anyone look good. But as far as versatile is concerned, I guess you could say he was very versatile. He didn't have the same match with one person twice. That's admirable. Flair and Hogan had practically the same match all the time and they were still great. However, Bret Hart is very versatile...he spanned a generation. Going from the Hogan Era, to the Attitude Era and into the Monday Night Wars era.

He was SOOOOO over in Canada, and haters usually say that Bret Hart wasn't a good technical wrestler and he was character was boring, but you can't fault the guy for being who he wanted to be. He's not 'The best their is, the best their was, and the best their ever will be.', but he was a great wrestler and he played well with about everyone he was in the ring with, except Goldberg. Then again, who had a passable match with Goldberg?

 

[jericho3150]

I don't know that Bret was the most versatile... In fact thats what many critics and even some wrestlers criticize Bret for. I think he was one of if not the greatest storytellers of all time and that is what allowed him to have tell different stories in the ring but as far as his style he rarely changed it up.

 

[Arrynboot]

Mr.Lariato, you started by saying Bret is overrated and went on to give a ton of reasons as to why he is so great, quit sitting on the fence and realize that Bret truly is the greatest in ring performer of all time.

 

[wolvdog316]

I'm not sure I can give the nod to Hart. I might have to go with Angle. He like Hart didn't have many bad matches. Both could bring it with any kind of wrestler. Where I think they seperate is mic skills and personality.

Angle, especially with Austin and McMahon was simply some of the greatest promo's ever shown on film, and I incude Flair in that too. His stuff was gold.

And I don't care how predictable Flairs match's were. He made his opponets look 10x better than when they went in. And most of the time he won. He was one of the FEW guys ever that could win the match and the face STILL came out 1000x better than when they went in.

I also liked Savage. Before he went all big and shit. He was really good. Anybody that could have a damn classic with Warrior, WM7, deserves some.

So its either Hart or Angle, with Flair behind them IMO

 

[DhA]

Of course he's overrated, btu that dosen't mean he's not great. Most of the greats, from Hogan and Flair to Rock and Austin tend to get overrated, but that's only because they're the best at what they did, so people see no harm in elevatign them to stupid heights. I'd say that Bret was the best in-ring that I personally have seen, better than frequently touted names like HBK, Benoit and Angle even.

 

[Dragonslayer]

Well, as far as Angle and Bret Hart go, it really gets kinda tough for me. I mean, I grew up watching Bret Hart, and really loved him. And to this day, there is not one other guy who ever looked as crisp in the ring as Bret Hart did. The only one to come close to that and ever touching that, was Kurt Angle (at least of the wrestlers I know/have watched). Now as far as pure versatility goes... I have to admit that I believe from a purely atheltic point of view, Kurt Angle is more versatile than Bret Hart.

Both guys are of about equal stature, but Kurt Angle has always been a physical freak - he can deliver Suplexes like almost no other, of any kind or form, plus he has got an amazing aerial repertoire that the Hitman can't show. However... if you ask me, the main difference is that despite probably an advantage of Angle in the purely athletic department, I think that Bret Hart just is the definite professional wrestler.

Kurt Angle's gimmick is and has always been - and rightfully so! - centered around the fact that he was a legit Olympic champion, a legit amateur wrestler. He could thrive off that, and he really evolved well into a professional wrestler.

However Hart on the other hand, was born into wrestling's royal family, and from the day he was born, he inhaled professional wrestling with every breath he took. And I believe that is what sets him apart from Angle. For no matter how great Angle is, he still will remain the legit-wrestler-turned-pro-wrestler. For Bret Hart, there really was only Pro Wrestling, right from the get-go. He knew exactly how the business worked, he knew exactly how to tell a great story in the ring - and even if Angle managed to catch up really great on that, Hart still has a few points on him in that department, at least in my opinion. As has been stated - Bret Hart could have good matches with anybody, no matter if they were smaller/faster technical guys (Hakushi, anyone?), brawler types (Stone Cold) or big guys (Undertaker, Kevin Nash, Yokozuna, for crying out loud), and he always could tell a great story inside the ring - simply because he was just brought up to know the business by heart, and know how to work a match in such a way to make it mean something.

Of course, these days there are still many talented wrestlers, and there also were during Hart's day - but Bret Hart definitely managed to deliver both intensity, athleticism and the storytelling aspect of a pro wrestling match in pretty much most of his matches. So to sum it up, I'd definitely be inclined to say that Bret Hart is indeed the greatest versatile wrestler of all time.

 

[reddevil69]

I'm not a hater of Bret Hart, but he's overrated. He had great matches, and his work/shoot promos in 96/97 were awesome. He can work well with anyone, and make anyone look good. But as far as versatile is concerned, I guess you could say he was very versatile. He didn't have the same match with one person twice. That's admirable. Flair and Hogan had practically the same match all the time and they were still great. However, Bret Hart is very versatile...he spanned a generation. Going from the Hogan Era, to the Attitude Era and into the Monday Night Wars era.

He was SOOOOO over in Canada, and haters usually say that Bret Hart wasn't a good technical wrestler and he was character was boring, but you can't fault the guy for being who he wanted to be. He's not 'The best their is, the best their was, and the best their ever will be.', but he was a great wrestler and he played well with about everyone he was in the ring with, except Goldberg. Then again, who had a passable match with Goldberg?

why do people always have to pull the "he was over in Canada crap"? I live in Canada and yes he was over, but people, including that jerk Flair constantly try and rewrite history and downplay Bret's impact in the business by stating he mattered in Canada more than the U.S.A. Bret was unanimously cheered by fans at the 95 Rumble over "made in the USA" Lex Luger and went on to win the belt at Mania. Bret the Canadian was chosen as the man to carry the load over Luger, the American...the same Luger that Flair calls a great worker and then has the nerve to say Bret was an ok worker but not great!!???

Bret and Owen wrestled a 6 month program that drew the biggest business for the WWF in 1994 and culminated with a five star cage match at summerslam 1994 in Chicago....yes I am aware the same night Undertaker made his return, but the main buildup for that event was centered around Bret and Owen...CANADIANS!...and the last time I checked Chicago was not in Canada...your current President calls that city home! And before anyone says that business was in the toilet in 1994, yes it was bad compared to other years,but WWF was still drawing better and making more money than WCW was in 1993 and 1994 and guess who was the top man for most of 1993 and 94 in WCW? Ric Flair. Bret was top man in WWE and he outdrew Flair...period.More people talked about Bret and Owen's feud than Hogan/Flair's lame ass feud the same summer.

Having said all that, Bret was one of the best storytellers ever in the business and it was because he was so versatile.I've seen matches from 1981/82 with Bret in his early twenties, from Stampede Wrestling in Calgary that are more exciting than any match i've seen with Flair and Harley Race, or Flair and Rhodes, or Flair and Garvin, and especially Flair and Luger. Flair claims in order to be truly GREAT one must have worked with Jack Brisco,the Funks,Rhodes,Race,and Wahoo McDaniel ...Wow, that's funny because the two guys Flair claims are the best in the business Triple H and HBK never ever worked with those guys.Nice try Flair.

Bret knew what he was doing alot better than most guys from his era and that is why he went to the top of the business, stayed there for 6 years and is still being talked about by everyone on this forum and fans all over the world, not just in Canada, today in 2009.

 

[avi01]

It`s not right to say Bret Hart was over only in Canada. That was the case in his last heel turn and it was quite a unique situation. When he was the top face of the company (mainly 1994). he was THE guy and absolutely popular everywhere. He is one of the most popular wrestler ever.

 

[smalltownfan]

To me, Bret Hart was the total package (no offense to Lex Luger). He could mat wrestle, he could brawl, he could adapt to any style and any opponent, he could beat you with a quick move or by submission, he was great on the mic...what more could you ask for. Other notable wrestlers that can be considered the most versatile include:

Ric Flair--for obvious reasons
Kurt Angle--The best mat wrestler today
Eddie Guerrero--Especially late in his career
Chris Benoit--Got to give him his due. Best brawler of this group, but not the best on the mic.

 

[Undercurrent]

Watching a Bret Hart match resembled viewing a mini movie where he was the star, director and producer. Bret Hart is easily the greatest storyteller within the history of professional wrestling. He not only brought out the best in the opponent but also the best out of the fans who truly got lost in the moment. We all genuinely cared about Bret when he stepped foot in that ring as there stood a man who was so passionate about this business and every night was willing to give us the best match possible. I consider it an honour to have watched so many Bret Hart matches and because of that at a young age I grew to truly appreciate this businsess.


Whether he was locking up with Diesel, HBK, his brother Owen or Bam Bam, he was able to adjust and use the proper psychology in defeating them. He wouldn't attempt to over power Diesel and rather would work on his legs. HBK was always known to literally fly around the ring and rather than keep up with him, Bret would attempt to slow him down. If you were to construct a wrestler who was extremely balanced and talented in every category, you would end up with Bret Hart.

Bret Hart is indeed The Greatest Versatile Wrestler Of All Time.

 

[simonhirst]

The reason most people call Bret overrated is because he was an old school wrestler. He was a technician. you dont see anybody who does technical wrestling anymore. It's mainly high flying and signature moves. Wrestling has moved on and in most people's case, they seem to prefer current wrestling to technical wrestling. so therefore, people will say Bret was overrated, but for his time period, he could have a brilliant match. Most versatile however, i don't think. I'd be more inclined to go for Shawn Michaels. I just think Shawn has adapted his style to fit in with todays wrestling, although of course Bret isnt around anymore, but i think bret would have struggled and there are loads of matches where i can't imagine it being good with bret because of brets style. for instance, bret hart vs jeff hardy? bret hart vs shelton benjamin? put shawn in there and you have a better match in my opinion. To conclude my point, bret would have been limited to whom he could have feuded with compared to say shawn.

 

[Ryanhitman316]

I am an American but for some reason I favor Canadian wrestlers and when I started to watch wrestling back in the 90s, Bret Hart is and was the Best to me. I look at wrestling as technicians. Such as Benoit, Angle, Jericho and Bret. Those are true wrestlers to me. I mean high flyers are great too but this is not aerobatics. Until this day I praise Bret Hart to be the greatest and the Best ever. So yes he is the greatest versatile of all time. Today I look at Kurt Angle to be another Bret.

 

[ZEUS]

Bret had great matches with spot monkeys like 1-2-3 Kid and Hakushi, so I don't see how a Jeff Hardy match would be difficult. If you don't remember, Bret could take to the air as well, obviously not to the same ability of a Jeff Hardy or HBK, but he was still very good at aerial wrestling. I don't see how a Bret-Jeff Hardy, Bret-Matt hardy, Bret-Shelton Benjamin match wouldn't be great.

I also disagree that HBK has changed his style. He really hasn't. He has always spent most of the match getting the tar kicked out of him as a face, just like most of his matches today. He has always done the high flying stuff that he still does, which is in itself admirable as he isn't a young guy anymore. My problem with HBK being considered in this particular category, is that he is not the best brawler. He has had some good street fight style matches, but over the course of his career, he just has not come across as a tough brawler. Unlike Hart, who, under the right conditions, would have a better brawl than anyone else in the business. Don't get me wrong, HBK is great, and is very versatile, but I don't think he has really adapted that much over the course of his career.

The reason most people call Bret overrated is because he was an old school wrestler. He was a technician. you dont see anybody who does technical wrestling anymore. It's mainly high flying and signature moves. Wrestling has moved on and in most people's case, they seem to prefer current wrestling to technical wrestling. so therefore, people will say Bret was overrated, but for his time period, he could have a brilliant match. Most versatile however, i don't think. I'd be more inclined to go for Shawn Michaels. I just think Shawn has adapted his style to fit in with todays wrestling, although of course Bret isnt around anymore, but i think bret would have struggled and there are loads of matches where i can't imagine it being good with bret because of brets style. for instance, bret hart vs jeff hardy? bret hart vs shelton benjamin? put shawn in there and you have a better match in my opinion. To conclude my point, bret would have been limited to whom he could have feuded with compared to say shawn.

 

[Black Snow]

Bret was NOT overrated. He definitely lacked charisma. I would never deny that. His promos were never that exciting which is probably why people rate Flair, HBK and Angle over his. They could work and light up the mic.

I'd call Bret the most versatile wrestler. Absolutely. Angle is a close second. HBK can't work hardcore nearly as well as some people think. Flair can't work hardcore period. Bret can.

But in all honesty? If someone said Shawn, Flair or Angle was the most versatile wrestler I wouldn't argue with them that much. As long as the answer is one of those four guys you can make a great case for them.

 

[andy zones]

Many people are bringing the popularity theory here, Just seen a news where Bret hart s book "My life in Cartoon World of Wrestling" will be debuting at NO. 5 on the UK Best Seller List and Bret hasnt even started the promotions of the book yet. Simply Astonishing.

 

[Tony Soprano]

Bret Hart- The best there is, the best there was, the best there ever will be!

Well, I dunno about the last one but when one thinks of wrestling they have to think of the Hitman. Top 5 at least.

 

[It's...Baylariat!]

Mr.Lariato, you started by saying Bret is overrated and went on to give a ton of reasons as to why he is so great, quit sitting on the fence and realize that Bret truly is the greatest in ring performer of all time.

He is a great technical wrestler, but a crappy storyteller. The only time he had any heat caused from his promos were when he was half shooting on being treated like shit. EVERYBODY thinks Bret Hart's one of the greatest of all time. He's simply not. Great wrestler, poor storyteller. That equals overrated.

He had good matches with some great wrestlers, but as far as Bret Hart carrying a company or being the star...look at what happened to him in WCW. I know Owen passed away during this time frame, but overall, his performance in WCW was a flop. Because he was a product of Vince McMahon, not himself. He has no personality, his look is plain, and he was just flat out boring at times. Ric Flair said it best. Canada blew him up to be waaay bigger than he really is.

 

[Tony Soprano]

The reason Hart was a flop in WCW was because well, it was WCW. By the time he got there the place was going down hill. Look at all the title changes in the last 3 years of WCW. Everyone it seemed had a run and with the exception of Goldberg, nothing helped the ratings. Bischoff didnt use Hart like he should have. It was all about Hogan and Nash. Hell, Nash was the booker for alot of the time Hart was there! He was the reigning WWF champion and they proceded to do absolutely....nothing with him! People say McMahon screwed up pushing Big Show when he got to WWE but thats nothing ompaired to what WCW did to Hart, or well, didnt do.

 

[GameOver]

Well not in an overall capacity i wouldn't rate his as the best ever

Brets only bad point was he came off as too shy on the mic. to me anyway
Other than that there was noone above him in ring. He had that HBK factor that could make anyone he wrestled look good and had no problems battling people alot bigger than him or alot worse in terms of ability and making it still believable

Personally i loved Bret Hart as a champ but he didn't have a huge amount of charisma. only thing that differend between him and HBK IMO HBK had charisma and that it factor but both were/are phenomenal in ring.

Ring Technicians hard to differentiate they all had awesome ability
Bret Hart, HBK, Ted Dibiase, Randy Savage, Chris Benoit, Kurt Angle

Overall
Stone Cold, Ric Flair, HBK, Triple H

Charisma off the planet
Hulk Hogan, The Rock

So i guess that means no. HBK is atleast on par with Bret.

as for his performance in WCW, ever think that was cause WCW didn't use him much like they buried Randy Savage pretty much I do agree though he was a shit storyteller but hardly consider that being overrated as a wrestler. Hogan never told a story he just did the same match every single time but because he was huge and could scream on the mic we all ate it up.

 

[andy zones]

He is a great technical wrestler, but a crappy storyteller. The only time he had any heat caused from his promos were when he was half shooting on being treated like shit. EVERYBODY thinks Bret Hart's one of the greatest of all time. He's simply not. Great wrestler, poor storyteller. That equals overrated.

He had good matches with some great wrestlers, but as far as Bret Hart carrying a company or being the star...look at what happened to him in WCW. I know Owen passed away during this time frame, but overall, his performance in WCW was a flop. Because he was a product of Vince McMahon, not himself. He has no personality, his look is plain, and he was just flat out boring at times. Ric Flair said it best. Canada blew him up to be waaay bigger than he really is.

I really cant understand where u coming from. Vince has himself called bret as the greatest storyteller this business has ever seen, And i dont think anybody has greater understanding of business than vince(who himself build it), Seriously its one thing if you dont like bret but its completly different if you close your eyes over the facts of wrestling. And the fact is bret is the greatest storyteller of all time. His ability of storytelling was simply unparllel.

Now as far as ric flair is concerned, we all know how much hatred flair has shown towards bret over the years, simply because bret had better in ring skills and had more classic matches than flair. Flair himself was not the greatest. If i leave NWA days i really struggle to put any 10 five star matches flair had from 1991-2008. As far as wcw days goes we all know what kind of performances flair had in wcw. Remmember if you are putting one fingure towards anyone the remaining four fingures will point towards yourself. I really dont care what guys like flair,hbk or hhh had to say about bret, i will always prefer comments of true workers like angle,benoit,austin,taker, foley over them. And according to them bret was truly the best, that s what matter the most.

 

[Tony Soprano]

WcW should have done this-

Bring him in and be the ref between Hogan and Sting and put Sting over clean 1-2-3.
Then Nash could have been so upset that Hogan lost the belt for the nWo that he decided to take his anger out on Hart thus setting up a good 2-3 month feud.

After getting Hart over in that feud give him the belt in a clean win over say Hogan who would have re-taken the belt off of Sting a few months after Starcade. You then could of had Sting and Bret team up to face Hogan and Nash for a few months while also building up Goldberg. Goldberg would eventually beat Bret 1-2-3 at Starcade 1998. In 1999 you could have had Bret get into some great feuds with the likes of Flair and maybe Hogan again or eventually even Benoit and Sting. Hell, have Sting, Bret and Goldberg in some great matches vs. the nWo. They could have played the nWo card much longer had they built up some good feuds besides ones against DDP and against Sting.

But hey, that sounds too easy and good and we all know that wasnt how WCW did things.

 

[Ryanhitman316]

I really cant understand where u coming from. Vince has himself called bret as the greatest storyteller this business has ever seen, And i dont think anybody has greater understanding of business than vince(who himself build it), Seriously its one thing if you dont like bret but its completly different if you close your eyes over the facts of wrestling. And the fact is bret is the greatest storyteller of all time. His ability of storytelling was simply unparllel.

Now as far as ric flair is concerned, we all know how much hatred flair has shown towards bret over the years, simply because bret had better in ring skills and had more classic matches than flair. Flair himself was not the greatest. If i leave NWA days i really struggle to put any 10 five star matches flair had from 1991-2008. As far as wcw days goes we all know what kind of performances flair had in wcw. Remmember if you are putting one fingure towards anyone the remaining four fingures will point towards yourself. I really dont care what guys like flair,hbk or hhh had to say about bret, i will always prefer comments of true workers like angle,benoit,austin,taker, foley over them. And according to them bret was truly the best, that s what matter the most.

I agree...I believe people today are confused about entertainment and wrestling. If they want to talk about someone who is over-rated it has to be Hogan. How much moves did he perform? we are talking about wrestling not storytelling. Look at Shelton, many people say that he can't tell a story but he can put on a hell of a match. And that is something which the fans who know wrestling will always remember.

 

[Dragonslayer]

Actually, I have a feeling that people are beginning to confuse things a bit in this thread... Since as far as I understand it, the "storytelling" we are referring to when we are saying that "Bret Hart was a great storyteller" relates to his "storytelling" in the ring, during a match. Like, the psychology of the match, the different stages a match goes through from start to finish, basically just the dramatic development of the "epic battle" that every wrestling match technically is supposed to be.

This "storytelling" does NOT describe or relate to the skills (or lack thereof) people have on the microphone, when doing their promos - that I believe is a different thing altogether.

So when someone says that Bret Hart was a great storyteller, usually they will be referring to his ability to tell an interesting story inside the ring, not to his work on the microphone (and there are definitely people who are better at that then the Hitman!).

I just felt I had to add this since I got the impression that things were getting a bit mixed up here over the subject of Bret's "storytelling"... Because in that department, I really have the feeling that Bret Hart is pretty much the best of all time - but just read my earlier post in this thread on that.