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

[Jordan adams]

I am beg bret heart fan but i don't think you can say he is the greatest versatile wrestler. I would have to say HBK is. I can say that i have never seen a bad shawn micheals match i have seen a few bad bret heart matchs like wm 10 agianst Yokozuna which wasent bret's fault but it was still a bad match. i would say he is in the top five.

 

[Megadeth]

I think some people need to look up the definition of versatile. According to Merriam-webster Versatile: changing or fluctuating readily. Whether you are talking character or in-ring work, I think bret is easily the best example of this. Bret's character always seemed like a real person who constantly adapted or reacted to all the cartoony craziness that was going on around him. People argue that Bret wasnt the most charismatic person, but I think the fact he never really portrayed some over-the-top bigger than life character yet was so over with the fans proves the opposite. According to his autobiography, which granted isnt the most unbiased source, Vince told him he was getting more fan mail than anyone including Hogan in the late 80's. As far as in-ring, people critize basically every major star for having using the same moves in every match. Lets face it, for example, while it may have gotten old watching Austin stun everyone on a weekly basis, if you are in the live crowd at a show, and Austin didnt stun someone, or use the Thez Press, or stomp a mudhole in the corner, you would have felt ripped off. So of course a wrestler is gonna try to get their trademarks in. Yet with that being said, although bret did have some moves he used often, like the Russian leg sweep, piledriver, elbow drop, I can think of many high-profile matches bret was in that did not end with the sharpshooter. He constantly mixed it up to make the big matches a little more unpredictable. When Bret won the King of the Ring, he had 3 matches that night and did not win any of them with the sharpshooter. When is the last time HBK won a match without sweet chin music. While I appreciate people like Austin, HBK, Flair, etc I think you have to give it to bret on being versatile.

 

[andy zones]

Matches where bret hart didnt use his trademark finisher "Sharpshooter"
Against Diesel(SS95)
Against Owen(Steel cage)
Against Steve Austin (SS96)
Against British Bulldog (INH 96)
Against Hakushi (INH 1)
I can go on and on. These are some of the greatest matches in history of wrestling. This clearly shows how much thought been put in the matches by hart and proved his versatility. Another thing which should be looked that when bret use these simple but effective pinfalls for winning the matches it actually made his opponent look good. It actually sent a message to the crowd that the opponent was almost on the verge of beating bret but somehow bret got his way out of trouble. Thats what classics are all about.

 

[schaeffershawn]

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.

I beg to differ I have seen some pretty lousey matches that were quite boring. For instance his feud with Isac Yankem, was utterly horrible. His matches with Ric Flair were nothing special, and if anything anticlimatic. His match with Piper over the US title in WCW was lazy and tried to recreate the tension of Wresltemania 8 iC title match the two had. I never saw him take on a truely great big man like the Undertaker and have anything but an avearge match, Summerslam 97 was only saved by teh Hart HBk feud.

To answer teh question no he is not the greatest versatile wrestler of all time, I would put HBK, Owen, Austin, Foley and a slew of others above him in that regards.

 

[schaeffershawn]

can anyone give me list of any 10 five star matches that flair had between 1991-2008.

that depnds on your scale. i would argue almost every match he had wth Sting in that time frame was a classic. his final feud with Ricky Steamboat was again classic. he pulled good matches out of Hogan, althoguh Hogan was kicking and screaming the entire way. His match with Vader for the WCW title was great. for me all if these macthes were five star, and whats the difference between Meltzer and any other fan, well simple Dave has abigger forum to say what he thinks.

 

[reddevil69]

I beg to differ I have seen some pretty lousey matches that were quite boring. For instance his feud with Isac Yankem, was utterly horrible. His matches with Ric Flair were nothing special, and if anything anticlimatic. His match with Piper over the US title in WCW was lazy and tried to recreate the tension of Wresltemania 8 iC title match the two had. I never saw him take on a truely great big man like the Undertaker and have anything but an avearge match, Summerslam 97 was only saved by teh Hart HBk feud.

To answer teh question no he is not the greatest versatile wrestler of all time, I would put HBK, Owen, Austin, Foley and a slew of others above him in that regards.

If you had any clue as to the components that make up a great match then you would not make as ignorant and uninformed a comment as Taker and Bret was an "average match". It was a great match and the one they had a month later at One night Only was even better. Undertaker himself has stated that his matches with Bret were his best up to that point in his career.

And speaking of other big men, Diesel had his best matches with Bret and that is a direct quote form Kevin Nash himself. Yokozuna had his best matches with Bret,no one carried Yoko to a better match...by the standards of a 1993/94 big man vs. little man match those were good bouts and fans loved them. and Isaac Yankem was a rookie with less than a year in the company at that time...what the hell kind of match do you expect Bret to have with a guy that inexperienced? No one could have done any better. And Piper was a washed out lazy farce who rode on his past laurels in WCW just like Hogan....that match was not Bret's fault, every match Piper had in WCW was complete crap.

 

[schaeffershawn]

If you had any clue as to the components that make up a great match then you would not make as ignorant and uninformed a comment as Taker and Bret was an "average match". It was a great match and the one they had a month later at One night Only was even better. Undertaker himself has stated that his matches with Bret were his best up to that point in his career.

And speaking of other big men, Diesel had his best matches with Bret and that is a direct quote form Kevin Nash himself. Yokozuna had his best matches with Bret,no one carried Yoko to a better match...by the standards of a 1993/94 big man vs. little man match those were good bouts and fans loved them. and Isaac Yankem was a rookie with less than a year in the company at that time...what the hell kind of match do you expect Bret to have with a guy that inexperienced? No one could have done any better. And Piper was a washed out lazy farce who rode on his past laurels in WCW just like Hogan....that match was not Bret's fault, every match Piper had in WCW was complete crap.

Considering i have been a wrestler for 9 years, have grown up in the industry I think my opinions actualy is just that another opinion. Just because its differnt then yours does not mean it is wrong. Its very easy to blame the other peopel involved but HBK has had great matches with rookies and lazy people, in fact he has doen so with guys like Kane who many consider lazy now, Relative rokkies like Snistky. As far as teh Summerslam I respectively disagree the match was bland which is why HBK was put in their as special ref. The One Night Only match which you inspired me to go watch, was avearge at best, Austin has had better with Taker as have HHH,HBK, Foley, hell honestly the Hell in the Cell with Bossman was more enteraining.

The bottom line Hart was abover average in terms of wrestling ability, but he was below avearge on the mic, below average charisma and with the excpetion of his fued with HBK he never had one of thsoe career defining rivalries. Versitile wrestlers have multiple. Taker has had too many to count. Flair has had Steamboat, Rhodes, Sting, Luger, Funk and Piper. HBK has had Hart, HHH, Jericho and many many others. Austin had Mcmahon, The Rock, Angle and HHH.

Finaly were exactly did Nash say that, or Taker for that matter. show actual evidence instead of just spoutting off made up facts, because until I heasr it from one of them, or read it from one opf them I don't buy it. Especialy with Nash who said in the commentary of HBK's behind the vault that their streetfight befopre he left for WCW was his career making match.

 

[reddevil69]

Considering i have been a wrestler for 9 years, have grown up in the industry I think my opinions actualy is just that another opinion. Just because its differnt then yours does not mean it is wrong. Its very easy to blame the other peopel involved but HBK has had great matches with rookies and lazy people, in fact he has doen so with guys like Kane who many consider lazy now, Relative rokkies like Snistky. As far as teh Summerslam I respectively disagree the match was bland which is why HBK was put in their as special ref. The One Night Only match which you inspired me to go watch, was avearge at best, Austin has had better with Taker as have HHH,HBK, Foley, hell honestly the Hell in the Cell with Bossman was more enteraining.

The bottom line Hart was abover average in terms of wrestling ability, but he was below avearge on the mic, below average charisma and with the excpetion of his fued with HBK he never had one of thsoe career defining rivalries. Versitile wrestlers have multiple. Taker has had too many to count. Flair has had Steamboat, Rhodes, Sting, Luger, Funk and Piper. HBK has had Hart, HHH, Jericho and many many others. Austin had Mcmahon, The Rock, Angle and HHH.

Finaly were exactly did Nash say that, or Taker for that matter. show actual evidence instead of just spoutting off made up facts, because until I heasr it from one of them, or read it from one opf them I don't buy it. Especialy with Nash who said in the commentary of HBK's behind the vault that their streetfight befopre he left for WCW was his career making match.

Wrong again. HBK was put in as referee at Summerslam 97 so he could begin a program with Undertaker, by screwing him out of the victory. a program that lasted almost 5 months from the Ground zero PPV, thru Hell in Cell culminating with Royal rumble's casket match in Jan. 98...it had nothing to do with Taker/Hart being bland...that is complete and utter bullshit...Bret was the hottest heel in the WWE in august of 1997, his anti America character was over as hell and he had huge heat! Taker was champ and over huge and the build up for the match was anything but bland. People at the Continental Airlines arena were buzzing all afternoon outside the building in anticipation for the match...they were not there to watch Shawn be a referee.

and i will gladly send you your own DVD copy of both the interviews I have with Undertaker and Kevin Nash saying exactly what I said they did....Undertaker interview from April 2003 from a canadian sports show called Score Tonight...Nash shoot interview from RF video June of 2007. you can watch with your own eyes their lips move and hear the words come right out of their mouths. you can probably find the Taker one on youtube as well and the Nash one is available for purchase at RF Video.com....in any event I have copies of both.

and Steve Austin and Brets feud wasn't career defining? Hello....those matches put Austin on the map and he'll be the first guy to tell you that Bret carried the bulk of those matches and came up with the majority of the spots, as well as bladed him at WM 13 because he had never juiced himself before...Austin has said numerous times and he said it when he inducted Bret in HOF that he never ever achieved anything ever again like the matches he had with Bret. and you have to be the only person on the planet who thinks the Cell match with Bossman is entertaining...Undertaker is my absolute favorite wrestler ever and I can admit that match sucked pud. It is nowhere near the level of the Taker/Bret matches. Bret's run with Owen was also excellent...it was a terrific blend of drama, the brother vs. brother angle was brilliant and the matches it produced were excellent, including one of the best cages matches of all time.

 

[Muffin Top Merkley]

Anyone else believe that Jericho is the modern day Bret Hart?

Full of talent.
Awesome mic skills.
Can work with anyone.
Can have any type of match.

 

[schaeffershawn]

Wrong again. HBK was put in as referee at Summerslam 97 so he could begin a program with Undertaker, by screwing him out of the victory. a program that lasted almost 5 months from the Ground zero PPV, thru Hell in Cell culminating with Royal rumble's casket match in Jan. 98...it had nothing to do with Taker/Hart being bland...that is complete and utter bullshit...Bret was the hottest heel in the WWE in august of 1997, his anti America character was over as hell and he had huge heat! Taker was champ and over huge and the build up for the match was anything but bland. People at the Continental Airlines arena were buzzing all afternoon outside the building in anticipation for the match...they were not there to watch Shawn be a referee.

and i will gladly send you your own DVD copy of both the interviews I have with Undertaker and Kevin Nash saying exactly what I said they did....Undertaker interview from April 2003 from a canadian sports show called Score Tonight...Nash shoot interview from RF video June of 2007. you can watch with your own eyes their lips move and hear the words come right out of their mouths. you can probably find the Taker one on youtube as well and the Nash one is available for purchase at RF Video.com....in any event I have copies of both.

and Steve Austin and Brets feud wasn't career defining? Hello....those matches put Austin on the map and he'll be the first guy to tell you that Bret carried the bulk of those matches and came up with the majority of the spots, as well as bladed him at WM 13 because he had never juiced himself before...Austin has said numerous times and he said it when he inducted Bret in HOF that he never ever achieved anything ever again like the matches he had with Bret. and you have to be the only person on the planet who thinks the Cell match with Bossman is entertaining...Undertaker is my absolute favorite wrestler ever and I can admit that match sucked pud. It is nowhere near the level of the Taker/Bret matches. Bret's run with Owen was also excellent...it was a terrific blend of drama, the brother vs. brother angle was brilliant and the matches it produced were excellent, including one of the best cages matches of all time.

Which is why Shawn was not aloud to touch Bret and tehy teased him doing so the entire match. Its also why the WWF magazine the next month had next to nohting about Undertaker/Hart but was full of HBK/Hart. And no I do not consider the Austin fued as career defining, because Hart got nothing from it, except fans like you who credit him for every great thing he did and dismiss any bad he did. I mean its like you have a sense of heroworship a 5 year old may have with Hogan in the 80's, you might wnat to get that checked out. I agree the Bret vs Own matched were great, but what excalty did they do for Owen, I cant seem to remeber him ever rising above midcard thanks to teh rub Bret gave him. Meanwhile Bret fueded with nobodies in between title reigns that did not draw. And that afterall is what the bussiness is about. And though Bret was arguabley the best heel in 97 he did so by getting cheep heat, i.e. anyone can bad mouth America, hell Im from Philadlephia and have used the anti-america gimick to get heat, it even worked for mr. no personality Lance Storm. And if Hart was going that well Vince would not have wanted to let him go, but the facts are Vince Choose Austin/DX/and the Attitude generation over Hart, because Bret could never have made that transition to real life and more reality based stories. I mean god what if Vince had brought up the ideal of referencing Bret's numerous affairs on TV would he have atacked every person involved, oh wait thats what Bret did the only time it was even backhandely mentioned.

Again you may choose to look at Hart as the wrestling god, but i see him as a whinney hypocrtical girl, who never drew a dime. And being i have actualy been in a wrestling ring and have wrestled all over the usa and canada I feel my opinions are valid, but I can recognize others have different opinions and I even understadn why, maybe and here is just a thought you should get over yourself and try doing the same.

 

[schaeffershawn]

Anyone else believe that Jericho is the modern day Bret Hart?

Full of talent.
Awesome mic skills.
Can work with anyone.
Can have any type of match.

I would say Jericho is better, because he is way better on the mic, he is way better in charisma and he is just as good if not better in teh ring then Hart ever was, or could ever hope to be.

 

[Skillz]

If by versatile, you mean the ability to have different kinds of matches with the same opponent, and different kinds of matches with different opponents, and also the ability to play both face and heel effectively, then yes Bret Hart is one of the most versatile wrestlers of all time. He could have a great match with any style of wrestler. The variety of different stories he told in his matches are amazing.

Bret Hart could wrestle as an underdog, take the beating of a lifetime, and make a believable and exciting comeback at the end (vs. Yokozuna, Bigelow, Bulldog at IYH, etc). Bret Hart could wrestle a closely fought technical/athletic contest and make it exciting and dramatic to watch (vs. Perfect, Bulldog, Owen, HBK, Benoit, etc). Bret Hart could wrestle a much larger opponent, and believably take control of the match and wear the opponent down (vs. Taker, Diesel, etc). He could take a virtual nobody and give them the match of their career (vs. 1-2-3 Kid, Hakushi, etc) and he could take someone who hasn't been relevant for a decade and make him look credible again (vs. Backlund). Bret Hart could even have a great brawl when need be (vs. Owen at SS, Austin at WM, etc). And he could mix technical wrestling, brawling and aerial moves all into one match (vs. Piper, Diesel at SS, Bulldog at IYH, Austin at SS, etc). He could play an amazing babyface and make great babyface comebacks (vs. DiBiase, Razor, Bigelow, etc). And he could play an amazing heel and get the crowd to hate him (vs. Savage at SNME, Austin at WM, Taker at SS, etc). And all of this is not even including his amazing tag-team work as a part of the Hart Foundation.

All these different scenarios, and Bret Hart could have a great match in any one of them. Inside a wrestling ring Bret Hart could literally do it all. Anyone denying this is simply not intelligent, or a blind hater.

 

[reddevil69]

Which is why Shawn was not aloud to touch Bret and tehy teased him doing so the entire match. Its also why the WWF magazine the next month had next to nohting about Undertaker/Hart but was full of HBK/Hart. And no I do not consider the Austin fued as career defining, because Hart got nothing from it, except fans like you who credit him for every great thing he did and dismiss any bad he did. I mean its like you have a sense of heroworship a 5 year old may have with Hogan in the 80's, you might wnat to get that checked out. I agree the Bret vs Own matched were great, but what excalty did they do for Owen, I cant seem to remeber him ever rising above midcard thanks to teh rub Bret gave him. Meanwhile Bret fueded with nobodies in between title reigns that did not draw. And that afterall is what the bussiness is about. And though Bret was arguabley the best heel in 97 he did so by getting cheep heat, i.e. anyone can bad mouth America, hell Im from Philadlephia and have used the anti-america gimick to get heat, it even worked for mr. no personality Lance Storm. And if Hart was going that well Vince would not have wanted to let him go, but the facts are Vince Choose Austin/DX/and the Attitude generation over Hart, because Bret could never have made that transition to real life and more reality based stories. I mean god what if Vince had brought up the ideal of referencing Bret's numerous affairs on TV would he have atacked every person involved, oh wait thats what Bret did the only time it was even backhandely mentioned.

Again you may choose to look at Hart as the wrestling god, but i see him as a whinney hypocrtical girl, who never drew a dime. And being i have actualy been in a wrestling ring and have wrestled all over the usa and canada I feel my opinions are valid, but I can recognize others have different opinions and I even understadn why, maybe and here is just a thought you should get over yourself and try doing the same.

your argument is so weak it'd be funny if it wasn't so sad...is that why you have to resort to insulting me and telling me I have a disorder i need to get checked out? and i notice you have nothing to say regarding the "proof" you asked for regarding Taker and Nash's comments...they said what they said and they completely disagree with your viewpoint and it's documented on video for anyone who disputes it.

oh and by the way, as far as drawing money,how come Bret's book and dvd set has outsold Shawns biography and dvd in Canada, the UK and ....oh wait for it...the USA? And Bret's book is not benefiting from having the WWE hype machine to push it like Shawns did, it's published independently.

and before you ask me another stupid question about "proof" regarding the sales figures...yes it's available and it's not difficult to find.

and as far as your wrestling is concerned, how much money did you ever draw? I'm pretty sure Bret made more money in the business than you ever did and you claim to be an expert on what it takes to be a successful wrestler. you say it's about making money and then you say what did the feud do for Owen? Owen hart made the most money of his career feuding with Bret due to the fact he was in all the house show main events, all over the world, for 6 months with Bret...and then he made more money than he was currently making once again by joining the Hart Foundation in 1997 and being featured in main and semi main events with Bret,Taker and Austin...his share of PPV's and house show revenue were at their peak while getting the rub from Bret.

 

[jellmoo]

Most versatile wrestler ever? No, I wouldn't think so. And this is coming from a Canadian.

Bret was a great wrestler, no doubt, but I would say that both Owen and Benoit were better.

Bret was only decent on the stick at best. He cut some good promos, but they never stole the segment.

Bret drew some crowds, but never to the extent that Hogan did before him, or Austin and the Rock did after.

If I were to pick the most versatile guy of all time, I would have to go with Steve Austin. The guy *could( wrestle. Check out his Hollywood Blondes work for great examples of wrestling ability, it's just that it didn't mesh with the Stone Cold character. He was absolute gold on the mic. He had the crowd hanging on each and ever word. Heck, he had the damn crowd yelling "What?" when he listened to his watch! And the guy drew in money like no other.

 

[jericho3150]

I agree with some of the other posters were Flair..Austin and HBK are more versatile. And Shawn comes to mind right away as more vers. Shawn has been everything from a technician to a brawler to hardcore to lucha style to high flying catch as catch can... He can play serious.. dramatic.. funny..cutting edge...arrogant and cocky to the point that he gets heat before he even gets to the ring. Although I really enjoyed Bret in 1997 he was a bigger user of cheap heat ..Shawn can and has done EVERYTHING there is to do in the business...

BIG GUYS:
Brets matches with big guys weren't anything too great like Yoko..Sid..Diesel..Taker.(meh). They were passible and sometime very well done but Shawn worked better with the big guys.. Shawns matches with Taker (WM25 and HIAC) blow Bret/Taker matches out of the water as did HBK/Diesel(IYH8). Ive heard people talk about Brets match with Bam bam.. which was great... but then again. Shawns match with Vader was better.

I wish Bret fans could sometimes look at things a bit more objectively.. and stop trying to see Bret only through his own rose colored glasses. Like the guy who said "Isn't Jericho a modern day Bret?" haha no.. I think Bret was better in the ring and had better timing than Y2J but outside the ring Jericho owns Bret... and even back inside the ring Jericho performs much more like HBK than Bret. Which makes sense being that Jericho said Shawn was his biggest influence..and according to Jericho "the greatest of all time"

 

[Megadeth]

Considering i have been a wrestler for 9 years, have grown up in the industry I think my opinions actually is just that another opinion.

Wow a wrestling fan for 9 years. 9 years ago Bret was practically retired. I have been watching wrestling for about 20 years now. How can you sit here and talk crap when you apparently werent even alive during most of Bret Harts career. A lot of the things Bret did may seem like commonplace now, but at the time they were revolutionary. Bret was the person that brought the ladder match to the WWE, which HBK stole from him. Bret was using suicide dives to the outside long before most people. They may not have been as flashy as the dives people do now, but if it wasnt for people like Bret using them in the first place, than you wouldnt have the crazy spots that go on now.

For everyone complaining Bret didnt draw as well, while ratings in the US may have been a little down, the Hitman was the leader of the WWF's international expansion. Bret wasnt just big in Canada, he was big all across the world. And for the record, I looked up the RAW ratings over the years, and during the mid-90s they were around an average of upper 2's to lower 3's, the average rating of raw currently, mid to lower 3's. Not that much of a difference. Now during the attitude era it was twice that, but you have to keep in mind the Monday night wars were going on and WCW was really the ones who brought most fans into wrestling, then when WCW started to go downhill, they switched over to RAW.

Finally, someone complained about Bret using Cheap heat while praising HBK during the 97 feud. If it was "cheap heat" than why is it everything Bret said made him a heel here in the US, yet made him an even bigger face everywhere else. That right there is the prime example of Versatility. It seems like I remeber HBK during that feud sticking a Canadian flag up his nose, and then humping a Canadian flag before the Survivor Series match, Nothing cheap about that is there? I'll end my rant for now.

 

[reddevil69]

Wow a wrestling fan for 9 years. 9 years ago Bret was practically retired. I have been watching wrestling for about 20 years now. How can you sit here and talk crap when you apparently werent even alive during most of Bret Harts career. A lot of the things Bret did may seem like commonplace now, but at the time they were revolutionary. Bret was the person that brought the ladder match to the WWE, which HBK stole from him. Bret was using suicide dives to the outside long before most people. They may not have been as flashy as the dives people do now, but if it wasnt for people like Bret using them in the first place, than you wouldnt have the crazy spots that go on now.

For everyone complaining Bret didnt draw as well, while ratings in the US may have been a little down, the Hitman was the leader of the WWF's international expansion. Bret wasnt just big in Canada, he was big all across the world. And for the record, I looked up the RAW ratings over the years, and during the mid-90s they were around an average of upper 2's to lower 3's, the average rating of raw currently, mid to lower 3's. Not that much of a difference. Now during the attitude era it was twice that, but you have to keep in mind the Monday night wars were going on and WCW was really the ones who brought most fans into wrestling, then when WCW started to go downhill, they switched over to RAW.

Finally, someone complained about Bret using Cheap heat while praising HBK during the 97 feud. If it was "cheap heat" than why is it everything Bret said made him a heel here in the US, yet made him an even bigger face everywhere else. That right there is the prime example of Versatility. It seems like I remeber HBK during that feud sticking a Canadian flag up his nose, and then humping a Canadian flag before the Survivor Series match, Nothing cheap about that is there? I'll end my rant for now.

you hit the nail on the head dude. I find it amusing that people accuse Bret of doing things, and Shawn has gone and done the exact same thing they accuse Bret of, amplified a thousand-fold.. Humping a country's flag, picking your nose with it, sticking gauze down your 'bicycle shorts', dancing around like a prima-donna chippendale, playing strip poker in your joe boxers, referring to your fellow wrestler as a racist on live tv...no absolutley nothing cheap about that.I'm not saying it didn't do what it was intended to do, which was annoy people and make them hate him, but it was still cheap none the less.

what Bret accomplished in 1997 was groundbreaking and you will never see it again in our lifetime, i'm willing to bet on that. No one, and I mean no one has been, or is a heel ONLY in America and cheered and respected everywhere else.That was unique, it was innovative and it was ,in the words of Vince McMahon himself, "truly one of the most fun times in the business". Bret helped get every single person who stepped in the ring with him,whether they liked them or not, over huge while in the USA because his heat was truly legitimate and people really believed he felt that way about the States.Did anyone actually give a flying fuck about Del "the Patriot" Wilkes before or after he wrestled Bret Hart? The answer is an emphatic NO!

and as far as someone claiming that they have been a "wrestler" for 9 years, all i can say is, I've made my living in the music industry for a decade and while I may not be a big fan of Neil Young or Springsteen's current body of work and the direction they have gone in recently, I sure as hell respect them and what they have accomplished and I sure as fuck am not going to tell them how to write fucking music. If someone is truly a wrestler or aspiring to be one, they can only learn by watching footage of Bret Hart.Any person claiming Bret's accomplishments are not relevant to the craft of wrestling is biased or just ignorant.

 

[jericho3150]

Wow a wrestling fan for 9 years. 9 years ago Bret was practically retired.

Read it again Asm... He said been a "wrestler" for 9 years. Im sure he was fan much further back. Which means he might have a little more insight into this whole discussion. If were discussing making TV shows and films I would have more insight than some guy who just liked to watch them because thats what I do for a living. I think thats all he was saying.

 

[andy zones]

that depnds on your scale. i would argue almost every match he had wth Sting in that time frame was a classic. his final feud with Ricky Steamboat was again classic. he pulled good matches out of Hogan, althoguh Hogan was kicking and screaming the entire way. His match with Vader for the WCW title was great. for me all if these macthes were five star, and whats the difference between Meltzer and any other fan, well simple Dave has abigger forum to say what he thinks.

I really feel petty at your sense of understanding wrestling. If acc to you flair matches with Hogan, vader and luger were 5 star , then I think bret s matches with issac yankem, john Lafitte , and jerry lawler were 1000x times better than any of the matches you just mentioned.

For all those guys thinking that undertaker had his best matches with hbk but according to taker bret was the best wrestled he ever faced and his matches with bret were his best. After that i think there is no need of any more arguments.

 

[jericho3150]

you hit the nail on the head dude. I find it amusing that people accuse Bret of doing things, and Shawn has gone and done the exact same thing they accuse Bret of, amplified a thousand-fold.. Humping a country's flag, picking your nose with it, sticking gauze down your 'bicycle shorts', dancing around like a prima-donna chippendale, playing strip poker in your joe boxers, referring to your fellow wrestler as a racist on live tv...no absolutley nothing cheap about that.I'm not saying it didn't do what it was intended to do, which was annoy people and make them hate him, but it was still cheap none the less.

The difference is that those things are not how Shawn got his heat. Shawn was already obnoxious and getting booed. He was simply adding fuel to the fire that was already going. The only reason people booed Bret in that era in that feud is because he was Anti-American.

what Bret accomplished in 1997 was groundbreaking and you will never see it again in our lifetime, i'm willing to bet on that. No one, and I mean no one has been, or is a heel ONLY in America and cheered and respected everywhere else.

Oh for Gods sake lets stop pretending here for a second. Vince and Bret were playing off the rest of the worlds resentment of the US. If Chris Jericho came out on Raw everyweek and said how the USA was corrupt and evil and that his true home Canada was the greatest country on Earth.. guess what? He'd be cheered here and abroad. It wasn't this AMAZING "Oh my God how did Bret pull this magic off" it was careful planned out.

Did anyone actually give a flying fuck about Del "the Patriot" Wilkes before or after he wrestled Bret Hart? The answer is an emphatic NO!

No but wasn't that Brets job..??

and as far as someone claiming that they have been a "wrestler" for 9 years, all i can say is, I've made my living in the music industry for a decade and while I may not be a big fan of Neil Young or Springsteen's current body of work and the direction they have gone in recently, I sure as hell respect them and what they have accomplished and I sure as fuck am not going to tell them how to write fucking music. If someone is truly a wrestler or aspiring to be one, they can only learn by watching footage of Bret Hart.Any person claiming Bret's accomplishments are not relevant to the craft of wrestling is biased or just ignorant.

I think you missed the point of him being a wrestler... Its like if you were having a discussion with someone over music recording.. Don't you think that you would have a little more insight into the conversation than somebody who's never been on a stage or worked in a recording studio?? You would simply have more information about the subject than someone who simply who simply downloaded a couple songs from itunes.

 

[jericho3150]

For all those guys thinking that undertaker had his best matches with hbk but according to taker bret was the best wrestled he ever faced and his matches with bret were his best. After that i think there is no need of any more arguments.

Thats all well and good. But just because Taker said it doesn't make it so. Shawn and Taker have 2 absolute classics with Hell and a Cell and WM25 that will be remembered for ever and ever.

Every once in a while I'll see a quick clip of the SS97 Taker vs Bret match but 99.9% times its with Shawn hitting Taker with a chair and then counting the 123.

 

[schaeffershawn]

Read it again Asm... He said been a "wrestler" for 9 years. Im sure he was fan much further back. Which means he might have a little more insight into this whole discussion. If were discussing making TV shows and films I would have more insight than some guy who just liked to watch them because thats what I do for a living. I think thats all he was saying.

actually because my uncle was a wrestler for the old Tri-state company which as we all know gave way to the Eastern Championship wrestling and eventually Extreme championship wrestling, the real one not the WWE bs, I have been a fan of wrestling since I was 4 years old. That puts me around the mega powers exploding, or 21 years. I also have a tape collection dating back to the early 50's. I love watching Gorgeous George matches, that was a heel.
And yes you hit the nail right on the head as far as what i was saying. I fully admit there are people who love Bret and as a in-ring performer I respect his body of work, but That in no way makes me think he is the greatest of all time or even top five. I believe it is funny that people will give Bret credit for everything good he did and then try and blame someone else for everything bad he did. It is so easy to blame a rookie or a lazy wrestler for a bad match that Hart was in, but bottom line it falls on him too.
What is it always being said about the all time greats, they could have a great match with everyone. Well I gave clear examples that i felt were not great matches, or even very good matches. I know guys on the indie level who could have had great matches with HBK, Austin, Owen, Bulldog, Taker, Lawler, and Henning. The point is anyone can have great matches with another good to great wrestler. The truly great can turn a shit match with a shit opponent, into something watchable, and enjoyable for the, majority of people. If Hart was in the upper group he would have sparked a boom period, but as evidenced by bad ratings, and losing the Monday Night Wars for so long it can be argued he not only did not create another boom period, but hindered one.

 

[schaeffershawn]

I really feel petty at your sense of understanding wrestling. If acc to you flair matches with Hogan, vader and luger were 5 star , then I think bret s matches with issac yankem, john Lafitte , and jerry lawler were 1000x times better than any of the matches you just mentioned.

For all those guys thinking that undertaker had his best matches with hbk but according to taker bret was the best wrestled he ever faced and his matches with bret were his best. After that i think there is no need of any more arguments.

Just a question when did I say his Luger matches in the 1990's were good. Now the 1980's when flair was in his prime, yes those weer likely the best matches Luger ever had. And yes I do think the matches Hogan and Flair had when Hogan first got to WCW were good, and that's because as I stated Flair dragged hogan to quality matches. And while you may not have enjoyed the Vader/Flair title match it along with the wrestlemania ten ladder match and yes the Bret/Owen match are what inspired me to become a wrestler.

 

[Megadeth]

Read it again Asm... He said been a "wrestler" for 9 years. Im sure he was fan much further back. Which means he might have a little more insight into this whole discussion. If were discussing making TV shows and films I would have more insight than some guy who just liked to watch them because thats what I do for a living. I think thats all he was saying.

Your right I did mis-read it, I wrote that post around like 4 or 5 am local time so I wasnt as careful as I should have been, but it seems like alot of people who get on here and try to argue this are like 15 year old kids. So while it may not of applyed in his case, I still stand by my arguments.

 

[schaeffershawn]

Originally Posted by reddevil69 View Post
and as far as someone claiming that they have been a "wrestler" for 9 years, all i can say is, I've made my living in the music industry for a decade and while I may not be a big fan of Neil Young or Springsteen's current body of work and the direction they have gone in recently, I sure as hell respect them and what they have accomplished and I sure as fuck am not going to tell them how to write fucking music. If someone is truly a wrestler or aspiring to be one, they can only learn by watching footage of Bret Hart.Any person claiming Bret's accomplishments are not relevant to the craft of wrestling is biased or just ignorant.

I'm sorry when did I say Bret's accomplishments were not of merit? Furthermore when did I say he is not someone I have learned from. All i said was 1. he was not a big draw, and that is the name of the game, 2. while on a technical level he is one of the best in ring performers, I do not care for him, I find him to be bland and I do not understand the tribute he is constantly paid as a wrestling god, when there were better performers and draws. That said I have learned much from Bret. 1st don't cross the boss, 2nd it takes more then in-ring ability to draw. You have to be a compelling character people enjoy watching, i.e. Hogan, Austin, Rock. Now I would only list Austin as better performer then Hart, but that is simply my opinion. I will take a HBK, Austin, Flair or Steamboat match over anything Hart did, minus the matches against Mr. Perfect, because to me those were the best Hart ever had.