KB Answers Wrestling Questions | Page 164 | WrestleZone Forums

KB Answers Wrestling Questions

Terry: probably not. The big muscleheads haven't done much lately.

No one really comes to mind. McIntyre maybe?

Depends on where the match is held. Can't imagine Hogan losing it though. Warrior would go out quickly as he didn't mean anything until the 90s, at least not in the main event. Bruno was great but the crowd pushed him higher than he'd go today....I think. Cena is beatable so he wouldn't last long. He'd be the big pop in the middle of the match. Same with early 2000s Rock. He lost often. It comes down probably to Austin vs. Hogan and in a cage.....yeah Hogan doesn't lose in a cage.
 
My guess is he gets frustrated with losing all the time and turns heel because of it, maybe cashing in at TLC, saying that this isn't wrestling and making it about wrestling again or something.
 
How can people justify the top guy "never losing" when someone like The Rock lost way more than someone like HHH does, yet he was also way more over?
 
Top five spotty women wrestlers of all time? From an annoying smark's point of view and what they would call "real wrestling" (high workrate, holds and moves, etc.) I'm not looking for ring psychology, just, um, spotfests, I guess. If there aren't that many women who fall under that category, then go ahead and add ring generals.

Sleep deprivation FTL. Is my question crystal clear now?
 
I saw ROH's debut show. Definitely not their best effort. I understand the need to recap some things, but I think they could have done a much better job of doing so. They could have easily explained the Code of Honor during the first match. They could have also used some of that time during the opener to talk up the history between the Kings of Wrestling and WGTT. I didn't mind the Davey Richards recap, but there was no reason to show the tag match from BITW twice. A mention of what happened would have been plenty. That would have given time for one more match, which could have been a squash for a wrestler they are trying to build up.

Overall, I understood what they were going for. But it was pretty poor execution. I think you gave it a D- in your review, right? I wouldn't say it was that bad, but it wasn't that much better.

EDIT: That being said, I thought the wrestling itself was pretty decent. They just need to work on the formatting of the show I guess is what I'm trying to say.
 
Dang you watch some Great American Bash and the questions pile up.

How has the best spear of all-time?

Goldberg. He plows through people with it and looks like he cuts them in half.

I have it was okay, just to fast of matches an yeah D+ seems fitting for a grade.

For a national debut, it was horrid.

Big man with the better future, Zeke Jackson or Mason Ryan?

Also: better Manager, Jimmy Hart or Bobby Heenan?

Jackson but not by much.

Hart probably.

Would you recommend the Starrcade DVD?

Absolutely. It's great stuff, but some of the match picks are real head scratchers. Also the top two picks should be swapped. When you get to the #2 match (it's in a cage if you haven't seen the list), stop and find some of the buildup online. It's one of the most violent matches ever and the build makes it all the better. The documentary is great for about 50 minutes but then the last 5 minutes try to sum up about 10 years and it doesn't work at all.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,846
Messages
3,300,837
Members
21,727
Latest member
alvarosamaniego
Back
Top