Miami Region, Fifth Round: (4) Lou Thesz vs. (11) CM Punk

[klunderbunker]

This is a fifth round match in the Miami Region. It is a standard one on one match. It will be held at Sun Life Stadium in Miami, Florida

#4. Lou Thesz
Vs.

#11. CM Punk

​

This match takes place one week following the fourth round. Beginning with this round, the final three rounds will take place on one night. The margin of victory will determine the amount of damage and energy spent in a round. For instance, a win by 50 votes would mean the winner expended very little energy, whereas a win by 1 vote would mean the winner spent a good deal of energy in a hard and close match.

Polls will be open for five days following a one day period for discussion. Voting will be based on who you feel is the greater of the two competitors. Post your reasons for why your pick should win below. Remember that this is non-spam and the most votes in the poll win. Any ties will be broken by the amount of posts of support for each candidate, with one vote per poster.

Also remember that this is a non-spam forum. If you post a response without giving a reason for your selection, it will be penalized for spam and deleted.

 

[jmt225]

Let me ask you all a couple of questions… could Wilt Chamberlin score 100 points in a game in today’s NBA? Could Babe Ruth hit 60 home runs in a season today in the MLB? Could Rocky Marciano beat Vitali Klitschko?

The answer to all these is a big fat NO. The fact of the matter is, yesterday’s athlete cannot compete with today’s athlete. Lou Thesz was in his prime over 60 years ago, and since then… pro wrestlers, and athletes in general, have heavily evolved. They’re stronger, faster, smarter, more athletic, etc. And logic should tell you that there’s no reason to believe a wrestler from over sixty years ago could ever be able to defeat the best wrestler in the World today.

Everything Lou Thesz dominated with… Punk EASILY has an answer for. Whatever Thesz has to offer, Punk has already seen and much more. Punk might not have an amateur wrestling background, but he’s a practitioner in jiu-jitsu and Kickboxing, and I guarantee you Thesz never stepped in the ring with someone well versed in either area. Nor has he ever stepped in the ring with someone who has the pro wrestling arsenal and overall skill set of Punk. Did Thesz ever see a GTS in his day? An Anaconda Vice? Shit, did he ever see an elbow off the top rope? Nope, which is why Punk has the ultimate advantage. He's felt everything Thesz could throw at him, whereas Thesz hasn't felt any of Punk's primary moves.

Over 60 years of evolution, people. How can anyone fathom someone from the 1950’s beating a pro wrestler like CM Punk? It’s simply not possible unless he was some kind of monster. Maybe if Punk didn’t have any shoot credentials you may have an argument, but that’s not the case with Punk.

So, if you’re voting kayfabe, then the answer is obvious who to go with: CM Punk. There’s absolutely no argument against it. You would never believe that Bill Russell could beat Dwight Howard or Tim Duncan in a basketball game, so why would you believe Thesz could beat Punk in a pro wrestling match? It just wouldn't make any amount of sense.

If you want to vote for Thesz because he’s a legend… then let me ask you this, how many Lou Thesz matches have you sat through and enjoyed? Be honest with yourself. If you say more than one then you’re most likely full of shit. Now, ask yourself how many matches of CM Punk’s have you sat through and enjoyed. I bet you can’t count that high, nor could you count up to all the great promos he has given us. Show me one good Lou Thesz promo? You can’t.

Yes, Thesz wrestled in a completely different era, but that’s no excuse for still being that boring and generic. You see all those athletes I named above? I can go to Youtube right now and enjoy watching them do what they do best. I can enjoy a Rocky Marciano fight. I can enjoy watching Johnny Unitas play football, Babe Ruth play baseball, Wilt Chamberlin play basketball, etc. However, I can not enjoy a Lou Thesz wrestling match.

Before someone responds saying it’s not a fair comparison since those sports are all “real”… well, let me say that I can enjoy “fake” stuff from that era as well. I can sit down and thoroughly enjoy a movie like On the Waterfront or a television show like I Love Lucy. So, there are also fictional things from that era that I can enjoy, which covers both sports and entertainment, and what is professional wrestling? Sports entertainment.

But why is it that I can’t find any enjoyment from the man who carried the business at that time? Hmmm… maybe because it fucking sucked? Yes, that would be it. And no, it’s not personal preference. There are maybe two people here who can tell me with a straight face that they can sit down and enjoy a Lou Thesz match. It’s only possible for someone extremely pretentious who forces himself believe that this was some great era of professional wrestling. There’s no other explanation, and if you say otherwise you’re simply lying to make yourself look intelligent.

The people of the time might have enjoyed watching Lou Thesz wrestle, but I don’t put stock in that for a couple of reasons. Reason #1 was that they were fans of wrestling and the overall show is what drew them to the arena. It’s not like there was much else to do at that time. Billy Watson vs. Gorgeous George would draw nearly the same amount of fans to the arena as Lou Thesz vs. either one of them. No matter who was champion, they would have showed up. And reason #2 is because if Thesz was really as great as his legacy leads us to believe, then at least some of his work would still hold up to some degree today. The true masters of their craft are able to create art that stands the test of time, and Thesz was unable to do that. Period.

The only real compliment I can give Lou Thesz is that he was able to make people believe his matches were legitimate. That’s somewhat impressive, no matter the era, but at the same time… pro wrestling should have always been a show, and that’s something Thesz was never able to understand. He went out there to make it seem like a real grappling contest, when it actually was just two guys in their underwear laying on top of each other holding on to an arm. Nothing more, nothing less. And when the business made the transition to a show instead of two phony hacks pretending to grapple, business only got better and better.

CM Punk should go over no matter how you see it. The guy entered the business in the late 1990’s as a skinny little douchebag, went on the become the king of the Indies, got stuck in WWE development hell, only to rise up and become not only a multiple time WWE and World Champion, but also be proclaimed as the best wrestler in the World by the biggest pro wrestling company in the World. He has given us countless classic matches, promos, and storylines, and his fanbase is as big as anyone’s in the business today. You think if Lou Thesz was around today he would have accomplished a quarter of what Punk has accomplished? Of course he wouldn't have. The dude would have been another Charlie Haas, if that.

The fact that CM Punk has accomplished what he has is the only proof I need to show he has more talent in his pinkie than Lou Thesz had in his entire body. Punk should have NEVER been a success in this business. Look at the guy.

What a fucking douchebag. How the hell did he grow up to amount to the success he has been able to acquire? It's unbelievably mind-blowing. The only answer is talent. And he was able to use his talent to rise up during a time where there's literally THOUSANDS wrestlers clawing to make it in this business. How many were around during Thesz's day? Not even a 3rd as many as there are today I'm willing to bet. Wrestling was taboo back then. They didn't have many, if any, wrestling schools. To make it in the business you needed a shoot background. That's really the only requirement you needed. You didn't need to know how to talk, sell yourself, have good matches... just have a shoot background. Today, however, it's completely different, and if you're able to become a legitimate star in today's era, then you could have become a star in any era if given the opportunity. You can't say that about the guys from the 1950's though, can you?

Vote CM Punk, people. The only reason not to is if you deeply hate the guy, or if you’re voting on who was the bigger draw (and even then, like I said… Thesz didn’t attract people to the arena, it was the show itself, but technically he does get the credit for it, whether it’s deserved or not, so you do have an argument). If that’s how you want to justify your vote, then that's your prerogative, but there’s no argument that can be made for kayfabe or who is the better professional wrestler. That answer is CM Punk, and it’s indisputable.

 

[Davi323]

I have over 3,650 reasons to vote for Lou Thesz over CM Punk. Do you know what the significance of that number is? It's 1 reason for every day that Lou Thesz held the NWA championship. Do the math, it's pretty simple. It means that Lou Thesz spent a combined DECADE as the acknowledged best wrestler in the world. TEN YEARS. He held other championships too, this is only in reference to the NWA belt alone. CM Punk is a good wrestler. Woohoo. Great for him. Let me know when his combined WWE and World championship days even reach half of Thesz's time as champion.

 

[jmt225]

I have over 3,650 reasons to vote for Lou Thesz over CM Punk. Do you know what the significance of that number is? It's 1 reason for every day that Lou Thesz held the NWA championship. Do the math, it's pretty simple. It means that Lou Thesz spent a combined DECADE as the acknowledged best wrestler in the world. TEN YEARS. He held other championships too, this is only in reference to the NWA belt alone. CM Punk is a good wrestler. Woohoo. Great for him. Let me know when his combined WWE and World championship days even reach half of Thesz's time as champion.

And Bill Russell won 11 NBA Championships, by far more than anyone. Does that mean he's better than Michael Jordan? Nope.

Basically, with this mind-set, Thesz is the greatest wrestler of all time because he had the longest reigning championship run in history. Okay.

But the fact is, if prime CM Punk, aka CM Punk RIGHT NOW, got in a time machine and went back in time to wrestle Lou Thesz, he wouldn't kick Thesz's ass? Cena wouldn't kick Thesz's ass? Mark Henry wouldn't? Of course they would. Hell, Alberto Del Rio would kick Thesz's ass.

Your argument doesn't mean anything. Ten years is a long time, sure, but show me one good match. Show me all the great competition Thesz beat. You can't, because neither exist.

 

[Con T.]

Are we so sure the standards have been raised so much in the WWE during Punk's run?

Right about now, can we agree that the best heel, at least active wrestling heel, is Jericho, right? Actually, no, the best heel is D-Bry; accounting name and legacy, it is Jericho, though, right? After that, who's the most talented heel on the roster... Rhodes? Maybe Dolph? Del Rio? My point is that while wrestling may have evolved, the talent hasn't exactly been at tip top shape while Punk's been champ. Consider this... Less than a month ago, there was serious consideration in a feud between CM Punk, and Lord Tensai. The talent pool isn't at its deepest, and Punk isn't exactly staring down murderer's row himself

That isn't to say that the points you're making aren't fair; I think, at the end of the day, we may never meet eye to eye, because I buy into the draw argument. I'm on the draw argument, because at the end of the day, wrestling's a business all about making money. Both Thesz and Punk have differing benefits and drawbacks with this argument; though, buyrates and ratings during Punk's segments don't exactly set my hair ablaze. I'm going to likely spend some time before I vote.

 

[Davi323]

And Bill Russell won 11 NBA Championships, by far more than anyone. Does that mean he's better than Michael Jordan? Nope.

Basically, with this mind-set, Thesz is the greatest wrestler of all time because he had the longest reigning championship run in history. Okay.

But the fact is, if prime CM Punk, aka CM Punk RIGHT NOW, got in a time machine and went back in time to wrestle Lou Thesz, he wouldn't kick Thesz's ass? Cena wouldn't kick Thesz's ass? Mark Henry wouldn't? Of course they would. Hell, Alberto Del Rio would kick Thesz's ass.

Your argument doesn't mean anything. Ten years is a long time, sure, but show me one good match. Show me all the great competition Thesz beat. You can't, because neither exist.

Actually, a lot of basketball experts do consider Russell better than Jordan, and a lot of wrestling historians do consider Thesz the greatest wrestler of all time, so your point is what, exactly? That Thesz is Russell, and Punk is somehow the equivalent of Michael Jordan? Completely laughable. Given that Punk has never truly been the top guy, the most he could hope for is to be the equivalent of Horace Grant or Scotty Skiles. Fuck, he isn't even Scotty Pippen if you want to stick with your asinine basketball analogy.

Show you a match? Are you serious? For a good part of his career, most people didn't even have TVs. I can't show you videos of the Revolutionary War either, so what? Lou Thesz would kick CM Punk's ass. Frank Gotch would too. So would George Hackenschmidt and Verne Gagne. CM Punk has done jack shit to be placed on the same pedestal as. those guys...and I am one of the people that put CM Punk into this round over Andre the Giant.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

And Bill Russell won 11 NBA Championships, by far more than anyone. Does that mean he's better than Michael Jordan? Nope.

Basically, with this mind-set, Thesz is the greatest wrestler of all time because he had the longest reigning championship run in history. Okay.

But the fact is, if prime CM Punk, aka CM Punk RIGHT NOW, got in a time machine and went back in time to wrestle Lou Thesz, he wouldn't kick Thesz's ass? Cena wouldn't kick Thesz's ass? Mark Henry wouldn't? Of course they would. Hell, Alberto Del Rio would kick Thesz's ass.

Your argument doesn't mean anything. Ten years is a long time, sure, but show me one good match. Show me all the great competition Thesz beat. You can't, because neither exist.

I do find it interesting that you ask this. Punk is proclaimed to be the Best in the World but let's take a look at how he has fared against the top guys of his era.

Cena: Every Punk supporter has cited his MITB and Summerslam wins as reasons why he should win in this tournament. What these same supporters have failed to mention, to my knowledge, that Cena pinned Punk and made him submit in TWO minutes when Punk was in a better position then he was before last year.

HHH: Lost to him at Night of Champions

Batista: Has never pinned him

Undertaker: If you're going to bring up that Breaking Point match, then I feel sorry for you. Undertaker beat him three or four straight times after that.

Orton: Punk's never pinned or made him submit, either.

If Punk routinely loses to the top guys of his era, why should I think he can beat one of the best in wrestling history?

 

[jmt225]

Actually, a lot of basketball experts do consider Russell better than Jordan, and a lot of wrestling historians do consider Thesz the greatest wrestler of all time, so your point is what, exactly?

Show me.

That Thesz is Russell, and Punk is somehow the equivalent of Michael Jordan? Completely laughable.

Did I say that? No, way to put words in my mouth.

It's all to show how far today's athlete has progressed since the times of Lou Thesz. Why is that so hard to grasp? I'm not comparing Punk to anyone... I'm comparing today's high profile athletes against those from the 1950's.

Show you a match? Are you serious? For a good part of his career, most people didn't even have TVs.

Didn't you post in the Back to the Future thread earlier? So, you do remember the TELEVISIONS they had in 1955, yes? That was a part Lou Thesz's prime. And since we live in 2012, we have the internet to see those matches we missed out on if we want to. There are matches of Thesz on Youtube. Show me the good ones. If he's so great, then it shouldn't be too hard to find.

I can't show you videos of the Revolutionary War either, so what?

Some people are going to look at this joke and think you're being serious, and they're really going to believe you're a moron. Nice try, though.

Lou Thesz would kick CM Punk's ass. Frank Gotch would too. So would George Hackenschmidt and Verne Gagne. CM Punk has done jack shit to be placed on the same pedestal as. those guys...

Did those guys ever face anyone with a Jiu-Jitsu or Muay Thai background? No? Did they ever face anyone with the moveset of CM Punk? No? Then tell me, how in the World do we know that they would be able to handle someone with Punk's credentials if they've never fought anyone like him before?

and I am one of the people that put CM Punk into this round over Andre the Giant.

Yeah, and I'm one of the people who didn't jump in on that argument, despite being a big CM Punk fan. Why didn't I? Because I knew Punk would lose to Andre and didn't bother making an argument otherwise, which goes to show I'm really not looking for excuses here why Punk would win against Thesz. I genuinely believe my arguments are backed up with strong hard facts, and so far, nobody has proven me wrong.

I do find it interesting that you ask this. Punk is proclaimed to be the Best in the World but let's take a look at how he has fared against the top guys of his era.

Cena: Every Punk supporter has cited his MITB and Summerslam wins as reasons why he should win in this tournament. What these same supporters have failed to mention, to my knowledge, that Cena pinned Punk and made him submit in TWO minutes when Punk was in a better position then he was before last year.

HHH: Lost to him at Night of Champions

Batista: Has never pinned him

Undertaker: If you're going to bring up that Breaking Point match, then I feel sorry for you. Undertaker beat him three or four straight times after that.

Orton: Punk's never pinned or made him submit, either.

If Punk routinely loses to the top guys of his era, why should I think he can beat one of the best in wrestling history?

Nice little rundown there, LJL. Now, before I retort, please go over the level of competition Lou Thesz faced and beat. Thank you.

 

[The Brain]

Why is it when we have wrestlers from different eras that people say the older one wouldn’t cut it today? Who’s to say the younger one could cut it back in the older era? Thesz didn’t contend with moves like the GTS or and elbow of the ropes because those moves weren’t believable back then. If Punk competed in the 50s he would have been laughed at for being a phony. The so called pure wrestlers like Punk look completely fake compared to Thesz. I don’t really have a problem with that when watching the product today but to use that against Thesz is not fair. He had a different job than Punk. He was supposed to make wrestling look real. As soon as someone does something as simple as a leapfrog the match loses all credibility of being a real competition. Thesz did not have the advantages that Punk did by getting to use so many obviously choreographed moves. For him to remain popular for so long with a restricted offense is pretty remarkable. As the business slowly evolved and became more accepted as being a show instead of a legitimate competition Thesz’s repertoire evolved accordingly. The thing is it took a long time for wrestling to evolve into what it has become today. By the time it was just admitted and accepted to being scripted Thesz was done.

To say that the overall show drew people to the arena as an argument against Thesz but not Punk is completely ridiculous. Do you really think Punk is the one bringing fans to WWE events? He is popular right now. I won’t deny that but the name WWE is far more of a draw than the name CM Punk. Even as champion Punk has not been the biggest draw on his own brand. Last summer John Cena put over CM Punk in an effort to establish another main event wrestler because besides Orton no one has been close to Cena for the past couple years and even Orton hasn’t been that close. Punk has been over since then but despite the wins last summer he still isn’t as over as Cena. If he’s not the best on his own brand I can’t vote him into the final four for best of all time.

 

[cult_of_icecream_bar]

Punk is one of the best wrestlers of today,i give him that.But how on earth you expect him to win agains Thesz,argubilly the greatest wrestler of all time.Everything punk throws at thesz,thesz will have a counter for it.It will be a 5 star match,but with punk in the losing effort.And punk comes of a heavily brutal match with Andre and thesz rather easily beat austin.So with all considerations,thesz wins.

 

[jmt225]

Why is it when we have wrestlers from different eras that people say the older one wouldn’t cut it today? Who’s to say the younger one could cut it back in the older era? Thesz didn’t contend with moves like the GTS or and elbow of the ropes because those moves weren’t believable back then. If Punk competed in the 50s he would have been laughed at for being a phony. The so called pure wrestlers like Punk look completely fake compared to Thesz. I don’t really have a problem with that when watching the product today but to use that against Thesz is not fair. He had a different job than Punk. He was supposed to make wrestling look real. As soon as someone does something as simple as a leapfrog the match loses all credibility of being a real competition. Thesz did not have the advantages that Punk did by getting to use so many obviously choreographed moves. For him to remain popular for so long with a restricted offense is pretty remarkable. As the business slowly evolved and became more accepted as being a show instead of a legitimate competition Thesz’s repertoire evolved accordingly. The thing is it took a long time for wrestling to evolve into what it has become today. By the time it was just admitted and accepted to being scripted Thesz was done.

The argument from the kayfabe point of view, Brain, is that you take Thesz in his prime and stick him in the ring against Punk in his prime. That's the kayfabe aspect. So, obviously, the man from 2012 is going to have an advantage over a guy from the 1950's because of the evolution professional wrestling has gone through. It's common sense.

And it's not like Punk is just some random wrestler from 2012. He's promoted by the biggest pro wrestling company in the World as the best wrestler today. And his skill set in the ring is vastly superior to Thesz's for reasons I stated above. At the end of the day, Thesz has a limited arsenal, while Punk can attack him from many different ways.

To say that the overall show drew people to the arena as an argument against Thesz but not Punk is completely ridiculous. Do you really think Punk is the one bringing fans to WWE events? He is popular right now. I won’t deny that but the name WWE is far more of a draw than the name CM Punk. Even as champion Punk has not been the biggest draw on his own brand. Last summer John Cena put over CM Punk in an effort to establish another main event wrestler because besides Orton no one has been close to Cena for the past couple years and even Orton hasn’t been that close. Punk has been over since then but despite the wins last summer he still isn’t as over as Cena. If he’s not the best on his own brand I can’t vote him into the final four for best of all time.

I'm not arguing that Punk is this huge draw, and I admitted that Thesz gets credit for the big houses. Thesz is unquestionably the bigger draw, and I wouldn't argue it. If you or anyone else want to vote for him just because he's drew more than Punk, then fine. There's nothing I can say to disprove that assessment.

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

If Lou Thesz went over Steve Austin, he better beat Punk.

I don't even need to talk about Thesz. Austin is better than Punk. Bigger draw, better wrestler, better talker, better... everything. He's just better.

That's right, this is about Steve Austin, 100%. Austin losing to Thesz means nothing to me, that's fine. If Austin can't beat him, neither can Punk.

Vote Thesz, if only because Punk isn't better than Austin.

 

[Gelgarin]

Why Lou Thesz goes over CM Punk​

Reason 1: Because it's fucking ridiculous for him not to.

This tournament is intended to crown the greatest wrestler of all time. In one corner we have a man for basically invented professional wrestling, who was its first ever national star, who was one of the most successful and influential athletes of all time and without whom the industry wouldn't even exist.
And in the other corner we have a modern day Chris Benoit; an average competitor who has accomplished little with his career other than to moisten the panties of Dave Metlzar's congregation.

Thesz was a bigger star in his era than Punk is today.
Thesz changed the business more than Punk.
Thesz was more a more established draw than Punk.

Popularity, talent and legacy. The three corner stones of what makes a professional wrester great, and CM Punk cannot touch Lou Thesz in any category. This should be an easy choice, and it is frankly disgusting if Lou Thesz does not win.

Reason 2: Lou Thesz was a better draw.

What, when it comes right down to it, is a professional wrester for? Ask a Punk supporter and they'll probably try and tell you that a wrestler's purpose is to do a lot of flips, but that is because they don't understand the industry.

Pro wrestling is a business, and the purpose of a professional wrestler is to draw money.

Lou Thesz was the biggest draw in the world during his prime, pulling in higher crowd numbers during the 1950's than CM Punk can manage today. Thesz was wrestling's top star and top draw, because he was the best professional wrester of his generation.

You simply can't say that for CM Punk. Even at the very apex of his career, he is still just playing a poor second fiddle to John Cena. The WWE don't trust his as a draw, which is why he is almost never booked as the PPV main event despite being the world champion. The only PPV he headlined during his current title run is TLC; which bombed. I actually like CM Punk, but he has never been treated as a significant draw during his entire career.

Biggest draw in the world against a guy who seldom draws even when he is the world champion. I don't have to tell you who the greater professional wrestler is.

Reason 2: Lou Thesz was more important.

For a laugh, I actually looked "greatness" up in the dictionary. The first definition referred to size (in which case Punk would have died against Andre the Giant) but once we got further down the page the following definition came up.

Of outstanding significance or importance...

Now tell me; which athlete here do you think those words better applies to?

Even is CM Punk causes you to spontaneously orgasm every single time he opens his mouth; you would have to be tremendously deluded to describe his career as significant. He's never been the top dog, he has introduced nothing to the industry that wasn't there before and after he's gone there'll be very little that is remembered by the next generation. It industry without CM Punk is almost indistinguishable from one with him.

You can't say that about Lou Thesz. An industry without Lou Thesz very probably wouldn't exist, and certainly wouldn't exist in the same form. Lou Thesz was the man who turned professional wrestling from a purely local sceptical into a national past time. If Lou Thesz hadn't spent over a decade touring the country, knocking off every local champion and uniting the entire wrestling world behind the NWA banner then the industry would never have become established enough in society for Vince McMahon to go national in the 1980's. Before Lou Thesz every territory was trying to make money off of its own top star, and usually not doing a very god job. Lou Thesz broke that mould, allowed for journeyman wrestlers to become national celebrities and in doing so changed the way the industry would function forever.

Then we get to the in ring product, and exactly how much of what we call pro wrestling today was invented or popularised by Lou Thesz.

The man is famous for inventing a bunch of pro wrestling's most ubiquitous manoeuvres: the German suplex, the backdrop, the STF, the powerbomb, the pile driver, the Thesz press... the list goes on; but what's more impressive is how much of the elementary psychology that was take as standard was derived from the career of Lou Thesz.

Thesz basically popularised the notion of faces and heels. It had been done before without catching on (George Wagner) but it was Lou Thesz who made it a fundamental part of the wrestling business. When he would travel all over the world knocking off local heroes he would play up to the crowds displeasure, taking tricks like eye rakes and dirty breaks and using them to build heat. Across swathes of the US this kind of psychology had never been witnessed before, and it added yet another way that Lou Thesz helped to shape the industry we have today.

Would we have an industry without Lou Thesz? I honestly don't know, but I don't think it's unreasonable for anyone to conclude that we might not. That certainly can't be said for CM Punk.

Lou Thesz was incredibly significant and important. CM Punk was not. Therefore, according to the dictionary, Lou Thesz was a greater wrestler than CM Punk.

Reason 3: Lou Thesz was better in kayfabe.

Lou Thesz was an undefeated champion of the world for an entire decade. He managed to wrestle well over a thousand consecutive matches against the top stars of the era without losing a single time. In terms of win/loss record Lou Thesz is the one of the most dominant talents in the history of the business.

CM Punk has last repeatedly to names such as Chavo Guerrero, Dolph Ziggler or John Morrison. He has never, ever been presented as dominant.

Lou Thesz was presented as the unambiguous best wrestler in the world. CM Punk, for the majority of his career, hasn't even been presented as the best wrestler in the company.

Reason 4: Lou Thesz was better outside of kayfabe

CM Punk has no actual legitimate credentials; Lou Thesz has knocked off Olympic quality wrestlers in legitimate contests. Thesz has real experience of shoot fighting, having to defend himself in legitimate contests when guys went into business for themselves.

Karl Gotch, a former Olympian and famous martial arts expert once attempted a double cross on Thesz and several of his ribs by deliberately botching a backdrop. From that point on the match degenerated into a shoot fight, which the severely injured Lou Thesz won in a matter of minutes.

Lou Thesz actually knows what he's doing and has experiences of doing it. He was a batter and more experienced legit fighter than CM Punk.

Reason 5: Lou Thesz was more entertaining

JMT is going to try and tell you that Lou Thesz is boring. This is stupid, and displays are rather pitiable attitude of "If I'm not entertained by something then nobody else is allowed to be entertained by it either."

Lou Thesz wasn't trying to entertain JMT, he wasn't trying to entertain you and wasn't trying to entertain me. Lou Thesz was trying to entertain wrestling crowds in the 1950's, and he was unbelievably good at it.

The measure of how entertaining a person was is simply to look at how many people they entertain. Lou Thesz entertained more people than CM Punk, ergo he was more entertaining; it is very simple logic.

Does anyone really think that in 50 years time the early work of Hulk Hogan is still going to stand up? In 200 years when we're watching wrestling in fully immersive 3D holograms that anyone will want to go back and watch CM Punk? Of course they won't. And in 200 year time some small minded idiots are going to claim that Punk, Cena, Hogan, Savage and the like weren't entertaining; and they'll be just as wrong and stupid then and JMT is now.

Thesz entertained more people. He was more entertaining.
Thesz was better an entertaining people than his contemporaries. Punk is worse at entertaining people than his contemporaries.

This shouldn't be hard.

Reason 6: Is it 6? I'm not really counting at this point. Ahem...

Reason 6: JMT doesn't really know what he is talking about.

JMT has been having great fun these past few days sulking that everyone who votes against him is an ignorant sheep. Eventually he got called on this due to the fact that he knows nothing about Lou Thesz, and was heard to protest that he was in fact better informed on Thesz than 90% of the forum.

With that comment in mind, I present a not wholly comprehensive list of 'shit JMT either got wrong or made up'.

1) Punk has already seen and much more. Punk might not have an amateur wrestling background, but he’s a practitioner in jiu-jitsu and Kickboxing, and I guarantee you Thesz never stepped in the ring with someone well versed in either area.

CM Punk, to the best of my knowledge, possess a white belt in (the lowest rank belt that is given to beginners) and zero kick boxing qualifications. In other words he's roughly as accomplished in the world of martial arts as I am.

Let us talk a look through Lou Thesz's history and see if we can come up with any martial artists who can rival CM Punk's mastery.

Karl Gotch: Legendary martial artist. Lost to Lou Thesz.
Antonio Inoki: Martial arts "practitioner". Lost to Lou Thesz.
Rikidozan: Legendary martial artist and sumo wrestler. Lost to Lou Thesz.
El Canek: Legendary pro wrester and MMA fighter. Lost to Lou Thesz.
Seiji Sakaguchi: Fifth degree judo blackbelt and 1965 All Japan Judo Champion. Lost to Lou Thesz.

So yeah; Thesz can walk over one of the best Judo competitors in the whole world, but stick him against somebody who is a fan of Jiu-Jitsu and he doesn't stand a chance? You're either ignorant or you are deluding yourself.

2) Shit, did he ever see an elbow off the top rope? Nope, which is why Punk has the ultimate advantage.

And there we have it. Proof that you've never actually watched Thesz matches. Of course he's seen a fucking elbow off the top rope. Guys like Don Leo Jonathan used to pull that kind of crap out all the time. Traditionally Lou Thesz would move out of the way, then win the match.

3) Maybe if Punk didn’t have any shoot credentials you may have an argument, but that’s not the case with Punk.

I think you need to look up the word "credentials" because I don't think it means what you think it means.

4) But why is it that I can’t find any enjoyment from the man who carried the business at that time? Hmmm… maybe because it fucking sucked? Yes, that would be it. And no, it’s not personal preference.

And whilst we're dealing with the issue of you not knowing what fairly basic English words mean, I think you ought to look up "personal preference" as well.

The industry did not universally suck during Thesz's era. If it had then it wouldn't have made money.

5) The people of the time might have enjoyed watching Lou Thesz wrestle, but I don’t put stock in that for a couple of reasons. Reason #1 was that they were fans of wrestling and the overall show is what drew them to the arena.

OK; at this point you are quite frankly embarrassing yourself. If you don't know shit about Lou Thesz then that's fine, nobody is going to think any the less of you.

You keep whining on and on about other people voting for Thesz without a knowledge of his career just to try and make themselves look intelligent; but literally the only person in this thread pretending to know things that they don't is you. You're the only one trying to make yourself look more intelligent than you are here.

The overall show drew people instead of Lou Thesz? Then why did cards with Lou Thesz draw roughly four times as many fans as cards without him? Why did Thesz and Rocca combined draw more gates of 10000+ than the next ten more popular wrestlers in the world combined?

If these people were just fans of wrestling and not of Thesz, then most names from the 1950's would have managed to outdraw names like Rock, Undertaker and CM Punk from the modern age. But no; Lou Thesz is the only man who managed that. And that is because he was more entertaining then anyone else.

Billy Watson vs. Gorgeous George would draw nearly the same amount of fans to the arena as Lou Thesz vs. either one of them.

Billy Watson and Gorgeous George drew fewer gates over 10,000 in their entire careers combined than Lou Thesz drew in the course of about three years of his.

You. Do. Not. Know. What. You. Are. Talking. About. Just. Admit. It. Please.

Seriously; it's just embarrising at this point.

Reason 7: In conclusion

Lou Thesz was a better wrestler than CM Punk because he we batter at entertaining people. He entertained more people for longer and drew more money doing it. Dave Meltzar named Thesz one of the highest draws of all time, even without adjusting for inflation or population growth. Therefore Thesz is the greater professional wrester.

Lou Thesz was a better wrestler than CM Punk because he had more influence on the business. He changed the nature and shape of the industry forever. He is the reason that wrestling took off in Japan. He is the reason that wrestling took off in the US. He has fingers in the rise of Lucha Libra and even made a significant contribution to the popularity of MMA. CM Punk in contrast has changed the business in no way. Therefore Thesz is the grater professional wrestler.

Lou Thesz was a better wrestler than CM Punk because he accomplished more. He rose to the very top of the industry at a time when far fewer guys managed it. In Punk's era you get well over twenty different guys on to during the course of a decade. During Thesz's era only three guys made it to the top in twenty years, and he was the most dominant. Thesz led the wrestling world as one of the most dominant champions of all time. CM Punk is a paper champion playing second fiddle to John Cena. Therefore Lou Thesz is the greater professional wrestler.

Lou Thesz was a better professional wrestler than CM Punk because he had better credentials both in kayfabe and in real life. Thesz was actually an accomplished shoot fighter used to battling against Olympic wrestlers, sumos and martial arts masters. CM Punk has a beginner's rank in BJJ. Lou Thesz went undefeated for four and a half hears fighting against the titans on the industry. CM Punk loses regularly to absolute nobodies. Therefore Lou Thesz is the greater professional wrestler.

Lou Thesz was a better professional wrestler because I say so. And I know what I'm talking about.

 

[Tastycles]

Let me ask you all a couple of questions… could Wilt Chamberlin score 100 points in a game in today’s NBA? Could Babe Ruth hit 60 home runs in a season today in the MLB? Could Rocky Marciano beat Vitali Klitschko?

The answer to all these is a big fat NO. The fact of the matter is, yesterday’s athlete cannot compete with today’s athlete. Lou Thesz was in his prime over 60 years ago, and since then… pro wrestlers, and athletes in general, have heavily evolved. They’re stronger, faster, smarter, more athletic, etc. And logic should tell you that there’s no reason to believe a wrestler from over sixty years ago could ever be able to defeat the best wrestler in the World today.

Firstly - do you not think that if Babe Ruth had the coaching, diet, equipment of today, he too would not be on top of the game and still one of the best of all time? People haven't ran at the same speed for literally 10,000 years and then SUDDENLY FROM NOWHERE got a second faster over 100m in the last 50 years by natural evolution. It’s about people adapting to the sport around them. The reason people still talk about those guys is that they were head and shoulders above their contemporaries, which is all you can judge people on, unless you can objectively evaluate the difference that improvements to the sport have made.

Secondly, wrestling isn’t real and Jerry Lawler regularly competes against people 30 years his junior. Do you think someone as old as Sting would beat someone as young and athletic as Matt Morgan in any other sport? No.

So not only is it a bad analogy, it’s a wrong one.

Everything Lou Thesz dominated with… Punk EASILY has an answer for. Whatever Thesz has to offer, Punk has already seen and much more. Punk might not have an amateur wrestling background, but he’s a practitioner in jiu-jitsu and Kickboxing, and I guarantee you Thesz never stepped in the ring with someone well versed in either area.

Lou Thesz wrestled Masahiko Kimura, the all-Japan Judo champion, and (admittedly, according to Wikipedia) “widely considered one of the greatest Judoka of all time”. He invented “The Kimura” and beat Jiu Jitsu legends in crossover matches. But, that’s no match for CM Punk’s jiu jitsu experience, which is level of accomplishment is not really clear.

Nor has he ever stepped in the ring with someone who has the pro wrestling arsenal and overall skill set of Punk. Did Thesz ever see a GTS in his day? An Anaconda Vice? Shit, did he ever see an elbow off the top rope? Nope, which is why Punk has the ultimate advantage. He's felt everything Thesz could throw at him, whereas Thesz hasn't felt any of Punk's primary moves.

A knee to the face? Yes I’m sure he’s seen that. A martial arts submission hold? Yes he wrestled in Japan. Given his last world championship was won in Mexico, I think it’s fairly likely he saw an elbow drop, yes. Also, Antonino Rocca was flying about back then. Yes, Punk has been laid out by powerbombs and submitted to legholds etc.

Over 60 years of evolution, people. How can anyone fathom someone from the 1950’s beating a pro wrestler like CM Punk? It’s simply not possible unless he was some kind of monster. Maybe if Punk didn’t have any shoot credentials you may have an argument, but that’s not the case with Punk.

Have you ever watched wrestling? Bret Hart, a 50 something stroke victim beat The Miz, a 27 year old former world champion. Perhaps more tellingly, when Sammartino came back in the 80s, he still beat people, as did Bob Backlund in the 90s despite being stylistic dinosaurs. That’s ignoring the fact that Punk’s shoot credentials are sketchy – he’s said himself he couldn’t go into MMA without a lot of training, i.e. he’s not a legitimate fighter – and Thesz’s aren’t.

So, if you’re voting kayfabe, then the answer is obvious who to go with: CM Punk. There’s absolutely no argument against it. You would never believe that Bill Russell could beat Dwight Howard or Tim Duncan in a basketball game, so why would you believe Thesz could beat Punk in a pro wrestling match? It just wouldn't make any amount of sense.

There’s two reasons you’d believe this. Firstly, he would still be a better legitimate fighter than Punk is. Punk has ill-defined experience in Jiu Jitsu somewhere between “I used to do jiu jitsu” and “CM Punk has a blackbelt in Jiu Jitsu”. I have never seen any evidence that he has competed at any level in legitimate competition.

Secondly, wrestling is fake and basketball is real. The older guy often wins in wrestling, because he is the more popular.

If you want to vote for Thesz because he’s a legend… then let me ask you this, how many Lou Thesz matches have you sat through and enjoyed? Be honest with yourself. If you say more than one then you’re most likely full of shit. Now, ask yourself how many matches of CM Punk’s have you sat through and enjoyed. I bet you can’t count that high, nor could you count up to all the great promos he has given us. Show me one good Lou Thesz promo? You can’t.

Bearing in mind that there are people in this world, millions of people, who enjoy noting down the numbers of trains in an exercise book and collecting stamps, I don’t think it’s particularly outrageous to believe there’s a number of people who enjoy watching old school wrestling. Entertainment is subjective, and whilst your free to arrogantly dismiss other people’s interests, you know you can’t make a statement like that. Who are you to tell people what they do and don’t like? Thesz’s wrestling is similar to the sort you see in the Olympics, seeing that I can’t get tickets to that, I’m sure there are people who do like it.

Yes, Thesz wrestled in a completely different era, but that’s no excuse for still being that boring and generic. You see all those athletes I named above? I can go to Youtube right now and enjoy watching them do what they do best. I can enjoy a Rocky Marciano fight. I can enjoy watching Johnny Unitas play football, Babe Ruth play baseball, Wilt Chamberlin play basketball, etc. However, I can not enjoy a Lou Thesz wrestling match.

Given that the first televised sports broadcast in the USA was in 1939, 4 years after Babe Ruth retired and no sport was televised anywhere before the 1936 Olympics, I find it very hard to believe that you’ve seen anything but a few minutes of Pathé news reel highlights of his career, if that. But bullshit to prove your point, by all means. And again, I’m not disputing that you don’t like watching Thesz, but that’s an irrelevance. There’s plenty of people in the IWC who don’t like watching Hulk Hogan, would he lose to CM Punk?

Before someone responds saying it’s not a fair comparison since those sports are all “real”… well, let me say that I can enjoy “fake” stuff from that era as well. I can sit down and thoroughly enjoy a movie like On the Waterfront or a television show like I Love Lucy. So, there are also fictional things from that era that I can enjoy, which covers both sports and entertainment, and what is professional wrestling? Sports entertainment.

So because you happen to like one sitcom from the 1950s, and you don’t like Lou Thesz, this proves that he would lose to CM Punk. I like Arthur Miller’s A View From The Bridge and I like Buddy Holly, which are music and theatre from the 1950s. I don’t like Sound of Music, which is Musical Theatre from the 1950’s. Therefore anyone who likes it is a bullshitting pretentious arse licker.

You can do this all day. I like IKEA, which is Swedish. I also like Pizza which is food. I don’t like Gravalax which is Swedish food. Therefore anyone who likes it is a bullshitting pretentious arse licker.

I like the object I eat my meals off, which is a table. I also like Caroline Wozniacki who plays tennis. I don’t enjoy watching the Chinese Table Tennis team from the last Olympics. Therefore anyone who likes it is a bullshitting pretentious arse licker.

I like oxygen, which is a gas. I also like to put mustard on my food from time to time. The fact that I don’t enjoy inhaling Mustard Gas. Well… Ok. I think I’ve made my point.

There’s plenty of people who like entertainment, e.g. American Idol and sport e.g. NFL who wouldn’t dream of watching CM Punk. Does that make him an abysmal sports entertainer?

But why is it that I can’t find any enjoyment from the man who carried the business at that time? Hmmm… maybe because it fucking sucked? Yes, that would be it. And no, it’s not personal preference.

Well it is, isn’t it?

There are maybe two people here who can tell me with a straight face that they can sit down and enjoy a Lou Thesz match. It’s only possible for someone extremely pretentious who forces himself believe that this was some great era of professional wrestling. There’s no other explanation, and if you say otherwise you’re simply lying to make yourself look intelligent.

Or, they could, as thousands of the people at the time did, actually enjoy it? The only person who is trying to make themselves look intelligent is you. You think that because you don’t like something, the only reason someone else does is for pretentious reasons or because they are trying to prove a point when the reality is far more simple. Some people like watching it. It’s the real sign of a losing argument when you have to start attacking the character of the opponent before they’ve said anything. You could argue that people who prefer modern wrestling have a short attention span, or need everything to be as subtle as a brick. You don’t need to though, because the actual arguments stand up for themselves.

The people of the time might have enjoyed watching Lou Thesz wrestle, but I don’t put stock in that for a couple of reasons. Reason #1 was that they were fans of wrestling and the overall show is what drew them to the arena. It’s not like there was much else to do at that time. Billy Watson vs. Gorgeous George would draw nearly the same amount of fans to the arena as Lou Thesz vs. either one of them. No matter who was champion, they would have showed up.

Well, he did headline the two highest drawing shows anywhere in the world of the 1950s, against Baron Leone and Rikidozan.

I take up that challenge that you’ve made, with no basis, and I raise you cold, hard facts.
Lou Thesz vs. Whipper Billy Watson - 1st March 1956 – Maple Leaf Gardens, Toronto – Attendance 15,000
Whipper Billy Watson vs Gorgeous George - 30th March 1961 – Maple Leaf Gardens, Toronto – Attendance 5000
So probably not, actually.

And reason #2 is because if Thesz was really as great as his legacy leads us to believe, then at least some of his work would still hold up to some degree today. The true masters of their craft are able to create art that stands the test of time, and Thesz was unable to do that. Period.

Why was he unable? Because you don’t like it? Wrestling isn’t like simple art. I don’t know how many times NorCal and Slyfox have made that point, but you’ve all read it and I don’t need to make it again.

The only real compliment I can give Lou Thesz is that he was able to make people believe his matches were legitimate. That’s somewhat impressive, no matter the era, but at the same time… pro wrestling should have always been a show, and that’s something Thesz was never able to understand. He went out there to make it seem like a real grappling contest, when it actually was just two guys in their underwear laying on top of each other holding on to an arm. Nothing more, nothing less. And when the business made the transition to a show instead of two phony hacks pretending to grapple, business only got better and better.

I’d say being able to attract a crowd three times bigger than some of wrestling’s biggest names is a fairly good indicator of knowing how to put on a show. If you don’t understand that, you’re never going to.

CM Punk should go over no matter how you see it. The guy entered the business in the late 1990’s as a skinny little douchebag, went on the become the king of the Indies, got stuck in WWE development hell, only to rise up and become not only a multiple time WWE and World Champion, but also be proclaimed as the best wrestler in the World by the biggest pro wrestling company in the World. He has given us countless classic matches, promos, and storylines, and his fanbase is as big as anyone’s in the business today. You think if Lou Thesz was around today he would have accomplished a quarter of what Punk has accomplished? Of course he wouldn't have. The dude would have been another Charlie Haas, if that.

What’s your basis. I don’t want to make this comparison, but Thesz credentials were as a tough guy with technique, not the other way around. Brock Lesnar is a closer contemporary match, a man who with a fraction of the effort and a quarter of the time has accomplished more in the business than CM Punk.

The fact that CM Punk has accomplished what he has is the only proof I need to show he has more talent in his pinkie than Lou Thesz had in his entire body. Punk should have NEVER been a success in this business. Look at the guy.

So a man who unified wrestling world titles and became the first national champion for nearly 50 years has achieved less than a guy who isn’t even the main man on a promotion he is the world champion of. If winning the World Championship whilst rarely featuring in the main event is an achievement, kudos to Punk. I’d argue that making yourself the main event in every wrestling promotion in the world is more of an achievement.

What a fucking douchebag. How the hell did he grow up to amount to the success he has been able to acquire? It's unbelievably mind-blowing. The only answer is talent. And he was able to use his talent to rise up during a time where there's literally THOUSANDS wrestlers clawing to make it in this business.

Well, talent and perseverance, just like all world champions have.

How many were around during Thesz's day? Not even a 3rd as many as there are today I'm willing to bet. Wrestling was taboo back then. They didn't have many, if any, wrestling schools. To make it in the business you needed a shoot background. That's really the only requirement you needed. You didn't need to know how to talk, sell yourself, have good matches... just have a shoot background. Today, however, it's completely different, and if you're able to become a legitimate star in today's era, then you could have become a star in any era if given the opportunity. You can't say that about the guys from the 1950's though, can you?

The vast majority of wrestlers who don’t make it now look like the dweeb CM Punk was in your picture up there. It’s an achievement to make it, no doubt, but it’s more of an achievement to be number 1 in the world, because there can only be 1. Thesz did that. Punk emphatically hasn’t. As for your second point, do you honestly think that people even as recently as the 1980s would have had any time for people like Jeff Hardy? They had him. He was called Lanny Poffo and he was a jobber. Bret Hart didn’t reach the main event until he was the wrong side of 35. There wasn’t a market for people like him before that. What the audience wants changes, and it’s difficult to compare. What you can do is see how they stand against contemporaries. Thesz blew his out the water, CM Punk is treading water.

Vote CM Punk, people. The only reason not to is if you deeply hate the guy, or if you’re voting on who was the bigger draw (and even then, like I said… Thesz didn’t attract people to the arena, it was the show itself, but technically he does get the credit for it, whether it’s deserved or not, so you do have an argument). If that’s how you want to justify your vote, then that's your prerogative, but there’s no argument that can be made for kayfabe or who is the better professional wrestler. That answer is CM Punk, and it’s indisputable.

Punk says he is the best wrestler in the world, Thesz won world titles in all three major wrestling territiories. He lived being the best wrestler in the world. Vote Thesz.

 

[IrishCanadian25]

Like many Thesz matches, I started reading Tasty's post, got bored, and realized it was just way too long to pay attention to.

I already know I am backing Lou Thesz in this match, for a few reasons. And here's a hint - none of them have to do with effing dribble like "being a better draw" or anything like that. Ace of Base and the Backstreet Boys have higher selling albums than Boston and Queen, but nobody in their right mind would argue that Ace of Base are better musicians than Queen.

Thesz started wrestling in 1932 at a time when the ONLY WAY to be a professional wrestling fan at all was to attend a match live or maybe catch results in a newspaper. Even after it was televised, wrestling was what was watched like any other massive sporting event. CM Punk has earned a massive following and is a fair draw at a time when there are more than 1000 HD channels at the disposal of most people in the civilized world. This isn't a knock on Thesz, but to make the "bigger draw" argument, to me, is such a far off comparison that it borders on irresponsible lunacy.

What Thesz is, however, is amazingly legit. All of Tasty's claims about Thesz being a "hooker," which is to say, someone who could stretch an opponent out in painful submission-style holds, are totally accurate. The fact that Thesz, as the NWA Champion, had to deal with opponents "going into business for themselves" in matches back then and yet he was still able to not only prevent this, but teach those bums a lesson, is a fact. Thesz did this at a time when the integrity and "realness" of wrestling was defended like the location of the Holy Grail. Had someone succeeded in pinning Thesz without Thesz willingly putting that person over, the NWA wouldn't have been able to come out and say "we fired the new champ because he wasn't supposed to win." Thesz defended not just a title, but the entire industry we are all now assembled here to discuss.

The US fricking army even had Thesz teach medics hand-to-hand combat techniques.

Punk is a great kid and has a world of potential, some of it yet untapped, in professional wrestling. I don't believe he has the skill set or experience just yet to take out Lou Thesz, who wrestled matches in 7 different decades and won titles all around the world while always maintaining the integrity of the business, completely gimmick free.

Vote Thesz.

Cody Rhodes says: "I'm voting for Lou Thhhe...Lou Thhhh...Lou Tthhhhssss...I'm voting against CM Punk."

 

[jmt225]

This tournament is intended to crown the greatest wrestler of all time.

Actually, it's not. If that was the case, then only one tournament would have been necessary. Maybe we'd redo it in 5 more years, but it wouldn't be a yearly thing.

In these tournaments, the luck of the draw means everything. And both Punk and Thesz have been very fortunate to this point to draw the names they have in under the match stipulations they have. Neither man is close to being the greatest wrestler of all time, but who is closer than the other?

I'll admit, Lou Thesz would top Punk on most people's list. Why? Because he was in the business much longer and Punk still has many, many more years to go. When Punk's career is finished, however, his legacy will most surpass he Lou Thesz's. Now, of course Gelgarin will argue that's ******ed, but then again I'm sure if you asked many "wrestling historians" if Shawn Michaels in 1993 (at that point he had already been in the business almost ten years) if he would go down as an all time great, they would have called you ******ed as well. But, look what happened. Shawn Michaels is now considered by many to be the greatest of all time, and his legacy is far ahead of Thesz's. The road Punk is heading down, he will have a similar legacy of Shawn Michaels. I'm sure most would agree, including HBK himself.

Reason 3: Lou Thesz was better in kayfabe.

Lou Thesz was an undefeated champion of the world for an entire decade. He managed to wrestle well over a thousand consecutive matches against the top stars of the era without losing a single time. In terms of win/loss record Lou Thesz is the one of the most dominant talents in the history of the business.

CM Punk has last repeatedly to names such as Chavo Guerrero, Dolph Ziggler or John Morrison. He has never, ever been presented as dominant.

Lou Thesz was presented as the unambiguous best wrestler in the world. CM Punk, for the majority of his career, hasn't even been presented as the best wrestler in the company.

This point is absolutely invalid since there's absolutely no way Lou Thesz would have been a dominating champion today. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it. It's an indisputable fact.

My kayfabe argument stands... you put Punk in a time machine and send him to 1955 to have a match with Lou Thesz, Punk wins, period. Thesz has simply not seen the weapons Punk brings with him to the ring. Thesz literally has not one advantage.

Reason 4: Lou Thesz was better outside of kayfabe

CM Punk has no actual legitimate credentials;

So training Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu under the family who founded it isn't a legitimate credential? Really? Extensive Muay Thai training isn't legitimate? What World are you living in?

Reason 5: Lou Thesz was more entertaining

JMT is going to try and tell you that Lou Thesz is boring. This is stupid, and displays are rather pitiable attitude of "If I'm not entertained by something then nobody else is allowed to be entertained by it either."

Lou Thesz wasn't trying to entertain JMT, he wasn't trying to entertain you and wasn't trying to entertain me. Lou Thesz was trying to entertain wrestling crowds in the 1950's, and he was unbelievably good at it.

The measure of how entertaining a person was is simply to look at how many people they entertain. Lou Thesz entertained more people than CM Punk, ergo he was more entertaining; it is very simple logic.

Does anyone really think that in 50 years time the early work of Hulk Hogan is still going to stand up? In 200 years when we're watching wrestling in fully immersive 3D holograms that anyone will want to go back and watch CM Punk? Of course they won't. And in 200 year time some small minded idiots are going to claim that Punk, Cena, Hogan, Savage and the like weren't entertaining; and they'll be just as wrong and stupid then and JMT is now.

Thesz entertained more people. He was more entertaining.
Thesz was better an entertaining people than his contemporaries. Punk is worse at entertaining people than his contemporaries.

This shouldn't be hard.

Like I said, and it cannot be disputed, if Thesz was truly entertaining, then his work would stand the test of time. It doesn't.

Just because people showed up to watch it doesn't necessarily mean it's entertaining... it very well could mean there was nothing else going on. A lot of shitty shows got high ratings during the 1950's and 1960's. I ask my mom, "How could you watch that crap?" and her answer every time would be, "Well, there was nothing else on."

Look at the film The Pride and the Passion. Horrible movie starring Cary Grant from the 1950's. Didn't get good reviews at all, but yet still did very well at the box office. Why? Because there was nothing else to do.

A big wrestling match would have drew people, period. Now, did Thesz have bigger name value than others? Yes, but was it because of talent? I'd argue no. It was because he held on to the belt so long that people became intrigued of when he would lose it, so of course as he reign continued, the more his matches were able to draw. That has nothing to do with talent. That has everything to do with good promotion and booking, and like I said... it was the sport of wrestling that drew those crowds more so than one man.

CM Punk, to the best of my knowledge, possess a white belt in (the lowest rank belt that is given to beginners) and zero kick boxing qualifications. In other words he's roughly as accomplished in the world of martial arts as I am.

His pro wrestling career is what keeps him progressing in martial arts, but his training in each area, while limited, is still enough to beat someone up from the 1950's. It's not a hard concept to grasp.

I'm not saying Punk is more accomplished than Thesz when it comes to shoot fighting, but he can beat Thesz up just because of the training he has had in Jiu-Jitsu and Muay Thai. That is a fact. Why do you think in every Boxing vs. MMA argument you always see the guy arguing the MMA side say that a white belt in Jiu-Jitsu would be able to beat up a Boxer who's never trained BJJ? Because it's true. And the same goes for wrestlers, especially those from the 1950's.

Let us talk a look through Lou Thesz's history and see if we can come up with any martial artists who can rival CM Punk's mastery.

Karl Gotch: Legendary martial artist. Lost to Lou Thesz.
Antonio Inoki: Martial arts "practitioner". Lost to Lou Thesz.
Rikidozan: Legendary martial artist and sumo wrestler. Lost to Lou Thesz.
El Canek: Legendary pro wrester and MMA fighter. Lost to Lou Thesz.
Seiji Sakaguchi: Fifth degree judo blackbelt and 1965 All Japan Judo Champion. Lost to Lou Thesz.

So yeah; Thesz can walk over one of the best Judo competitors in the whole world, but stick him against somebody who is a fan of Jiu-Jitsu and he doesn't stand a chance? You're either ignorant or you are deluding yourself.

Gelgarin, I got my name around here strictly because of my knowledge on MMA, aka shoot fighting, so I'm pretty sure I know a hell of a lot more about it than you do.

And the fact is, in just ten years we have seen shoot fighting evolve to TREMENDOUS heights. Almost every World Champion from 2002 could not compete with the World Champions of today. If the sport of fighting has evolved that much in just ten years, you just only imagine how much it has involved in over 60.

Thesz would not be able to beat up any one with the size and athletic ability of CM Punk who has any amount of extensive training in Jiu-Jitsu and Muay Thai. It's simply not possible. Punk vs. Thesz would look similar to like this...

[YOUTUBE]gEDaCIDvj6I[/YOUTUBE]

That there is a Martial Arts LEGEND going up against some random MMA bum, and look at what happened. Why should I believe Punk vs. Thesz would be any different?

The overall show drew people instead of Lou Thesz? Then why did cards with Lou Thesz draw roughly four times as many fans as cards without him? Why did Thesz and Rocca combined draw more gates of 10000+ than the next ten more popular wrestlers in the world combined?

If these people were just fans of wrestling and not of Thesz, then most names from the 1950's would have managed to outdraw names like Rock, Undertaker and CM Punk from the modern age. But no; Lou Thesz is the only man who managed that. And that is because he was more entertaining then anyone else.

As I explained earlier, people were fans of the championship. That's simply the truth. Anyone holding that belt for that long would draw large crowds as the years went by.

As Davi pointed out, Thesz held on to the belt longer than anyone. Was he this massive draw his first couple of years? I'm sure he did well, but I'm positive his best numbers came as the years went by the and people started thinking that the guy was unbeatable. That has absolutely nothing to do with talent.

 

[Davi323]

Would a black belt in Jeet Kune Do today be better than Bruce Lee? That's the argument you are making there, jmt. That because combat fighting advances so much, Bruce Lee, the most highly regarded martial artist of all time, dead almost 40 years now, would be inferior to any high level practitioner of jeet kune do, the martial art that Bruce Lee himself invented, because it's supposedly advanced over the past 40 years.

C'mon. Say that ANY of today's martial arts champions would be better than Bruce Lee.

I guess you would also have to say that Wladimir Klitschko is heads and above a superior boxer to Muhammed Ali, Joe Lewis, Sugar Ray Robinson, Mike Tyson or Dempsey.

You want to talk about advancements? What advancements, exactly? That instead of having to be conditioned like an Olympic athlete because you had to routinely wrestle 60 minutes a night multiple nights a week, you only had to be conditioned to wrestle 10 minute matches, with a 20 minute PPV match once a month? Running a couple of laps so that you didn't get winded delivering a promo?

Lou Thesz was so good, he was 20 when he won his first heavyweight title. 20. He was an expert at greco-roman wrestling, a similar style to what Kurt Angle's entire legacy is built on. Considering professional wrestling is still more based on that than it is martial arts, I would say that Thesz's vast knowledge of greco-roman wrestling gives him an advantage over Punk's martial training, of which, we have absolutely no idea what level he actually attained.

 

[jmt225]

So not only is it a bad analogy, it’s a wrong one.

You're completely missing the point that this was apart of my KAYFABE argument, nothing else. And when we look at this from a kayfabe point of view, first of all, wrestling is real, and secondly, it's the idea that you take one man in his prime and stick him up against another man in his prime. Of course a man in his prime TODAY is going to have a ton of advantages over a guy from the 1950's due to the evolution of professional wrestling.

If Babe Ruth was around today, then there is a chance that he would still be a success. However, if God simply reached down and picked him up during his prime and placed him on the Yankees today to play for them during the World Series, I sincerely doubt he would have much success. That's my point with Thesz.

Lou Thesz wrestled Masahiko Kimura, the all-Japan Judo champion, and (admittedly, according to Wikipedia) “widely considered one of the greatest Judoka of all time”. He invented “The Kimura” and beat Jiu Jitsu legends in crossover matches. But, that’s no match for CM Punk’s jiu jitsu experience, which is level of accomplishment is not really clear.

Pretty much.

Like I told Gelgarin, I know much more about this kind of stuff than either of you do, so I don't know why you're bring it up.

In MMA, aka shoot fighting, there is ONE successful Judo practitioner in the entire sport, and it's a GIRL. That's it. Every Judo black belt we've seen enter the sport, they fail. Why? Because they can't strike, and they don't know submissions.

So, yeah... Thesz having a win over a Judo guy doesn't impress me at all.

Have you ever watched wrestling? Bret Hart, a 50 something stroke victim beat The Miz, a 27 year old former world champion.

This would be a good point if The Miz wasn't an absolute joke. Punk is a serious wrestler, and he's booked as one. The Miz is a pompous ass who has "earned" everything out of luck, and that's exactly how he was booked. It's not fair to bring up someone like The Miz when we're talking about CM Punk.

Perhaps more tellingly, when Sammartino came back in the 80s, he still beat people, as did Bob Backlund in the 90s despite being stylistic dinosaurs.

Not a fair comparison. Sammartino and Backlund had some small success, sure, but both we're still in great shape and it wasn't that ahead of their prime. We're talking 60 years here with Thesz and Punk, not 10.

Bearing in mind that there are people in this world, millions of people, who enjoy noting down the numbers of trains in an exercise book and collecting stamps, I don’t think it’s particularly outrageous to believe there’s a number of people who enjoy watching old school wrestling. Entertainment is subjective, and whilst your free to arrogantly dismiss other people’s interests, you know you can’t make a statement like that. Who are you to tell people what they do and don’t like? Thesz’s wrestling is similar to the sort you see in the Olympics, seeing that I can’t get tickets to that, I’m sure there are people who do like it.

You can say this all day Tastycles, but we're on a wrestling forum with over 2200 members, and only a couple will truthfully say that they enjoy someone like Thesz's matches. You know this is true.

People who find enjoyment in 1950's wrestling are few and far between, and that's because it's not entertaining. Period.

Given that the first televised sports broadcast in the USA was in 1939, 4 years after Babe Ruth retired and no sport was televised anywhere before the 1936 Olympics, I find it very hard to believe that you’ve seen anything but a few minutes of Pathé news reel highlights of his career, if that. But bullshit to prove your point, by all means.

Did I say I've seen it Tasty? No, I said that I could enjoy watching Babe Ruth play baseball. Whether I have the means to or not, watching Babe Ruth hit would be a pleasure to watch. Watching Lou Thesz wrestle, however, certainly would not.

And again, I’m not disputing that you don’t like watching Thesz, but that’s an irrelevance. There’s plenty of people in the IWC who don’t like watching Hulk Hogan, would he lose to CM Punk?

The difference is that there are still PLENTY of people who find enjoyment in Hogan's work. Where are the people who like Thesz's matches? Point them out to me, Tasty. That's a horrible comparison.

So because you happen to like one sitcom from the 1950s, and you don’t like Lou Thesz, this proves that he would lose to CM Punk.

No, it was me erasing the thought that since I'm trashing 1950's wrestling, that I wouldn't like anything from that era. Gelgarin ignorantly assumed that I don't think Citizen Kane is a good film simply because I don't like to watch Lou Thesz. So, part of my argument was that just because something was set in the 1940's and 1950's, that shouldn't be an excuse why it's such a pain to sit through today.

People want to talk about eras, but true entertainment and art stand the test of time, and Lou Thesz's matches don't.

Well it is, isn’t it?

It would be if there was still a large part of people out there who enjoy watching wrestling from that era, but you can't find those people, can you?

I’d say being able to attract a crowd three times bigger than some of wrestling’s biggest names is a fairly good indicator of knowing how to put on a show. If you don’t understand that, you’re never going to.

And Lou Thesz deserves all the credit, huh? It had nothing to do with the booking?

So a man who unified wrestling world titles and became the first national champion for nearly 50 years has achieved less than a guy who isn’t even the main man on a promotion he is the world champion of.

Lol... where did I ever say that?

The vast majority of wrestlers who don’t make it now look like the dweeb CM Punk was in your picture up there. It’s an achievement to make it, no doubt, but it’s more of an achievement to be number 1 in the world, because there can only be 1. Thesz did that. Punk emphatically hasn’t.

My point still remains though that it's harder to reach Punk's level of success today than it was for Thesz to reach his. Thesz had a lot of behind-the-scenes power and was trained by pretty much the founder of the business. He was very fortunate in a lot of ways. Punk, however, didn't luck out with anything.

As for your second point, do you honestly think that people even as recently as the 1980s would have had any time for people like Jeff Hardy? They had him. He was called Lanny Poffo and he was a jobber. Bret Hart didn’t reach the main event until he was the wrong side of 35. There wasn’t a market for people like him before that. What the audience wants changes, and it’s difficult to compare. What you can do is see how they stand against contemporaries. Thesz blew his out the water, CM Punk is treading water.

We're not talking about Jeff Hardy; we're talking about CM Punk. CM Punk has the shoot arsenal, whether you buy into it or not, kayfabe wise he is an elite level kickboxer and submission specialist. Punk also has a gimmick where he doesn't drink, do drugs, or smoke. He would be successful at any area as a heel or as a face. He's that kind of rare talent, which is one of the reasons why people should vote him over Thesz. Lou Thesz wouldn't be successful today... Punk, however, can magically disappear to any area and either piss people off or make people cheer for him while also providing them with exciting, compelling wrestling matches.

 

[jmt225]

Would a black belt in Jeet Kune Do today be better than Bruce Lee? That's the argument you are making there, jmt.

If the black belt in Jeet Kune Do also trained extensively in other forms of martial arts like TODAY'S martial artist do, then yes... he would be able to beat up Bruce Lee.

Lee, to his credit, became one of the first to mix in a lot of different martial arts together, and he is a big reason for the evolution of fighting. However, if he were still alive today, I'm sure he would agree that if the 30-year-old version all of the sudden magically appeared today to face top martial artists, he would most likely get his ass kicked, just as Thesz would if the same thing happened to him.

I guess you would also have to say that Wladimir Klitschko is heads and above a superior boxer to Muhammed Ali, Joe Lewis, Sugar Ray Robinson, Mike Tyson or Dempsey.

Boxing is one martial art. There's only one way to win. How does that come close to comparing to the situation we're talking about here?

And by the way, yes... Klitschko would beat all those names, with the exception of Muhammed Ali.

You want to talk about advancements? What advancements, exactly? That instead of having to be conditioned like an Olympic athlete because you had to routinely wrestle 60 minutes a night multiple nights a week, you only had to be conditioned to wrestle 10 minute matches, with a 20 minute PPV match once a month? Running a couple of laps so that you didn't get winded delivering a promo?

MMA is the perfect example. Look how in just ten years how much the sport has evolved. You would not see someone like Ken Shamrock ever be a Heavyweight Champion today.

Lou Thesz was so good, he was 20 when he won his first heavyweight title. 20. He was an expert at greco-roman wrestling, a similar style to what Kurt Angle's entire legacy is built on. Considering professional wrestling is still more based on that than it is martial arts, I would say that Thesz's vast knowledge of greco-roman wrestling gives him an advantage over Punk's martial training, of which, we have absolutely no idea what level he actually attained.

And what happened when Kurt Angle stepped in there with someone with just limited training in Jiu-Jitsu?

[YOUTUBE]1RBWFhlCyk8[/YOUTUBE]

Angle was on his way to a broken arm before the ref stepped in there to save him. Thank you for bringing his name up. This here completely proves my point.

 

[Davi323]

Not a fair comparison. Sammartino and Backlund had some small success, sure, but both we're still in great shape and it wasn't that ahead of their prime. We're talking 60 years here with Thesz and Punk, not 10.

And Lou Thesz's last championship title occurred 42 years after he won his 1st. How are you defining how long is substantially after you prime, exactly? How much time has to pass?

But...all arguments aside, here is a little tidbit a lot of Wrestlezone members might not have known...in 1963, the Nature Boy Buddy Rogers, then champion, lost a title match to Lou Thesz that would change the entire course of history. Not every promoter in the NWA acknowledged the title change, and insisted on still recognizing Buddy Rogers as champion, not Thesz. Two promoters from the northeast formed their own alliance and named Buddy Rogers their 1st champion. The promoters were named Toots Mondt and Vincent James McMahon, and their new promotion is now a global wrestling empire.

Has CM Punk fundamentally altered the entire course of professional wrestling the way that Thesz's victory over Rogers did?

 

[jmt225]

And Lou Thesz's last championship title occurred 42 years after he won his 1st. How are you defining how long is substantially after you prime, exactly? How much time has to pass?

Pro wrestling still only evolved just a little to that point. The brawlers and showmen were few and far between. The business was still mostly filled with grapplers. It wasn't until after Thesz retired where guys like Race and Funk would come along and start to steer the business into a more gritty direction. Thesz held the business back during that late run of his, no doubt about it.

But...all arguments aside, here is a little tidbit a lot of Wrestlezone members might not have known...in 1963, the Nature Boy Buddy Rogers, then champion, lost a title match to Lou Thesz that would change the entire course of history. Not every promoter in the NWA acknowledged the title change, and insisted on still recognizing Buddy Rogers as champion, not Thesz. Two promoters from the northeast formed their own alliance and named Buddy Rogers their 1st champion. The promoters were named Toots Mondt and Vincent James McMahon, and their new promotion is now a global wrestling empire.

This is once again crediting Thesz for simply good moves by promoters and bookers.

Also, Thesz was an asshole for his treatment of Rogers. Like I said, he held the business back because of shit like that. He shouldn't be praised for it.

 

[Gelgarin]

Actually, it's not. If that was the case, then only one tournament would have been necessary. Maybe we'd redo it in 5 more years, but it wouldn't be a yearly thing.

This year I'm asking you to vote for this in a more unbiased manner. What I mean by that is don't vote for someone simply because you like them. Vote for the person that you think is greater.

I don't really have to counter this myself do I? KB asked us to vote for the greater professional wrestler and not just who we like best. Me right; you wrong.

I'll admit, Lou Thesz would top Punk on most people's list. Why? Because he was in the business much longer and Punk still has many, many more years to go. When Punk's career is finished, however, his legacy will most surpass he Lou Thesz's. Now, of course Gelgarin will argue that's ******ed, but then again I'm sure if you asked many "wrestling historians" if Shawn Michaels in 1993 (at that point he had already been in the business almost ten years) if he would go down as an all time great, they would have called you ******ed as well. But, look what happened. Shawn Michaels is now considered by many to be the greatest of all time, and his legacy is far ahead of Thesz's. The road Punk is heading down, he will have a similar legacy of Shawn Michaels. I'm sure most would agree, including HBK himself.

So people are supposed to vote for CM Punk based on these mystical things that he might do in the future? In that case I'll certainly be pushing Darrell Oblexon next year. He hasn't been born yet; but I'm absolutely certain that he's going t go on to surpass Hulk Hogan.

We were asked to vote for who is the greater wrestler, not who is going to be the greater professional wrestler. Especially when we have nothing outside of guesswork to back that up.

This point is absolutely invalid since there's absolutely no way Lou Thesz would have been a dominating champion today. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it. It's an indisputable fact.

And Punk would never have resin above jobber status if he'd been born in 1910. And it's not an indisputable fact, that's not what the word "fact" means; it's a theory.

My kayfabe argument stands... you put Punk in a time machine and send him to 1955 to have a match with Lou Thesz, Punk wins, period. Thesz has simply not seen the weapons Punk brings with him to the ring. Thesz literally has not one advantage.

You mean like when you claimed that Lou Thesz had never seen a top rope elbow drop before? Yeah; you already got proved not to know what you're talking about on that front. I see you ignored that part of the debate.

So training Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu under the family who founded it isn't a legitimate credential? Really? Extensive Muay Thai training isn't legitimate? What World are you living in?

The real one. He has a white belt. I know guys who work in an office all day and hit the gym once a week who've advanced higher than that. Hell; I'm pretty certain that there are a decent number of small children who have achieved the same level of mastery.

Let's look at the evidence here. You are saying he's an expert. I am saying he's a beginner. He has no competitive fighting history, has publicly admitted that he couldn't complete in MMA and has only achieved the beginner's in Kiu-Jitsu. Which of us do you think has the more compelling case?

Like I said, and it cannot be disputed, if Thesz was truly entertaining, then his work would stand the test of time. It doesn't.

Let us look up the word "entertaining" since you seem to be having so much trouble with it.

Entertaining - adjective - Providing amusement or enjoyment.

Lou Thesz provided amusement or enjoyment to hundreds of thousands of people on a regular basis. As such he was entertaining.

Oh; and for the record; there's a lot of stupid kids out there who don't think that Hogan holds up. Was he not entertaining either?

Just because people showed up to watch it doesn't necessarily mean it's entertaining... it very well could mean there was nothing else going on. A lot of shitty shows got high ratings during the 1950's and 1960's. I ask my mom, "How could you watch that crap?" and her answer every time would be, "Well, there was nothing else on."

Look at the film The Pride and the Passion. Horrible movie starring Cary Grant from the 1950's. Didn't get good reviews at all, but yet still did very well at the box office. Why? Because there was nothing else to do.

Oh for the love of...

So now you're not arguing that Lou Thesz wasn't entertaining; but that the entire 1950's and 60's weren't entertaining. There was literally nothing else for people to fill their time with, so bored people flocked in droves to shows that weren't entertaining just to break the monotony of staring at the wallpaper all day.

People in the 1950's had film, sport, sex, drugs, music, parties, friends, alcohol, theatre, books, food, dancing and a thousand and one other things that they could have been doing with their time. Instead they flocked in droves to watch Lou Thesz wrestle.

I'm half a decade younger than you; and that's so fucking depressing right now.

Now, did Thesz have bigger name value than others? Yes, but was it because of talent? I'd argue no. It was because he held on to the belt so long that people became intrigued of when he would lose it, so of course as he reign continued, the more his matches were able to draw. That has nothing to do with talent.

Actually that isn't what you'd argue. What you would originally argue is that people would come to the shows no matter who was competing. Then Tastycles and I proved you to be full of crap, so now you're making something new up.

I like the way it's only about 24 hours since you made your self righteous "I'm one of the few people who'll admit when I'm wrong" speech; but when you get caught out making up information you're response is simply to pretend it didn't happen and move on to making up something new.

Your new theory can be just as easily disproved by the way. Lou Thesz carried on being a top draw when he wasn't holding the belt, and guys like Hutton and O'Connor never drew close to his numbers even when they'd been NWA champion for over a year.

Would you like to invent a third theory why Lou Thesz outdrew everyone else?

His pro wrestling career is what keeps him progressing in martial arts, but his training in each area, while limited, is still enough to beat someone up from the 1950's. It's not a hard concept to grasp.

So what you are saying as that anyone for whom Jiu Jitsu is a hobby will automatically and invariably defeat anyone for whom it isn't. I think you're confusing martial arts training with attending Hogwarts.

I'm not saying Punk is more accomplished than Thesz when it comes to shoot fighting, but he can beat Thesz up just because of the training he has had in Jiu-Jitsu and Muay Thai. That is a fact.

Please stop repeating "that is a fact" every time you state your opinion. It doesn't make your argument more compelling, it just makes it look like you don't know what a fact is.

You have absolutely nothing to back that statement up other than your assertion that amateurs who practise martial arts as a hobby have magical powers.

Gelgarin, I got my name around here strictly because of my knowledge on MMA, aka shoot fighting, so I'm pretty sure I know a hell of a lot more about it than you do.

And I got my name around here talking about Lou Thesz and Verne Gagne; and very clearly know more about their careers than you. Yet you're still quite happy to make up information about them when talking to me. So forgive me if I don't cower out of respect to your shoot fighting expertise. You claimed the other day to know more about Thesz that the majority of the forum, and that turned out to be a lie.

And the fact is, in just ten years we have seen shoot fighting evolve to TREMENDOUS heights.

No; physical training advanced. Tastycles has already countered this point, so I don't have to.

As I explained earlier, people were fans of the championship. That's simply the truth. Anyone holding that belt for that long would draw large crowds as the years went by.

Pat O'Connor. Wrestling legend. NWA champion for multiple years. Lou Thesz drew twice as many gates of 10000+ than he did whilst O'Connor held the strap (and Thesz was in the armed services for a significant portion of that).

Once again you are proved not to know what you're talking about. Man up and admit it like you said you would. It doesn't mean losing the argument, it doesn't mean calling me the better man, it just means keeping your word and being a hypocrite.

I'm one of the few people on this forum who will tell you the truth, and who will also tell you when I'm wrong about something.

You were wrong when you said Billy Watson vs. Gorgeous George would draw nearly the same amount of fans to the arena as Lou Thesz vs. either one of them. You were wrong when you said that anyone holding that belt for that long would draw large crowds as the years went by. You were wrong last round when you tried to claim Verne Gagne never got over in the NWA.

You don't know what you're talking about. Be true to your word and admit it.

As Davi pointed out, Thesz held on to the belt longer than anyone. Was he this massive draw his first couple of years? I'm sure he did well, but I'm positive his best numbers came as the years went by the and people started thinking that the guy was unbeatable.

You aren't positive, that's not what positive means. You're making information up, yet again. You have not one shred of evidence to back this claim up. Imagine my surprise.

For the record, he drew some of his best numbers during the early years when he was still knocking off all the local champions. If you know what you were talking about then you'd know that. Fuck, if you read Wikipedia you'd know that. Sadly though...

 

[Benson]

Gelgarin, in all honesty, I'd love to get a better understanding of Lou Thesz. What's the best way to go about doing that? Is there anything you can link me to? WWhat are some matches I should look for?

 

[Gelgarin]

Sadly there isn't a whole lot of footage that can be linked to. Most of Thesz's career was never televised, and most of what was never went digital. There are dribs and drabs on Youtube, but nothing impressive. The best stuff available is on VHS tapes acquired from shady old school wrestling fans. If by a million to one chance you find one, Thesz's matches against Gagne were nothing short of incredible.

There also isn't much in the way of a repository of information - most websites talking about old school guys jsut quote Wikipedia, and Wikipedia is frequently wrong. I've picked up what little I know through years of simply browsing Google and reading whatever caught my eye. Start with Wikipedia, every time you come to a reference to something that sounds interesting, Google it. Repeat ad infinitum.

There is one rather good spot that I go to when I need information, and that's Lou Thesz's old forum.

http://wrestlingclassics.com/.ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=forum;f=10

Lou and his wife both used to post there prior to his death, answering questions and interacting with fans. Mark Madden stopped in at one point as well, though only long enough to apologise for calling Lou Thesz a woman beater.

These days it's basically become the ultimate haunt for those who remember to good old days. By and large the people there make me look like JMT, so if you want to learn about the pioneer era then that's the place to go.

There's also Lou Thesz's book "Hooker", which is widely regarded as one of the best wrestling books ever written. It'll set you back a few hundred dollars for an original copy, and fifty of so for a phorocopy (I paid for one - never showed up), but from what I've read it's a fascinating read.

Other than that I'm afraid I can't be of too much help.

 

[nightmare]

All these moves that Thesz brought to the business and innovated are all moves that Punk takes on a daily basis. Is Punk going to be beaten by a Thesz press? Nope. German suplex? Not likely. Powerbomb? Nope. STF? yeah he lost to Cena with that, but how many time has he gotten out in his career? Way more than he has been beaten with it. Thesz won using a hammerlock, Punk takes those and is never in danger of losing because of it. So i now await you all to say, "But it wasnt Thesz giving him those moves". So fn what who applies them? I have seen men much stronger than Thesz pull a hammerlock and not win. I have seen men better than Thesz pull multiple Germans and not win with them- EXAMPLE KURT ANGLE. When was the last time Angle or anyone won using a belly to back German suplex?


Go ahead. Say it. "Kurt isnt a better wrestler than Thesz" I will direct you to the lack of olympic gold medals Thesz has. Such a great 'legit' wrestler would surely have one of those right?


JMT already did a good job at pointing out the Punk judo\jujitsu\kickboxing argument so that needs no further info. He has skill. It would work.


Lets look at entertainment value in matches. Thesz wrestled alot of matches to a draw- that were boring and slow. People bring that up alot. In fact 90% of the forums are so excited by Thesz and are such big fans- they n6ever mention him till WZT comes and Gelgarin opens his mouth. Call me a Punk 'fanboy' for liking Punk for 10 years, but thats better than being on the 'once a year Thesz bandwagon'.


Punk had two fantastic exciting and entertaining matches in ROH that ended in a draw. Those 2 matches were more entertaining to watch than anything I have seen from Thesz.I have actually seen my fair share of Thesz matches from old tapes gained through the years. He has plenty of merit and was a tough guy back then, but overall- just not that entertaining for the most part. Thats just my opinion, but as a fan of many styles of wrestling- those matches just dont get me cheering like others.


Only thing I give Thesz over Punk is historical significance and length of titles held. No one can deny that he is a pioneer in that regard. It also doesnt mean he could win just based on that.


Now a subject I like to call 'Territories'. Something that Thesz came up smack dab in the middle of. We all should know by now how wrestling was ran back then. It was a way different structure and Thesz was obviously champ for a good period of time. Well, Punk is one of the last men around who succesfully worked through the territory system known now as the Indipendent Circuit. There he had battles in all forms, including many matches that went to the 60 minute limit and a few beyond.





IWA Mid-South Heavyweight Championship (5 times)
IWA Mid-South Light Heavyweight Championship (2 times)
IWC Heavyweight Championship
MAW Heavyweight Championship
NWA Cyberspace Tag Team Championship
NWA Revolution Heavyweight Championship
OVW Heavyweight Championship
OVW Southern Tag Team Championship
OVW Television Championship
ROH Tag Team Championship (2 times)
ROH World Championship
SDW Northern States Television Championship (2 times)
SPCW Northern States Light Heavyweight Championship


Seems like he did pretty well in the Indipendent Circuit to me. Or 'territories' as they were called back in the day. That was all before his titles and work in WWE that he is most known for now. Seems like he is plenty qualified and deserving of his own legacy now- with much more to come.



Dont just blindy count out Punk here folks. Thesz has plenty of significance to wrestling because of what he did for the sport, but that shouldnt erase everything that Punk has done. He might not have innovated moves, but he does pull off an impressively vast moveset that differs from 90% of guys today. He has talent and doesnt even need to be 'the strongest' to do so, or even have the 'look\build' of a wrestler. He has done all he has in a time where the business is very fickle and most never even touch a belt let alone hold them multiple times.




Everyone, vote how you want. Not because someone tells you to or you want to seem cool. Dont count either man out until you do some research and decide for yourself. You like Thesz because of what he has done and how he did it- Vote for him. If you like Punk for what he has done\how he did it- then Vote Punk.



Also I would take the guy who looks like 'Hardcore' Jesus over the guy who looks like Eddie Munsters big brother. Not really relevant, just saying...



Im voting Punk... He might have not held his belts for as long as Thesz, or made up a new move- but he does a pretty damn good job and entertains me a hell of alot more than Thesz ever has.