No DQ Triple Threats ?

[Australian Punk]

I was watching the Wrestlemania 22 dvd last night, and the Angle vs Mysterio Vs Orton triple threat had disqualifications, and i'd like to know, since when have triple threats been no DQ?.

I was puzzled when Orton went and got a chair and the ref tried to take it away, so since when have triple threats been no DQ?

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

As long as I remember they have been "No DQ".

I suppose the mentality has been that if there is a Triple Threat match and someone gets disqualified, then who do you award the match to?

Although logic would dictate to me that the person should be disqualified and eliminated from the match ..... with the match changing to a Singles match .... and that is what I think they should do.

Then again, if the match is for a title, and the Champion gets disqualified, then what incentive is there really for the other two competitors to continue since the Champion keeps the title on Disqualifications?

Good observation, though. Not a subject that is talked about very often that is worthy of discussion.

 

[TLC]

Yeah I always thought they had been no DQ, except for some times, but other than they have been the same as fatal 4 ways where its anything goes. Only reason why I believe it is no DQ is because who get's the win if some1 gets disqualified, does it go to the champion, or the guy who got hit the weapon and so on.

I prefer it to be No DQ anyway, adds more flavour into the match if its people who aren't very good in ring but can brawl.

 

[Yrrab]

Well, I can't exactly recall which triple threat matches I've seen that have had similar situations, but I always remember it just led to the person being distracted by the ref taking the weapon and someone else in the match attacking them. Seem's like it could have just been a spot in the match or something, not neccessarily the ref enforcing no-dq rules.

 

[Tastycles]

I don't really see how they could be anything else really, it's just one of those possibilities that never really happens because wrestling is fixed. For example, people rarely leave the ring during a submission match. The match wouldn't really work if you had disqualifications. I remember on WWF Attitude on the playstation that if you got disqualified, you'd just go and sit outside the ring while the other two duked it out. It's something that hasn't really been done before that would be an interesting way of doing things, particularly in the upcoming two at Survivor Series, as you could have, say, Big Show get diqsualified for destroying Undertaker, then Jericho picking up a win. Not to say I want that to happen, but it'd be an interesting idea for the future.

 

[Blade]

Having it no DQ is the only way it makes sense, really.
Assume there's a triple threat match with wrestlers A, B and C. If wrestler A hit wrestler B with a chair, there's no reason wrestler A and C should lose. Wrestler C had nothing to do with it, so he shouldn't lost cause wrestler A is violent. And there's no reason wrestler B should win just cause he got hit with a chair. If that were the case, they'd all just spend the match trying to persuade the other two guys to hit them with a weapon. What else are they supposed to do? Just eliminate wrestler A from the match? Well that would just be stupid on many levels.

So yeah, No DQ is the only way to do triple threat matches. Or any multi-man matches to be honest.

 

[JGlass]

I suppose the mentality has been that if there is a Triple Threat match and someone gets disqualified, then who do you award the match to?

I think the most logical thing to do would be to award the match to the person who suffered most from the DQ. For instance, if Orton hit Angle with the chair, than Angle would be awarded the match. This would be a problem though if it was a type of thing where, say, Legacy came in and started beating on both HHH and HBK at Survivor Series.

I think Triple Threats have always been No DQ, but they've also been no count-out, so some standard rules still apply while others do not.

 

[shooter_mcgavin]

"Disqualification" by definition means that the person should not be included in the contest. I guess if this is the case if the ref catches someone cheating, maybe that person can be removed from the match.

Of course they can always pull a Summer Slam 1999, where Triple H hit Austin and Foley with the chair and the Guest Referee, Jesse Ventura, refused to make the count.

 

[BigAdz]

This is why I always preferred the ECW 3-Way Dance format to the Triple Threat.

3 guys to start, once one falls to a decision he is eliminated and the other 2 remain to settle the contest. Plus the No-DQ always made things fairer in a way.

 

[NSL]

I've always thought they were No DQ, because there was no way to decide who got the win. It also makes the match more interesting. While 2 guys are fighting, one guy can set up a spot on the other side...Or, if 1 guy is getting his ass beaten, he can make a believable come back by pulling out a chair or sledgehammer.

This is why I always preferred the ECW 3-Way Dance format to the Triple Threat.

3 guys to start, once one falls to a decision he is eliminated and the other 2 remain to settle the contest. Plus the No-DQ always made things fairer in a way.

What he said. The Three Way Dance is a great way to do it, and forces two people to be pinned/tap out. You get longer matches, and you still get the No DQ stipulation. Wouldn't the SS main events be better that way? Cena v. HBK v. HHH for the title...Instead of one member of DX pinning Cena, and the match being over, they'd then have to fight each other. Same with the SD main event...

 

[XgringolocoX]

BigAdz beat me to it. The ECW style of the 3 way dance I liked best. Basicly elimination style or a gauntlet match but everyone starts at the same time. You get DQ'd, yer out!

 

[Dirty Spamchez]

The ref probably didn't want him cheating, that's why.

And it's logic that triple threats are No DQ because who would win if someone hit someone else with a chair in a triple threat?

 

[wwefan2010]

Having a DQ in a triple threat match makes about as much sense as having a DQ in a steel cage ala TNA. Someone pointed out having them thrown out if they get DQ'ed and what to do if it was the champ and that answer is simple, just announce like they have done before when champs try to get intentionally DQed that if they do get DQed they will lose the title and be out of the match.

 

[deadman403]

The No DQ triple threat makes sense seeing as though there are three people in the match.

Think hypothetically. if a wrestler was to be disqualified for using a chair and the victim of the shot was awarded the win, where does the third wrestler stand?

 

[justinsayne]

Then again, if the match is for a title, and the Champion gets disqualified, then what incentive is there really for the other two competitors to continue since the Champion keeps the title on Disqualifications?

Well the champ can already lose his title in the match without being pinned or submitting so I don't see why they couldn't just have the champion be able to lose the title by DQ as well, and then have the match continue as a singles match

personally I've always thought the idea that the champion retains on a DQ is pretty stupid really, I've never understood why the heel wouldn't just wait for the match to start and then just deliver a low blow in front of the ref, get DQed and leave with this title in hand