OFFICIAL: Suggestion for next Wrestlezone Tournament

[Slyfox696]

First, let me say that Shockmaster does a GREAT job with this thing (when the hell are you going to get rid of the current username anyways?). It's fun, and a great thing.

But, let's be honest. What is it really accomplishing? What are we really doing with this? Is it kayfabe? Is it based on skill? Is it based on popularity? Hard to tell. Sometimes it's skill while also kayfabe.

Additionally, some of the results in this thing have been ludicrous. Kane over Hart? HHH over Hogan? Simply ridiculous. While I understand that is the nature of the beast, and everyone is able to vote how they feel, in no world would Kane ever go over Hart, nor would HHH beat Hogan. Finally, it's clear that this tournament favors current wrestlers, and hamstrings all-time greats. Mostly because so many voters started watching wrestling during the Attitude Era. While that is fine, it also gives votes to those like HHH and HBK in places where they don't really deserve them.

So, here's my suggestion for the next tournament thing. Keep in mind, this is only a suggestion, and since I have ZERO interest in running it, take it as you will:

1) Bar any active wrestler from participating. An active wrestler would be anyone who regularly appears on programming in a wrestling capacity. Obviously there would be a couple problems with this. Such as where the Undertaker fits in there, and Ric Flair being not allowed in. But, I think it's the only way to have a fair tournament.

2) Limit the gimmick matches, and use the same gimmick matches. So, start the gimmick matches later, and stick with the basic ladder, cage, I Quit, 2 out of 3 Falls, etc. matches. Leave matches like Inferno matches, First Blood, Ultimate X, etc. out of it.

3) Clearly define the criteria for voting. Is it based on kayfabe? Is it based on who we like overall? Is it based on skill? You could even do different versions of the tournament based on the different criteria. For instance, this year would be in kayfabe, next year based on skill, and third year based on simple popularity.

4) With the elimination of current wrestlers, drop the number of wrestlers participating.

5) If you DO have current wrestlers performing, put all of them in the same bracket, or same side of the bracket. If you have overflow, put those who are way past their prime such as Flair, in with the older guys. This will level the playing field.


These are just suggestions, and again, take them for what they're worth. I just think it would help eliminate some of the silly things.

 

[Uncle Sam]

1) Bar any active wrestler from participating. An active wrestler would be anyone who regularly appears on programming in a wrestling capacity. Obviously there would be a couple problems with this. Such as where the Undertaker fits in there, and Ric Flair being not allowed in. But, I think it's the only way to have a fair tournament.

Really do not like this idea, particularly considering that Chris Benoit, Sting, Hulk Hogan, Rob Van Dam, Big Van Vader and Bam Bam Bigelow have got this far and are not active, and I'm sure there must be others. Besides, Ric Flair will almost definitely be retired by next time around.

2) Limit the gimmick matches, and use the same gimmick matches. So, start the gimmick matches later, and stick with the basic ladder, cage, I Quit, 2 out of 3 Falls, etc. matches. Leave matches like Inferno matches, First Blood, Ultimate X, etc. out of it.

I'd actually like it if there were no gimmicks. People misinterpret what the actual advantages are, and put too much stock in the advantages that they have and haven't imagined. If there were no gimmicks, I'm almost certain Kurt Angle would have walked his match with RVD. Instead, people completely misinterpret the advantages supplied by the gimmick. I'm sure there are other, more universal examples.

3) Clearly define the criteria for voting. Is it based on kayfabe? Is it based on who we like overall? Is it based on skill? You could even do different versions of the tournament based on the different criteria. For instance, this year would be in kayfabe, next year based on skill, and third year based on simple popularity.

Personally, I voted on skill within kayfabe during a wrestler's prime, as I thought we were supposed to. If we were doing sheer fighting skill outside of kayfabe, Ken Shamrock probably would have won it.

4) With the elimination of current wrestlers, drop the number of wrestlers participating.

I disagree with number one anyway.

5) If you DO have current wrestlers performing, put all of them in the same bracket, or same side of the bracket. If you have overflow, put those who are way past their prime such as Flair, in with the older guys. This will level the playing field.

Hmm, agreed. I suppose. Actually, I like it at random.

 

[Skillz]

I agree with most of this. Kane over Hart was the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen. RVD's winning streak is an absolute joke. There's too many silly gimmick matches that favor certain undeserving wrestlers over the more deserving ones. This is a really great tournament, but with those suggestions by Slyfox, it could be a whole lot better next year.

 

[tarp]

I do think that there should be only one round of gimmick matches. They add excitement to the touranment but it shouldn't be elimating people like Flair & Hart so early. I voted for Kane over Hart but look at the stip. I think the Finals of each region should be the only gimmick matches. Stick with the ones made famous by that region.
2nd thing why in the world do you think HHH couldn't beat Hogan. Hogan isn't on HHH atmosphere. Yes Hogan was a great entatiner but actual wresting come on.

 

[Skullz Crack'Em]

Originally posted by Conspicious Asparagus
1. This is not a popularity contest

^^^This was rule #1 in voting in this tournament, so the criteria for voting is mostly based on the skill of the wrestler, so that should answer your question about voting. It definitely isn't based on Kayfabe, if that was the case, Austin would be beating Vader right now and Hogan would be beating HHH.

I totally agree about Kane beating Hart, it was ridiculous because Kane is pretty much a glorified jobber and loses in matches that seems to benefit him, where Bret is one of the best of all time and a Sadistic Madness match shouldn't of put a stop to him. But, I disagree with what you said about Hogan vs HHH, now you know how voting is done, it is not about popularity which is the way you were voting(among others) whether you admit it or not, but about the skill of the wrestler and the environment he is put in. Triple H is a master of cage type matches, so that gives him a definite advantage and helped him get more votes over Hogan, I don't think it had anything to do with people voting for wrestlers that are active over wrestlers that are retired. If Triple H was beating Hogan with the same number of votes in a normal match, I would agree with you on that statement.

As for the Old School Tournament idea, I like the idea and will take part in it if CA is willing to do it. The only problem as you mentioned was where will guys like Taker, HBK, and Ric Flair stand in all of this? Three of them are definite legends and some people may argue to put them in the tourny or leave them out of it. Cutting down on the over-the-top gimmick matches will make for a more fair tournament, so I think that is a good suggestion as well.

 

[Skillz]

why in the world do you think HHH couldn't beat Hogan. Hogan isn't on HHH atmosphere. Yes Hogan was a great entatiner but actual wresting come on.

Hogan is twice the professional wrestler HHH is, was, and ever could be. A great entertainer is the exact same thing as a great wrestler, and no one entertained fans better than Hogan. HHH is a very overrated wrestler, who without a gimmick in a match, can't have a great one. Hogan didn't need a gimmick to have a great match.

Just last night on youtube, I watched a rare Hogan vs. Savage match from the London Arena in 1989. It was a great match. They both worked the crowd beautifully, Hogan as a face and Savage as a heel. The fans were so loud during the match, you could tell they were enjoying every second of it. That is what wrestling is all about. It's about making the fans suspend their disbelief, and making them emotionally invested in the match. Hogan was the best ever at this, it's that simple. HHH doesn't even come to close to being as good as Hogan, Savage, and many others.

As for the tournament, I think the gimmick matches should be kept simple and saved for the last few rounds, that way the ending of the tournament would have a really special feeling to it.

 

[Slim Pickns]

I do think that there should be only one round of gimmick matches. They add excitement to the touranment but it shouldn't be elimating people like Flair & Hart so early. I voted for Kane over Hart but look at the stip.

This is why I'm for getting rid of the gimmick matches. Everyone voted Kane simply for the fact the match name sounded like an advantage and forgot all about the fact that Hart is 10x better than him.

I think the Finals of each region should be the only gimmick matches. Stick with the ones made famous by that region.
2nd thing why in the world do you think HHH couldn't beat Hogan. Hogan isn't on HHH atmosphere. Yes Hogan was a great entatiner but actual wresting come on.

What is actual wrestling? Hulk Hogan is clearly the superior pro wrestler, their careers don't stack up side by side at all.

I'm for toning down the gimmick matches, but leaving out current wrestlers would make the tournament lose some of its luster. I'm fine seeing HBK, Taker, and Flair go far as long as I don't have to see potential winners get eliminated by duds just because its a barbed wire match.

 

[Shocky]

Well I will have an aftermath and feelings of the tournament thread after the tournament, but this is a good place to start. I'm glad to see the suggestions coming in for it though.

A few sidenotes to begin with. As long as this subforum is going to stay around, there are going to be different tournaments going on all year. Maybe nothing on a grandscale as this one, but there will be something going on in this forum. Jake has thrown out the idea of doing a "worst" wrestlers tournament which I'm interested in doing. Plus you could have not neccessarily tournaments of wrestlers, but things like best theme music, worst storylines, etc... This forum has limitless potential. Not to mention that Echelon is putting together a women's tournament as we speak and I encourage everyone to at least participate in it and give it a chance.

The big complaint is gimmick matches, and to tell you the truth, I love them. I'm not putting anything in their like Scaffold matches, House of 1000 tubes, throw your opponent from a roof, beat your opponent to death, or anything like that. I'm putting basic, everyday run of the mill gimmick matches you are more then likely going to find on a weekly edition of Raw.

Personally, I think the gimmick matches open this tournament up a hell of a lot more. In no world would Bam Bam Bigelow go 50-50 with Shawn Michaels, unless it was a match that favored Bigelow. I just think without gimmick matches you are going to be looking at list like this: Shawn Michaels, Ric Flair, Steve Austin, Bret Hart, Kurt Angle, Hulk Hogan, Triple H, Sting, Macho Man Randy Savage, Ultimate Warrior, The Rock, Edge, Chris Jericho, etc... You know what I mean.

Last year we had in the Elite 8: Raven, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker, Terry Funk, Eddie Guerrero, The Big Show, Ric Flair, and Steve Austin.

This Year we are going to have (most likely) Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker, The Big Show, Chris Benoit, Vader, RVD, Savage and Triple H. I'm pretty satisfied with only 3 guys being able to make it back to the elite 8, and I think that is mostly in part to the gimmick matches eliminating people that wouldn't other wise be eliminated.

It's a tournament, much like March Madness. Upsets are going to happen, brackets are going to be thrown out after the first weekend because that damn 15 seed knocked off a 2. I like the unpredictability of it. Last year we had 3 rounds of gimmick matches, this year we have two. I'm pretty satisfied with the way it has gone. I don't agree with all of the results, but I'm satisfied with the way it is going.

So as far as the main Wrestlezone Tournament, it will probably stay mostly the same with a few minor tweaks here and there. The main thing is, this is about educating people about the wrestlers in the tournament. That's why I like the 256 number and the way i announce them. I give a quick history with titles won. Most people don't do any research, but I guarantee you this, a guy like Vader is getting far more attention on these forums now then he was just 3 months ago before this thing started, and in the end, this is the goal. This tourney started in the old school section and got it's own subforum this year, so my goal is to always at least get the old school names out there.

I like mixing the old school with the new school, and guys like Sting and Savage making it into the elite 8 is sufficient enough. Plus a guy like Terry Funk making it in last year justifies this.

So for the most part, the tourney will stay the same, except for the credentials used to get into the tournament itself. Last year to get into the tourney was solely based upon individual title reigns along with the total number of days as champion, each title weighted for significance. This year I selected a group of people to give me their top 100 and I figured a formula for seeding from there. I figure as long as I change the credentials each year, we won't get stuck with the same matchups every year, and the same people.

Like I said, as long as this sub-forum is still around, I'll do what I can to fill it. A purely Old School tournament is certainly not out of the question. A tourney for just current superstars is not out of the question. There is a lot of time for me to fill from now until I start Wrestlezone Tournament 3 in December, so we can do a ton in this forum.

Keep the suggestions coming though.

 

[The_Rocket]

I Like the way that the wrestlezone tourney format is set up , It gives every wrestler in the tournment a equal chance to move on all you got to do is look at who is in the final 8 , we got guys who normally wouldnt even stand a chance at winning this tournment has gave many wrestlers more popularity and got their name out there so people now know who they all. I seen where their is going to be a womens tournment I think that is a really good idea , it gives us stuff to vote while keeping us busy until wrestlezone tournment 3 starts in december. Some other ideas for tournments is have the 70's vs 80's wrestlers in a 32 man tournment to decide who was the best wrestler of the two decades. Another idea is a storyline tournment that would be a really good idea.

 

[MattButcher]

I think that the combination of active and retired wrestlers is half the point of something like this. How would the stars of today stack up against the all time greats. Yeah, it skews some results and trends are fairly recognizable (who is popular/unpopular, what is really over). I also think that leaving the criteria ambiguous is a good idea. It fosters debate and conversation and it allows you to make the kind of choices that favor interesting match ups. If choices were made strictly on skill or athleticism (as some have argued) or on how things would have been booked or the impact/reputation that a performer had on the business (as others have argued) then the tournament would have a more predictable slant to it. It makes the voting more challenging for me as a fan as well. I admit I wasn't thrilled about some of the outcomes but complaining seems like so much sour grapes. Should we try to be more fair in an imaginary tournament of a worked sport? I don't think it warrants the effort.

 

[Slyfox696]

Really do not like this idea, particularly considering that Chris Benoit, Sting, Hulk Hogan, Rob Van Dam, Big Van Vader and Bam Bam Bigelow have got this far and are not active, and I'm sure there must be others. Besides, Ric Flair will almost definitely be retired by next time around.

Bigelow and Hogan are gone, eliminated by HHH and HBK...two active wrestlers. Sting is an active wrestler, and was eliminated by Benoit who was active less than a year ago, and would still be active today. RVD was active less than a year ago.

We have in the finals 6 guys who were active in the WWE at some point within a years time (Benoit, HHH, HBK, Big Show, Undertaker, RVD) and only two who would be considered "classics" (Vader and Savage). Seriously, tell me this tournament is not slanted to current wrestlers.

2nd thing why in the world do you think HHH couldn't beat Hogan. Hogan isn't on HHH atmosphere. Yes Hogan was a great entatiner but actual wresting come on.

Because Hogan is so far beyond HHH, HHH should be thankful Hogan allows hiim in his ring. That's why.

And that includes "actual wrestling" ability.

^^^This was rule #1 in voting in this tournament, so the criteria for voting is mostly based on the skill of the wrestler, so that should answer your question about voting. It definitely isn't based on Kayfabe, if that was the case, Austin would be beating Vader right now and Hogan would be beating HHH.

If it was based on skill, then Hogan should still have beaten HHH and Austin should have beaten Vader. And that's coming from someone who voted for Vader ahead of Austin. What's your point?

But, I disagree with what you said about Hogan vs HHH, now you know how voting is done, it is not about popularity which is the way you were voting(among others) whether you admit it or not, but about the skill of the wrestler and the environment he is put in. Triple H is a master of cage type matches, so that gives him a definite advantage and helped him get more votes over Hogan, I don't think it had anything to do with people voting for wrestlers that are active over wrestlers that are retired. If Triple H was beating Hogan with the same number of votes in a normal match, I would agree with you on that statement.

Triple H is a "master" of cage matches? Are you kidding me? Do you have any idea how many cage matches Hogan has been in? Hogan probably has a higher winning percentage in cage matches than any other wrestler in history.

As for the Old School Tournament idea, I like the idea and will take part in it if CA is willing to do it. The only problem as you mentioned was where will guys like Taker, HBK, and Ric Flair stand in all of this?

HBK would be out, as long as he's active. Undertaker kind of depends as he is only part-time these days. Flair will be retired.

The big complaint is gimmick matches, and to tell you the truth, I love them. I'm not putting anything in their like Scaffold matches, House of 1000 tubes, throw your opponent from a roof, beat your opponent to death, or anything like that. I'm putting basic, everyday run of the mill gimmick matches you are more then likely going to find on a weekly edition of Raw.

I had never heard of a Sadistic Madness match until this tournament. To the best of my knowledge, a Triple Cage match has been done less than 3 times in history.

Again, this isn't bitching for bitching's sake, because I respect the hell out of what you do for this thing. Just trying to find ways to improve it.

Last year we had in the Elite 8: Raven, Shawn Michaels, The Undertaker, Terry Funk, Eddie Guerrero, The Big Show, Ric Flair, and Steve Austin.

With the exception of Funk, every single one of those guys were an active competitor within the last 2 years of the tournament.

I like mixing the old school with the new school, and guys like Sting and Savage making it into the elite 8 is sufficient enough. Plus a guy like Terry Funk making it in last year justifies this.

Sting is an active wrestler within the last year. Terry Funk, given what I know about the board when I got here, was likely voted in for his ECW work, and not his NWA and WWF work.

So for the most part, the tourney will stay the same, except for the credentials used to get into the tournament itself. Last year to get into the tourney was solely based upon individual title reigns along with the total number of days as champion, each title weighted for significance. This year I selected a group of people to give me their top 100 and I figured a formula for seeding from there. I figure as long as I change the credentials each year, we won't get stuck with the same matchups every year, and the same people.

Next year you should do like the real NCAA tournament. Have a committee decide together.

 

[Evan Snow-Wolf]

My main gripe with this tournament was that it was set up to be fair, and that the votes were going to matter (Hmm... that sounds a lot like the original Taboo Tuesday premise) and they have, and now everyone is complaining endlessly about the results.

Sometimes upsets happen. From what I've read in nearly thread I've seen, this tournament was already decided in round 2 when the name "Hulk Hogan" was whispered by magical faeries. The great wise men foretold his coming. The seas shall part, yellow and red fire and brimstone shall rain from the sky... and every last one of us should be grateful to bask in the glory of Hulkamania!

Gag me.

Seriously, if the Hogan train is leaving the station at 85 miles per hour, and another train of anyone that isn't immortal leaves another station at 60 miles an hour, when and where will the Hogan train meet the other train and crash into it headlong with a throng of screaming fanboys?

It sounded like they made up their minds when his name was put in there. If you want a more fair and balanced tournament then you should take the name of anyone on that level and remove them from the list. If "everyone" knows that <wrestler> should have won the entire thing X rounds ago, then I don't think that <wrestler> should have been in the tournament, if everyone is just going to bitch endlessly about it.

 

[Slyfox696]

My main gripe with this tournament was that it was set up to be fair, and that the votes were going to matter (Hmm... that sounds a lot like the original Taboo Tuesday premise) and they have, and now everyone is complaining endlessly about the results.

It's also not supposed to be a popularity contest, so how else do you explain the current situation with 6 guys in the Elite Eight who have competed regularly in the last year?

Sometimes upsets happen. From what I've read in nearly thread I've seen, this tournament was already decided in round 2 when the name "Hulk Hogan" was whispered by magical faeries. The great wise men foretold his coming. The seas shall part, yellow and red fire and brimstone shall rain from the sky... and every last one of us should be grateful to bask in the glory of Hulkamania!

Gag me.

Seriously, if the Hogan train is leaving the station at 85 miles per hour, and another train of anyone that isn't immortal leaves another station at 60 miles an hour, when and where will the Hogan train meet the other train and crash into it headlong with a throng of screaming fanboys?

It sounded like they made up their minds when his name was put in there. If you want a more fair and balanced tournament then you should take the name of anyone on that level and remove them from the list. If "everyone" knows that <wrestler> should have won the entire thing X rounds ago, then I don't think that <wrestler> should have been in the tournament, if everyone is just going to bitch endlessly about it.

You're going on and on about Hogan, like that's the only reason people are making suggestions to improve this thing. I think more people are upset with Hart/Kane than they are with anything.

 

[Father:_Polley]

people are only complaining about results because they disagree with certain things and last i checked they had a right to. not as if slyfox is saying the tournament should be over because hogan lost.

he's merely suggesting ways to improve the thing for next time.

good job on organising it shockmaster

 

[Shocky]

Another thing would be what Jake suggested, keeping the polls closed for the first few days after the matches are open. Let people debate and discuss things for that match before people blindly choose for someone that they may or may not know.

There are many things to do with this tournament. Chris Cash suggested letting the exclusives help out with creating the field. Using guys with history inside the business to give endorsements I suppose. I would love to do an NCAA type war room with the seedings, and I think that would be a shit load of fun as well.

The thing I don't want to do, is take it out of the hands of the voters on here. A part of me says, hey, so in so is 13, he really shouldn't be voting on a match featuring Jeff Hardy vs. Bruno Sammartino because what are the chances this kid knows anything about Bruno. Unfortunately, I don't think a lot of this is a popularity contest (I know it's arguable) I think it's mostly due to ignorance.

Since the word Hogan is being thrown out there, I would almost guarantee that if we did a real old school tournament on a board of say 60 year olds, we would be laughed and mocked at for saying Hogan is the best. On that board guys like Thesz, Sammartino, Rogers, or hell Harley Race, would probably kill everyone. I think with the open voting forum, people are simply going to vote for people they recognize. It may not be right, but I deal with it. Like I said in my last post, this sub-forum will give us a chance to really focus in on very specific time frames for any tournament we want to do.

 

[Slyfox696]

Another thing would be what Jake suggested, keeping the polls closed for the first few days after the matches are open. Let people debate and discuss things for that match before people blindly choose for someone that they may or may not know.

I really like that idea.

There are many things to do with this tournament. Chris Cash suggested letting the exclusives help out with creating the field. Using guys with history inside the business to give endorsements I suppose.

They could maybe write editorial pieces, or suggest names, but I don't see what else they can offer.

I would love to do an NCAA type war room with the seedings, and I think that would be a shit load of fun as well.

That would be INCREDIBLY fun. The only problem is who and where.

The thing I don't want to do, is take it out of the hands of the voters on here. A part of me says, hey, so in so is 13, he really shouldn't be voting on a match featuring Jeff Hardy vs. Bruno Sammartino because what are the chances this kid knows anything about Bruno. Unfortunately, I don't think a lot of this is a popularity contest (I know it's arguable) I think it's mostly due to ignorance.

Since the word Hogan is being thrown out there, I would almost guarantee that if we did a real old school tournament on a board of say 60 year olds, we would be laughed and mocked at for saying Hogan is the best. On that board guys like Thesz, Sammartino, Rogers, or hell Harley Race, would probably kill everyone. I think with the open voting forum, people are simply going to vote for people they recognize. It may not be right, but I deal with it. Like I said in my last post, this sub-forum will give us a chance to really focus in on very specific time frames for any tournament we want to do.

Hogan was bigger and better than all of them.

 

[Evan Snow-Wolf]

I really like that idea..

I do, too. I think the Vader match-up recently posted was a good indication of why. Sometimes we don't always take into consideration certain elements of a Superstar until someone more attentive or informed points them out. It might also create more interest in the poll itself.

 

[Gelgarin]

I for one love the gimmick matches, exclusively because they cause upsets like Heart V Kane. Unpopular upsets are what make this like a tournament, and not like a “who is the greatest wrestler of all time debate.

Personally I’d enjoy seeing the first round of gimmick matches pushed back a round (or two) to create more interesting matches, because right now once the draw has been made, the vast majority of the results as to who’s going to make it into to quarterfinals right off the bat.

Another thing I’d have liked to have seen is a separate drawing for every round, once again to maintain interest between rounds, decrease predictability and give us something to speculate one mid week once 9/10 of the results have already been called.

As for Slyfox’s complaint about the tournament favouring currently active wrestlers, I think they unquestionably receive a certain boost in later, more heavily contested rounds; I also think that retired names tent to get an undue boost in earlier rounds since people invariably look back on a wrestlers career more favourably once he’s stepped out of the ring.

Most of the major upsets that have got to people, RVD>Angle, Kane>Heart, HHH>Hogan, have happened because of gimmick matches (HHH>Andre is about the only injustice that spontaneously, and that one’s highly debatable), and not because of some inherent prejudice every wrestling fan ages 20 and under has against guys outside of our own time period. And incidentally, I think if you go back to before the gimmick matches began, the ratio of people who have had major mainstream exposure (excluding Japan, indy or a couple of shows in TNA) to those who haven’t is far more reasonable, and as a second point, aside form a couple of wildcards both years, most of the active guys who did make it though will be ones who get ranked alongside the Thezs’ and Hogans’ of yesteryear.

What I think is a far bigger issue is the burial of almost every Japanese worker in the opening rounds, I think this would be best solved either by going forward with the idea of holding the voting off for a couple of days to those of us with a little bit of knowledge of Japan some time to make our cases (although I’d wager we’ll still loose almost every contest), or by simply dropping the majority of them altogether. Nobody has time to do too much research in the opening rounds, and most of the guys on there will loose automatically unless people Google half a dozen of there greatest matches, so it seems like a bit of a waste.

As a closing note, (aside from the obligatory paragraph talking about how great the tournament has been) I’d just like to say that, although I wasn’t paying attention when you said precisely how the selected superstars were selected, but the fact that whatever system it was failed to include K-Ness (and to a much lesser extent Dragon Kid) is damn near criminal, and I really like the idea of an all Japanese tournament so I can attempt to sell one of, in my eyes, the greatest workers of all time, to everyone.

Like I said, the tournaments been fantastic, certainly got me to start participating properly on the site instead of just lurking, which is an achievement in its self; so good on you, and keep up the good work.

 

[MattButcher]

I think an all Japanese tournament would be a lot of fun as well. Another idea is to have a Japanese territory in a future tournament. I think the ECW territory did wonders for some of the wrestlers so a Japanese territory could help some great Japanese performers to get to the later rounds. This way those with the knowledge or with the interest could vote in those match ups and you wouldn't have to read any "well I don't know who blank is so I voted for blank," type posts. Of course this leads to which of the current territories would take a break, and I'm not sure about that.

 

[Uncle Sam]

I'm just making sure, we're still going to be having the Tag Team Tournament, yes? If we did, I think we should test out Jake's "debate before voting" strategy beforehand in a minor tournament. The potential of this sub-forum is limitless. Personally, I've been waiting a few days before I vote for the bigger matches. I'm also pretty sure I'd have had a much better shot at saving Angle if I didn't come in one hour after the poll went up to find him down by forty votes.

 

[Slim Pickns]

I strongly support having the matches posted before voting opens. Like Sam and Sly said before this, it gives us a chance to debate and change some peoples minds. In fact, I'm sure if you go through the matches, you'll find someone who had asked to change their vote.

I had a simliar experience with the Hogan-HHH match. I came in two hours in and Hogan was already down by a considerable margin, yet only four or five posts had been made most of which were pro Hogan arguments. It kind of sucks when the match is already over before you can post why you think someone should beat another. You can't expect everyone to post something for every match, but they should at least have to read other peoples thoughts before just clicking and leaving.

 

[Bernkastel]

I whole heartedly agree with not posting the poll until some debate has been done on the match so that people don't blindly vote for "the popular choice". This technique could actually make the womens tournament much easier to manipulate. Once people have debated the two choices and the information given, maybe then will they make an educated decision. I feel that this technique will work equally well for any other tournament we use it with.

 

[emperor.indian]

Another thing would be what Jake suggested, keeping the polls closed for the first few days after the matches are open. Let people debate and discuss things for that match before people blindly choose for someone that they may or may not know.

i would say thats a very good idea. for some matches its difficult to predict a winner . it would not only make an interesting reading why people think who should win but it also helps others to make a more fair decision after reading to others views about a wrestlers strength and weaknesses and how would they imply an advantage/disadvantage in a particular match .
i think it will make the tournament more FAIR and transparent if one isnt allowed to vote for the first 1-2 days . then when the intial hype is over the members can GAIN from the views of others too and make a BETTER assesment of who can win in such a situation.

plus it gives people food for thought to do some research and watch some videos on youtube etc. then they might make a better assesment of a wrestlers ability.
i honestly did not knew about the great matches of vader and his AGILITY and ABILITY unless i was enlightened upon it by the BIGGEST VADER FAN ON THIS FORUM. and after reading his endless posts praising vader i watched those videos posted in this forum and on you tube.
so in a way discussion DOES help to make a BETTER decision.

hence in my opinion after a match is announced 1-2 days should be reserved for VOICING OPINIONS/VIEWS ONLY. and then voting should start.

 

[tarp]

I think Christian spoke on something like what I'm fixing to say.
After the first round shuffle the wrestlers to another region. Let's say all of the top ten seeds survive the first round. Put there names in a draw and pick out and put in a different region. As long as HBK is always in the WWE he will be hard to beat, put him in ECW or TNA and it might be different. I know it might be hard but I think it would be doable. After the 2nd round only the top fives that are left. After the third round the top 3's that are left. This would show some verastilty on a wrestlers part. This might be a crazy idea but I think it would be fun to see HBK or Hart in ECW.

 

[Capt. Charisma]

I have a suggestion which would allow voting to be fairer in some of the gimmick matches. This would be say from the start of the gimmick rounds to have the match spread over 2 legs. So if Angle loses to RVD in an ulitmate X match in the first leg, then wins by a greater margin in say a submission match, then Angle would go through. This would prevent some of the unfairness created by the gimmick matches, while still allowing intresting match ups, and still reward a wrestler for certain atributes which gives them an advantage in a match, while not toaly handicapping there competitior.