Semi-Finals: Shawn Michaels vs. The Undertaker

[klunderbunker]

This match has standard rules and a 45 minute time limit. All matches from this point forward take place in a single night which is one week after the previous round.

Location: University of Phoenix Stadium, Phoenix, Arizona

Shawn Michaels

Vs.

The Undertaker

​

Voting is open for 5 days after a two day discussion period.

Note: There have been measures put in place to avoid any alt issues. If you attempt to make one and are caught, you will be banned on the spot.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Every match these two have had against one another has been fantastic. The past two WrestleManias have given us matches with these two against one another and I've little doubt that their match at this year's Mania will probably be match of the year just like last year's match.

In the end, I'm going with The Undertaker. HBK has shown to be able to give Taker everything that he wants but, in the end, Taker's going to take it. When it comes to a one on one contest, Shawn Michaels can't beat The Undertaker and the past victories he holds over Taker have only been due to heavy outside interference. I'd expect a 30 minute epic out of this match and as much as I love old HBK, he shouldn't go over The Undertaker. This is one match we don't have to speculate about really. In the end, Taker is simply too tough for HBK to handle one on one.

 

[thepalaceprince]

these two would put on an incredible match just like they always do. no doubt this would end up being a match of the year candidate.
hbk would give taker everything he has he would push him to the brink but in the end taker would win. the last two wrestlemanias are a perfect example of that. in the end no matter how good hbk is taker is always just a little bit better a last ride and a tombstone backtoback would be enough to finally put shawn down for good

 

[The People's Peep]

This is the better of the two semi-final matches. Its just so close. We know that Taker has beaten HBK the last two years at WM. In both of those matches, HBK took Taker to the limit, but could not finish him off.

The difference between those matches and this match though, is that this isn't Wrestlemania. At Wrestlemania, we knew that there was a possibility for HBK to go over Taker, but that possibility was decreased because of the streak. If these two faced off on RAW or some other PPV (I cant remember one instance of this right now), I wouldnt be so sure that Taker would win. Shawn's chances increase with this not being Wrestlemania.

I dont know who to vote for. This is too close right now, and I'm going to wait for someone to convince me.

 

[The Underking]

From what I know Shawn beat Taker two times while heavy interfearence (Hell in a Cell with Kane and Casket with some random superstars I don't remember and Kane). Taker beat him twice clean sure it was Wrestlemania where Taker was unbeaten. Then I remember Shawn saying Taker could never beat him he beat Shawn anyways. My vote will obviously go to Taker.

In the end I guess around 35 minutes Taker will hit a third tomb stone or lock in the Hell's Gate for the pin or tap out.

 

[pun2003hh]

Hate to say it, but HBK has never beaten the Undertaker cleanly or convincingly to my knowledge. HBK beat Taker in the HiaC thanks to Kane, after pretty much getting destroyed throughout the match. HBK beat Taker in a casket match, again, thanks to Kane.

On the other hand, Taker not only beat HBK cleanly at the last two WrestleManias but he also eliminated HBK to win the Royal Rumble in 07 (though HBK did get revenge and eliminate Taker the following year, only to be eliminated himself immediately afterwords).

In terms of impact on the industry, you can make the argument for both men. They have been around for almost the same amount of time and they have both been the cornerstones of the company. The go to guys if you will. Neither one were big on championship reigns (well not at least until his later years for Taker) but their consistent performances through out the years are unmatched. For at least the past 7 years every single "Show Stealing" match at Wrestlemania has involved one of these two men. That's why I think in the impact sense, they cancel each other out.

So solely deciding on the Kayfabe sense, you have to give it to the Undertaker.

 

[Ferbian]

I hate this match, I truly do.

I would love nothing more but to have Shawn Michaels go through in this round to the finals once again, but I can't justify Shawn going over Undertaker.

Both has had some great careers, both have lost and won their matches, sadly Shawn has never beaten Undertaker cleanly, and they were both in their prime at that time, they were both out of their prime at Wrestlemania where Shawn lost both times they faced.

I'm not exactly sure who I would say wins this match, but I really have to say solely from a preference point, I would rather watch Shawn win.

So this is my vote for The Icon, The Main Event, The Showstoppah Shawn HBK Michaels.

 

[Hulkamaniac]

This is the first match in like three rounds that Undertaker should win, kayfabe wise or historical wise. Kayfabe wise, Undertaker is just better than Shawn. he's beaten Shawn in all their non-interference matches, including the last two when Undertaker has been noticeably injured and older. Historically, I think these guys exist on a similar tier of superstar in wrestling history. The WWE never considered building the company around Undertaker, because they knew he wasn't a centerpiece. They tried to do it with Shawn, and it failed. I think Taker being the best gimmick of all time just nudges out Shawn being one of the best sellers of all time.

 

[Captain America]

People are quick to point out that Shawn never beat Taker cleanly, but the fact still remains that he did beat him and at the end of the day that's all that matters. Sure Taker has defeated Shawn twice recently (at Wrestlemania), but those matches weren't between these men in their primes. During their primes Shawn has won every match he's ever had with the Undertaker (clean or not doesn't matter). Shawn would find a way to win this match.

 

[CobraVenom]

This isn't Wrestlemania, so Taker will not automatically get the win here.

Some people here are saying that Shawn never beat Taker cleanly. I say so what? At this stage, win is a win. I can't believe this, but I am going against one of my favorites again. HBK gets the win.

 

[Dave]

This is a no-contest from the start. The Undertaker is all over Shawn in this match.

I like Michaels but I must admit that I have never really been able to enjoy his in-ring work. This is probably due to my own failings. I started watching wrestling when Shawn Michaels was in DX with Triple H and at that time, they weren't known for being in-ring heroes. It was their humour that got them by and that has always stuck with me with Shawn. I am not trying to say that he is bad in the ring though. Far from it. All I am saying is that I don't really enjoy watching the routine matches that he is involved in like I can with The Undertaker. Taker has a talent for making people care about him and is a brilliant performer. I guess I hold a bias against Shawn and that is one of the reasons that I am not voting for him.

Of course, the other reason is that he lost the last two matches at WrestleMania to The Undertaker. That alone should leave this match with a clear winner. Both of these men are equal in most criteria but Taker just had a little more when it counted and this is certainly one of those times. Shawn Michaels gave it everything at WrestleMania 25 and 26 and still couldn't get past him. The Undertaker has his number and if he can't beat Taker whilst his career is on the line, then I fail to see how he could do it here.

 

[Uncle Sam]

Pretty much, Dave. Some of you with your "a strict precedent has been set on this but hey, what the fuck?" stay away from your country's respective legal systems.

Every time a Michaesl/Undertaker match has ended cleanly, The Undertaker has won decisively. That should be enough for anyone.

I like Michaels, I really do. But hey, what the fuck? I'm not particularly thrilled by these semi-finals anyway. It seems we also get an Undertaker/Michaels semi-final and I don't much rate Ric Flair.

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

Tough match, but I give it to Taker. As so many have said before, I can remember Taker beating Shawn clean several times, but never Shawn beating Taker clean.

In a non-kayfabe sense, it's a draw. Both of these guys have done a lot for the business. They are two of the top ten or twelve greatest of all time. Neither one of these guys really had their own era. Shawn did for a while after Wrestlemania 12, but it didn't last long. Same with Taker after 13.

So for me, it has to come down to kayfabe. And no matter how hard or how many times Shawn tried, he couldn't get the best of Taker. Undertaker moves on.

 

[PsychoBlack]

it has to be taker here. He has shawns number right now and has beaten him 2 years in a row at the biggest stage of them all. Taker even ended Shawns career that has to mean something here as it proves who can dominate the other one. Taker has the advantage in finisher, strength, brutality,and mystique hes not far behind in speed or agility either Vote Taker

 

[Adam08]

If this match happen maybe 2 or 3 years ago I might have given Shawn Micheals the nod. But I am going with The Undertaker here sure Undertaker really never beat Shawn In his prime. But it doesn't change the fact that Undertaker beat Shawn twice at wrestlemania when he was givening it his all and in less we get some interference by Kane then Shawn isn't going to win this match.

 

[It's...Baylariat!]

Undertaker all the way. HBK was only able to win his only big match against Taker at Hell in a Cell by Kane interfering with a Tombstone. The rest of the time, Taker's beaten HBK consistently and would do it again here.

Big matches are Taker's repetoire. He never loses them. Undefeated at Wrestlemania, defeated Hulk Hogan during Hulkamania. Even with interference, getting a win over Hogan in HIS era is an accomplishment few achieved. HBK's as good as they get, but Taker's better and I don't see a way that HBK could beat Taker.

 

[THE Madcap]

I don't even know why people are saying this is close. Forget the last 2 Wrestlemanias, forget their previous matches, forget their accomplishments, forget The Ministry, forget DX. When you look at both men in their prime, Taker is miles ahead of Shawn. And I've been rooting for Shawn throughout this. Taker was a beast and has the ability to kick out of anything dished to him by Michaels. If this was a real match, I'd imagine Taker would kick out of 2 SCMs and reverse the third into a tombstone for the 123.

 

[Coco]

I can't abide any arguments for HBK here. Taker's best matches have been a highlight real of Michaels looking like a bitch. he destroyed him in the HIAC and casket matches. He destroyed him at Ground Zero. He beat him at two Manias and ended his career. His defeated him man to man at the 2007 Royal Rumble. Kayfabe, Shawn just doesn't come away looking good. And in his second match of the night? He doesn't have enough in the tank to take the Phenom.

Simple as.

 

[nate dogg]

i think shawn gets the win here because when he faced undertaker in those matches that kane and dx interfered in he was heel as a face in his prime i think he will go over the undertaker rip!

 

[SunnyD]

We saw these two wrestle one on one for the past two Wrestlemania's. Taker went over both times. He will go over in this one too.

 

[Daniel]

Yes, Shawn hasn't beaten The Undertaker cleanly. And yes, Shawn has lost in their previous two encounters. But The Undertaker goes over at WrestleMania. Against anyone. That's what he does. And this isn't WrestleMania, which makes me see this as a level playing field.

They are both great wrestlers. In a kayfabe sense, Taker is more competent than Shawn in the ring. He doesn't appear to make mistakes. Michaels does. Look at their match at WM 25. Michaels was Tombstoned and pinned due to a messed up moonsault. I remember him being RKO'ed on Raw because of a failed kip-up. Taker rarely makes mistakes. This could give him the edge.

Non-kayfabe wise, they are both legends. They have been in the biggest promotion in the world for 20+ years (or there abouts). This difference is Taker has held a world title fairly consistently throughout his career. Michaels didn't get one this century.

It pains me to say this because Shawn Michaels had the best finisher ever and was in my favourite ever faction. But the winner is The Phenom. The Undertaker.

 

[HBK-aholic]

klunderbunker, I hate you

Now that's out of the way, I'm voting Shawn here - obviously. At the end of the day, both have beaten the other. You can point to interferences allowing Shawn to gain wins, but I can point to Wrestlemania allowing The Undertaker to win. Regardless of who The Undertaker was facing, he'd win, so I don't really that them into account anymore. What I DO take into account is that Shawn was with him every step of the way, possibly doing MORE during those matches, and until the points where The Undertaker HAS to win, because his streak won't end.

Here, I'm looking at both of these men in their prime, and who I think the better wrestler is - who I think deserves to be crowned the WZ tournament champion. And that man is Shawn Michaels. The Undertaker and Shawn are gimmick opposites, almost. The Undertaker is dark, mysterious, threatening. Shawn is loud, spectacular and damaging. Shawn has, at one point or another in his career, fought in, and matched up to every opponent he's ever had in terms of their style and match type.

Using kayfabe just seems so weird here, we have to look at this deeper. Who do you prefer watching? Who do you think deserves to be the winner of this tournament? Who do we believe is the best wrestler between the 2? I answer Shawn to all those questions - he's the icon, the showstopper, the man I've spent my life watching and loving, and who has made me continue to watch the WWE all these years. He CAN defeat the Undertaker, in their primes, and you all know it.

 

[Hulkamaniac]

This difference is Taker has held a world title fairly consistently throughout his career. Michaels didn't get one this century.

I voted for Undertaker, but this is just factually wrong. As I pointed out in the Taker vs. Hogan and Taker vs. Cena threads, Undertaker has a total of 7 world title reigns for a TOTAL of 445 days. That's hardly "consistently." That said, it's still longer than Shawn Michaels, who has 4 World title reigns for about 424 days. This is WWE title and World Heavyweight Titles combined. Like I said, I agree with you in this match up, just pointing out a factual error.

Now that's out of the way, I'm voting Shawn here - obviously. At the end of the day, both have beaten the other. You can point to interferences allowing Shawn to gain wins, but I can point to Wrestlemania allowing The Undertaker to win.

Except one is kayfabe and one isn't, so that's a really, really bad analogy.

Undertaker goes over in kayfabe, and he goes over historically. He'll be remembered as the greatest gimmick ever. He's been over since Day 1. He can work very well, and not just "for a big guy." He uses ring psychology far better. Shawn is the better seller. Undertaker has the more deadly looking offensive moveset. I'm not really a fan of either guy's promos personally.

Vote Undertaker.

 

[Coco]

klunderbunker, I hate you

Now that's out of the way, I'm voting Shawn here - obviously. At the end of the day, both have beaten the other. You can point to interferences allowing Shawn to gain wins, but I can point to Wrestlemania allowing The Undertaker to win. Regardless of who The Undertaker was facing, he'd win, so I don't really that them into account anymore. What I DO take into account is that Shawn was with him every step of the way, possibly doing MORE during those matches, and until the points where The Undertaker HAS to win, because his streak won't end.

That's not really a counter argument to the kayfabe point that Michaels won by cheating and Undertaker didn't. In kayfabe, this "he has to win at Mania regardless" nonsense isn't an issue, so this entire paragraph is a waste everyone's time.

Using kayfabe just seems so weird here, we have to look at this deeper. Who do you prefer watching?

Only if you're a blind Michaels fan looking for straws to grasp at.

 

[HBK-aholic]

That's not really a counter argument to the kayfabe point that Michaels won by cheating and Undertaker didn't. In kayfabe, this "he has to win at Mania regardless" nonsense isn't an issue, so this entire paragraph is a waste everyone's time.

You've said it isn't an issue, the other said it was a bad analogy, yet neither really explains why. If we're looking at past history - The Undertaker was NEVER going to lose at WM and you're stupid if you think otherwise. Regardless of anything else, no matter WHAT Shawn did, he wasn't going to win. When the 2 had matches OUTSIDE of this setting, there was outside interferences. Both of these things were decided before the match, so when someone uses one I'm going to use the other. The Undertaker didn't beat Shawn at WM because he's the better wrestler, he beat him because it's WM, and, last year, because Shawn was retiring.

Only if you're a blind Michaels fan looking for straws to grasp at.

No, Shawn is just better