Yeah, I'm just not buying into the whole "he only beat him at WrestleMania" defense for HBK. I've always liked HBK and I understand that some fans do prefer him over Taker and that's all well and good. But if you wanna vote for HBK just 'cuz he's your favorite wrestler, then by all means do so. These attempts at making at rationalizing why HBK should go over The Undertaker, however, are just really weak. This is a match that we don't have to speculate about, we don't have to compare accomplishments, we don't have to argue who has faced tougher competition, we don't have to compare who has had the better feuds. We've seen both of these two give it their all in what might possibly be the two greatest matches of this decade and The Undertaker went over. He went over cleanly and he went over decisively. There's not one credible argument that can be put up as to why Taker couldn't do the exact same thing if the matches had taken place on Raw, Smackdown, any WWE ppv or even at a house show.