Sid Vicious

Барбоса;2574559 said:
Yeah, damn Kurt Angle for putting on an entertaining match over and over

Clearly I was saying he was boring/bad when I said he was entertaining.
 
Nah. You must like tea instead. In that case, you are either sophisticated or British.. Or is that a stereotype?

It might be a stereotype but considering I am British, like most stereotypes, it is not incorrect.

Drinking some tea right now as it happens... Rip-roaring Saturday night ahead
 
God I hate the term "spot monkey". So stupid. Everyone is a spot monkey, Kurt Angle and Bret Hart are two of the biggest spot monkeys in the history of professional wrestling but you never hear them called anything other than technical gods because their spots involve mat-wrestling instead of flips.
Bullshit, even you should know better.

A spot monkey is not someone with spots in a match, it's someone uses big spots to pop a crowd, with little or no logical transitions in between. It's a wrestler (or wrestlers) who go from spot to spot, with no thought to the story in between. That's the difference between someone like Bret Hart/Randy Savage (notorious for planning his matches), and someone like the majority of the hacks you see on the Indy scene.

Even you should know better Xfear.
 
Bullshit, even you should know better.

A spot monkey is not someone with spots in a match, it's someone uses big spots to pop a crowd, with little or no logical transitions in between.

Then you should call it "illogical spot user" or some shit like that. Just calling someone a "spot monkey" implies they use a lot of spots...which every single wrestler does. Especially Angle and Hart.
 
Then you should call it "illogical spot user" or some shit like that.
I didn't create the term. :shrug:

It doesn't change what the term "spot monkey" means. It means you literally hop from spot to spot like a monkey hops from place to place, with no reason as to why. Actually, I have no idea if that's why they use the word monkey, but it sounded good.

Just calling someone a "spot monkey" implies they use a lot of spots...which every single wrestler does. Especially Angle and Hart.

Of course they do. The entire Savage vs. Steamboat match from WM 3 was nothing but spots, meticulously crafted down to every last minute detail. There's nothing wrong with spots, every match has them, HAS to have them in order to start a match and end one. But to say guys like Hart are spot monkeys is silly.
 
If Hart and Angle are spot monkeys, then Hogan is the spot gorilla. I don't think anyone would call him a spot monkey. Hart and Angle, much like Hogan, use a lot of the same moves at the end of their matches, but they get to those endings differently. Big differences between formulas and spot monkeys.
 
Technically, yes every wrestler good or bad uses a lot of spots in a match but the accusation of "spot monkey" comes with the underlying lack of ring psychology. Such "monkies" jump about from spot to spot with little thought put into how and when they are used.

When you are 3 weeks behind on your college homework? Yes.

Well, I have some work that could be done but I have done enough reading about plague and death for today
 
It's nothing short of downright foolishness to suggest that Bret Hart or Kurt Angle are spot monkeys. I think X must be just screwing around with people here, because I know for a fact he knows better than this.

As Sly points out, a spot monkey is exactly that, someone who jumps around from high spot to high spot, with no cohesiveness or storytelling. Jeff Hardy, love him or hate him, WWE or TNA, is the ultimate spot monkey. Cannot pull off a storyline to save his life, as in time we'll see with this attempt at a heel turn. No mic skills, and no forethought or flow to his in-ring action. Just holy shit moment after holy shit moment to shock and thrill the crowd until his next holy shit moment. Crowd goes nuts over some high risk manoeuver, and when the crowd starts to settle down, he decides, "oh no, I'm losing them, time to find something else to jump off."

Bret Hart, Kurt Angle, and many others are very repetitive in their in-ring styles. And that's OK because it's consistent repetition of quality. NOt OMG moments for OMG's sake.
 
I like how when Sarcy got owned she tried to change the subject. I'm more upset about the Shelley bashing than anything else in this thread though :disappointed:
 
Yeah. How dare I call out the fact that Alex Shelly and Chris Sabin show no emotion, don't play up to the crowd and completely no sell everything like ass munches unless the guy hits them hard enough and forces them to sell.

Show no emotion? You mean the same MCMG's who are well renowned for not only their in-ring work, but their quirky humor and entertaining promos with guys like Kevin Nash and Mick Foley?

Don't play up to the crowd? You mean the same MCMG's who basically point to the crowd and try to hype them up every time they hit a move?

No-sell? You mean the same MCMG who have, by their selling, made teams like GenMe and Lethal Consequences?

1.3 or 3.3? You mean that the sole performance of the Machineguns make the rating for the whole show? I tell you what, I'd hate to see what the ratings for a Raw solely based on Barrett and his "riveting" in-ring storytelling.

Yeah, you're a fucking moron and offically have no right to argue anything ever again. What's even more hilarious is that you could make a better argument for Wade possessing these traits then Sabin & Shelley.
 
Say, while we're at it, what's so impressive about Wade Barrett? He seems about as standard a wrestler as any. What makes him so special?

As for the subject, Sid looked like a gorilla. Seeing him was like going to the zoo. I like the zoo.
 
Great, I act like a TNA mark for one post and Killjoy thinks he's found the Batman to his Robin.
 
Sid was pretty awesome i think reason fans liked him was he was big and every one likes to see a big guy power bomb some one, he was a good worker sucks what happened to him in WCW
 
Me and you created it together :lmao:


You know. Your so anti anti anti, that you actually DONT like Nirvana. Its like the sub cult to the cult.

Same thing with saying WWE is good, and Cena is an excellent wrestler. People dont actually belive it, they just want to look smart. Once something begins to reach a point of mass popularity, it becomes the new cool smart thing to go in the opposite direction.

I don't like Nirvana. In fact, I think they're quite shit.

I also enjoy the WWE and I like Cena. So I guess I completely proved your point my formulating my own opnions based off of what I believe instead of what others told me.
 
Because Sid Vicious was the fucking man, and he always will be.

[YOUTUBE]I6_f73zwxUA[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]agWCZ57r4Ks&feature=related[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]JTWSW_8MGKM&feature=related[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]9wTP5tmRDGI&feature=related[/YOUTUBE]
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,837
Messages
3,300,747
Members
21,726
Latest member
chrisxenforo
Back
Top