If you're hating on the Undertaker then you obviously know nothing about wrestling. He's possibly one of the greatest performers of that generation. He's amazing, even at this age he can still put on a great performance. And if you don't think he's that good, take a look at his DVD for some spectacular matches, I'm talking Undertaker vs. Shawn Michaels, Kane vs. Undertaker x2, Hell in a Cell with Mick Foley, I mean the man has put it all on the line and is a legend in this business.
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Who is the true "Mr. Wrestlemania"?
- Thread starter Wall_of_Jericho
- Start date
I would say a tie between HBK and Taker. HBK never fails to leave us with an amazing match at Wrestlemania..win or lose. Taker is exactly what they say..the phenom.
Secondly, I would like to know why in the blue hell Hulk Hogan is even on the list. Yes, he was in the mix of revolutionizing the industry but for fuck's sake, he has no offense. Just like Cena..they get their ass stomped and then out of nowhere quit selling the match and strike with a 3 move offense and get the win. both are ridiculous!
You gotta be kidding me... The title of the thread isn't "Which wrestler has the most moves", it's "Who is Mr. Wrestlemania".
Hogan almost literally invented WrestleMania. In fact if you read his book he actually had something to do with the concept. He was in more Manias than anyone and he was pushed as the main deal in most of them as well.
When you think of WrestleMania, what comes to mind?
The one match or moment that comes to mind should define who you think is Mr. Wrestlemania. There are many... but the one that sticks out the most among all of them is...
Hogam slamming Andre at WrestleMania 3. EVERYONE, whether they watches wrestling as a fan or not, knows about that.
Hogan should be Mr. WrestleMania no question.
InstantClassic
The Irish Icon
As much as I am a well noted Shawn Michaels fanatic, I must go with The Undertaker on this one. You just can't argue with 15-0.
This streak is one of the few real amazing and defining things in professional wrestling at this present time, and in my opinion that qualifies The Deadman for the title of "Mr Wrestlemania"
This streak is one of the few real amazing and defining things in professional wrestling at this present time, and in my opinion that qualifies The Deadman for the title of "Mr Wrestlemania"
um.. ok.. considering that the undertaker won wrestlemania 23 to keep his undefeated streak to 15-0 kicking batista's ass AND winning the world heavyweight championship... then Undertaker deserves the title "Mr. Wrestlemania".. PLUS check out the wrestlemania's before.. 'Taker's actions speak for themselves.. and that's a good thing.
Rabbid Wolverine
Pre-Show Stalwart
Hart... I hate him so I can't vote for him but he was never a company guy, like the other three, enough to be considered Mr. WrestleMania if you ask me.
QUOTE]
BRET HART... he was at every stage in wrestlemania, tag champs, ic,wwf title. not just the main event like hogan. hart worked hard for vince, thats the only reason i dont agree with mcmahon screwing him, he could have dropped the title the days after. so i dont really see any merit in saying hart wasnt a company guy.
taker, alot of his matches were basically squashes, best ones were probly, psycho sid, hhh,kane.
anyways, back to my point about hart being there........
wm7-Tag Team Championships
Nasty Boys vs. The Hart Foundation
wm8-Intercontinental Championship
"Rowdy" Roddy Piper vs. Bret "Hitman" Hart
wm9-WWE Championship Match: Yokozuna with Mr. Fuji vs. Bret "Hitman" Hart
wm10-Bret "Hitman" Hart vs. Owen Hart & Bret vs Yokozuna
wm11-"I Quit" Submission Match: Bob Backlund vs. Bret "Hitman" Hart
wm12-Iron Man Match for the WWE Championship: Shawn Michaels vs. Bret 'The Hitman' Hart
wm13-Submission Match: Bret 'The Hitman' Hart vs. Stone Cold Steve Austin
who knows how many more wicked matches he could have had at WM, jericho, benoit, taker, angle.
some people have a confusion about a classic match and a big build up to a match. hogan vs rock= total hype, same with warrior,
bret and hbk iron man match, someone stated b4 that it was alot of rest holds, look at back in the day when flair use to fight in nwa for an hr... if ur goin an hr, u need those holds, if ur goin 10 mins you dont. austin vs hart, austin wasnt totally over at that point, after that match....he was and that match was insane, way better than the diesel/taker main event....
those were the 2 best matches ever at WM.
D
Dan1607
Guest
I would also like to add that, all those people who say HBK ALWAYS brings his A game - I agree to this but so does Taker.
Now, it is obvious why HBKs matches are classics because he wrestled people with actual talent at wrestlemania.
E.g.- HBK might have brought his A-Game at WM 23 but the match was absolutely shit.
Which proves my point that Even the most capable cant pull of a good show if their put with ******s.
Happened with HBK this time but MOST of the time it happens with Taker.
You put taker in the matches which HBK was in at those "5 star classics" I think It would be as good if HBK was in it.
And the only thing i can say about Hogan with WM is : He was at the right place at the right time, the only reason he gained so much popularity was because of all that American bull shit which made the fans go crazy like the dumb bastards that they are, especially after the Cold war.
To prove the above point
Imagine if WM was never invented and say it was going to be invented, at this present time, who do you think it would revolve around?????????
The answer is quite obvious that bastard John Cena.
Weather or not if wrestlers are booked to be the best, there are only a few things which actually prove that youre the best, which are:
Amazing Wrestling ability: HBK and taker - Not Hogan
Being able to draw: All 3
A sustainable gimmick: Taker was the only one
Consistency: Taker was the only one
Morally right and not egoistic: Taker was the only one
Taker Fits in all of them, HBK comes close Hogan doesnt at all.
In all honesty this isnt just about WM its all of Wrestling as a whole.
Now, it is obvious why HBKs matches are classics because he wrestled people with actual talent at wrestlemania.
E.g.- HBK might have brought his A-Game at WM 23 but the match was absolutely shit.
Which proves my point that Even the most capable cant pull of a good show if their put with ******s.
Happened with HBK this time but MOST of the time it happens with Taker.
You put taker in the matches which HBK was in at those "5 star classics" I think It would be as good if HBK was in it.
And the only thing i can say about Hogan with WM is : He was at the right place at the right time, the only reason he gained so much popularity was because of all that American bull shit which made the fans go crazy like the dumb bastards that they are, especially after the Cold war.
To prove the above point
Imagine if WM was never invented and say it was going to be invented, at this present time, who do you think it would revolve around?????????
The answer is quite obvious that bastard John Cena.
Weather or not if wrestlers are booked to be the best, there are only a few things which actually prove that youre the best, which are:
Amazing Wrestling ability: HBK and taker - Not Hogan
Being able to draw: All 3
A sustainable gimmick: Taker was the only one
Consistency: Taker was the only one
Morally right and not egoistic: Taker was the only one
Taker Fits in all of them, HBK comes close Hogan doesnt at all.
In all honesty this isnt just about WM its all of Wrestling as a whole.
I'd have to disagree with you about Taker always bringing his A-Game to Wrestlemania...
Remember his coffin match with Mark Henry? Or the handicap match against Big Show and A-Train? Total and utter shit, some of the worst matches I think I've ever seen, ever. Also...honestly Takers old school stuff really wasn't that good. He hadn't yet developed fully into a good wrestler until the mid-90s really.
Just my opinion on the matter. I still say HBK is Mr. Wrestlemania, nobody puts on a show at Wrestlemania like HBK, nobody.
Remember his coffin match with Mark Henry? Or the handicap match against Big Show and A-Train? Total and utter shit, some of the worst matches I think I've ever seen, ever. Also...honestly Takers old school stuff really wasn't that good. He hadn't yet developed fully into a good wrestler until the mid-90s really.
Just my opinion on the matter. I still say HBK is Mr. Wrestlemania, nobody puts on a show at Wrestlemania like HBK, nobody.
D
Dan1607
Guest
When your put in a match with Mark henry and A-train what do you expect?
My point was that a match can only be good if the peope in the match have ability.
I belive Taker vs Angle was as good as HBK vs angle
And Cena is better than Henry but HBK vs Cena was utter crap aslo.
Yea maybe you could say Hbk brings his A* game and takers brings his A game proving HBK is slightly better in that sense fine.
But i'd rather have student who gets As and Bs ever day rather than someone whos only had a few A*'s if you get me.
But yea i agree if you think HBk is better fine, but you have the understand that some people are put in matches which they can only hope for it to be Average.
15 years of consistency, not to mention a few classics definatly takes my vote.
(also don't forget when he began in the WWF he was actually told to act slow and what his moves set should be, he was told to act like a powerfull giant with a limited moveset, alot like Khali who is actually a fast runner in RL)
My point was that a match can only be good if the peope in the match have ability.
I belive Taker vs Angle was as good as HBK vs angle
And Cena is better than Henry but HBK vs Cena was utter crap aslo.
Yea maybe you could say Hbk brings his A* game and takers brings his A game proving HBK is slightly better in that sense fine.
But i'd rather have student who gets As and Bs ever day rather than someone whos only had a few A*'s if you get me.
But yea i agree if you think HBk is better fine, but you have the understand that some people are put in matches which they can only hope for it to be Average.
15 years of consistency, not to mention a few classics definatly takes my vote.
(also don't forget when he began in the WWF he was actually told to act slow and what his moves set should be, he was told to act like a powerfull giant with a limited moveset, alot like Khali who is actually a fast runner in RL)
Right, I can respect your opinion.
In my opinion however, Taker's matches were pure shit until his feud with Mankind in 96. Take his Wrestlemania matches for example...WM 7 against Snuka? Crap. WM 8 against Jake the Snake? Crap. Wrestlemania 9 against Giant Gonzalez? Super uber crap. WM11 against King Kong Bundy? More super crap. He didn't have a good match until he started feuding with guys like Diesel and Mankind in 96.
Whereas Michaels, has been putting on quality matches since the 80s. Everything from his early tag work with Marty Janetty in the Rockers in the AWA and the WWF, into his feuds with Razor Ramon, Diesel, Bret Hart, Austin, Angle, Jericho, etc etc. Not to mention his ability to consistently put on the best match at every Wrestlemania he appears on almost. Atleast he did in Wrestlemania 12, 14, 19, 20, 21, and 22.
That however is just my opinion.
In my opinion however, Taker's matches were pure shit until his feud with Mankind in 96. Take his Wrestlemania matches for example...WM 7 against Snuka? Crap. WM 8 against Jake the Snake? Crap. Wrestlemania 9 against Giant Gonzalez? Super uber crap. WM11 against King Kong Bundy? More super crap. He didn't have a good match until he started feuding with guys like Diesel and Mankind in 96.
Whereas Michaels, has been putting on quality matches since the 80s. Everything from his early tag work with Marty Janetty in the Rockers in the AWA and the WWF, into his feuds with Razor Ramon, Diesel, Bret Hart, Austin, Angle, Jericho, etc etc. Not to mention his ability to consistently put on the best match at every Wrestlemania he appears on almost. Atleast he did in Wrestlemania 12, 14, 19, 20, 21, and 22.
That however is just my opinion.
Alot has to do with the dance partner though. The Undertaker was stuck in some shit feuds on the main event level, whereas Michaels was in the midcard, but the midcard was stacked with great underappreciated talent, while the main event was filled with the land of slow moving giants.
The Undertakers feuds started with, Warrior, Hogan, Kamala, Gonzalez, Yoko. A bunch of slow moving giants. We've seen Michaels against Hogan, and even Michaels couldn't pull that match off on his own.
The Undertakers WM matches are unfair to compare as well. WM7 he was against an aging Superfly Snuka. WM 8 taker was against a going out the door Jake the Snake Roberts. Taker gets stuck with the Giant Gonzalez, while HBK has Tatanka to work with. WM11, the Undertaker is stuck with dead weight in King Kong Bundy. WM 12, Taker is with Big Daddy 6 Moves Diesel. WM 13, Taker gets Psycho Stiff. The list goes on and on. Out of the 15 WM taker has been a part of, he's had two legit guys he's been put against that were a threat to the streak, that is Triple H, which is one of the most under appreciated matches this decade, and Randy Orton at 21. Even the Casket Match the Undertaker was good in against Henry.
If you put the Undertaker against the guys that Michaels faced at WM, you would probably get high quality matchups. Michaels is the beneficiary of very good feuds going into WM, whereas the Undertaker is stuck destroying slow moving objects.
It's so tough to compare, because of the huge discrepency between talent each has faced.
The Undertakers feuds started with, Warrior, Hogan, Kamala, Gonzalez, Yoko. A bunch of slow moving giants. We've seen Michaels against Hogan, and even Michaels couldn't pull that match off on his own.
The Undertakers WM matches are unfair to compare as well. WM7 he was against an aging Superfly Snuka. WM 8 taker was against a going out the door Jake the Snake Roberts. Taker gets stuck with the Giant Gonzalez, while HBK has Tatanka to work with. WM11, the Undertaker is stuck with dead weight in King Kong Bundy. WM 12, Taker is with Big Daddy 6 Moves Diesel. WM 13, Taker gets Psycho Stiff. The list goes on and on. Out of the 15 WM taker has been a part of, he's had two legit guys he's been put against that were a threat to the streak, that is Triple H, which is one of the most under appreciated matches this decade, and Randy Orton at 21. Even the Casket Match the Undertaker was good in against Henry.
If you put the Undertaker against the guys that Michaels faced at WM, you would probably get high quality matchups. Michaels is the beneficiary of very good feuds going into WM, whereas the Undertaker is stuck destroying slow moving objects.
It's so tough to compare, because of the huge discrepency between talent each has faced.
D
Dan1607
Guest
Shockmaster that was the point i was trying to say, If taker was put in the classics instead of HBK they would be as good.
And like shockmaster said it is hard to tell in terms of match ups, so we go on to Consistency which taker wins no doubt, but we can also go onto drawing power which I think HbK wins. Charisma would be a tie i think and you can't compare them because they have different characteristics
Imagine Taker vs. HBK at WM that would be great, even now.
Both of them hitting almost 50 yet they could put on a match which creams the youths of today.
Something which HBK and taker have in commen is that they have been in the WWF/E for the longest yet they have very few title reigns.
Hogan to warrior to Stone cold to Rock to triple H to Batista to Randy ortan.
Generation to Generation, the undertaker has beaten them all He truely is deserving of the name Deadman.
(lol at the time when Taker and papa shamcho made Warrior sick)
And like shockmaster said it is hard to tell in terms of match ups, so we go on to Consistency which taker wins no doubt, but we can also go onto drawing power which I think HbK wins. Charisma would be a tie i think and you can't compare them because they have different characteristics
Imagine Taker vs. HBK at WM that would be great, even now.
Both of them hitting almost 50 yet they could put on a match which creams the youths of today.
Something which HBK and taker have in commen is that they have been in the WWF/E for the longest yet they have very few title reigns.
Hogan to warrior to Stone cold to Rock to triple H to Batista to Randy ortan.
Generation to Generation, the undertaker has beaten them all He truely is deserving of the name Deadman.
(lol at the time when Taker and papa shamcho made Warrior sick)
N
Napalm Death
Guest
Undertaker - Hands down. He'd win if he were to face Michaels and Hogan at Wrestlemania. More people tune in to see wether he wins or not, rather than watching HBK vs Cena or Hogan wrestle his way out of a paper bag.
T
TNA Smark
Guest
Just because Undertaker was undefeated doesn't make him Mr. Wrestlemania. Anyone can be undefeated at Wrestlemania if they were booked to. However HBK on the other hand who isn't undefeated at Wrestlemania has had more classic matches than Undertaker. HBK vs. Angle is a prime example of that. It went at least 30 minutes of action. HBK tapped out to the ankle lock but boy was it better than Undertaker vs. Orton because we saw more mat wrestling done by both HBK and Angle. HBK vs. Razor Ramon in the first ever ladder match was fucking awesome as well and HBK and Ramon made history and made the ladder match fucking famous when HBK did the big elbow off of it.
D
Dan1607
Guest
I belive Undertaker vs angle was as good as angle vs Hbk.
Like i have said before if undertaker was put in those matches instead of HBK they would have been as good.
Im sure taker could have made that ladder match famous if it was Taker vs razor.
Yea HBK has pulled of 5 star classics but thats because he was wrestling with people who have ability.
You could say HBK can put on a better ladder match i agree fully,
but you could also say taker puts on a better HIAC, and casket matches.
Like i have said before if undertaker was put in those matches instead of HBK they would have been as good.
Im sure taker could have made that ladder match famous if it was Taker vs razor.
Yea HBK has pulled of 5 star classics but thats because he was wrestling with people who have ability.
You could say HBK can put on a better ladder match i agree fully,
but you could also say taker puts on a better HIAC, and casket matches.
well technically speaking Undertaker is Mr. Wrestlemania in the sense that he has never been defeated on the most important ppv for the company so in that sense he is Mr. Wrestlemania...but in other standards Shawn Michaels could be considered Mr. Wrestlemania because he really goes all out when it comes to it...We've seen the matches we know the shit he pulls out....so it all depends on how you see it...these 2 could both be considered Mr. Wrestlemanias to certain degrees
Mr Wrestlemania has to be Hulk Hogan. How can it not be? The guy build Wrestlemania, without him very well might not even have made it past year one. Wrestlemania was dominated by Hulk Hogan, more than any other person has dominated any event, and when you carry a company on your back in WMI,II,III,V,VI,VI,VIII you have to be considered the main man in the event. Disregard the match quality, as he wrestled in an era where that was the standard, aside from a few guys like Santana or Steamboat. 93,000 people didnt tune in to watch Andre the Giant wrestle, they packed the Silverdome to see if Hogan could beat him. Without Hogans contributions to Wrestlemania there might not have even been a WMX for HBK, or a WMXIII for Taker.
Undertaker being undefeated is a great streak, but he doesnt make Wrestlemania what it is, neither does HBK. HBK put on maybe the best shows at Mania, but what Hogan did was an amazing feat. Even at X8, even with his age and poor skills people still tuned in bc Hulk Hogan was gunna wrestle. Im not saying Hogan was the best wrestler, or that he put on the best matches, but there is noone who has contributed more to the success of Wrestlemania than Hulk Hogan and thats why IMO he is Mr. Wrestlemania.
Undertaker being undefeated is a great streak, but he doesnt make Wrestlemania what it is, neither does HBK. HBK put on maybe the best shows at Mania, but what Hogan did was an amazing feat. Even at X8, even with his age and poor skills people still tuned in bc Hulk Hogan was gunna wrestle. Im not saying Hogan was the best wrestler, or that he put on the best matches, but there is noone who has contributed more to the success of Wrestlemania than Hulk Hogan and thats why IMO he is Mr. Wrestlemania.
Hogan was a big part of the first 9 Wrestle Manias no doubt. But he's partially the reason why most of the main events sucked. And the first W.M. wouldn't have been as successful if it wasn't for Piper. Every great face need's a great heel. And Hogan & Wrestle Mania 1 would have been nothing without Piper.
HBK vs. Razor Ramon in the first ever ladder match was fucking awesome as well and HBK and Ramon made history and made the ladder match fucking famous when HBK did the big elbow off of it.
Also, this was not the first ever ladder match. The first WWF ladder match was Bret Hart against HBK in 1991 or 1992, I cant remember. And IMO the most memorable image from the Razor HBK Match at WMX was when HBK splashed Razor off the ladder. This match did make the Ladder Match popular, but it was not the first ever ladder match, not even the first in the WWF.
Lets define Mr. WM.........
1. Someone who always brings their A-Game.
2. No matter who they wrestle, they'll make that person look like a superstar
3. Someone who doesn't LEAVE THE COMPANY FOR MONEY OR WHEN IT LOOKS LIKE THE COMPANY'S ABOUT TO FALL ON THEIR ASS.
That's I consider HBK and Taker Mr. WM (Main Event at WM24?..... think about it.)
1. Someone who always brings their A-Game.
2. No matter who they wrestle, they'll make that person look like a superstar
3. Someone who doesn't LEAVE THE COMPANY FOR MONEY OR WHEN IT LOOKS LIKE THE COMPANY'S ABOUT TO FALL ON THEIR ASS.
That's I consider HBK and Taker Mr. WM (Main Event at WM24?..... think about it.)
I belive Undertaker vs angle was as good as angle vs Hbk.
Like i have said before if undertaker was put in those matches instead of HBK they would have been as good.
Im sure taker could have made that ladder match famous if it was Taker vs razor.
Yea HBK has pulled of 5 star classics but thats because he was wrestling with people who have ability.
You could say HBK can put on a better ladder match i agree fully,
but you could also say taker puts on a better HIAC, and casket matches.
No way man. Taker was still way too green and hadn't even learned half of the moves he knows around the time of the first ladder match. HBK is irreplaceable in his WM matches. Taker would've been garbage in that first ladder match, his character at the time was slow and stiff, not at all the style needed for a good ladder match.
Not to mention the Iron Man match. I really doubt Taker would've been able to keep everyone's attention for an hour with Bret Hart and no falls for the entire hour. The fans would've turned on him. He still didn't have the skills to really pull it off at that time, though once his feud with Mankind kicked off he really started to shine and turn into the legend he is today.
And about the HIAC and Casket matches, the best of both of those types of matches were always Undertaker vs. HBK. Whether it be them in the first ever HIAC or their Casket match a few monthes later at Royal Rumble 98 setting the standard for a good casket match that doesn't suck, it all depends on whos in the match.
I'm not trying to diss Taker at all, he's one of my favorite wrestlers of all time by far and his feuds with Mankind, Kane, Austin, Rock, and HHH were all classics.
Monkey_Mania
I Am The One Who Knocks
Im going to go with Taker'. How can you not be Mr.Wrestlemania when your undefeated doesnt matter who the opponents are. But HBK is right behind him cuz he sure has put on some wrestling clinics at Wrestlemania. He always Brings his A game but so does Taker. So I suggest a match between the 2 to find out who truly is Mr.Wrestlemania.
Shadowmancer
I am The Last Baron
meh i still think its taker but i cant really tell nemroe cuz WWE is fake -_- they take steroids n stage the fight.... like seriously do u really expect the undertaker 2 kick batista's ass in RL and underneath taker i think Hulk hogan after he slammed Adre
Seriously WTF? All pro wrestling is staged, What the hell are you saying as I can barely translate what you are saying. It makes little to no sense. Most people watch wrestling knowing that it is staged, even TNA is staged, ROH is Staged. So what are you on about?
As for the question, I chose Undertaker, he is undefeated at 15-0. 16-0 if you include both of the other guys in that Handicap match. While the other guy may have been a shit opponent, Taker carried him to a decent match. Every one goes on about how WM23 was a good match, this was only because of Taker carrying Batista through the match.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 17
- Views
- 7K
- Replies
- 25
- Views
- 8K
- Replies
- 43
- Views
- 7K
Users who are viewing this thread
Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)