Who was better in-ring performer? Bret Hart vs Shawn Michaels

[Ruthless-RKO]

Simple question...most may find it hard to answer though...

Who do you think performed better in the ring?
whos style was better?
Which one had you going?

So many questions can be asked about the different styles of wrestling each of them brought with them to the squared circle..but if you had to choose one!! What would you say?? who was better in the ring?

Bret Hart or Shawn Michaels??

I'm going to go with Bret Hart, when I watched him, he reminded me of classic 60's, 70's wrestling from back in the World of Sport days from Britain...pure technician, arguably the greatest ever...he always performed to the top level in all his matches and he is someone I really enjoyed watching, I never got bored of the submission moves no matter how long they lasted...just amazing..

I just want to mention though, I don't have anything against Shawn Michaels, I think he is also a great performer and has performed for us fans in many great matches in his whole career in the 90's and since his return in 2002...I'm not going to take anything away from him, but I have to choose one, I'm going with The Hitman!!

Your views??

 

[Ferbian]

There's really no right or wrong answer to this question. It will all come down to what wrestler you enjoy watching the most, and who you think is better in the ring. They are very close in a way. Shawn is a great over-all in-ring performer with high flying abilities as well as mat wrestling. Bret Hart is very technical and mat wrestling based. Both are definitely some of the greatest in-ring performers ever to have performed in a wrestling ring.

However I find Shawn Michaels to be much more entertaining to watch in the ring. Mostly due to the fact that he is such an overall talent. He can wrestle with anybody, and wrestle well. Like John Cena said to Jericho last night, that is the definition of what Shawn was "A guy that could hang with anybody in the ring". He was truly one of the best in the world at what he does (Without stealing the catchphrase from Jericho).

Also I think it might come down to the fact that Shawn is my favorite wrestler. His in-ring ability contributes a lot to this. He tears the house down with every performance every night. Sure his later work got a little bit toned down compared to his 90's work. But he was still by far one of the best to perform in the ring at any given day.

 

[marklouis]

These are my 2 favorite wrestlers ever, so it's a tough choice. But, I'll go with HBK. He had more flair, was more flamboyant. He was more of an entertainer, & his match always seemed to be the most exciting on any card, regardless of who he was in the ring against. As a previous poster said, he could put on a great match with anyone. Not to say Hart could not, but I think HBK was better at it. Really though, it's a coin flip. Both are among the best ever.

 

[Nada]

Shawn Michaels

What edges Shawn above Bret to me is, that Shawn took his wrestling persona and brought that to his character, his charisma shines through and this adds to much more to his wrestling ability. He wrestlers 2 totally different matches whether he is a heel or face, he changes his whole game.

Bret is technically superb, but thats about it, he is very limited in all other areas and you never believed in his character, you never believed that his is who he really is.

There is never a single doubt that Shawn Michaels in the ring is the real man, he has a unpredictability about him whether its wrestling or doing promos whereas Bret just did the usual stuff.

 

[cbreezy]

good thread. you will get a lot of different opinions. ill say shawn. he could basically do everything bret could and more. i hope this doesnt come off as me bashing bret cuz i have no intentions to do that what so ever. the hitman was ahead of his time. as was shawn. so i gotta go with hbk. nothing taken from hart though. he was the man

 

[Ming]

Shawn Michaels is far more entertaining to watch in the ring than Bret Hart in my opinion. Bret Hart is a better technician, submission artist and better at mat wrestling but Shawn Michaels is simply more entertaining to watch due to his charisma and high risk moves. He can also put on a good match with anybody (even John Cena). That's why I think that Shawn Michaels is a better peformer than Bret Hart.

 

[Wade's Public Transit Bomb]

I thought that Shawn was better:

- Shawn seemed much more comfortable with having to work on the fly. If something went wrong, he was able to keep his character. For instance, in that ladder match you might have seen, his tights were pulled down. What did he do? He smiled like "Yeah, you know I have a great ass."

- Shawn was much more interesting vs Bret when he wasn't doing something. You never knew what Shawn was gonna do in the background, but Bret.. Boring.

- Shawn found much more chemistry with guys than Bret did. It wouldn't surprise me if it was because a lot of the guys really wanted to kick his ass, though. haha

- Shawn matches came across as much bigger deal. I dunno if it was because he was more willing to do stuff out of the norm of "We mat wrestling for 5-10 min, exchange some blows, I win the match" that Bret had.

 

[Davi323]

Great thread.

For me, it's HBK. Bret is a better pure mat technician...but he is boring as hell in the ring. No personality in his actual wrestling style. HBK is more fun to watch, always has been. For me, it comes down to the entertainment value. Shawn Michaels wrestled with personality. Bret always took the whole "best there is" thing too seriously, I never got the sense that he was enjoying it. Shawn, other than when he "lost his smile" enjoyed his actual matches. He hated everything else in his life, but he loved performing.

And then when he came back, after marrying, after finding God, after figuring out how to be happy outside of the ring, his matches got better. He enjoyed himself.

Bret Hart was a great technical wrestler. But HBK could have an entertaining match against a mannequin if he wanted to.

 

[supermanatsea]

This is a tough one! Growing up, I was a real fan of Bret Hart's. I remember that when I saw him on the cover of the WWE magazine with the title belt after he beat Ric Flair, he LOOKED like a champion. He told a great story in the ring. He could wrestle, he sold well. He had great offense. His matches has depth and I dont know if Stone Cold would be as big if Bret hadnt built him up as well as he did.

But...Shawn Michaels wins this argument by a hair. And here's why: I didnt much like him in 95 and particularly in 96. Problem was, as much as I didnt care for him or his character, I just LOVED watching his matches. Afterall, he could make ANYONE, I mean, ANYONE look good. He made Psycho Sid a viable champion. Compared to Shawn, Bret was good but not the best...I remember watching Bret against Undertaker, Diesel and Sid and he had the SAME matches with each of them...I actually got bored. Shawn NEVER bored me.

So Shawn is the better in-ring performer. But Bret made a better champion...maybe that's for another Forum?

 

[LongHessa]

Bret Hart.

 

[Miss Flawless]

I agree with Ferbian. They are both great in-ring performers. Bret Hart is a very technical wrestler, while Shawn is more of a high flier...I guess. It really depends on you enjoy watching more.

I enjoy watching Shawn Michaels more than Bret Hart. (And I'm Canadian) Shawn Michaels proved he can be a good high flier, while having some good technical matches too, one of them against Bret Hart. I guess I'm being biased though, because my dad is a huge HBK fan, and I have basically all of his matches, so I've seen more HBK matches than Bret Hart matches. I'm kinda also being biased cause HBK is my favourite wrestler.

But I still enjoy watching HBK more.

 

[jokerjoe110]

I have to say HBK hes just the best plain and simple. inside and outside the ring he put on a story like no other. He had more charisma, more originality and always put 110% into each and every match he had.

 

[Megadeth]

I have to go with the Hitman. While I enjoy watching HBK, I always felt Bret was more solid in the ring. Michaels moves are flashier, but I always felt Michaels would get a little confused when it came to technical ability, especially when it came to Shawn trying to do a submission move. It seems like every time Shawn ever tried to use a Sharpshooter, or figure four, he had to really think about what he was doing, and it normally looked kinda sloppy. Also, Michaels would occasionally known to be somewhat unprofessional in the ring, by overselling moves to try to make his opponent look bad, or I believe there was one time where Michaels had a sucker in his mouth while Ken Shamrock had him in the ankle lock and he just kept sucking away on it. Bret on the other hand, tended to be more solid in the ring, and thus I give him the edge based on in-ring performance.

 

[Miss Flawless]

Also, Michaels would occasionally known to be somewhat unprofessional in the ring, by overselling moves to try to make his opponent look bad

I believe that was one time against Hogan. Cause Hogan was being a dipshit and didn't wanna lose to HBK.

or I believe there was one time where Michaels had a sucker in his mouth while Ken Shamrock had him in the ankle lock and he just kept sucking away on it. Bret on the other hand, tended to be more solid in the ring, and thus I give him the edge based on in-ring performance.

LOL. That was in his DX days. Duuh. Don't you remember when he always was a dick? I also believe that the "sucker incident" wasn't even a real match. So I guess that doesn't count.

 

[Wade's Public Transit Bomb]

Well, when Shawn was an ass in the ring, but he got the job done. For that 3 mile high pedestal people put Bret on, no one seems to mention how he wanted to win all the damn time. What kind of mentality is that to have for the guy you are giving your belt to? Heck, and he didn't want Dusty finishes either.

 

[Hollywood Naitch]

Bret Hart is easily the best proper "wrestler" with far superior technical and submission skills. He can legitamately claim to be the best of all time in those areas

BUT...as an actual PERFORMER, Shawn Michaels is better. He is more entertaining in the ring, his style is more flamboyant and suited to pleasing the crowd. Shawn is a showman, unlike Bret.

Both guys could be relied upon to put on a great match with anybody, and it is a reallllly hard decision, but I am leaning slightly towards the Heart Break Kid, as you are asking who is the best "performer". If you had asked who is the best "wrestler" I would have gone with Bret Hart

 

[LascoX]

This one is a close one. Both were exelent in the ring and could make anyone they wrestled with look good. Both were solid performers who could sell a belivable match. I would definatly give Shawn an edge on charisma and showmenship but I think Hart was a better story teller in the ring. I give it to Hart by a small margine due to personal bias and the fact that I think Hart was more of a professional in the ring. Shawn took his ball and went home (forfited the title more times then anyone rather then do the honors and lose it in the ring) where as the only person that Hart didnt agree to drop it to was Shawn at Montreal. I think that these two were both the best wrestlers to step into a ring in the past 30 years though.

 

[Hazardous]

As Ferbian said earlier, not really a right or wrong question, as they has 2 different styles. if you mean REAL wrestling, then yes of course it would be Bret, but if you mean entertaining then it's HBK all the way. im not even going to make a choice, as i think they were both the best at their own styles

 

[Stone_Cold_Stunner]

These two guys are my two favorite performers in the ring ever so its hard for me to choose one whos better. But once again it comes down to is what style you perfer to watch. If you want technical style you watch Bret Hart. But if you want excitment fast paced performing you watch Shawn. Im gonna say Bret overall just because his style is more sound and professinal over the style Shawn wrestles