WrestleZone Tournament Finals: The Undertaker vs. Randy Savage

Discussion in 'The 2nd Annual WrestleZone Tournament (2008)' started by Shocky, Mar 22, 2008.

?

The Undertaker vs. Randy Savage

  1. The Undertaker

  2. Randy Savage

Multiple votes are allowed.
Results are only viewable after voting.
  1. Mighty NorCal

    Mighty NorCal SHALL WE BEGIN?

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Messages:
    0
    Likes Received:
    2,456
    eh. so we were both wrong. Taker still won one, something Savage cannot say. :undertaker2: and it IS relevant, becuase it pretains to preforming on a high profile stage.

    Yes your right. almost no one did go over Hogan in his prime. ESPECIALLY heels. Except that undertaker guy.... :undertaker2:
     
  2. Uncle Sam

    Uncle Sam Rear Naked Bloke

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 1973
    Messages:
    6,429
    Likes Received:
    3,001
    You rounded it differently, and it's the difference that cost Shawn Michaels his place in the finals.

    I don't think that's really comparable enough to put a great amount of stock in.
     
  3. Shocky

    Shocky Kissin Babies and Huggin Fat Girlz

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2007
    Messages:
    6,198
    Likes Received:
    1,115
    First of all, I must say that I'm extremely happy with the finals this year. I'm glad to see two guys that aren't publically recognized as "best ever" get into the finals. I would have been happy with Vader as well, but Savage is certainly worthy of being here, and the Undertaker, in my opinion, is one of the more under appreciated workers as far as the smark crowd goes. The first Wrestlezone Tournament was good, and I'm not knocknig in, but a finale featuring Shawn Michaels, Steve Austin and Ric Flair was about as stereotypical of an IWC finale you could get.

    Now onto the matchup. First of all, the percentages in the matchup. Sure, Undertaker had and easier match by percentages with Michaels, but just as I think it's insulting to think Benoit wouldn't have worn out Michaels, it would be just as insulting to assume that the Undertaker would walk right on over Shawn Michaels. Michaels would have given the Undertaker the match of his life. So essentially, you have two guys that have had relatively easy matchups. The Undertaker faced a SHW and a Cardio guy in Big Show and Michaels, and Savage has faced off with one of each as well in Triple H and Shawn Michaels.

    As far as credentials, both carry a fairly long and impressive list of credentials. Both are multi time world champions, and won events the other hasn't, Savage with KOTR, and taker with the Royal Rumble. People want to down play the Undertaker's title win over Hulk Hogan. Do people forget how many johnny come lately's and Super Heavyweights they had thrown at Hogan before that? The Undertaker, a rookie, was able to do what Orndorff, Piper, Bundy, DiBiase, Perfect, Slaughter, Earthquake, the list goes on and on, of guys that weren't able to get the belt off of Hogan, and the Undertaker was credible enough to do it in year one. Let's not forget as well, The Undertaker took the Undisputed Title off of Hogan as well, and that was about as bad of a beatdown Hogan has ever had. Between Hogan and Austin, they are twelve time WWE champions, and the Undertaker is responsible for taking the title off of them both five times. So to down play the Undertaker, especially as a heel, is really, really silly and kind of stupid in my opinion. He was the only heel to be credible enough to take down both Steve Austin and Hulk Hogan, and there will never be another guy to say that they took World titles off of Austin and Hogan in their primes.

    I love Savage, I think without him, guys like Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels would never have been. Savage was no small guy, but smaller then the norm at the time. Without his matches with Steamboat, the small guys never would have gotten a chance to shine. Savage was easily a trendsetter int he WWE. In my opinion, if Hogan had retired, Savage would have been the man in the WWE without him.

    Also on the flipside though, the Undertaker revolutionized everything that a Super Heavyweight should be. Sure, he started his career as slow and methodical, but now he one of the best in ring wrestlers the WWE has. He could have had stayed stagnant and simply been over based on name recognition and not do anything to change hsi career (Hogan, Flair, Triple H, HBK) but he continues to morph and make him better.

    Personally, I would love to see this match (and for one glad it didn't happen when it could have. God could you imagine it now, the Undertaker in love with Ms. Elizabeth and that's why he saved her, awful). A classic David vs. Goliath, but in the end, the big man will win, and this tournament will belong to, in my opinion, Vince McMahons greatest creation, the Undertaker.
     
  4. Y 2 Jake

    Y 2 Jake Slightly Autistic

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 1969
    Messages:
    6,886
    Likes Received:
    1,388
    I think you're wrong there. You don't honstly think Taker was bought in with the intention of being the next big star? He came just before the influx of all the ''wacky'' gimmicks. Repo Man, The Mountie, and so on.

    If it wasn't for the fans Undertaker would have gone the same way as that crazy dentist bloke. What's his name? Kane.
     
  5. RVDgurl

    RVDgurl Mrs. Danielson

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2006
    Messages:
    1,506
    Likes Received:
    339
    I'm am so glad to see two fresh names in this year's final match. Both participants are deserving and I feel that both have contributed alot to the world of wrestling. While I am usually a fan of guys who are more similiar to Savage (smaller stature, high flying, etc), I have to say that The Undertaker is one of my all time favorites. Yes, he ranks right up there with RVD for me- so I am ecstatic to see the Deadman in the finals. Savage was amazing in his prime, but still he would be no match for Taker.
     
  6. Shocky

    Shocky Kissin Babies and Huggin Fat Girlz

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2007
    Messages:
    6,198
    Likes Received:
    1,115
    Maybe giving too much credit to McMahon is questionable, considering some of the gems you mentioned afterwards, but no body has ever played a gimmick wreslter better then Mark Calloway. The guy bought into the role, and took it to the next level, and the WWF let the man walk with it. Creative always seems to be able to have something for that character. I think it's a perfect combination of the person playing the role, the company willing to get behind the character, adn the fans totally willing to suspend reality when the guy is in a match. It's a perfect trio that has created a guy that has reached a mega status of being over with the crowd, and still not be a bore.
     
  7. Y 2 Jake

    Y 2 Jake Slightly Autistic

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 1969
    Messages:
    6,886
    Likes Received:
    1,388
    Props to ''Mean'' Mark Callous for frequently reinventing himself. But I don't think that WWE have ever really got behind him. He's been around for 17 and a half years. He's got the Mania streak. But he's never been the focus of the company. He's always been near the top, and he's always been ready if needed. But WWE have never really invested in him.

    I pointed this out somehwere else. But out of all his Mania matches, he's only been in one main event. And that was because HBK was having an episode. You can't call him match with Batista a main event, it happened towards the beginning of the card. Anywho, surley if Taker was such a huge star then they would have promoted him for a long period of time as the best in the promotion. Every title reign he's had he's not been the focus.

    His first Title reign he defeated Hulk Hogan. It was a year after his debut. Sure it was big. But he lost it quickly, and nobody believed he's win it back in the Rumble. it was between Hogan, Flair & Sid.

    For his 2nd he deafeted Sid. Only because HBK was hormonal. During his reign he was behind Hart & Austin, both were pritrayed as being stronger. WWE didn't harm Taker, but he was feuding with nobodies. Nobody at that time saw Vader or Faarooq as legit challengers.

    3rd. Steve Austin at Over The Edge. I've never read this, but I always felt he won it because of the Owen incident. I might be wrong. He lost that on Raw, that doesn't happen often.

    He defeated Hogan again for his 4th title. HHH, Angle, Vince & Lesnar (debatable) were being pushed just as hard at that point. The title was also a hot potato in 2002. You can't really remember much from that reign. In fact all I remember is that botched Chokeslam he performed on Hogan.

    His WHC was marred by injury. Not that it matters, Cena's title was far more important.

    To me it appears he's just somebody relaiable who's managed to stay fresh for a long period of time.
     
  8. Shocky

    Shocky Kissin Babies and Huggin Fat Girlz

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2007
    Messages:
    6,198
    Likes Received:
    1,115
    The thing with the Undertaker, he is blessed by the gimmick, and he is cursed by the gimmick. There is no way in hell that Vince McMahon could have put the Undertaker as the number one guy to represent his company. As much as he is loved by his fans, it's the wrong image to try and sell to children. As Sly said a long time ago on here, you can't market a guy that uses magic, and uses the power of the darkside to defeat his opponents. The Undertaker is Mr. Reliable, but he's not Mr. Marketbale to the mainstream audience. Us Smarks love him, but you can't tell the mother of some 5 year old kid why you should by a shirt for her son of a guy that buries people and tells them to rest in peace.

    That spot (#1 spot) has been reserved for guys that are in touch with the mainstream. i can go into a big list about it, but the Undertaker just couldn't be that guy because the Image wasn't right. That being said, I think he's something speical, even beyond Hogan. I think (JR Said it last week) he has reached Andre status, something that most thought would be impossible someone else would achieve. He is bigger then the belt, he is an attraction, and he usually is the guy the WWE uses to clean up mistakes they pushed.

    On a side note, I just watched Survivor Series 91, and the Undertaker destroyed Savage in the promo video.
     
  9. Slim Pickns

    Slim Pickns Has Been Drafted To RAW

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2006
    Messages:
    907
    Likes Received:
    117
    This is one of the best finals I could have hoped for. Savage and Taker pretty much rotate with Bret Hart as my all time favorite. It usually depends on who I am watching.

    I haven't voted yet but I am leaning towards Taker. My biggest argument to everyone voting HBK was the stamina factor. I think it would be rather hypocritical to vote Savage when Taker has such a large advantage. I wish this match was between two fresh superstars so that I would have to think really hard who to vote for. I'm 99% sure I'm going Taker, I'm just waiting to vote so that I can soak the finals in for all its worth.
     
  10. IrishCanadian25

    IrishCanadian25 Going on 10 years with WrestleZone

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    Messages:
    6,092
    Likes Received:
    1,532
    I voted for Savage. And while that comes off as odd seeing how I should be "bitter" that he just went over my guy Vader, I have my reasons.

    Stamina is critical, and I agree with the point that, despite the gap in votes between Taker and Michaels, there is no way Taker had an "easy match" with Shawn Michaels.

    But at some point, stamina takes a back seat to adrenaline. Undertaker is a cold man who is not affected by adrenaline. Savage thrives on it. The man just beat mutil-time World Champion HHH and barely squeeks by legendary Superheavyweight and 6-time World Champion Big Van Vader. Savage is exhausted, but man, Savage has come this far and he can taste it. The crowd has to be rallying behind him.

    I say Savage finds a way to get it done around the 35 minute mark.
     
  11. Uncle Sam

    Uncle Sam Rear Naked Bloke

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 1973
    Messages:
    6,429
    Likes Received:
    3,001
    Lies. You have no reasons. And so I will answer this other person's post.

    Well, from the numbers and from the general arguments on offer, I'd say he had a much easier match with Michaels. I'm not saying that he had an easy match, but Vader and Savage took it to very near a draw. Besides, I still stand by my percentage calculations as a legitimate system to measure the "wear and tear" advantages.

    You're right, Undertaker doesn't need adrenaline. It wasn't adrenaline that makes him sit up time after time after time after time following hellacious beatings, and I reckon he'll be giving a lot more than taking in this one. So yeah, vintage Taker.

    [Darth Vader]NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO![/Darth Vader]
     
    IrishCanadian25 likes this.
  12. Slyfox696

    Slyfox696 Excellence of Execution

    Joined:
    May 23, 2007
    Messages:
    2,384
    Likes Received:
    2,408
    I'm not reading all of the long comments, so can someone give me a rundown about how in the hell Randy Savage isn't winning this tournament by a landslide?

    In no category whatsoever can Taker compare to Savage, except for maybe "acting as a dead person with magical powers". Taker might have that one in the bag. Everything else, Taker is completely smoked.

    Drawing power? Savage. Charisma? Savage. Promo ability? Savage? Pyschology? Savage. Workrate? Savage. Selling? Savage. Storytelling? Savage. Great matches? Savage. Penis size? Probably Savage too.

    I'm simply dumbfounded at the fact that Undertaker has even reached double digits in votes. Someone please present to me, a scaled down version of this argument. I have to see it.
     
    IrishCanadian25 likes this.
  13. Skillz

    Skillz Getting Noticed By Management

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2006
    Messages:
    306
    Likes Received:
    102
    It's because most people are voting based on this match being a shoot (even though pro wrestling isn't a shoot :rolleyes:), and putting too much stock into Taker having the easier matches. Not to mention the fact that Taker is one of the biggest smark favorites in the IWC.

    This is pro wrestling, Savage having tougher matches and overcoming the odds to beat Taker (to make a great story) is the type of thing that happens in pro wrestling. Just like what happened to Bret Hart at KOTR '93.

    Agreed. I like Taker, he's easily in my top 10 personal favorites of all time (so is Savage), but there's no way he's as good of a pro wrestler as Savage.
     
  14. Shocky

    Shocky Kissin Babies and Huggin Fat Girlz

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2007
    Messages:
    6,198
    Likes Received:
    1,115
    Wait, so now the Undertaker makes the finals, and miraculously he can't work. What the hell is up with that.

    Drawing Ability: Both guys were never given the chance to run with the company, so I don't know where that is coming from. Even when Savage was the champion, he was always second fiddle to Hulk Hogan. I really can't see how this can be an argument. Both are well known for different things, and probably about as equal when it comes to name power. Ask a 25 year old, they probably know who Randy Savage is, ask anyone under the age of 15, they don't have a clue.

    Charisma: Again, irrelevant. How exactly is a guy that as you said, A Dead Man, supposed to ask charismatic. He does have charisma, just not in the way that most are used to. He plays the character to perfection, dead men aren't charismatic. If you want the Undertaker's Charisma, see the American Bad Ass, the guy oozed of confidence.

    Promo Ability: Again, Deadmen don't speak. The Undertaker cuts damn good promos for his character. The American Bad Ass was exceptional on the microphone as well. Savage was great, but the Undertaker when given the chance is just as good.

    Ability, Psychology, Workrate, Good Matches: Push, push, push, push. Savage is more technically sound, the Undertaker is a brawler, both do there jobs incredibly well. Both deliver almost every time they are out there in the ring. The Undertaker's problem has always been the guys he works with, but even working with crap, the Undertaker can get exceptional matches out of them. As far as good matches, for every good Savage Match, I can probably name a good Undertaker match. If you don't like the Undertaker character, or his style of match, I get it, but it doesn't make him not as good as Savage. It just means you prefer Savage's style.

    Personally, Savage is going to be spent. This isn't Wrestlemania 4 and Hulk Hogan isn't waiting for a steal chair. This isn't the One Man Gang, the Giant, or any other Super Heavyweight, this is the Undertaker, the greatest big man in the history of the business. He'll eat Savage alive. Savage is a great, phenomenal worker (number 11 on my personal favorites), but the Undertaker is a legend.
     
  15. Mighty NorCal

    Mighty NorCal SHALL WE BEGIN?

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2006
    Messages:
    0
    Likes Received:
    2,456
    THE UNDERTAKER is a smark favorite???? And Savage ISNT??? LOL....then please explain to me how someone who accomplished basically nothing of great consequence over his carreer is in the finals right now??? Even during the time he was givemn the belt, He was never over Hogan, has was never booked to go over Hogan, and during his time on top, it was all about the Mega powers storyline. He is famous for preforming well in losing efforts which is THE magnet for IWC love.

    Just becuase The Undertaker doesnt dance sing and jump around like an ass clown, doesnt mean he lacks charisma. WTF is the character SUPPOSED to be played as??? Is the funeral music supposed to start followed by Taker breakdancing on card board boxes on the stage?? He is a FUCKING DEAD GUY, Last time I checked, dead dudes dont do a whole lot.
    And still, I love how the two IWC babies, Savage and HBK's supporters are convieniently choosing to just totally ignore the way this tournament is set up. As much as anyone wants to debate it, or disagree with the results, Taker has just simply had a MUCH easier raod to get to this point. Savages only advantage over Taker is his speed and agility, which by this time, becuase of fatigue, is basically all but gone. He cant run from Taker, and stick and move, if he is on the brink of total exhaustion. Taker will catch him, and break him.
     
  16. Slyfox696

    Slyfox696 Excellence of Execution

    Joined:
    May 23, 2007
    Messages:
    2,384
    Likes Received:
    2,408
    1) I never said that. I just said he pales in comparison to Savage.

    2) I've never said that Undertaker was that great of a worker.

    You're kidding with this, right?

    With or without Hogan, Savage was still a major draw in a boom time of wrestling. Undertaker's prime drawing period came during the worst era in WWF history.

    So, because they weren't born yet, that means that Savage wasn't a draw?

    Charisma has nothing to do with gimmick. Undertaker's peak charisma ends approximately the moment the bell rings for the start of the match.

    Don't get me wrong, Taker is not a bad worker, but better than Savage in his ability to connect with the fans during a match? C'mon.

    Undertaker has cut lots of promos in his career, and his best promos don't match up against Savage's promos.

    Again, no one is running down Undertaker's ability, but are you going to sit there and tell me that he can do it better than Savage?

    Want to talk about crap workers, let's talk about Savage's match with Crush at Wrestlemania 10. And Undertaker has NEVER had a match like Savage has had with both Ricky Steamboat and The Ultimate Warrior.

    And Undertaker has worked with his fair share of quality wrestlers as well.

    Spent on what? Energy?

    I mean, look at The Undertaker's opponents...Justin Credible in an ECW match, Harley Race, Yokozuna, Mick Foley and The Big Show....all in a hardcore environment.

    So, somehow Savage is going to be more spent than Taker, despite Taker taking on a former ECW champion in an ECW match, a Hall of Famer, a 700 pound monster, a man who has no qualms about killing himself to win, and a 500 pound monster who knocked Chris Jericho out with one punch?

    Where did you get that logic from?

    Then, he has to face Shawn Michaels in the semi-finals, who is every bit as tough of an opponent as Vader. Want proof? Michaels pinned Vader in 1996 Summerslam.

    So, by no logic can anyone say that Taker has had an easier road to the Finals, and thus should be in better condition.

    The greatest big man in the history of the business?

    Shocky, I understand you're pulling for Undertaker, but there is no need to make things up. Undertaker ain't got nothing on someone like Vader, Brody, Hanson, or even if you count him, Hulk Hogan.

    The only way Undertaker should win this match, is if Savage falls asleep during Undertakers 3 hour long entrance, and forgets to wake up in time.

    :lmao:

    And Savage isn't?


    Well, apparently because some people are under the age of 15, Savage shouldn't be getting votes.

    When you say "nothing of great consequence" are you doing that before or after considering his 6 World Titles in the biggest wrestling promotions in the history of wrestling?

    Not to mention the titles he won during his regional promotions work.

    Then Hulk Hogan should win this damn tournament because there has not been a single person bigger than Hulk Hogan in the history of wrestling.

    I wasn't aware he lost in his Wrestlemania 8 match vs. Flair, or his Wrestlemania 10 match vs. Crush.

    I guess I'll have to go watch those again.

    Charisma is about connecting with the crowd, not all that other stupid stuff you said. It doesn't matter what gimmick you have, you can still connect with the crowd.

    I mean, Umaga is a savage beast who can connect with a crowd.

    How do you figure, considering what I posted above?

    Yes, because as we all know, Savage was stick person.

    Please. Have you actually watched Savage wrestle. The man was very strong, very resilient, very quick, and had great stamina and endurance. Undertaker on the other hand, is slow, no stronger than Savage, and is not in as good of cario-respiratory condition. And, when people get exhausted, it's not just speed and agility which leave you, it's strength as well.

    By the way, I wasn't aware that all of these matches were occurring in one night.
     
  17. Uncle Sam

    Uncle Sam Rear Naked Bloke

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 1973
    Messages:
    6,429
    Likes Received:
    3,001
    Fair enough.

    Go on then, show us the figures. I know you're absolutely dying to.

    The Undertaker's character is nothing to do with connecting with the audience, not that he doesn't get massive pops anyway. He's the deadman, he's not going to go out of his way to rally the crowd behind him.

    This is a promo-cutting contest?

    That goes against the concept of the final three matches, which are "king of the ring style". Keep up Sly, this isn't like you. Savage has had tougher victories over Triple H and Vader than Taker has over Show and Michaels. The numbers don't lie.

    The rest seems to make sense enough.
     
  18. pookie

    pookie Dark Match Winner

    Joined:
    May 1, 2007
    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    1
    He's the Macho Man... If you watched wrestling at all on any type of level the Macho Man was exactly that... When I think of Sports Entertainment wrestling I think of Savage or Michaels... Even if he doesn't win, real wrestling fans know who the champ is... Savage is a better athlete bar none in comparison to Taker although I'm not sure how the Dead Man is still around (robot maybe?)... Guys like fucking Jerry Rice in this sport, but Savage is the Barry Sanders/Walter Payton (left too early)... Sorry about the football reference but do the math ninjas...
     
  19. Capt. Charisma

    Capt. Charisma Getting Noticed By Management

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2007
    Messages:
    304
    Likes Received:
    30
    You Donkey's make me sick. What your too lazy to go on youtube and watch 5 or 6 of Randy Savage's matches, because if you did you would realise how good this guy was. He was a better in-ring than Hogan, Hogan was the biggest draw, but Savage carried the company for a whole year without him with a shitload of pressure and the product didn't drop at all, and neither did the ratings. I think it's unfair to compare Hogan and Savage's popularity because Savage was IMO a better heel than face, and heels never or rarely get the credit faces do.

    No-one is stupid enough to say that Taker is bad, or even average. Taker is in the top 30 of all-time easily. But Savage was the perfect wrestler, he could do anything from brawling, to technical showcasing, to cutting an awsome promo, to keeping a live crowd on the edge of there seats for every second of a 30 minute match. He could do it all, Taker is a great wrestler but he's not even in Savage's league.

    However what I think it comes down to is who is the better in-ring performer and Savage's best 5 matches are better than any of Taker's, so that should be all it takes to convince you to vote for Savage.
     
  20. justinsayne

    justinsayne Cody Rhodes is an excellant

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2006
    Messages:
    3,383
    Likes Received:
    1,876
    Dude nobody is taking anything away from Savage, he's great, he'd have to be to get this far, but in this match Taker comes out on top, Savage had to go through a a fucking war with Trips which lasted a good 30-40 mins. then after that had to go on to face Vader, in a close match, where according to a lot of Vader's supposrters in this tournament, Savage got the shit beat out of him, but still manged to come out on top in that, to barely make it to the finals where he has to face Taker. Taker on the other hand went up against Big Show, and beat him in what was probably a fairly short match that lasted 20 mins tops, then went on to face a tired and beat up HBK, who probably gave everything he had and dragged this match out for a good 30-45 mins. before Taker got the win and was able to move onto the finals. with all that being said, it's quit clear going in to this match that Taker is the fresher man, and I don't care who you are, if your tired and going into a match with the Deadman your fucked, Savage will put up a hell of a match but no matter what happens I just can't see him getting past the Deadman, Taker is just coming in with too much of an advantage, he's got the size and power advantage plus he's coming in much fresher than Savage, savage will put up a hell of a fight but there is no way in hell he's coming out on top the Taker in this one
     
  21. Slyfox696

    Slyfox696 Excellence of Execution

    Joined:
    May 23, 2007
    Messages:
    2,384
    Likes Received:
    2,408
    Connecting to the audience has nothing to do with gimmick or character.

    This is the best wrestler, right? Does promo not affect the ability of a wrestler?

    Umm...what?

    Are we saying that percentage of votes determines how tired a wrestler gets in the match?

    Because that's flat out stupid. Again, is this all taking place in one night or something?


    By the way, Savage beat Triple H with 70% of the vote.

    I don't know if I'd say he's Top 30 or not.

    30-40 minutes? I'm sorry, I must have missed where we voted on time length of matches.

    Oh, I see.

    So because Vader supporters say so, Savage must be sporting 3 broken arms and 12 broken fingers, right?

    It's these kinds of stupid justifications that make create threads like I did.

    So, a 20 minute ECW match with The Big Show is walk through the park now?

    But you're right. Nothing like a standard wrestler match with Triple H, which, for some arbitrary reason went 30-40 minutes. I mean, I can't really figure out how a Savage vs. Triple H match with 40 minutes, considering between the two of them they probably have less than 5 matches that long, but obviously it must have been.

    Wait, why was HBK tired and beat up? I mean, he had more than double the votes of his opponents combined, and, according to logic up above, that means HBK was completely fresh.

    I love how people just randomly assign criteria, without realizing how they contradict themselves.

    With logic like you've tried to present here, it's not wonder why Savage is getting fucked over in this final.

    Apparently, a 20 minute ECW match against Big Show is an easy match, but a standard wrestling match between Savage and Triple H just completely wears Savage out, despite the fact that both men moved on with more than 70% of the vote.

    Then, HBK has a match, winning nearly 70% of the vote, but for some reason he is completely worn out (much more so than a 20 minute ECW rules bout with Big Show), and so, after a grueling 45 minute match, Undertaker is very fresh to face Savage. And, apparently Randy Savage was incredibly beat up by Vader, simply because his fans said so.

    If you can find logic in that, then I salute you, because it makes no sense to me.
     
  22. pookie

    pookie Dark Match Winner

    Joined:
    May 1, 2007
    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    1
    Hey is there any way that you could put in your reasoning w/ your vote? I mean there are some people in here voting so biased because they probably never even seen a savage match. I mean correct me if I'm wrong (which you guys have no problem with) there should be some type of legitimate reason for their vote... If it's not then their vote shouldn't count plain and simple...
     
  23. Dylanis

    Dylanis Occasional Pre-Show

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2007
    Messages:
    50
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ok, so people talking about lenght of matches is ridiculous, your right. There were no rules talking about that. However, I think it's fair to assume that the voting does affect how "close" a match is. The Vader-Savage match could be considered closer than Savage's first round match because the votes were so close.

    You seem pretty hung up on this Savage beating HHH by 70% of the vote, so let's look at percentages as a way to determine stamina. First, Undertaker's matches "tonight":

    vs. Big Show: 86.42-13.58
    vs. HBK: 62.00-38.00

    Ok so let's each wrestler starts out with 100 HP (isn't that from video games? I dunno, it works). So at the end of the day, if someone has 50 HP, that means they have 50% of what they start with.

    So after facing the Big Show it goes down to 86.42. Let's round it, 86. Then against HBK, Undertaker loses 38% of what he has left in him. So that mean he loses 32.68 (round it to 33) and you have 53 HP left for his match with Savage.

    Macho-Man time:

    vs. HHH: 70.93-29.07
    vs. Vader: 52.00-48.00

    So he starts with 100 and then drops down to 70.93 -> round it to 71. So going into semi-finals he had a tougher time than the Undertaker. Yet, after that matchup, he goes into a fight with Vader where he loses nearly half of what he has. Which is 34.08 (round to 34) and Mr. Savage is left with 37 HP. Meaning, the final round matchup will be:

    Undertaker (53%) versus Savage (37%)
     
  24. Slyfox696

    Slyfox696 Excellence of Execution

    Joined:
    May 23, 2007
    Messages:
    2,384
    Likes Received:
    2,408
    You certainly put some very good thought and effort into that post, and I applaud your posting effort. However, if we are going to use percentage of votes as a measure of "HP", then you cannot just start at a random place to determine that HP, but rather you need to start at the beginning of the tournament.

    Let's give both guys 300 HP to start.

    Savage: 300 HP
    Match percentages:
    10.34
    14.29
    23.88
    11.59
    16.28
    29.07
    48

    Which would leave him with a total of 146.55 HP, or roughly 49% energy.

    Now, let's compare Undertaker:300 HP
    Match percentages:

    7.69
    5.45
    16.13
    10.26
    13.58
    38
    70.42
    44.71
    16.44

    The last three was his two out of three falls match, in which Foley beat him in the very first match.

    This would leave Undertaker 22.68 HP left, or roughly .08% energy.


    I apologize if you feel I have come down on you too hard in this post. Like my signature says, I certainly never meant to do anything other than post my opinion. However, using that theory, Randy Savage should have had MUCH more energy in the finals match.
     
  25. Uncle Sam

    Uncle Sam Rear Naked Bloke

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 1973
    Messages:
    6,429
    Likes Received:
    3,001
    If that's the case, I don't see anything wrong with Undertaker's ability to "make a connection" if you're using it in the way I think.

    Not in the ring it doesn't, which is the basis for this tournament.

    It's flat out correct, that's what it is.

    Just the quarters, semis and finals.

    And Undertaker beat Big Show by 86%. 86 > 70, yeah?

    Excluding the numbers even, The Undertaker would still have an easier time with Show than Savage would with the Game.

    Yeah, Savage moved on with 0.93% more than 70%, Undertaker with just over 16% more.

    Numbers, numbers, numbers...

    I'd rather you bow down but saluting is a start.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"