Someone also made a good point earlier which I wil lreiterate, and will also use to back Goldberg. People say they can only go ten minutes - what they mean is that they only needed 10 misn to beat their opponent. You can't wrestle for longer than it takes to beat your opponent - if anything Warrior has more psychology - he would just get the match voer and done with, whereas Foley is a psycho who seemes to care mroe about hutring his opponents than just wrapping a match up.
WWE: 2 out of 3 Falls Match: Mick Foley vs. The Ultimate Warrior
- Thread starter Shocky
- Start date
Yeah, the Ultimate Warrior was pure wrestling drivel. Clumsy and hamfisted in the ring, probably among the worst on the mic in the history of the WWE.
I'm not getting everyone's arguments for Warrior here. He's bigger then Foley? Barely. He has more endurance? Doubtful, Foley has wrestled in several grueling deathmatch tournaments, with back-to-back matches.
The mandible claw is good for one fall, and a double arm DDT could take care of a second. Considering how insane Warrior is, maybe he'd accidently get himself counted out for a fall.
Foley definately gets my vote here.
I'm not getting everyone's arguments for Warrior here. He's bigger then Foley? Barely. He has more endurance? Doubtful, Foley has wrestled in several grueling deathmatch tournaments, with back-to-back matches.
The mandible claw is good for one fall, and a double arm DDT could take care of a second. Considering how insane Warrior is, maybe he'd accidently get himself counted out for a fall.
Foley definately gets my vote here.
The only way Foley would stand a chance herre is if it was a hardcore match. In any variation of a normal match, Warrior wins. Warrior gets criticised for running out of gas etc, but have you SEEN Foley? Hardly an athlete is he? Foley is famous for losing. Would Foley have gone over Hogan at ANY poitn in his career, never mind during Hulkamania? Don't even pretend he would have. Warrior should be further ahead than he is.
It almost saddens me that you don't know what a Cactus Clothesline is. It's just a regular clothesline, except Foley is running across the ring, and when it connects, both men go over the top rope, landing on the outside.
Once they're on the outside, Foley just needs to whip Warrior into the steel post, and slam his face into the guardrail, and send him back in the ring. As long as he doesn't over-do it, he won't be DQ'd. After a few clotheslines, and a few shots on the guardrail, Foley will be able to get his first pinfall. Then he just needs to wait for Warrior to gas himself, and get the 2nd pinfall.
I'm not saying Foley wins this in a landslide, but I think it will become a battle of endurance, and shockingly...Foley has the edge here.
I'm going for Foley especially if he is Cactus Jack. Warrior annihilated most of his opponents in 10 minutes. This will almost certainly last longer than 10 minutes Warrior may easily win the first fall but Foley can take inhuman amounts of punishment and Warrior may not have that kind of move in his arsenal to put Foley down. If Foley was Cactus Jack all he has to do is grab a dangerous object and rip into warrior this will hurt warrior and will help Foley towards the end of the match he is sadistic and ruthless enough to do that. Foley wins 2-1
I know what a cactus clothesline is, I assumed that you meant once they were on the outside, he'd use weapons, the next point of this argument suggests you mean otherwise, I was jumping to conclusions, but I know what moves Foley does, I've read his self promotion manifesto, or "book" as it is more commonly known.
So you think a guy who got straight back up after being hit by an urn by the Undertaker will lose to a shot to the guard rail? Bearing in mind we're talking WWE's padded guardrail? You cannot be serious. And for literally the twelfth time, Warrior has never gassed himself out.
Why because, as I see it, only one of these guys has ever lost after becoming tired out, and it wasn't Warrior.
Why in the hell is Mick Foley winning this? Tastycles first post on the matter shut down every argument that Foley supporters brought.
Fine by me. He'll also get disqualified, lose a fall, and have an extremely pissed off Warrior to deal with. You do not want this mad at you.
Notice: Warrior was twatted in the head with an urn. He popped back up, angry of course, and pulled the Undertaker around the ring like his bitch.
The Ultimate Warrior participated in short matches because HE WON THEM QUICKLY. I don't understand how you guys don't get that. Winning quickly and decisively is a bad thing? That makes no sense. As for stamina, he went 28 minutes against Randy Savage, took 5 elbow drops and was still able to get back up, run around, shake the ropes, and win the match.
And, so? He fell off and through a cell. He lost. He took 11 chair shots. He lost. Foley doesn't win those matches. I'd like to see Foley take 5 elbow drops and kick out. Oh yeah, he'd be pinned after one or two.
I also recall Foley being pinned after a Pedigree. Warrior took one of those once...
[youtube]f3oLq9KPbkw[/youtube]
Warrior never submitted in his career EVER.
How does that matter in this match?
Have you ever seen Warrior make a mistake in the ring? I can't recall any. But, I can recall Mick Foley making a couple mistakes in nearly every match he's ever been in.
**
There isn't a valid reason to vote for Foley in this match. The Ultimate Warrior lost three matches in his entire career, never once clean. He beat Hogan for the title at WM, Savage, The Undertaker, Mr. Perfect, HHH, and well, every other wrestler that he faced in his entire career.
Foley lost to most everyone he faced. I love Mick Foley. He's the average guy that we can all relate to. He's the lovable loser. He's made his career out of giving us moments to remember. Unfortunately, most of those moments involved him taking some insane bump and nearly killing himself. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any Foley moment where he stood tall. He even won the title with help.
Foley is a great man and a wonderful performer. But here, he doesn't stand a chance.
Fine by me. He'll also get disqualified, lose a fall, and have an extremely pissed off Warrior to deal with. You do not want this mad at you.
Notice: Warrior was twatted in the head with an urn. He popped back up, angry of course, and pulled the Undertaker around the ring like his bitch.
The Ultimate Warrior participated in short matches because HE WON THEM QUICKLY. I don't understand how you guys don't get that. Winning quickly and decisively is a bad thing? That makes no sense. As for stamina, he went 28 minutes against Randy Savage, took 5 elbow drops and was still able to get back up, run around, shake the ropes, and win the match.
And, so? He fell off and through a cell. He lost. He took 11 chair shots. He lost. Foley doesn't win those matches. I'd like to see Foley take 5 elbow drops and kick out. Oh yeah, he'd be pinned after one or two.
I also recall Foley being pinned after a Pedigree. Warrior took one of those once...
[youtube]f3oLq9KPbkw[/youtube]
Warrior never submitted in his career EVER.
How does that matter in this match?
Have you ever seen Warrior make a mistake in the ring? I can't recall any. But, I can recall Mick Foley making a couple mistakes in nearly every match he's ever been in.
**
There isn't a valid reason to vote for Foley in this match. The Ultimate Warrior lost three matches in his entire career, never once clean. He beat Hogan for the title at WM, Savage, The Undertaker, Mr. Perfect, HHH, and well, every other wrestler that he faced in his entire career.
Foley lost to most everyone he faced. I love Mick Foley. He's the average guy that we can all relate to. He's the lovable loser. He's made his career out of giving us moments to remember. Unfortunately, most of those moments involved him taking some insane bump and nearly killing himself. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any Foley moment where he stood tall. He even won the title with help.
Foley is a great man and a wonderful performer. But here, he doesn't stand a chance.
PYT, you make some good points, but others, well...not so much.
1) Warrior's matches were short because he couldn't go for very long. He went 28 minutes against Savage? 10 minutes of that was him lying on his back. 20 + minutes against Hogan? I seem to remember 10 minutes of bear hugs and reverse chin locks. He was half gassed before his matches even started because of his sprint from the back to the ring.
2) The claw would work on Warrior. It worked on a better Undertaker than the one Warrior faced. It isn't a submission hold, it is a hold that takes the opponent down and puts them out cold. Nobody submitted to the claw. They all passed out before they could.
3) Warrior made mistakes in every single match. So did Foley, but for you to say he didn't is simply wrong.
Taking Mankind (evil, twisted Mankind from his debut) and throwing him against the Warrior would have Warrior confused beyond belief. Warrior doesn't have any one move that can put Mankind down. He doesn't have a Tombstone/Stunner type move that knocks a guy out. The first version of Mankind was unstoppable, he won his feuds with everyone except HBK. Even Undertaker. And don't tell me that the Taker from his Mankind feud was worse than the Taker from his Warrior feud, that is just wrong.
I'm not saying that I know for certain Foley would win, but you Warrior supporters sure are making this sound like a squash match. News flash....it isn't.
1) Warrior's matches were short because he couldn't go for very long. He went 28 minutes against Savage? 10 minutes of that was him lying on his back. 20 + minutes against Hogan? I seem to remember 10 minutes of bear hugs and reverse chin locks. He was half gassed before his matches even started because of his sprint from the back to the ring.
2) The claw would work on Warrior. It worked on a better Undertaker than the one Warrior faced. It isn't a submission hold, it is a hold that takes the opponent down and puts them out cold. Nobody submitted to the claw. They all passed out before they could.
3) Warrior made mistakes in every single match. So did Foley, but for you to say he didn't is simply wrong.
Taking Mankind (evil, twisted Mankind from his debut) and throwing him against the Warrior would have Warrior confused beyond belief. Warrior doesn't have any one move that can put Mankind down. He doesn't have a Tombstone/Stunner type move that knocks a guy out. The first version of Mankind was unstoppable, he won his feuds with everyone except HBK. Even Undertaker. And don't tell me that the Taker from his Mankind feud was worse than the Taker from his Warrior feud, that is just wrong.
I'm not saying that I know for certain Foley would win, but you Warrior supporters sure are making this sound like a squash match. News flash....it isn't.
You seem to think that Foley was a man who had great endurance. Foley rarely went over 20 minutes, and when he did, it was some sort of gimmick match where he executed spot after spot, set things up, and was knocked out on the ground for the majority of the match. Foley never went full-tilt for 30 minutes.
About the Hogan and Savage matches: Warrior was laying on his back for 10 minutes taking 5 of Savage's finishers. After that, though, he was able to get back up, full of energy, and win the match. That shows extreme toughness and endurance. In his match against Hogan, he was locked in a long test of strength. Sure, he wasn't chain wrestling him or doing anything fast-paced, but they were both struggling against each other, using all their strength. Imagine being Hogan or Warrior, who were the two strongest men in the company, and pushing full-force against each other for a few minutes. Rock, meet Hard Place. That test of strength was more rigorous than any of the rest holds that Bret and HBK exchanged during their famous iron-man.
Mick Foley isn't a strong man. Warrior was a strong man. He could easily force Foley's hand out of his mouth.
I'd like to see an example of a Warrior mistake in a match.
How about the splash that put Hogan down?
Well, the Undertaker that Warrior beat was the same Undertaker that was fresh off a year-long win streak that culminated by pinning Super-Hogan. The Undertaker that Foley beat once (and lost multiple times) was one that was no where near as dominant. Undertaker of '96 lost a hell of a lot more than he did in '91.
None of Foley's matches were squashes. He hung in there for a long time. Foley could take a whoopin', but he still lost the matches. Warrior would have won this match, and he should win the vote.
Your half right. And it isn't the second half.
No he wasn't "half gassed", he was pumped. And if we want to talk about wrestlers lying on their back doing nothing for ten minutes, I suggest you watch a Mick Foley match.
So the Undertaker of 1996 who hadn't held a title for 5 years, who had lost to guys like Mabel, and who had Paul Bearer squandering his matches, including the Foley one, was better than the undefeated one that beat Hogan for the title about three months after his matches with the Warrior? Give me a break, sunshine.
One example of a Warrior mistake please.
Mankind: less evil, less twisted and less good than 1991 Undertaker in just about every single way. You know who was unfazed by the Undertaker? Ah yes, Ultimate Warrior.
Errr, well the Warrior splash seemed to keep Hulk Hogan down a lot better than the tombstone did.
Except when he lost all of his matches against main eventers like I already stated.
And Hunter Hearst Helmsley, Kane, Ken Shamrock,
Exactly, even Undertaker beat him. To my recollection, they had about 6 or 7 PPV matches and Foley won two, both because Paul Bearer handed him victory, once by fucking up, once by betraying Undertaker.
A guy who loses to Mabel is precisely as good as one who beats Hulk Hogan. Gotcha. Actually, I've just realised that isn't right at all.
Well that's the thing. Foley fans are saying things like "he has a chance", 2this isn't a foregone conclusion" etc., that's because they know he shouldn't win this. I'm not saying Foley will be easy to beat, but, you know what, neither were some of the other people Warrior has beaten in the past. The guy is basically unbeatable, and Foley just isn't in the echelons of those that could beat him.
It's all untrue in my opinion, not that this statement makes the remotist bit of difference.
Warrior is practically unbeatable and Foley is our loveable loser, we are voting a guy who was hardly ever pinned over a guy that has lost the majority of his Main Event matches.
Maybe not much bigger, but a hell of a lot stronger, and faster.
Both have underrated endurance in my opinion, apparently Warrior being able to beat people in 10 minutes is a bad thing and means he has no endurance.
On a guy who has never submitted?
So that finisher will succeed where pretty much every other finisher he's taken has failed then?
Never happened before. Warriors usually smart enough to stay in the ring.
Bullet To Binary
New Member
Why is the Ultimate Warrior losing? This guy was ridiculously over, and portrayed as unbeatable in the WWE, the only reason he gets so much hate is because people watched that DVD I guess, because sure enough during his run he was VERY over. I can barely remember him losing, he's like the prototype for Goldberg, and really, Mick Foley is a "nice guy", but he's just a normal guy. How can a normal guy beat that which is Ultimate?
WillYouStopIt!
Dark Match Jobber
I have to quote him because everything he says is spot on. I like mankind, both as a wrestler and as a person, I wish all wrestlers had the love for the business that he did. With that said, nobody should be voting for Foley here, nobody. By voting for Foley you are saying he is going to defeat a man who to my knowledge has never lost without interference of some sort. And not only beat him once, but twice, a task nobody in this tournament would be able to do.
By voting for Foley you are saying that Foley would be able to defeat HULK HOGAN when Hulkamania was running wild on the biggest stage of them all, cleanly. This would never happen, Mankind would never, let me stress NEVER be able to beat Hogan cleanly when Hogan was in his prime. All of us know this and yet somehow choose to ignore this fact and vote for Foley
By voting for Foley you are also saying that Foley would also be able to defeat Macho Man cleanly on the biggest stage of them all when Macho Man was also on top of his game as one of the greatest heels of all time.
Has Foley ever defeated Stone Cold or The Rock cleanly, let alone twice in the same night? IF not then how could he possibly defeat the Ultimate Warrior who was more unstoppable then those two.
Because Foley has more votes
So was Foley
"Porayed as unbeatable" and "unbeatable" are two different things. Warrior was capable of losing.
This is irrelevant.
He's still lost before, you should look it up.
And like Goldberg, he's overrated.
Have you seen some of his matches? I assure you, Mankind and Cactus Jack was very far from being nice guys.
A normal guy? Seriously? This is a man whose taking some of the most punishment in the history of the business, and is still capable of coming back and winning matches.
Very clever, a play on words. How about this one. How can a Warrior beat all of Mankind by himself?
Remember people, Warrior isn't all that he's cracked up to be, and a perfect scenario has been given in which Foley wins the match.
He gets a barbed wire bat/steel chair and beats the shit out of Warrior, busting him wide open and knocking him senseless. Foley gets DQ'd, but easily pins Warrior to even the score at 1-1.
They go into the last fall with Warrior beaten and bloodied and Foley uninjured. Foley takes advantage of this, and a few minutes later is able to pin Warrior after a couple of DDT's.
Vote Foley.
Yes, and congratulations to the three people that were able to do it, and all the help they needed to do it.
Foley lost nearly every match in which he took a ridiculous amount of punishment, he was never capable of beating the big names cleanly either.
With the power of all of the Warriors calling to him?
His win/loss record would disagree with you there.
Hmm
Good scenario, well not that good, you see Mick Foley would only be able to hit Warrior once, if he did it again he'd be DQ'd not once, but twice, this means that he would lose.
History has proven that one weapon shot doesnt keep Warrior down for long, he usually comes back and destroys the person that hit him, so that makes Foley 1-0 down and Warrior extremely pissed off. That doesnt bode well for Foley.
Vote Warrior.
Which is a travesty.
Foley never got the pops Warrior did. When Foley is able to split the crowd against Hogan, then you can talk.
He lost three times by interference. Pretty damn unbeatable.
I agree.
I'll change my name to Foley's Bitch if you find me one clean Warrior loss.
Obviously not. They were both incredibly over with the crowd and won the vast majority of the matches they were in.
I'd say his prime is when he was winning his world titles. That's around the time when he was tag-teaming with The Rock and begging to help out Stone cold. Mankind was a pussy.
When does he ever win the matches where he gets beat to death? HE DOESN'T! Foley would not kick out of a Savage Elbow. Warrior took five. Foley would go down after being hit with the urn. Warrior popped back up. Foley has been beaten by the Pedigree. Warrior was up before the pin attempt.
He beat all of Hulkamania by himself, so I say that Mankind won't be an issue.
Really? Because I haven't heard one logical scenario. Everyone has just been grasping at straws, pretending that maybe somehow Foley could win. It won't happen.
He can hit him ONCE. Why do you not get that? After the first hit, Warrior jumps up and runs around and shakes things, incredibly pissed. Then Foley is already down a fall. If Foley hits him twice, he loses. It's not that hard to understand.
Because the DDT is better than five Savage elbows? Warrior has NEVER been pinned clean. Foley won't do it here twice.
Only if you're stupid.
justinsayne
Cody Rhodes is an excellant
Not really, the real travesty is the fact that Warrior hasn't been eliminated yet, the guy was absolute shit in the ring, and did about as much damage to the companies he worked for as he did good
Foley also never held the ME of SummerSlam hostage like Warrior did either, Foley always took care of his business whether he agree'd with Vince or not, he (to the best of my knowledge) never threatened to no show for the ME of a major PPV unless paid millions of dollars up front
First off his career PPV record is 16-4, and the second the definition-
If he were unbeatable than he wouldn't have those 4 PPV loses to his name
I'm sorry but exactly where the fuck does it say in the match stipuilation that Foley must win both his falls clean?, if the ref were to get knocked out Foley could take all the cheap shots to Warrior he wants to soften the overrated clown up, and get the fall
How the fuck does being booked to win matches doesn't make you good, for fuck sake, so if WWE starts booking Hornswoggle as an unbeatable midget that will automatically make him good, and yeah both were booked as unbeatable and for a short stint in the history of professional wrestling both were over, but both were also overrated as fuck, it's not as if their impact actually met much for the long term of the business, both were really only there for for the quick pay day, and neither really gave a shit about the business, which is why the never put anyone over, and both are pretty much all but forgotten by mainstream wrestling fans now
This statement right is about the most unbelievably ignorant load of horseshit I have ever read in this thread so far, and call Foley a pussy for working with two of the biggest names in the business, but who exactly was Warrior working with in his prime?, Hogan, Savage, Taker, Roberts, Rude, Dibiase, Andre, guess if working with big names makes a pussy then Warrior maybe the biggest pussy in the history of professional wrestling
SO because Warrior was shit at selling moves he's better, if anything you would think that this would prove that Foley was better than Warrior at least he could sell pain and make the matches look more realistic, and as far as the stupid fucking pedigree argument goes, Warrior popped up from a pedigree he got from a jobber Triple H, that would be the equivalent of kicking out of a Cody Rhodes DDT for fucksake, Foley took the pedigree when Triple H was actually a competitive member of the roster and not just used to put people over, and if I recall correctly in the street fight at the 2000 RR it took two pedigrees to keep Foley down for a three count, with the second one being on a pile of thumbtacks, and then the following month Foley took the pedigree and lost after Triple H back body dropped him through the top of the cell breaking the ring as he landed, Foley still manged to get up which is when Triple H finished him off with the pedigree
No, he beat Hogan by himself, big difference
Really? the only fucking argument I have heard for Warrior this entire fucking tournament has been, he lost 3 times, he's unbeatable, he's beat Hulk Hogan, the fact of the matter is that Warrior is shit, and the everyone knows it, so his fans must cling to what little postive shit there is to say about the fucking overrated clown, yet Foley is able to adjust his style somewhat depending on who he's facing, overall Foley is a better Wrestler than that hack Warrior could ever dream of being
Yes, he can only hit him once...IN FRONT OF THE REF, if the ref is out he can't call what he doesn't see, Foley would take advantage of this and hit Warrior with everything he can get his hands on to soften him up
if the Ref is knocked out and Foley hits the DDT on a steel chair then pushes the chair out of the ring before the ref comes to, then yeah I could see Foley picking up the fall, he would then use the mandible claw to pick up the final fall
He was just as good as Hogan in the ring. He captivated the fans and made people care about him. Thus, he was a good in the ring. He doesn't have to know 15 variations of a suplex to be a good wrestler.
What Warrior did backstage doesn't mean jack shit. I'm not holding Triple H's politics against him.
Again, it doesn't matter. Warrior being unprofessional doesn't mean a thing in this match.
Once was a tag-team match. Tag-team losses don't mean a thing in a singles match.
Would you like me to count Foley's PPV losses for you?
Have you ever seen Foley attack the referee? Nothing leads me to believe he would here. If he does, though, he loses a fall. And who's to say that Foley can just knock the shit out of Warrior with weapons? Warrior wouldn't just stand still.
Because, ya know, in a match, the guy that wins all of his matches usually beats the guy that loses all his matches.
He was begging Stone cold to let him be his partner and trying to make jokes with the Rock. He was not a mean person. He was almost pathetic.
Because Foley laid on the ground for 15 minutes to sell a finisher, he's better than someone who gets up before the pinfall? That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. "Oh, he sucks because he doesn't stay down after a finisher!" No, he's good because the finishers do nothing to hurt him.
And you don't think he can beat Foley, then?
All I've heard is that Warrior doesn't sell finishers, he wins quickly, Foley can take loads of punishment (but still lose), Warrior was an ass, and Foley knows how to get dq'ed.
And how exactly will the ref get knocked out, exactly?
Because Warrior would just stand still and let this all happen, right?
justinsayne
Cody Rhodes is an excellant
Seriously have you ever watched a fucking match?, How many matches do we see where someone "accidentally" runs or gets pushed into the ref knocking him out for like 25 mins., it happens in pretty much every PPV ME in WWE for the past 10 fucking years if not longer
Warrior charges for Foley, the ref gets in the way, because as we all know in wrestling refs are ******ed, gets run over by Warrior, Foley see's this as his chance to break out the weapons and nails Warrior repeatedly with ring bells, barbwire bats, and steel chairs
Warrior charges for Foley, the ref gets in the way, because as we all know in wrestling refs are ******ed, gets run over by Warrior, Foley see's this as his chance to break out the weapons and nails Warrior repeatedly with ring bells, barbwire bats, and steel chairs
Seriously have you ever watched a fucking match?, How many matches do we see where someone "accidentally" runs or gets pushed into the ref knocking him out for like 25 mins., it happens in pretty much every PPV ME in WWE for the past 10 fucking years if not longer
Warrior charges for Foley, the ref gets in the way, because as we all know in wrestling refs are ******ed, gets run over by Warrior, Foley see's this as his chance to break out the weapons and nails Warrior repeatedly with ring bells, barbwire bats, and steel chairs
Show me an example of Warrior running over the referee, please. Until then, you're grasping at straws. "Because the referee might get knocked over, Foley might be able to beat up Warrior with weapons and might be able to do enough to pin him." That's a terrible argument.
justinsayne
Cody Rhodes is an excellant
WTF, is that your new catch phrase now, grasping at straws, how the hell am I grasping at straws by saying something that happens in the vast majority of high profile matches would happen in this match, Refs get knocked out all the fucking time, do you even fucking watch wrestling!!?!?!?, and no might about it, that's exactly what Foley would do, it's an entirely possible scenario, no matter how much you want to down play it by calling it a terrible argument
Has a referee been knocked down in a Main Event of a Pay-Per-View this year? I don't think so. Has a referee been knocked out in a match on Pay-Per-View this year? I'm not sure. Therefore, you saying that it happens in the vast majority of high profile matches is an over statement. It only happens on special occasions.
FromTheSouth
You don't want it with me.
I went with Foley. This is a style of match that requires patience. I see the Warrior being gassed after the first fall. Warrior's offense is unrelenting and sudden. I see him winning the first fall,a dn then losing, as Foley takes the next two.
We have to consider that Foley's matches on average, were much longer than Warriors. In this endurance test, that experience will help Foley. Furthermore, I think Warrior gets going so early that if he was stretched, I would question what he had left.
We have to consider that Foley's matches on average, were much longer than Warriors. In this endurance test, that experience will help Foley. Furthermore, I think Warrior gets going so early that if he was stretched, I would question what he had left.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll