WWE Region, Third Round, Pure Rules Match: (2) Undertaker vs. (7) Antonio Inoki

[klunderbunker]

This is a third round match in the WWE Region. It is a Pure Rules match, held at Madison Square Garden in New York City, New York.

Rules: This match is won by pinfall, submission, countout or disqualification. There are three special rules.

1. Wrestlers can only be saved by the ropes three times. If their rope breaks are used up, reaching the ropes in a pin or hold has no effect whatsoever.

2. Closed fists are illegal. The first punch thrown will result in a warning, the second in the loss of a rope break, and the third is an automatic DQ.

3. The wrestlers have a twenty count to return to the ring instead of ten.

#2. Undertaker

Vs.

#7. Antonio Inoki

​

Polls will be open for four days following a one day period for discussion. Voting will be based on who you feel is the greater of the two competitors. Post your reasons for why your pick should win below. Remember that this is non-spam and the most votes in the poll win. Any ties will be broken by the amount of posts of support for each candidate, with one vote per poster.

Also remember that this is a non-spam forum. If you post a response without giving a reason for your selection, it will be penalized for spam and deleted.

 

[Bernkastel]

Pure rules? Fuck yes! Undertaker has no chance. This is the worst match he could have possibly drawn with an opponent like Antonio Inoki. He can't use open hand fists [his bread and butter] and he has to grapple [something he's not good at.]

Inoki earned his merit by fighting shoot matches and pro wrestling matches and blurring the lines between the two. His list of conquered opponents reads like a whose who of ultimate legends...

Hulk Hogan
Andre the Giant
Rick Flair
Lou Thesz
Harley Race
Sting
Dory Funk Jr.
Bob Backlund

Among many others. And he has a winning record in the WWE, is a former WWE champion, and is a member of their HOF, so he isn't going to be jobbing just cuz this match isn't in Japan. Undertaker is a big star for one night out of the year. Inoki is a big star 365 days out of the year. I don't see Americans lining up in droves to be slapped in the face by Mark Calloway. Also Taker has a terrible record against technical wrestlers. He's been beaten by Kurt Angle, he's been beaten by Brock Lesnar, he's been beaten by Vladimir Koslov [he counts], and he's been beaten by Bret Hart.

Undertaker admires shooters and real legends of the industry like Antonio Inoki so he'd no problem doing the job for a bigger star in a match he can't possibly win.

Vote Inoki.

 

[SSJPhenom]

The rules of this match kind of make me think that the deck was stacked against 'Taker. Oh well. Here we go again. We have 'Taker going up against one of the greatest Japanese wrestlers of all time.

First off, 'Taker does have a chance. Since when has 'Taker not been good at grappling? We've seen him use several grapple and wrestling moves throughout his career; especially in the second half of his career. Second, I'm tired of morons saying that 'Taker is only a big star one night a year. Yea, that's true NOW BECAUSE HE ONLY WRESTLES ONE NIGHT A YEAR NOW! When 'Taker was wrestling full time, however, he remained one of the WWF's/WWE's top tier talents. Just because every match 'Taker has had wasn't in the main event doesn't mean he wasn't a big star. Now I'll be the first to say that 'Taker never really was the face of the company, however, he's always been the one constant in the WWE and is probably the most consistent performer in the company's history. He's had main event feuds with Hogan, Yokozuna, Hart, HBK, Austin, The Rock, Angle, Lesnar, Kane, Sid, and on and on. Also, the fact that this match is in the states and in the WWE region does give 'Taker an advantage. I guarantee that if this match took place in the WWE, in Madison Square Garden during both mens primes, that the majority of the live audience would be cheering for 'Taker.

I know that Inoki is a huge name in this business and all, however, so is 'Taker. 'Taker has shown to be very versatile for a performer his size and is one of few big men that can really do it all. Don't count 'Taker out just because of the rules because we've seen 'Taker wrestle this style of match before and do very well with it.

'Taker is a beloved superstar of recent memory and is still loved to this day. Vote 'Taker.

 

[Bernkastel]

First off, 'Taker does have a chance. Since when has 'Taker not been good at grappling? We've seen him use several grapple and wrestling moves throughout his career; especially in the second half of his career.

Since when does Taker grapple as well as actual shooters? Never.

Second, I'm tired of morons saying that 'Taker is only a big star one night a year. Yea, that's true NOW BECAUSE HE ONLY WRESTLES ONE NIGHT A YEAR NOW! When 'Taker was wrestling full time, however, he remained one of the WWF's/WWE's top tier talents.

Yeah, he was ONE of their top tier talents. Never the talent. Inoki was the MAN. For decades. Even WWE has acknowledged this. Undertaker has losing records against actual top era stars, where as Inoki has beaten just about every top era star there has been.

Taker has always played second fiddle to someone. Inoki never did. Even overseas.

Just because every match 'Taker has had wasn't in the main event doesn't mean he wasn't a big star. Now I'll be the first to say that 'Taker never really was the face of the company, however, he's always been the one constant in the WWE and is probably the most consistent performer in the company's history. He's had main event feuds with Hogan, Yokozuna, Hart, HBK, Austin, The Rock, Angle, Lesnar, Kane, Sid, and on and on. Also, the fact that this match is in the states and in the WWE region does give 'Taker an advantage. I guarantee that if this match took place in the WWE, in Madison Square Garden during both mens primes, that the majority of the live audience would be cheering for 'Taker.

Inoki WAS the face of puroresu. For decades. His list of classic matches easily rivals Undertaker's. If you're talking consistency then Taker does not compare to Inoki. Not as a wrestler, not as a top star, not as a champion. Taker would be the guy that would be immortal for one day, only to lose to rookies like Khali or Vladimir Koslov or Kennedy in the same year. Taker was the guy that WWE used to put over newbies to make a statement without having to have a whole lot of buildup.

If you're talking longevity Inoki was a much bigger draw for a much longer period of time. Undertaker's title reigns were not only short, but several of his crowning moments came on the B show winning the B world title.

If location meant anything then Hogan would have stomped Yokozuna in Japan considering he was just as massively popular there as he was in the States. But nope! Kayfabe logic Yokozuna wins LOL! Antonio Inoki is a WWE HOFamer, a former WWE world champion, and has a very favorable record there. Even someone like Taker would not just roll over him.

I know that Inoki is a huge name in this business and all, however, so is 'Taker.

Taker is well known for being a novelty star who didn't draw as a champion. Inoki is known as a massively popular champion, international superstar, crossover sports superstar, promoter, and a trailblazer.

Taker has shown to be very versatile for a performer his size and is one of few big men that can really do it all. Don't count 'Taker out just because of the rules because we've seen 'Taker wrestle this style of match before and do very well with it.

Taker has never fought someone like Inoki who wrestled pure matches often. That was his bread and butter. If this were a Casket Match I could see your point. But in a match that heavily favors a technical wrestler, whom Taker has lost many times against, I do not see it.

Taker is a beloved superstar of recent memory and is still loved to this day. Vote 'Taker.

And Antonio Inoki isn't? The man has practically reached god tier in his own country. His contributions to the industry were so important that even the jingoistic, heavily biased, and self centered WWE could NOT ignore him. Let me know when New Japan Pro Wrestling inducts the Undertaker into their Hall of Fame.

Inoki was a much bigger star than Taker, who's contributions to the industry were far more important. He was also a bonafide shooter who would whip Taker's ass in a pure rules match. So we should vote for him.

 

[deem]

When i saw the match I thought i'd be fairly torn. 'Taker is a personal fave and his kayfabe dominance has very few equals. Inoki is one of them probably. I've always wanted a Japanese run in this event and, although he's a mile away from my favourite, he's probably the kayfabe all-time Ace of the region.

The stipulation is fairly massive, for sure. Where I'm at - people are WAY selling Undertaker short on his grappling. He's elite for sure. Problem is, yeah it's not his strength. His strength is clearly his striking. Probably the greatest ever. Inoki's grappling is probably as close to "best ever" as Undertaker's striking is, but he's also heavily reliant on striking. Here is the swing, and it's a huge one for me. Taker's striking is almost entirely through punches, Inoki is FAR more varied. Kicks, dropkicks.. and vitally, open palm strikes. The fact that this match REQUIRES a transition from close fist to open hand, with Inoki already specialised in such techniques, is a huge deal.

It'd be close. Both are amongst the best ever. Having such a clear way to seperate the men in the stipulation swings it for me. I think I vote Inoki anyway for what it's worth, but it'd be a lot tougher.

 

[stingray11214]

In an era with idiotic gimmicks, one gimmick that should never have survived, did. Look at some of the idiotic gimmicks they came up with: Repo Man, Duke the Dumpster, The Gobbledy Gooker, Sparky Plugg, Isaac Yankum, DDS, and here comes a WCW failure by the name of Mark Callaway being saddled with an idiotic gimmick that was sure to die. They even brought in Percival Pringle III aka William Moody (May he rest in Peace), of all things a licensed mortician. They would give Moody and urn and corpse paint, and call him Paul Bearer. Mr. Callaway was put into a black jacket and cowboy hat, and he would be called the Undertaker. But, something strange happened on the way to the forum.

Callaway and Moody made the character work

When gimmicks like Diesel Red Rooster we dying on a vine, the Dead Man would carve a legacy that will last long after The Undertaker finally rests in peace. He beat Hulk Hogan for his first of 4 WWF Titles soon after his arrival. He would add 3 World straps to his credit. But, what started as a 4 minute, non-descript victory over Jimmy Snuka, would lead to a date to destiny and pro wrestling history. He would go 21 Wrestlemanias without losing. Despite a flirtation as the American Badass, the Dead Man would be iconic.

Antonio Inoki is one of Puroresu's "Holy Trinity": Rikidozan, Baba and Inoki. He would spend his formative years as Rikidozan's disciple. Before wrestling, he lived in Brazil, where he excelled in Track and Field. After Rikidozan's murder, he would play second fiddle to the iconic Baba. He would go back and forth with other companies and the JWA. However, He would go on to legendary status after founding New Japan Pro Wrestling in 1972. Despite winning the IWGP title only once, he would leave a legacy that will go on for ages. He would enter the pantheon of the International psyche when he fought Muhammad Ali in 1976. He would enter both the WCW and WWE Halls of Fame, as well as the Wrestling Newsletter.

I am really torn on this one. For one, Inoki was an international star for years. But, Undertaker had the harder road to travel. That said, I am leaning towards Inoki only because of his legacy in Japan, and not to denigrate 'Taker's iconic legacy.

 

[Pay Per Ghost]

Taker and after his redebut as the Deadman he has had even lesser losses. Especially clean losses. Khali comes to mind, Batista at Cyber Sunday comes to mind. Thats it.

In a singles one on one Taker is more than adept in holding his own with someone like Inoki. But there is one VERY big blow to Taker, cant use close fists. I see him getting warned and after that using the 90s repertoire of those neck thrusts will come back (and I'd mark).

Also this is WWE region people, and no way does he lose to Inoki here.Inoki got his biggest wins in the land of the rising sun to boost his credentials and of his promotion later on.

 

[Pay Per Ghost]

P
Among many others. And he has a winning record in the WWE, is a former WWE champion, and is a member of their HOF, so he isn't going to be jobbing just cuz this match isn't in Japan. Undertaker is a big star for one night out of the year. Inoki is a big star 365 days out of the year. I don't see Americans lining up in droves to be slapped in the face by Mark Calloway. Also Taker has a terrible record against technical wrestlers. He's been beaten by Kurt Angle, he's been beaten by Brock Lesnar, he's been beaten by Vladimir Koslov [he counts], and he's been beaten by Bret Hart.

Undertaker admires shooters and real legends of the industry like Antonio Inoki so he'd no problem doing the job for a bigger star in a match he can't possibly win.

Vote Inoki.

Among the men you mentioned, Inoki has beat the majority in Japan.

Angle didn't beat Taker, there were 2 draws. Brock beat Big Evil I count his prime after his re debut in 2004.

Undertaker sure as hell admires shooters and they sure as hell respect the hell out of him. Inoki would say Domo Arigato and take the Tombstone.

 

[Bernkastel]

Among the men you mentioned, Inoki has beat the majority in Japan.

And yet he has a winning record in the States. WWE doesn't just hand victories over established talent to foreign, not under contract, talents that weren't big deals.

Angle didn't beat Taker, there were 2 draws. Brock beat Big Evil I count his prime after his re debut in 2004.

Except Kurt Angle did pin the Undertaker. No Way Out 2006. The title was on the line.

Undertaker had multiple primes. And he admired Brock Lesnar because he is a machine. Antonio Inoki fought Lesnar to a one hour exhibition draw pushing 60 and Lesnar called him a machine. Do you not think Undertaker would have the same admiration?

Undertaker sure as hell admires shooters and they sure as hell respect the hell out of him. Inoki would say Domo Arigato and take the Tombstone.

Nope. Undertaker would get in plenty of offense [or what he'd could] before being outmaneuvered and pinned by the far more skilled Inoki.

Also this is WWE region people, and no way does he lose to Inoki here.Inoki got his biggest wins in the land of the rising sun to boost his credentials and of his promotion later on.

LOL as if location means anything. If it did then why didn't Hogan destroy Yokozuna in Japan? Undertaker has no kayfabe advantage, and Inoki has beaten everyone in the industry that could call themselves someone. And despite that there's a few people even he would not beat in this thing if given the advantage.

Vote Inoki because he was easily the bigger and more important wrestler, and the point of this tournament is to vote the bigger and more important wrestler forward.

 

[FunKay the Inevitable]

This is a very interesting match, not only because it's really a dream match in a way, but also because of the stipulation - this is a match that theoretically favours neither and yet both at the same time: they both happen to be well versed in submissions yet they both rely on closed fists for close proximity attacks. So really this comes down to the practicalities of this match.

Given the region, Taker has to be a favourite. He's the 'conscience of the WWE' for a reason, y'know? However, it's a very real possibility that Inoki in fact has more victories in MSG than Taker given his appearances for the E' back in the 1980s and was undefeated for that entire period. That leads to the fact that Inoki was very rarely beaten while Taker, with a good win/loss record, would often be defeated at least once during a feud and was often tasked with getting guys over in new gimmicks or positions: look at JBL, Mr. Kennedy, The Great Khali, Randy Orton, John Cena, Maven etc...

Ultimately though the major deciding factor has got to be this: I cannot remember a single match where Taker didn't throw repeated closed fist shots. It's his bread and butter as Ech put it. So Taker's in a bit of trouble in that he could get DQ'd. Inoki has and can easily mix it up with open handed slaps as he famously did for years.

I get the feeling this would be a very intriguing match and even feud, but this boils down to a few simple practical elements and for me this has to go to Inoki, even if it is via DQ.

 

[Dmbfantomas]

Undertaker can use palm strikes, neck thrusts and chops. Sure, he's more effective with a closed fist, but to me this is just the gimmick you use to make it seem like the Deadman can't win...and then he does. I support Inoki a lot every year, but Taker is the bestest ever, and he won't even use those gloves now.

Undertaker beats Inoki after a third tombstone piledriver, and all fans agree this was the best match of the entire tournament.

 

[Dmbfantomas]

Also, why would Taker get DQ'd? I know HOW he could (by punching duh) but...why would he ever allow that to happen? Taker isn't stupid. In fact, he's one of the smartest in ring guys ever (and is touted as such). Everything Taker does is well thought out in advance, so he would certainly push the warning, but I really can't see a scenario in which Taker goes full ****** and gets himself DQ'd via punching. I'm not saying he can't lose, just I SINCERELY doubt he would go out like that.

 

[Spidey Revivey]

Taker was touted several times by Michael Cole and JR that he was "The Purest Striker in the WWE". You'd think somebody who was labeled such would know more than a closed-fisted punch.

Vote Taker. It's in the WWE Region, and everybody including Sting knows you're not going over a guy like Taker there. That, and WWE doesn't recognize Inoki being a WWF champion.

 

[Bernkastel]

Also, why would Taker get DQ'd? I know HOW he could (by punching duh) but...why would he ever allow that to happen? Taker isn't stupid. In fact, he's one of the smartest in ring guys ever (and is touted as such). Everything Taker does is well thought out in advance, so he would certainly push the warning, but I really can't see a scenario in which Taker goes full ****** and gets himself DQ'd via punching. I'm not saying he can't lose, just I SINCERELY doubt he would go out like that.

Do you really think that Undertaker could grapple with Inoki hold for hold and move for move? Most of the matches he had with foreign non shooters he was mostly playing with them for the sake of putting on a show. They could adapt the style, but if aren't a shooter then you're playing. That's Undertaker. If you were to put Inoki in a match like this he'd probably shoot, since a pure rules match is the one match type that encourages that. [And since everyone's claiming how the Undertaker could "hang," Inoki would probably want to test that.] He's done so several times in the past. Do you really think Undy would last if Inoki shot on him? Nope.

Vote Taker. It's in the WWE Region, and everybody including Sting knows you're not going over a guy like Taker there. That, and WWE doesn't recognize Inoki being a WWF champion.

Region shouldn't mater. See Hogan vs Yokozuna. If this match were Thesz vs Inoki in Japan I'd still vote for Thesz, despite Inoki having both a location and kayfabe advantage. Why? Because Thesz was the bigger and more important star. Just like Inoki was bigger and more important than Taker and should move forward here.

WWE doesn't recognize the title change because Inoki refused it. Pride and honor thing. The same thing happened with Hogan when he refused the IWGP world title.

 

[Pay Per Ghost]

And yet he has a winning record in the States. WWE doesn't just hand victories over established talent to foreign, not under contract, talents that weren't big deals.



Except Kurt Angle did pin the Undertaker. No Way Out 2006. The title was on the line.

Undertaker had multiple primes. And he admired Brock Lesnar because he is a machine. Antonio Inoki fought Lesnar to a one hour exhibition draw pushing 60 and Lesnar called him a machine. Do you not think Undertaker would have the same admiration?



Nope. Undertaker would get in plenty of offense [or what he'd could] before being outmaneuvered and pinned by the far more skilled Inoki.



LOL as if location means anything. If it did then why didn't Hogan destroy Yokozuna in Japan? Undertaker has no kayfabe advantage, and Inoki has beaten everyone in the industry that could call themselves someone. And despite that there's a few people even he would not beat in this thing if given the advantage.

Vote Inoki because he was easily the bigger and more important wrestler, and the point of this tournament is to vote the bigger and more important wrestler forward.

El Santo, Mascaras all won their share in the States, doesn't mean they are bigger than someone like the Undertaker In the USA.

Kurt Angle, Taker in 2006 ended in a double pin come on.

And there isn't a legend from the past shooter or not who hasn't spoken in glowing terms when talking about Taker, he has adapted holds and submissions in his style since 2004 and can very much go in pure rules.

 

[Tastycles]

A pure rules match is a ridiculous attempt to try to add a legitimacy to pro wrestling that is impossible. Even ROH binned the concept. The Undertaker is so incongruous with such a match up, that his presence in it is utterly ludicrous. The man is basically a zombie, for Christ sake. This match would never be booked because it is stupid. Inoki has won one completely stupid match before against Muhammed Ali, so on that basis I'm giving it to him.

 

[Bernkastel]

El Santo, Mascaras all won their share in the States, doesn't mean they are bigger than someone like the Undertaker In the USA.

These are supposed to be neutral matches. One guy isn't supposed to have home field advantage. That's stupid. And even when they do they still don't always win. If Yoko can beat Hogan in Japan, Inoki can beat Taker in the States.

Kurt Angle, Taker in 2006 ended in a double pin come on.

Angle most certainly got the clean win. There was no double pin. Watch the match again broski.

And there isn't a legend from the past shooter or not who hasn't spoken in glowing terms when talking about Taker, he has adapted holds and submissions in his style since 2004 and can very much go in pure rules.

They don't talk about him as an equal. They talk about him as a guy that admired them enough to incorporate some of what they do into his moveset. Just because he has adapted holds or even trained them doesn't make him an expert. Inoki on the other hand was an expert. He had to be shackled with a bunch of ludicrous regulations to keep him from beating Mohammad Ali's ass. Do you think Taker could have done the same thing? Ali would have knocked him out in no time.

In a match that encourages Inoki to test how well Taker can actually fight, Taker's gonna lose. Also Inoki was simply better than Taker, and would easily win in a neutral setting with no gimmick. You can't get around that. So stop trying.

 

[SSJPhenom]

Since when does Taker grapple as well as actual shooters? Never.

Since when is this a shoot wrestling match?

Yeah, he was ONE of their top tier talents. Never the talent. Inoki was the MAN. For decades. Even WWE has acknowledged this. Undertaker has losing records against actual top era stars, where as Inoki has beaten just about every top era star there has been.

I'm not sure whether or not 'Taker has a losing record against the top era guys or not. I know he's lost to them, however, he's also beaten them.....a lot.

Sure Inoki was the man, in Japan. It's far easier to be the man in Japan as opposed to being the man in the WORLD'S largest wrestling organization. IMO, it's more impressive that 'Taker has remained relevant, important, and at the top in WWE for as long as he has. Let me ask you something; if a top well known Japanese wrestler came to the WWE right now against one of the WWE's top talents, would the casual fans know who that person is? Now let's reverse it. If a top WWE talent went to Japan to wrestle against one of New Japan Pro Wrestling's top talents, would the Japanese audience know who they are?

Inoki WAS the face of puroresu. For decades. His list of classic matches easily rivals Undertaker's. If you're talking consistency then Taker does not compare to Inoki. Not as a wrestler, not as a top star, not as a champion. Taker would be the guy that would be immortal for one day, only to lose to rookies like Khali or Vladimir Koslov or Kennedy in the same year. Taker was the guy that WWE used to put over newbies to make a statement without having to have a whole lot of buildup.

So now we're going to fault 'Taker for helping to put over younger talent? I think it goes to the credit of the Undertaker that he was the guy that WWE would use to allow newbies to make a statement and become popular. It shows how beloved and important he is to the audience. It actually means something to beat him. Hell, not just to beat him, to even be in a match with him means something.

If you're talking longevity Inoki was a much bigger draw for a much longer period of time. Undertaker's title reigns were not only short, but several of his crowning moments came on the B show winning the B world title.

I'm not sure about that. 'Taker has been a top draw in WWE for the better part of a quarter of a century. Sure he spent years on Smackdown, however, when Raw and Smackdown would come together for the big four PPVs, 'Taker was often the most important match or in the main event. To try and sell 'Taker short as a draw is just ridiculous.

If location meant anything then Hogan would have stomped Yokozuna in Japan considering he was just as massively popular there as he was in the States. But nope! Kayfabe logic Yokozuna wins LOL! Antonio Inoki is a WWE HOFamer, a former WWE world champion, and has a very favorable record there. Even someone like Taker would not just roll over him.

If location doesn't mean anything then why in the world do we have different regions and venues for these matches. Why would it matter? Just because people wouldn't put Hogan over Yoko in Japan and your feelings were hurt doesn't mean that location doesn't mean anything. That was a totally different match and history had shown that when Hogan and Yoko actually had a real match, Yoko came out on top. Maybe that's why Yoko went over. Also, I never said that 'Taker would just roll over him. I guarantee, though, that Inoki would not just run over 'Taker.

Taker has never fought someone like Inoki who wrestled pure matches often. That was his bread and butter. If this were a Casket Match I could see your point. But in a match that heavily favors a technical wrestler, whom Taker has lost many times against, I do not see it.

We've seen 'Taker put on wrestling clinics and employ several impressive submissions during his career. He once broke Mcmahon's ankle using a submission hold. He and Angle had a classic match at No Way Out 2006 and the majority of that match was wrestled with a technical style. This doesn't have to be a casket match. You're selling 'Taker short on his grappling ability.

"But all 'Taker does is strike with a closed fist!" I call bullshit. For the first 6 years of 'Taker's career, I recall very rarely seeing him strike with a closed fist. He employed neck thrusts and chops, which is something he could easily do in this match.

And Antonio Inoki isn't? The man has practically reached god tier in his own country. His contributions to the industry were so important that even the jingoistic, heavily biased, and self centered WWE could NOT ignore him. Let me know when New Japan Pro Wrestling inducts the Undertaker into their Hall of Fame.

If you wanna talk about someone reaching god like status with their fans, look no further then 'Taker. He is easily the most revered and respected performer in WWE's history. Not just with the fans but with his own peers.

Inoki was a much bigger star than Taker, who's contributions to the industry were far more important. He was also a bonafide shooter who would whip Taker's ass in a pure rules match. So we should vote for him.

We can talk contributions to the industry and such all day long. You misunderstand me. I know how important Inoki was and is, however, who are we to judge who's contributions to the business are more important? 'Taker has never founded his own organization, however, 'Taker has redefined what it means to be a "big man" in professional wrestling. 'Taker took a gimmick that, by all rights, should've failed way before the attitude era started. Alas, though, 'Taker was able to change and grow with the times and because of that, he's remained over and relevant throughout the entirety of his career. Now that gimmick will likely go down as the greatest gimmick in wrestling history.

Every year, Ech, we do this song and dance. One of your Japanese darlings come up against one of the WWE's best and you severely sell the WWE performer short to try and make your point. If Inoki was so good, you shouldn't have to do that to make your point and Inoki was that good. Idk if you just don't like 'Taker or what, but to say things like the location doesn't matter, 'Taker sucks at grappling, and 'Taker wasn't a draw is just ridiculous.

Vote 'Taker.

 

[Mr. Artistic guy]

The notion that saying The Undertaker was never the top guy in the WWE as if it's a detriment to him is incredulous. He has that spot, and has held it for a long time because of the fact the he doesn't NEED to be champion, to be the top guy, to a) remain relevant and revered and b) to prove that he is the WWE's golden boy in all but statistics.

Him gimmick is self-sustaining. Whereas other may float up and down the card depending on the quality of their work and their age (Kane, Big Show, Jericho), Undertaker could slip right into a main event spot unnoticed and it would fit comfortably because he is THAT guy. A guy whose spot is dictated only by the whim of those that would book for him.

A pure match for a guy who is all about strikes really kindof fits his mould. He may be coming up against a master in the style but he is going to adapt very well to that environment. He's not only known as WWE's best pure striker, but he is a keen MMA enthusiast and has Incorporated this interest and knowledge into his moveset when he introduced his Hell's Gate submission which has been mightily successful since he started using it.

The Undertaker is the greatest gimmick character of all time. That includes guys like Crow Sting, Cactus Jack, Gorgeous George, Ric Flair, ad infinitum. He tops that list because the limits of his character are nearly endless. It's an age old story that plays out well endlessly. He dies, his rises, he rights the wrong.

Inoki is definitely not a wrong choice. He is an icon of wrestling history and is completely revered. But so is The Undertaker, by the alumni of wrestling's biggest fraternity, he gets the most love. Vince McMahon holds a special place in his heart for this man and his well being. That should say it all. I am voting for The Undertaker and can only encourage others to do the same.

 

[Bernkastel]

Since when is this a shoot wrestling match?

It's not, but it's a match that certainly encourages it. Just like a Falls Count Anywhere or HIAC encourages hardcore.

I'm not sure whether or not 'Taker has a losing record against the top era guys or not. I know he's lost to them, however, he's also beaten them.....a lot.

Steve Austin - 36 wins. 75 losses.
Rock - 24 wins. 40 losses.
Hogan - 4 wins. 8 losses.
John Cena - 5 wins. 8 losses.
Ultimate Warrior - 0 wins. 58 losses.

Undertaker falls into the "one of the biggest stars but never the top star category" so his record against the HHH's, Jericho's, Kane's, Orton's is going to be better.

Sure Inoki was the man, in Japan. It's far easier to be the man in Japan as opposed to being the man in the WORLD'S largest wrestling organization.

It's the world's largest organization now and no thanks to Taker. When he won his first championship WWE wasn't the largest. In fact Taker spent years in the WWE without it ever being the largest. And despite that he still was never it's top star.

NJPW has always been a major promotion. In fact there were times when they easily surpassed the WWE.

IMO, it's more impressive that 'Taker has remained relevant, important, and at the top in WWE for as long as he has.

No it's not. Why? Because not only was Inoki relevant as a wrestler for just as long as Undy has been, but since retiring he's continued to remain dead center in the eye of the pubic. He's one of Japan's most recognizable figures. Even to non wrestling fans. Is Undertaker? Of course not. Only wrestling fans remember Taker.

Let me ask you something; if a top well known Japanese wrestler came to the WWE right now against one of the WWE's top talents, would the casual fans know who that person is? Now let's reverse it. If a top WWE talent went to Japan to wrestle against one of New Japan Pro Wrestling's top talents, would the Japanese audience know who they are?

That's not a good analogy for several reasons... 1.) Taker doesn't wrestle full time any more. He is not exposed to a world wide audience every week. 2.) Undertaker has multiple primes. If you were to say his prime was in the AE he would not have been exposed to a worldwide audience every week then either. 3.) I could make the argument that Miz is not only a bigger star than Inoki based on this logic, but Randy Savage, Sting, Warrior, Michaels, Goldberg, Austin, Rock, Hart, and even Hogan because he appears in front of 70 countries every week and they didn't. Would you accept that? If not then why make this argument. 4.) If you're talking about from a fans perspective and not a casual perspective, American wrestling fans knew who KENTA was before he came here. They knew who Great Muta was too.

If you were to make the same claim in the 1970's or 1980's I would have said yes, and then pointed to Antonio Inoki.

So now we're going to fault 'Taker for helping to put over younger talent? I think it goes to the credit of the Undertaker that he was the guy that WWE would use to allow newbies to make a statement and become popular. It shows how beloved and important he is to the audience. It actually means something to beat him. Hell, not just to beat him, to even be in a match with him means something.

It also shows that WWE never viewed him as a top era guy. How many times did Austin, Rock, or Hogan lose during their peaks? Putting over guys is admirable, but it's also the duty of those that aren't top stars. Cena is the lone exception to this rule. And now that Lesnar is back full time he won't be.

I'm not sure about that. 'Taker has been a top draw in WWE for the better part of a quarter of a century. Sure he spent years on Smackdown, however, when Raw and Smackdown would come together for the big four PPVs, 'Taker was often the most important match or in the main event. To try and sell 'Taker short as a draw is just ridiculous.

Taker was A top draw, not THE top draw. This match is not Taker vs Great Muta. Or Taker vs Toshiaki Kawada. This is Taker vs The Hulk Hogan of Japan. A man who was a crossover and international icon for longer than Taker has been.

If location doesn't mean anything then why in the world do we have different regions and venues for these matches.

Because placing wrestlers in regions A, B, C, and D would be boring. But notice how we did away with the ECW region because of the shit storms it kept creating. I've been pushing more more neutral locations for years and KB did a really good job with that this year. If you followed my WWZT I made sure that nobody had the location advantage. There was one match in the whole tournament where that happened [Trish vs Ivilesse in Mexico] and the bigger star won anyway. Just like it should be here.

Who cares if this is in the WWE and in the States? Antonio Inoki is a former WWE champion and a WWE HOFamer. If Undertaker wins solely on location then that's utterly pathetic.

Why would it matter? Just because people wouldn't put Hogan over Yoko in Japan and your feelings were hurt doesn't mean that location doesn't mean anything.

No, because it's fucking hypocritical. Hogan was the bigger star in Japan and should have won hands down. Instead people went LMAO kayfabe! And used that as an excuse to mask the novelty of bumping a #1 seed in the first round. If you want to be a hypocrite and vote Undertaker, even though Inoki was the bigger star and has a match type that suits him better, be my guest.

That was a totally different match and history had shown that when Hogan and Yoko actually had a real match, Yoko came out on top. Maybe that's why Yoko went over.

That shouldn't matter. This is not a kayfabe tournament. You can use kayfabe to vote, but the point is to vote the better star forward. If this were a kayfabe based tournament then we would have all fucking failed miserably because most of the heavy hitters [Strangler Lewis, Goldberg, Frank Gotch, Hackenschmidt, Jim Londos, Hogan etc] are already gone. The kayfabe argument standing alone is bullshit.

Also, I never said that 'Taker would just roll over him. I guarantee, though, that Inoki would not just run over 'Taker.

And Inoki wouldn't. It would be a great match that fans would love. But ultimately Inoki would win because he's the bigger star, with a match that favors him more.

We've seen 'Taker put on wrestling clinics and employ several impressive submissions during his career. He once broke Mcmahon's ankle using a submission hold. He and Angle had a classic match at No Way Out 2006 and the majority of that match was wrestled with a technical style. This doesn't have to be a casket match. You're selling 'Taker short on his grappling ability.

No I'm not. He's not in Inoki's league when it comes to grappling. That should be obvious. You tried to make an argument last year that Taker could have hung with Thesz and it was stupid. Based on that logic I guess Inoki could throw closed fist strikes just as well as Taker.

"But all 'Taker does is strike with a closed fist!" I call bullshit. For the first 6 years of 'Taker's career, I recall very rarely seeing him strike with a closed fist. He employed neck thrusts and chops, which is something he could easily do in this match.

A neck thrust is great way for Undertaker to get himself caught in a submission. And since we're being fickle and pedantic Inoki could use a variety of kicks to take out Undy's vertical base and wear him down.

If you wanna talk about someone reaching god like status with their fans, look no further then 'Taker. He is easily the most revered and respected performer in WWE's history. Not just with the fans but with his own peers.

Keyword "with fans," particularly old fans. New fans that started watching recently don't know who Taker is. Wrestlemania was the first time they ever saw him. Inoki is known by the general pubic, people that aren't even fans of wrestling.

Every year, Ech, we do this song and dance. One of your Japanese darlings come up against one of the WWE's best and you severely sell the WWE performer short to try and make your point.

Inoki is not a "darling" he was a major international star and a cornerstone of Japanese wrestling. I could say the exact same thing about you and your love for Taker. You overrated him to the point where you see him as a top 5 name. He's not. And never was. He isn't even Andre's class as a novelty. So why should he beat someone that could easily be compared to Hogan, or Thesz, or Santo?

If Inoki was so good, you shouldn't have to do that to make your point and Inoki was that good. Idk if you just don't like 'Taker or what, but to say things like the location doesn't matter, 'Taker sucks at grappling, and 'Taker wasn't a draw is just ridiculous.

Well obviously I have to because people don't know history. If they did then I wouldn't have to remind them why putting Taker [who was for all terms and purposes a B player for his whole career and a novelty to boot] over Inoki [who was one of wrestling's biggest stars ever] would be idiotic. The contributions that Taker [while tremendous] gave to this business do. not. come. close to Inoki's. Only a fanboy would think that they do. And I take absolutely nothing away from Taker when he's my second favorite wrestler of all time.

Inoki wins.

 

[Richard Blonoff]

I respect Inoki and his glorious chin. He is one of the few Japanese wrestlers I can recognize, but I'm gonna tell you why I voted for The Undertaker.

Wrestling is a big deal in both the US and Japan, so is baseball. I love baseball, favorite sport. There are some differences between Japanese baseball and the MLB, just like there are some differences between Japanese wrestling and US wrestling, but largely they are the same spectacle. I prefer US baseball because I know the names and faces, I'm just more accustomed to them, just like I'm more accustomed to American wrestling than I am Japanese wrestling. Its a piss poor argument for sure, but I used it.

 

[SSJPhenom]

It's not, but it's a match that certainly encourages it. Just like a Falls Count Anywhere or HIAC encourages hardcore.



Steve Austin - 36 wins. 75 losses.
Rock - 24 wins. 40 losses.
Hogan - 4 wins. 8 losses.
John Cena - 5 wins. 8 losses.
Ultimate Warrior - 0 wins. 58 losses.

Undertaker falls into the "one of the biggest stars but never the top star category" so his record against the HHH's, Jericho's, Kane's, Orton's is going to be better.



It's the world's largest organization now and no thanks to Taker. When he won his first championship WWE wasn't the largest. In fact Taker spent years in the WWE without it ever being the largest. And despite that he still was never it's top star.

NJPW has always been a major promotion. In fact there were times when they easily surpassed the WWE.



No it's not. Why? Because not only was Inoki relevant as a wrestler for just as long as Undy has been, but since retiring he's continued to remain dead center in the eye of the pubic. He's one of Japan's most recognizable figures. Even to non wrestling fans. Is Undertaker? Of course not. Only wrestling fans remember Taker.



That's not a good analogy for several reasons... 1.) Taker doesn't wrestle full time any more. He is not exposed to a world wide audience every week. 2.) Undertaker has multiple primes. If you were to say his prime was in the AE he would not have been exposed to a worldwide audience every week then either. 3.) I could make the argument that Miz is not only a bigger star than Inoki based on this logic, but Randy Savage, Sting, Warrior, Michaels, Goldberg, Austin, Rock, Hart, and even Hogan because he appears in front of 70 countries every week and they didn't. Would you accept that? If not then why make this argument. 4.) If you're talking about from a fans perspective and not a casual perspective, American wrestling fans knew who KENTA was before he came here. They knew who Great Muta was too.

If you were to make the same claim in the 1970's or 1980's I would have said yes, and then pointed to Antonio Inoki.



It also shows that WWE never viewed him as a top era guy. How many times did Austin, Rock, or Hogan lose during their peaks? Putting over guys is admirable, but it's also the duty of those that aren't top stars. Cena is the lone exception to this rule. And now that Lesnar is back full time he won't be.



Taker was A top draw, not THE top draw. This match is not Taker vs Great Muta. Or Taker vs Toshiaki Kawada. This is Taker vs The Hulk Hogan of Japan. A man who was a crossover and international icon for longer than Taker has been.



Because placing wrestlers in regions A, B, C, and D would be boring. But notice how we did away with the ECW region because of the shit storms it kept creating. I've been pushing more more neutral locations for years and KB did a really good job with that this year. If you followed my WWZT I made sure that nobody had the location advantage. There was one match in the whole tournament where that happened [Trish vs Ivilesse in Mexico] and the bigger star won anyway. Just like it should be here.

Who cares if this is in the WWE and in the States? Antonio Inoki is a former WWE champion and a WWE HOFamer. If Undertaker wins solely on location then that's utterly pathetic.



No, because it's fucking hypocritical. Hogan was the bigger star in Japan and should have won hands down. Instead people went LMAO kayfabe! And used that as an excuse to mask the novelty of bumping a #1 seed in the first round. If you want to be a hypocrite and vote Undertaker, even though Inoki was the bigger star and has a match type that suits him better, be my guest.



That shouldn't matter. This is not a kayfabe tournament. You can use kayfabe to vote, but the point is to vote the better star forward. If this were a kayfabe based tournament then we would have all fucking failed miserably because most of the heavy hitters [Strangler Lewis, Goldberg, Frank Gotch, Hackenschmidt, Jim Londos, Hogan etc] are already gone. The kayfabe argument standing alone is bullshit.



And Inoki wouldn't. It would be a great match that fans would love. But ultimately Inoki would win because he's the bigger star, with a match that favors him more.



No I'm not. He's not in Inoki's league when it comes to grappling. That should be obvious. You tried to make an argument last year that Taker could have hung with Thesz and it was stupid. Based on that logic I guess Inoki could throw closed fist strikes just as well as Taker.



A neck thrust is great way for Undertaker to get himself caught in a submission. And since we're being fickle and pedantic Inoki could use a variety of kicks to take out Undy's vertical base and wear him down.



Keyword "with fans," particularly old fans. New fans that started watching recently don't know who Taker is. Wrestlemania was the first time they ever saw him. Inoki is known by the general pubic, people that aren't even fans of wrestling.



Inoki is not a "darling" he was a major international star and a cornerstone of Japanese wrestling. I could say the exact same thing about you and your love for Taker. You overrated him to the point where you see him as a top 5 name. He's not. And never was. He isn't even Andre's class as a novelty. So why should he beat someone that could easily be compared to Hogan, or Thesz, or Santo?



Well obviously I have to because people don't know history. If they did then I wouldn't have to remind them why putting Taker [who was for all terms and purposes a B player for his whole career and a novelty to boot] over Inoki [who was one of wrestling's biggest stars ever] would be idiotic. The contributions that Taker [while tremendous] gave to this business do. not. come. close to Inoki's. Only a fanboy would think that they do. And I take absolutely nothing away from Taker when he's my second favorite wrestler of all time.

Inoki wins.

You have your way of voting just like everyone else has their way. Some vote on kayfabe only and others(like yourself) vote only on a statistical criteria. Me; I personally like to use a combination of both. To say that kayfabe shouldn't matter is ridiculous because it makes everything as far as match type, location, and etc a moot point. Let's just cut to the chase and have Hogan vs Austin every year and do away with this entire tournament.

Also, please don't ever call me a hypocrit. If you paid any attention during the Hogan/Yoko debate; not only did I argue for Hogan to go over, I voted for Hogan as well.

Unfortunately for you, you're wrong. The WWE has been the world's biggest wrestling promotion since about 1985. Barring a brief period from 1996 -1998 when WCW was the world's biggest. To my point though, despite what many of us know about international wrestling, the majority of wrestling fans just don't know who Inoki is. I'm willing to bet that the only place that Inoki would illicit a bigger crowd reaction than 'Taker would be in Japan.

So, while we know that Inoki isn't a darling, casual fans do not. I guarantee that if the question was posed to the majority of wrestling's fan base, not just in the states, but around the world: Who would win Inoki or 'Taker? 'Taker would be the choice. Like I said, most fans here don't know who Inoki is or what he did, however, most fans in Japan know who 'Taker is and what he has done.

I've never acted like 'Taker is a top 5 name in the wrestling business, however, you act as though 'Taker's career is relatively meaningless. Is it a stretch to say that 'Taker is a bigger name then Inoki? NO IT ISN'T and I've already explained why. 'Taker, whether you like it or not, is known and loved by more wrestling fans, as opposed to Inoki who is huge in Japan. 'Taker has been exposed to more people around the world then Inoki has.

So to me, when you say that Inoki should go over because he was a huge star in Japan; its like saying Jerry Lawler should beat such and such because he was the face in Memphis or Dusty Rhodes should beat wrestler A because he was the guy in Florida.

'Taker may have only been, at best, second fiddle in the WWE, however, IMO, that's better than being the face of wrestling and only being known in a relatively small area of the world.

Am I saying that all WWE talent would go over Inoki? NO; I'm saying that Inoki isn't just going to come in to 'Taker's house(A house that according to you he had no hand in building. Another moronic statement.) and beat a guy like him in front of fans who have no idea who Inoki is. The answer is yes btw, I would vote for Inoki if this match were in Japan. Whether you like it or not; location, match type, venue, etc should go into consideration when voting in these matches. It's why RVD beat Cena at One Night Stand. Its why CM Punk beat Cena in Chicago. It's the reason why there's a Montreal Screwjob. It matters.

Vote 'Taker.

 

[Bernkastel]

You have your way of voting just like everyone else has their way. Some vote on kayfabe only and others(like yourself) vote only on a statistical criteria. Me; I personally like to use a combination of both. To say that kayfabe shouldn't matter is ridiculous because it makes everything as far as match type, location, and etc a moot point. Let's just cut to the chase and have Hogan vs Austin every year and do away with this entire tournament.

Except it wouldn't be Hogan vs Austin every year. I could name 20 people that are easily deserving of winning this tournament. Did you vote Kurt Angle over Strangler Lewis? Did you vote HBK over Hackenschmidt? Did you vote George over Nash? Did you vote Race over Goldberg? Did you vote Savage over Jim Londos? If you did any of these then kayfabe clearly isn't that important to you.

Also, please don't ever call me a hypocrit. If you paid any attention during the Hogan/Yoko debate; not only did I argue for Hogan to go over, I voted for Hogan as well.

Point taken.

Unfortunately for you, you're wrong. The WWE has been the world's biggest wrestling promotion since about 1985. Barring a brief period from 1996 -1998 when WCW was the world's biggest. To my point though, despite what many of us know about international wrestling, the majority of wrestling fans just don't know who Inoki is. I'm willing to bet that the only place that Inoki would illicit a bigger crowd reaction than 'Taker would be in Japan.

Yeah, and in the down period during the mid 90's many promotions surpassed them. And what about before the mid 80's? NJPW has been around since the 70's. They have been a major promotion since then. AJPW too. WWE and WCW have both done many collaborations with them because those were majorly known companies.

Fans loved Inoki in Mexico as well. Taker benefits from the WWE's name brand. If it's just him without that massive promotional machine does he put butts in seats? Yes, but not like Antonio Inoki could and did.

So, while we know that Inoki isn't a darling, casual fans do not.

Casual fans that don't follow wrestling don't know who Taker is either. And he's still semi active. Moot point. And Inoki has been retired for almost a decade.

I guarantee that if the question was posed to the majority of wrestling's fan base, not just in the states, but around the world: Who would win Inoki or 'Taker?

From a subjective or objective standpoint? From a subjective standpoint I'd vote Taker over Inoki. But from an objective standpoint Inoki would win. And I've explained why.

Taker would be the choice. Like I said, most fans here don't know who Inoki is or what he did, however, most fans in Japan know who 'Taker is and what he has done.

Because he benefits from being apart of the massive promotional machine known as WWE. They can make a wrestler look better or worse however and whenever they want. Like I said before, based on that logic I could put a semi big star like Miz over lost legends from the past because a larger audience from around the world gets to see him every week.

But if you asked this same question 15-20 years ago, when Taker was still an established full time star, the worldwide audience would not be able to answer. Because WWE was still a national promotion.

I've never acted like 'Taker is a top 5 name in the wrestling business, however, you act as though 'Taker's career is relatively meaningless.

It's not meaningless. It's just not as impressive as others.

Is it a stretch to say that 'Taker is a bigger name then Inoki? NO IT ISN'T and I've already explained why.

O rly? Explain how Undertaker was a bigger draw. Explain how he put butts in seats better than Inoki. What foreign Halls of Fame is Undertaker apart of? Explain how Undertaker had more longevity as the biggest star in a major promotion. Explain how he was more consistent in his pushes. Explain how Undertaker had better accolades. Explain how Undertaker was more charismatic or a better worker. Explain how non wrestling fans don't know Taker in his own country, but in Japan they know Inoki.

I've thoroughly explained with Inoki is better. You have done no such thing.

Taker, whether you like it or not, is known and loved by more wrestling fans, as opposed to Inoki who is huge in Japan. 'Taker has been exposed to more people around the world then Inoki has.

Has he? Taker has been a part timer for years now. A decade ago WWE was still expanding globally. They ran only a handful of shows internationally. They weren't broadcast in 70 countries. 15-20 years ago Undertaker would have only been known Stateside. Undertaker isn't exposed to half the world weekly like John Cena, or Daniel Bryan, or Dean Ambrose are now.

Turn back the clock to the 1980's and how many American's know Antonio Inoki? Quite a few because he was in the public eye then.

So to me, when you say that Inoki should go over because he was a huge star in Japan; its like saying Jerry Lawler should beat such and such because he was the face in Memphis or Dusty Rhodes should beat wrestler A because he was the guy in Florida.

There's a difference between territory, national, and international stars. Territory stars were mostly just known in that area. Lawler rarely got national coverage. WWE stars in the Golden and Attitude Era's were national stars. They weren't global stars. You could call them international because WWE did shows in Canada, but most stars pre 80's [Dusty Rhodes especially] would have been included under that banner. However Inoki was known not only in Japan, but the States and Mexico. Japanese audiences were not introduced to taker until about 10 years ago. And since he was a Smackdown star they saw much less of him than they would have Randy Orton or John Cena.

Taker may have only been, at best, second fiddle in the WWE, however, IMO, that's better than being the face of wrestling and only being known in a relatively small area of the world.

That's a dumb argument. Taker doesn't transcend the industry like Inoki did. He's not bigger than the promotion he works for. Inoki made wrestling in his country. Based on your logic someone like Dean Ambrose would easily be more popular than Taker since more people watch him weekly than they ever watched the Deadman.

Am I saying that all WWE talent would go over Inoki?

Yeah you pretty much are. If they were good enough to be second tier in WWE they were good enough to go over a known international star who transcended the industry in ways no current wrestler could.

NO; I'm saying that Inoki isn't just going to come in to 'Taker's house(A house that according to you he had no hand in building. Another moronic statement.) and beat a guy like him in front of fans who have no idea who Inoki is.

And how is it moronic? Undertaker was never a top era star. He wasn't Austin. He wasn't Hogan. What wrestling booms did he start?

The answer is yes btw, I would vote for Inoki if this match were in Japan. Whether you like it or not; location, match type, venue, etc should go into consideration when voting in these matches. It's why RVD beat Cena at One Night Stand. Its why CM Punk beat Cena in Chicago. It's the reason why there's a Montreal Screwjob. It matters.

Except it doesn't. Home field advantage would matter if we're booking feuds or trying to create dramatic match ups. We aren't. We're just trying to vote the better wrestler forward. And that's Inoki. Clearly.

 

[Pay Per Ghost]

Angle most certainly got the clean win. There was no double pin. Watch the match again broski.

My bad, had that confused with the 02 bout I guess. That was the 'I got y'r number' finish.

These are supposed to be neutral matches. One guy isn't supposed to have home field advantage. That's stupid. And even when they do they still don't always win. If Yoko can beat Hogan in Japan, Inoki can beat Taker in the States.

But Yoko beat Hogan because it was Japan. That was clear home field advantage some gave him here. That would make a point for Taker in States then.

They don't talk about him as an equal. They talk about him as a guy that admired them enough to incorporate some of what they do into his moveset. Just because he has adapted holds or even trained them doesn't make him an expert. Inoki on the other hand was an expert. He had to be shackled with a bunch of ludicrous regulations to keep him from beating Mohammad Ali's ass. Do you think Taker could have done the same thing? Ali would have knocked him out in no time.

That exhibition was just that, an exhibition. In no way shape or form, was that gonna turn shoot. Inoki wanted to make a name for himself by givin him a hard time. In which case, Gorilla Monsoon should be lauded for picking up and airplane spinning Ali on the cuff. Taker is someone who has submission prowess too, maybe not to Inoki's level of training, but to a level that should betaken seriously.

In a match that encourages Inoki to test how well Taker can actually fight, Taker's gonna lose. Also Inoki was simply better than Taker, and would easily win in a neutral setting with no gimmick. You can't get around that. So stop trying.

here is the deal; Inoki's gimmick was respect. Inoki was a Japanese big man who had a lot of pull and booked himself over. Taker was saddled with a cartoony gimmick that will last till the end of time. He is one that is known beyond, beyond wrestling and during that time has kept morphing his style to become fresh and better. The same reason I believe you gave for Orton in the RKO Vs Angle thread.


Taker wins coz he was better

 

[Bernkastel]

But Yoko beat Hogan because it was Japan. That was clear home field advantage some gave him here. That would make a point for Taker in States then.

Which makes zero sense considering Hogan was a huge babyface in Japan, while Yokozuna was a Samoan playing a Japanese man. The Japanese are very ethnocentric. If they couldn't accept the Korean Rikidozan into the higher echelons of the sport then how are they going to accept and back an American Samoan playing a yokozuna? Don't pretend that match was anything more than a novelty to kick out a #1 seed in the first round.

Inoki was an known international star, a former WWE champion, and a member of its HOFame. I fail to see how Taker would have the clear cut home advantage.

That exhibition was just that, an exhibition. In no way shape or form, was that gonna turn shoot. Inoki wanted to make a name for himself by givin him a hard time. In which case, Gorilla Monsoon should be lauded for picking up and airplane spinning Ali on the cuff. Taker is someone who has submission prowess too, maybe not to Inoki's level of training, but to a level that should betaken seriously.

Lesnar gave the impression that it was a shoot, and that Inoki was testing his ability. Maybe not going all out, but just to see what he could do. And Inoki already had a name, if anything he was giving one to Brock Lesnar considering he was an unknown at the time.

here is the deal; Inoki's gimmick was respect. Inoki was a Japanese big man who had a lot of pull and booked himself over. Taker was saddled with a cartoony gimmick that will last till the end of time.

Oh god the "booked himself" argument.

He is one that is known beyond, beyond wrestling and during that time has kept morphing his style to become fresh and better. The same reason I believe you gave for Orton in the RKO Vs Angle thread.

You imply that casual non wrestling fans know who the Undertaker is. They don't. Only wrestling fans [older ones] know the Undertaker. he did not transcend the wrestling industry. Inoki did.

Taker wins coz he was better

Nope. Taker wins cuz this is in Murica and we need to be biased about it.