WZ Tourney Semi Final: The Undertaker vs. Edge

[TheOneBigWill]

Will, the argument is very relevant. Undertaker has beaten Edge more times than vice versa...thus, the likelihood of Taker winning again would seem to be far greater than the likelihood of Edge winning again. Perhaps the lopsided record suggests that The Undertaker is, in fact, better than Edge? I mean, that's what I would deduce from the statistic.

Okay Ricky, I'll play along. So by this logic.. Hacksaw Jim Duggan is greater than Steve Austin. And the Brooklyn Brawler is greater than Triple H. That about sums it up, right? Well it has to - because each have only met once on national television - and Duggan as well as the Brawler have bested Austin & Triple H, respectively. So by your theory, they're greater than two of the top names in this industry - right? Well sure.

Once again, use this logic if you'd like. Clutch to it, believe in it, do what you want with it.. but you aren't ever going to prove it to be a fact that Edge couldn't win just as easily, just because he's lost more to this individual - from their past match-ups.

By this logic, Jeff Hardy would never have defeated Edge at Extreme Rules. By this logic, the Undertaker should've never defeated Shawn Michaels at Wrestlemania. I beg you to try and dispute any of those, because you and I both know you can't.. not by your theories and way of thinking on how Taker should win, anyways.

So whats next, Ricky? How about because the tournament and Taker both have "T's" in their names. Or what about because the Undertaker even won last year's tournament, huh? Logically that means he MUST win this year, right? I mean, because the original Tournament winner won the follo.. wait, there's only been two before this.. and the winner of the previous year, never repeated. Well shit Ricky, I guess that's just one more dumbass reason to add to the list on why the Undertaker WON'T be winning here.

Honestly, when you can bring up a convincing argument.. I might consider giving it more time than just what it needs to have, to make a mockery out of. Once again, just because the Undertaker's won more - doesn't mean he'll win them all. This one, included.

 

[Steamboat Ricky]

Okay Ricky, I'll play along. So by this logic.. Hacksaw Jim Duggan is greater than Steve Austin. And the Brooklyn Brawler is greater than Triple H. That about sums it up, right? Well it has to - because each have only met once on national television - and Duggan as well as the Brawler have bested Austin & Triple H, respectively. So by your theory, they're greater than two of the top names in this industry - right? Well sure.

Once again, use this logic if you'd like. Clutch to it, believe in it, do what you want with it.. but you aren't ever going to prove it to be a fact that Edge couldn't win just as easily, just because he's lost more to this individual - from their past match-ups.

By this logic, Jeff Hardy would never have defeated Edge at Extreme Rules. By this logic, the Undertaker should've never defeated Shawn Michaels at Wrestlemania. I beg you to try and dispute any of those, because you and I both know you can't.. not by your theories and way of thinking on how Taker should win, anyways.

So whats next, Ricky? How about because the tournament and Taker both have "T's" in their names. Or what about because the Undertaker even won last year's tournament, huh? Logically that means he MUST win this year, right? I mean, because the original Tournament winner won the follo.. wait, there's only been two before this.. and the winner of the previous year, never repeated. Well shit Ricky, I guess that's just one more dumbass reason to add to the list on why the Undertaker WON'T be winning here.

Honestly, when you can bring up a convincing argument.. I might consider giving it more time than just what it needs to have, to make a mockery out of. Once again, just because the Undertaker's won more - doesn't mean he'll win them all. This one, included.

I never said he would. But the numbers suggest that it's more likely that he would win. I suggest looking at the Phillies/Nationals example, again.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

I never said he would. But the numbers suggest that it's more likely that he would win. I suggest looking at the Phillies/Nationals example, again.

Ricky, if the Undertaker and Edge were playing a game of Home Run Derby, I might be a bit more scared.. because most Canadians aren't good with a bat, as opposed to a Hockey Stick. Thankfully, this isn't a game of Baseball, or anything remotely close.

In fact, the closest way this turns to anything that makes me look at that way off the wall logic you think you tried using - is if Edge takes a baseball bat, pop-flies the Undertaker's bottom jaw outta the arena, and wins off that.

BUT to satisfy your need for me to look at what I consider truly bottom of the barrel, horrible logic.. one "team" might have more victories over the other "team", but once again - it doesn't stand to reason that the "team" with less victories couldn't pull off an upset in the Playoffs, when it means more.

OH NOES, did I just tear your Baseball logic to crap, too?! Damn.. sorry.

Now, if you don't mind - can you please stop spamming and get back on topic of this being a Wrestling match, not a one-on-one baseball game? Or not, I mean either way you just keep helping me to prove why Edge would win - and you just continue making it look worse, that you have to scrap that much to find anything on why Taker should win.

 

[Nate DaMac]

You're ruining my life Will. I spend way too much time watching you school people. The Undertaker has beaten Edge more than vice versa. Fact. Undertaker's wins have been more impressive. Sure that is a fair argument. Undertaker is a more dominant competitor. Sure why not. You guys have made a strong argument. I'm voting Edge. That's right. I have 2 reasons. 1. I like Edge more. Irrefutable fact. 2. I like the taste of tears. The crying will be EPIC if Edge pulls this out. If he loses, hell I understand. But the entertainment value of him winning is so worth the vote. Vote Edge!

 

[Uncle Sam]

Will, your logic is flawed.

In their primes, Edge and Undertaker met fresh, one-on-one on five occasions. On all of those occasions but one, The Undertaker was victorious, and clearly victorious at that. That is by no way the same as, what did you say? I think it was Hacksaw Jim Duggan beating what I'm supposing was a relatively green Austin.

I'm also saddened by... no, that's not the right word. Surprised by... no, that's not it either. Ah yes, that's right. Indifferent to people voting Edge "because they want to."

 

[Tastycles]

I've sypported Edge every single round, and it has absolutely nothing to do with anything except the fact that the guys he's faced nare the type of guy he beats in real life. Now he's up against someone he facedin what I would consider to be his own prime and one of two of his opponents primes. Now, there are certainly arguments to be made for Edge, after all Undertaker has done piss poor in tournament settings and Edge has won them.

Now, I criticised people who voted against Edge without arguing, so I shall do so here.

Or, you know, the exact same argument everyone claiming the Undertaker should win has been giving.. which is, Edge has defeated the Undertaker - just like the Undertaker's defeated Edge. Oh noes, what now. Shame.

But the difference is this: Three of the Undertaker's four wins have come in standard one on one matches. Edge's wins came from a cash in, after Undertaker had been beaten up by Batista and Mark Henry, something that emphatically won't happen here, because they have long gone home.

Five? So let's count these bad-boys out.

WrestleMania: The Undertaker won, even without question because its Mania and he wins. But a win is a win. (despite Edge likely not having a chance, much like 16 other victims)

So what? Edge only won his matches to futher his character, it is essentially the basis of professional wrestling for the outcomes of matches to futher develop the character.

Backlash: Taker wins again. But the bigger question is, why? Oh, I don't know - maybe to keep from having Taker's pathetic reigns as Champion look absolutely for shit - especially since he's a face. But a win is a win, right? Right.

But the answer in kayfabe is because he was a better wrestler. The reason Edge took the title offRVDwas because he got suspended, the reason Lex Luger never won the title is because he told someone he was going to, the reason Bret Hart won the title is because he didn't look like he was on steroids. Everything is about vested interests in wrestling, and it isn't right to use them as a basis for argument.

Judgment Day: Once again, count-out or draw - you decide. Most of you will give Taker the win, so be it. But last time I checked his reign ended here. That doesn't sound like a win in my book.

That isn't where his reign ended at all, it ended about three weeks earlier when Vickie stripped him of the title. Taker won the match, but Vickie said the title can't be won on a count out. This is as much a win as a pinfall in the tournament setting.

One Night Stand: With his CAREER on the line, the Undertaker chokes, and loses everything. His chance to keep his title, and his career. In fact, the Undertaker wouldn't even be back IN Wrestling right now (according to storylines) if it wasn't for Vickie.

So, you can claim the "Family" helped Edge win all you want. But the "Family" also kept Taker a job - one, I might add, that he couldn't keep for himself.

I think the stipulation helped quite a lot. There's no way that level of interference could be utilised in a one on one match with DQ's etc. It'd be completely ridiculous. You appear to have missed off Taker's win at Summerslam, which again, may have been helped by the stipulation, but was probably the most decisive win so far in this tournament.

And yeah, Edge lost at Mania and Backlash - but shouldn't Taker's biggest match be one where his career's on the line? So how'd he come to lose that? Most of the time, when you drop a career match - logically there isn't suppose to be anymore second chances. How many other people have ended Taker's career? Oh, thats right - none, just Edge.

But Edge is booked as a guy who will do literally anything forthe world title. He lives and breathes for it, and the Undertaker has denied him three oppurtunities to win it, which is surely as relevant. The Undertaker is booked as a character who is driven by revenge, and the match at Summerslam would suggest that he got that fairly easily.

I've made plenty, you just have to try reading them for once.

Seemed to work here..

[youtube]9gyhGZdp6M0[/youtube]

Oh, but.. but.. but.. but nothing. It worked, didn't it?

Well if the Undertaker starts the match on his back having been mauled by two guys then yes, yes the spear will work.

Watch the Wrestlemania match a bit closer. He kicked out of everything Undertaker gave him. Last Ride, Chokeslam and even the Tombstone. So, yeah, he can take the Undertaker's finishers just as well.

I'd agree, except The Undertaker has kicked out of all of his end moves, Edge has never broken out of the submission finisher, which the Undertaker has used to beat him twice.

[youtube]_4-2BwmJBsk[/youtube]

Something tells me the Undertaker wasn't happy after taking that Spear. And my guess is, he was hurting quite a bit as well.

Not hurting enough to lose the match though, evidently.

[youtube]rDZIP3lLE5o&feature=related[/youtube]

So, this is the Undertaker having a bigger threshold for pain? He was ONE SECOND away from a victory - and taps out. On the flip side of this, while Edge has tapped to Angle as well - he didn't do it when he was inches away from victory, like some little bitch.

Come on, be serious. Firstly, that was a chokehold of the sort that is rarely if ever used in professional wrestling, secondly, Edge tapped out on far more occaisions. Have you ever seen Undertaker tap out to any standard professional wrestling holds? Of course you haven't. I'd say that, yes, that is a higher threshold for pain.

Uhm, yeah.. no. Taker's "threshold for pain" might not be less than Edge, but he doesn't hold a superior stretch over him, either, by any means.

Well, I think the fact that over a similar period that Taker's tapped out once, Edge has tapped out considerably more times suggests otherwise.

 

[Coco]

I'm extremely confused here. So by all means Will, catch me up. The Undertaker won a match at Wrestlemania and at Backlash, but that doesn't matter because this isn't Mania or Backlash? In your view, they're not comparable to the current setting... Why? They're far more comparable to this setting than the TLC match or the MITB cash-in you love bringing up. This isn't TLC, and Taker hasn't just been through a cage match war with Batista and gotten beaten down by Mark Henry. In standard one on one matches, like the one being contested right now, La Famila and Edge's dirty tactics have straight up failed before. But those don't matter because of the events they took place at? Odd... because you brought up how much Edge's WM21 win matters. Oh, but we have different rules for Taker because he's good enough for be undefeated? I think not.

If the Mania and Backlash wins for Taker don't matter, surely the MITB cash-in and TLC don't either and you should never bring them up again. After all, if you're going to say Edge losing matters less because it was Mania (where he, in reality, stood no chance because Taker always wins there) and Backlash (to prevent Taker from looking like shit, according to you... a crap argument, but okay), don't Edge's wins in the MITB cash-in and ONS matter even less? After all, Edge only got those wins because Taker needed time off.

 

[IrishCanadian25]

I'll be honest. I am disappointed either of these men is still in this tournament. It's boring and predictable, and I am shocked the IWC is backing a potential repeat winner in The Undertaker, a man whom many thought would not make it out of round 1.

Edge is a terrific current competitor, but he's a paper champion who has had some hyped up gimmick matches, and some how rode that to a victory in a deep-as-hell ECW region featuring such men as Raven, Brock Lesnar, Vader, Michaels, and Liger. Edge, to me, represents "The path of least resistance" in this tournament. He's been just mediocre enough to ride the wave of hatred against guys like Lesnar.

Whoever wins this - I assume it will be Undertaker - I just hope to god gets creamed by the winner of the Hart / Jericho match.

 

[Nate DaMac]

I am so tired of people acting like the quality of victories really matter. The bell rung, somebody lost, somebody won. There is no section in the win loss column that factors in the quality of the win. Taker won by countout. That is a win. Edge cashed in and scored a pin. That is a win. But if everyone wants to write off Edge's cash in, then you should have to write off Taker's countout victory, which is even weaker. At least Edge got a pinfall.

 

[Uncle Sam]

I'll be honest. I am disappointed either of these men is still in this tournament. It's boring and predictable, and I am shocked the IWC is backing a potential repeat winner in The Undertaker, a man whom many thought would not make it out of round 1.

It's the way the game works. I've begun many of my posts with "The Undertaker should win because..." but ended them with "He should've lost to Khali though." I'm not gonna hold an undeserved win over him. Hell, if we were doing that then...

Well, I'm sure you see where I'm going with that one.

Whoever wins this - I assume it will be Undertaker - I just hope to god gets creamed by the winner of the Hart / Jericho match.

I'll be backing Hart all the way over Taker, no doubt. I'd probably back Jericho over Edge though.

 

[simpsons_fanatic742]

So as I'm reading these arguments I've found one thing to be clear from the Edge camp.

We can't count one-on-one matches between these two because both have won atleast one match. That one match that Edge won has, apparently, more merit than other Undertaker wins because he career was on the line. I reufte this because if Edge loves the title so much, wouldn't those matches for the Undertaker's title be considerably important to Edge, but still loses?

We also can't assume that Undertaker would kick out of the spear because one time he didn't after being beaten up before the match.

Also, the Undertaker tapped once while pinning Angle, so we have to assume that he will tap to the Edgecution, even if it rarely (if ever) makes an opponent tap.

So that's what I'm assuming are the reasons Edge can win this matchup. I don't really know why head-to-head matches between these two are discredited, but probably because it favours Undertaker oh so strongly.

I just find it very funny how we can't use any of the Undertaker's accomplishments in this match because they aren't relevant, but meanwhile we have to take into account that Edge has beaten him once so he'll do it again.

 

[Uncle Sam]

I am so tired of people acting like the quality of victories really matter. The bell rung, somebody lost, somebody won. There is no section in the win loss column that factors in the quality of the win. Taker won by countout. That is a win. Edge cashed in and scored a pin. That is a win. But if everyone wants to write off Edge's cash in, then you should have to write off Taker's countout victory, which is even weaker. At least Edge got a pinfall.

Well, not really. In this scenario, The Undertaker could feasibly get a count-out victory again. The argument that The Undertaker will have a cage match with Batista shortly before this match, then get attacked by Mark Henry though... well, it just doesn't hold any water, does it?

 

[justinsayne]

Five? So let's count these bad-boys out.

WrestleMania: The Undertaker won, even without question because its Mania and he wins. But a win is a win. (despite Edge likely not having a chance, much like 16 other victims)

Umm yeah which would be why there were rumors that Edge was going to be the guy to to break the streak going into WM, not to mention the fact that Taker is undefeated at WM kinda suggest that he's pretty damn good

Backlash: Taker wins again. But the bigger question is, why? Oh, I don't know - maybe to keep from having Taker's pathetic reigns as Champion look absolutely for shit - especially since he's a face. But a win is a win, right? Right.

You mean like Edge?

Judgment Day: Once again, count-out or draw - you decide. Most of you will give Taker the win, so be it. But last time I checked his reign ended here. That doesn't sound like a win in my book.

By your logic it's not really a win by Edge either

One Night Stand: With his CAREER on the line, the Undertaker chokes, and loses everything. His chance to keep his title, and his career. In fact, the Undertaker wouldn't even be back IN Wrestling right now (according to storylines) if it wasn't for Vickie.

So, you can claim the "Family" helped Edge win all you want. But the "Family" also kept Taker a job - one, I might add, that he couldn't keep for himself.

Alright if fine if this match is a 5 on 1 TLC match then I'll gladly give my vote to Edge...oh what's that it's not, heh sucks for Edge

And yeah, Edge lost at Mania and Backlash - but shouldn't Taker's biggest match be one where his career's on the line? So how'd he come to lose that?

Dude it was a fucking 5 on 1, and Edge's signature match, if Edge needs the odds stacked that heavily in his favor than how can he possiably beat the Deaman ina singles one on one match right after a match you danm sure know was a war with Austin

Most of the time, when you drop a career match - logically there isn't suppose to be anymore second chances. How many other people have ended Taker's career? Oh, thats right - none, just Edge.

Umm...you do know Takers career isn't over right?

I'm not telling people to not use the understanding of Edge losing to the Undertaker. However, how can it possibly be relevant when Edge has pinned and defeated the Undertaker, just the same?

Well Will it's pretty simple, TAKER WAS WON MORE OF THE MATCHES AND DONE SO MORE DECISIVELY

 

[TwistofRKO]

I cannot believe I'm sitting here reading an argument that previous match-ups, which were contested in Edge's prime, are not viable. That's 100% bull.

Will didn't count the SummerSlam match, for reasons unknown.

The Undertaker choked while fighting against 5 men rather than just 1, nearly winning the match anyways.

His spear worked on a bloodied up 'Taker, AFTER FAILING prior to that. He pinned him after a MiTB cash in after Undertaker just had a match, and was ganged up on by multiple other superstars. Give Edge credit for the belt, but as far as I know the Undertaker won't be half-awake on the mat when Edge cashes in the MiTB, which he doesn't have right here.

Will, this is the weakest argument I've seen displayed by anyone in this tournament with more than 42 posts. Terrible reasoning, lack of logic, and I can't even consider it grasping at straws.

 

[D-Man]

Edge shouldn't even have made it this far. Welcome to the slaughter of the Rated R Superstar. My vote is with Taker, and NO ONE is going to convince me otherwise.

 

[Sasori]

As much as I like Edge (no homo), 'Taker obviously takes this one. Edge got brutalized by Brock in a barbed wire match and got one hell of a beat down from Austin for sure and now he has to face off against 'Taker who has brutalized Edge many times in the past. But I think 'Taker won't win the finals 'coz of a few reasons.

1: He just wrestled Chris Benoit! The man won't go down without a fight and in that match we would have probably seen the Cripler, Triple German Suplex, Diving Head Butt, and The Sharp Shooter! And that is massive damage to all body parts, 'Takers arms and neck are gonna be soar from the crossface, not to mention the triple German's which add additional pain! And the Sharp Shooter probably would have took a lot out of him as well! And Benoit's head Butts are just legendary!

2: IT'S EDGE! I have yet to see Edge lose to Undertaker without a fight! Edge can pull off an Edgecution, the Edge-o-Matic, and the Edge-a-cator! The Edge-o-Matic and Edgecution will add SEVERE damage to the all ready damaged neck of the Undertaker! And not to mention The Edge-a-Cator! That is the most fucked up and effective of using the Sharpshooter IMO, which also hurts the already damaged back of 'Taker!

3: His final opponent is either Bret Hart or Chris Jericho! Hart and Jericho are MASTERS of submission and with the already fucked up back and neck that Undertaker has Bret Hart can hit the Sharp-Shooter and make him tap and Jericho can hit The Lion Tamer! Its a lose lose situation for 'Taker IMO.

But for this match I'm voting 'Taker!

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Taker's going all the way. He's beaten Edge on multiple occassions and its general consensus that Edge is unable to win without a considerable degree of outside help.

If he faces Hart, it'll be no different. In their matches, Taker took everything Hart had and always came back. He was the first to get out of the Sharpshooter and the man doesn't tap. He has never submitted and this time'll be no different. Of course, some'll vote Hart because they're fans of his or out of spite or some will think, despite all evidence to the contrary, that Hart can actually beat him.

It's pretty much the same with Jericho, he has nothing in his arsenal that can keep Taker down. I'd hardly call Jericho a master of submission wrestling. He's good, but he's not on the level of a Chris Benoit or Bret Hart in that department. Either way, it's irrelevant because...say it with me...Taker doesn't tap.

Now, I can't say I'll be surprised if Taker doesn't go all the way as some will vote against him out of spite. There's also a chance the guy could be surprised with a surprise roll up, can happen to anyone after all. I just don't see it happening.

Whatever happens, Taker's got nothin' to be ashamed of. He's been dominant.

 

[Skullz Crack'Em]

I am sick of Taker getting free passes in this tournament just because he seems invincible, even though he is far from it. That was a fair argument in his match against Benoit since Chris doesn't have the tools to keep Taker down, but Edge certainly does.

The most popular argument I am seeing is the "Taker beat Edge more, so he should win". That argument is meaningless because Edge has defeated Taker a few times as well, it doesn't matter how he won, the fact is, he CAN win this match just as much as Taker can.

Another thing that bothers me about Taker is his prime. People assume that the Undertaker of today is his prime, because a lot of people believe his best matches were during these last couple of years. That's fair enough, but where is Taker now exactly? Oh, that's right, he is taking time off to heal his wounds...............AGAIN! In the last five years the "Prime" Taker has taken off more time than anybody in the WWE because he is a worn down man that can't keep up with the younger wrestlers, so how the hell is this so-called "Prime" Taker going to win a King Of The Ring type of tournament? Speaking of the KOTR, I believe Edge has won one in his career, and he beat Kurt Angle in the finals to do it, quite an impressive feat if I do say so myself. Taker hasn't won a KOTR before, I don't even remember seeing him take part in a KOTR before, maybe because he doesn't have the stamina for it, oh well.

Unlike Taker, Edge very rarely gets any time off because he is currently one of WWE's workhorses along with John Cena and Randy Orton, make no wonder he lost to Taker a couple of times, Taker was usually always rested up before they had their matches while Edge is wrestling in matches every week non-stop, talk about unfair, but that's Taker for ya.

I am in no way disrespecting The Undertaker, everything I said is basically true, he does not have the stamina that you guys think he has, why else would he only work half as much as Edge? His match against Shawn at WM25 probably wouldn't have been as great if he had to wrestle every week like most of the main roster. That's what Taker has been doing for years now, he takes a shit load of time off, puts on a few good matches, then takes more time off. The Deadman is a Legend and is never an easy opponent to beat, but he is very susceptible to cheating tactics, and Edge is quite possibly the best cheater of all time in professional wrestling. Whether he has five people with him, or nobody with him, he always finds a way to get a victory. After a few clever distractions and a couple of Spears, Edge picks up the victory in a very tough match.

 

[kingdirrtysouth1]

Nobody, & I mean nobody possesses the mystique Undertaker does! The man is the truest definition of a pro wrestling legend! He's beaten the biggest names on the biggest stages! Nobody struck fear into their opponents the way he used to. Edge never struck fear into his opponents! He pissed off a lot of people yes, but they didn't fear him! Taker is one of, if not the greatest big man to ever lace them up! I respect the hell out of Edge for what he has done in his career and I consider him a future legend, but I'm voting for the Phenom!

 

[TheOneBigWill]

I would consider myself the "silent Will" throughout this tournament. By that I mean, I as not very vocal but each round I gave my vote to Edge without question. Now though, he meets the Undertaker and I cannot hold my silence any longer. Whoever thinks that Edge will beat the Undertaker here is sorely mistaken. Taker would absolutely crush Edge no doubt about it. The only reasons I can think of that someone would vote Edge here is out of defiance of sheer fanboyism. I say defiance because some might vote for Edge so as not to vote for Taker and some might vote for Edge because he is Edge. Seriously though, Edge, as much as I love the guy, hasn't got a hope in Hell in this one. This one won't even be tight IMO.

This is pretty much the worst thing I've ever read. Not at all because its a bad post, but because I now have people trying to imitate me by claiming to be like Me. But naturally, I had to laugh when this guy claimed he was similar or to quote him.. a "silent Will".. then turns around and votes for Taker and has the gull and nerve to claim anyone who votes for Edge is.. mistaken and a, what was the word again "fanboyism".

So, first let's clear something up. You, aren't me, and never will be anything LIKE me.. especially when you take into account how hard I've busted my ass trying to explain why Edge should be exactly where he is. And you've done nothing but "silently voted". Second, if you were even anything remotely close to me, you'd have voted Edge.. because he'd be your favorite, like he is mine. And you'd find every reason in the book, why he could beat someone that "on paper" seems like he could lose to.

You see, Copycat, I'm backing Edge because I believe in the guy. Call me a "mark", call me a "fanboy", call me Will, do anything but call me collect. The fact is, Edge deserves to be here. I've said why, I've posted why, I've explained why and I continue to repeat why.

If you had any sense at all, claiming to be similar to me, you'd have had enough brain cells to understand that.

Now don't take this as me bashing you. I apologize if you do, because I'm not. I'm merely jumping down your throat, for trying to mislead anyone into thinking you're anything like me.. when you're in fact, the polar opposite. For no better reason than I'd never vote against Edge. And to add to that, I'd always, ALWAYS explain why I'm doing what I'm doing.

I hope this clears all of that nonsense up right here, right now.

And I'm back again baby.

And here.. we.. go...

Obviously we can't ultimately "prove" who is or isn't the better wrestler by the vague definitions people use in this tournament. But what fun would it be to argue about proven fact?

I think it'd be hilarious to see me try and prove a fact wrong, or anyone not me, trying to prove a fact wrong for that matter. But alas, nothing is proven and in the world of Professional Wrestling, even when you look at something that's actually happened.. you can never be guaranteed it'll happen the same way twice.

I'd put Edge over Raven for sure. I initially went with Lesnar against Edge, but have had second thoughts of it. Austin on the other hand was completely robbed. Gotta say though, I don't see Edge being able to go over Taker here just because of Taker's popularity. Even if he did surpass 'Taker, he'd likely be stopped by Hart (assuming Hart goes over Jericho like we all suspect he will).

This is pure opinion based and I respect you for it. I respect everyone for their opinion. But let's just clear up basics. Opinions are like Assholes.. everyone has one, some of them just stink worse than others.

I'd pretty much go off opinion to disagree with most of what you said here. Why? Because I'm backing Edge, silly.

Truth is though, you can re-look through all of those threads. Raven, Steamboat, Lesnar, Austin.. and you'll see posts by me, explaining why Edge is here now. It's no different now.

The Undertaker is not better than some of the individuals Edge has already "bested", and to assume Taker wins by popularity is a gross prediction, considering Edge sent home the #2 seed, and the highest voted for Superstar in this entire tournament. (Look at the Elite 8 standings, more people voted for Austin to win overall.. and where is he now?)

So to say Edge loses by popularity is wrong. And my hope is, if Edge gets to the Finals.. enough people will just finally understand what I've been trying to say, and give Edge the respect You & I both know he deserves.

So I suppose I'll actually contribute the bare minimum to this thread.

I've only been floating through this thread half-assed because most people no longer care for real logic or reasoning. I guarantee you, over half of the individuals who've voted for the Undertaker.. didn't do it because they thought he was better, so much so because they just wanted Edge gone - because of all the drama it's caused lately. Sad, but true.

...Seriously Will? You're grasping at straws now man, I certainly hope you've got a better reason then who is the face or heel in the match. Completely and totally irrelevent.

You say it's grasping, yet you didn't try to argue it. I'm sure your reason is because you felt it was weak.. but at the same time, if it was so weak - why didn't you just disprove it, and move on?

Fact is, the Undertaker has always been a better face than a heel. I'm not making any of this my prime logic on why Edge wins.. I'm merely saying, in the history of ANY tournament.. you have a face, and a heel in the end. Sometimes you can have two heels, sometimes - rarely - you can get a face against a face. But more often than not, it's a heel against a face.

Hart is a prime time face, and was only a good heel from 97-98. Jericho is a prime time heel, more than he's ever been a face. But the great thing about that is.. Edge and Jericho, both as heels, still can feud because they're both cocky and arrogant enough to despise each other.

The Undertaker isn't the type to even be a thought in this equation, mainly because he's not a top level player - (he is, but isn't) so much as a top level "attraction". The guy is a entertainment value card, more than an actual "Wrestler", if that makes sense.

He's there to draw in people for a one time moment.. whereas guys like Hart, Jericho & Edge can keep their attention, longer than that of a "nifty entrance".

That match has been cited by just about everyone for every one of the last five or six match-ups it seems (myself included), but the truth of that match is that Jericho defeated Austin with a slew of help, mainly Booker T with a title belt. That match didn't exactly scream "fair fight".

Is anything involving a Heel and a Face, ever fair? Hardly. To assume so is naive. You and I both know this.

Shocky has said outside interference doesn't exist, and I've done my part to explain every bit of why even without it Edge could still win. The guy finds ways to cheat, the likes of which not even Eddie Guerrero could come up with.

And once again, it's a pure crap shoot as to if he'd even need to cheat. I hear all the Taker-nuts screaming 4-2 record, Taker owns Edge, and everything else.. but seriously now.. that means nothing with each new match.

If it did, guys like Hardy would never be World Champion. Guys like Edge wouldn't have TWO Championship reigns, taken from the Undertaker.. and guys like the Undertaker, would only be worth a damn if Wrestlemania happened 365 days a year.

Rhyno? Man, I don't understand the appeal to the IWC of the guy. He's good for a gimmick match and that's about it. The guy isn't exactly anywhere near someone like Undertaker on the Great Totem Pole of Wrestling.

I never ever said he was, and never even meant to suggest it. I'm merely pointing out.. People have claimed Edge has the worst spear there is. Apparently those same people don't have eyes, to witness video proof of 'said' worst spear knocking people down, a lot larger than Taker, including Taker, for a 3+ count and a victory.

I brought Rhyno up, because he was a tough enough opponent for Edge. Shit man, once upon a time I seem to recall him being a tough enough opponent (InVasion storylines) for the Undertaker. So shit or not, he seemed to wear down the guy you voted for.. where as Edge beat him, then advanced to beat an even better technical great in Kurt Angle.

All any of this proves, that I'm trying to point out.. is that Edge, unlike the Undertaker, can win Tournaments.

Defeating Angle certainly is impressive after a match with Rhyno, but 'Taker has just as much stamina as Edge if not more.

I'd say based on what era Undertaker, he'd definitely had a bit more juice.. but that doesn't always mean anything. Taker for most of his early career as the "Deadman" was slow as molasses. Because of this, he might of been powerful - but he was definitely beatable.

I'm confused as to which Era Taker people are trying to go for. I really don't care, he was one big "circus attraction" through-out most of his career, only relying on a flashy entrance, nifty "immortal" powers, and the ability to no-sell like Hogan, only by sitting straight up.

Edge doesn't need to sit up, he doesn't need a flashy dark and eerie entrance. Edge proves why he's good, INSIDE the ring. Taker's biggest weapon is his ability to scare his opponent before he even gets to the ring. Edge has never been scared of Taker, and HIAC proved that much.

...Dude! You kept citing Edge match after Edge match after Edge match and now you want to throw away that criteria when it doesn't support your choice? That's not very logical.

I'm so lost on criteria it's ridiculous. Honestly, no clue what people base this shit off of.

I base off of WHOLE careers. Taker's been around longer. Edge's accomplished more. Victory - Edge.

Once again, if this were Mania.. Taker'd win, hands down. I don't think even "I" could argue that. But it's not Mania. I lie, I'm sure I could.. but you get my point.

And if we're going by judging the wrestlers based on a business of "non-competitive sport", then the Undertaker wins this match simply because of his massive popularity and drawing ability far outweighing Edge's. But let's not confine ourselves to judging this contest soley on that

How so? You can confine yourself to it all you want, by proving to me how the Undertaker is a better.. because he's The Undertaker?

Who's Main Evented more Pay per views since Edge has become a Heavyweight contender? Who's had more Heavyweight Championship matches?

I'd wager heavily that it's been Edge.

The Undertaker isn't even AROUND for half of each year. How on earth can you consider him to be any type of a reliable draw - when Edge is there headlining the shows.

I'm not gonna say Taker isn't a drawing force. But to say he's leaps and bounds above Edge is ludacris. Again, where is the guy? He has one decent Mania match.. then leaves for months at a time.

I just cannot believe you are using this as an argument Will. Who's a face and who's a heel is completely and totally irrelevent.

Already explained why it's not.

I thought this was a tournament to determine the best pro wrestler? Not who would win in a kayfabe storyline if so-and-so was a face and so-and-so was a heel.

If this is a story to prove who the best Pro-Wrestler is, wouldn't that go to the guy with the better list of accomplishments? (ie. Edge)

I get so lost in what people believe anymore. Its Kayfabe, it's not Kayfabe. It's Primes, it's not Primes. I have no clue, X.. your guess is as good as mine. I just jump in and out of this shit whenever someone brings something to my attention.

Thats how I work. Someone says something ridiculous.. I give my opinion, or even prove for a fact, how it's wrong.

'Taker should win Will, because he is better then Edge at every single criteria by which you can judge a professional wrestler. This is a man who beat Hulk (motherfucking) Hogan in the midst of Hulkamania in his first year in the business. This is a man who has won more Wrestlemania matches then the amount of years Edge has been wrestling. 'Taker has destroyed every big name in wrestling there is, so defeating Edge should be absolutely no problem.

You'd think so, but sadly it's a bigger problem then you'd want to believe.

So the circus attraction defeated Hulk Hogan. (with major help from a Steel Chair and Ric Flair, you neglected to mention) He also lost SIX DAYS LATER, to the same guy.

You're 100% right about the Wrestlemania argument. And once again, if this match were taking place AT a Wrestlemania.. I don't think Edge would have even a single vote. Thank fuck it's not.

Taker's beaten every big name through his time in the Company. What a shock, SO HAS EDGE.. whats next, X? We gonna wager who wears more black?

A Pro-Wrestler is based off his in-ring ability, his accolade's, and his character. Taker and Edge have differing in-ring abilities. I couldn't say one was better than the other, and neither could anyone else. Taker is a brawler/striker.. whereas Edge adapts, but is mainly a technician/high flier, I suppose.

Edge has won way more accolade's than Taker's even had chances at. And both men's characters have gotten them far. With each, changing it up a bit.

Well I'll admit my vote is already locked to 'Taker, but that doesn't mean we can't have som fun while we're here.

Agreed. Good luck.

I never said he would. But the numbers suggest that it's more likely that he would win. I suggest looking at the Phillies/Nationals example, again.

You know, Ricky, I've already owned (if I could use that word) You on this argument.. but I decided to add even more ownage (I'm gonna love that word) to the post.

So you want me to look at the baseball argument. Despite this not being a baseball game, right? Okay.. So the Phillies have held a pretty good game record over the Nationals, right? I think thats what you said. So you believe it's entirely logical to think they'd win over them again, and again..

WRONG. Two, very great examples of how wrong you are.

I redirect you to the Boston Red Sox/New York Yankee's Playoff series, in which the Yankee's had it won some 3 games to nothing, right? Then the Sox's came back.. won out, went on and became World Series Champions.

Not enough for you? Let's use a different sport.

The Dallas Cowboys defeated the New York Giants, both times they met.. yet went into the Playoffs, and lost to the Giants.. whom went on, to WIN the Superbowl.

Still not enough for you? Let's switch it up again.

The Penguins, down 3 games to 1, came back to whoop the crap out of the Red Wings in the Stanley Cup finals, to become Cup Champions.

There you go, Ricky. Three sports, all including against the odds logic. ALL with the underdog team, who's lost majorly before hand.. coming back.. winning not just the match, but the ultimate prize in the end.

HOLY CRAP I'M GOOD! You convinced yet?

Umm yeah which would be why there were rumors that Edge was going to be the guy to to break the streak going into WM, not to mention the fact that Taker is undefeated at WM kinda suggest that he's pretty damn good

Way to prove Edge is good enough to defeat the Undertaker, Justin.

So let's get this straight. The Undertaker, the man who's undefeated at Wrestlemania. The man who's at the very top of his game, at Wrestlemania. And you just mentioned that there was discussion on how Edge COULD'VE VERY WELL been the guy to defeat him.

Now yes, Taker won and all.. but to even suggest, in a booked/scripted sport.. for Edge to have gotten that much thought about defeating the man, in his greatest spotlight moment.. says A LOAD about Edge.

You mean like Edge?

Not hardly. Heels are meant to lose Championships after the Faces catch them, Justin. Faces aren't meant to drop the title directly back to the Heel upon the Heel gaining a rematch.

By your logic it's not really a win by Edge either

Did I ever say it was? I don't recall that.

Alright if fine if this match is a 5 on 1 TLC match then I'll gladly give my vote to Edge...oh what's that it's not, heh sucks for Edge

Justin, do me a simple favor. Its one that doesn't involve a lot of research or actual thought process, so you should be good. Look up winners and losers. Tell me again, was it really a 5-on-1 "Edge's gimmick" match?

It wasn't, was it? All it'll say is.. Edge d. Undertaker.. won't it? Yeah.. it's okay though, I know you really want him to lose.

Dude it was a fucking 5 on 1, and Edge's signature match, if Edge needs the odds stacked that heavily in his favor than how can he possiably beat the Deaman ina singles one on one match right after a match you danm sure know was a war with Austin

Cheating. Any heel can win by cheating. Its the one thing a Face (except for guys like Austin, anyways) won't try. Taker wouldn't cheat to win. But he would get Disqualified once he's had enough of Edge's bullshit.

Umm...you do know Takers career isn't over right?

Justin.. do me another favor. Once again, really simple task, not very hard if even hard at all. Google what the stipulations were to the match Edge and the Undertaker had at One Night Stand.

I think you'll find that the Undertaker's career was on the line. Right? Right. Now, would you please scroll up to the original winner/loser of that match that you've found.. and repeat it please.

Ah, yeah.. that'd be the one.

So while the Undertaker's career may have been much like his gimmick, resurrected. I think you'll find in the history books.. Edge, has retired him before. And that, my friend, is a HUGE accomplishment - a lot more so, than any mere victory.

Well Will it's pretty simple, TAKER WAS WON MORE OF THE MATCHES AND DONE SO MORE DECISIVELY

I'm sorry, I couldn't find any logic behind using Size 6 lettering. Maybe you could find me even so much as ONE match in which the Undertaker has so dominantly and/or decisively won against Edge?

Mania? Nope, afraid not. Edge almost had it won - and if he wouldn't of tried pinning Taker mistaking him for Beulah in an attempt to rape him at the same time, he very well could've.

Backlash? Really? Did Edge not even get in a remote chance at winning? Wrong again.

Judgment Day? Sure, draws and/or count-outs can be pretty decisive.

One Night.. oh, my bad. Nevermind that one.

Summerslam? Ah yeah, decisively sent him to Hell. I'll give you that one. I mean, Edge sure was never the same.. coming back and winning how many more Championships, again?

 

[Ronin]

Honestly, as much as you blab on, the Undertaker, in my mind, is just better. Nothing you can say, nothing you can muster, will prove to me that Edge is better than the Undertaker.

I do believe that my vote won't count. Too many people are deluded into thinking Edge is the best thing ever. He's not, I mean, seriously, he's not.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

Honestly, as much as you blab on, the Undertaker, in my mind, is just better. Nothing you can say, nothing you can muster, will prove to me that Edge is better than the Undertaker.

I do believe that my vote won't count. Too many people are deluded into thinking Edge is the best thing ever. He's not, I mean, seriously, he's not.

You have got to be kidding me. I make a great post, and it's swallowed up by.. this. Someone else crying about Edge, and how he doesn't deserve to be here.

Cry me a river man, seriously. You know all of what you just said? Replace the word "Undertaker" with "Edge", and replace your ridiculous self-point outs with Me, and you get my exact thoughts on this.

The difference, all the (what was it again?) "blabbing", that I do.. actually contributes to something meaningful. Whereas the.. stuff.. you're rambling on about, doesn't do a whole lot of anything but spam up decent posts.

Truth is, EVERY Vote counts. But its votes by people like you, that really shouldn't. You say others are deluded in voting for Edge? Why, because YOU said so? Tell me when you became better than the rest of us.

I'm not here forcing anyone to vote for Edge, but I AM here to make a damn good convincing argument as to why you should at least consider it. You, on the other hand.. convinced me, that you have nothing better to say - than what you think, at which point you don't even go into detail and explain why.

"He's not, I mean seriously, he's not". Oh really? Well, I guess I'll never know.. because thankfully - I'm not simple-minded enough to just take your word for it.

 

[FromTheSouth]

This is an interesting match, if only because we get to see it a couple of times a year.

I am voting Edge in this one.

Throw out the win loss records here. Edge gets the advantage because this isn't Wrestlemania. If this match were made for Wrestlemania, case closed.

Secondly, Edge has the mental Edge. Taker's shtick won't work on him anymore. He has beaten Taker, outsmarted him numerous times, most notably, on Smackdown. I think Edge may be the only wrestler in Taker's head.

Third, Edge's style has always been troublesome for Taker. Edge is a bigger version os HBK, in his prime. Taker may have beaten HBK this year, HBK in his prime was a nightmare for The Undertaker. Edge has a bit mroe size, but all of the quickness. Basically, like HBK, Edge is good at not getting hit. Taker's takedown abilities are impressive, however a man like Edge, with that combination of quickness and speed makes Edge hard to beat. Taker may have beaten Edge several times, but I think Taker gets older every day, and Edge gets smarter. Five years ago, this is no contest, Taker wins, however now, I think Edge's experience, most notably against Taker, matching up to his athletic ability.

Next, this is the second match of the night. As I have said, Taker is getting old. He is good for a a brutal match, but for two? You have to start to question Taker's stamina. If this match is going on right now, Taker is injured and out of shape.

When Edge is on a mission, he is unstoppable in his drive. Edge needs this match to fully validate his career. Many of his championship wins are questionable. His tactics have sustained him, however, they have left a mark on his legacy. A clean win here, over Taker, makes everything he has done legit.

For those of you who would like to run off the win loss record of the head to head matches, let me give you something to think about. Taker has never won a second round King of the Ring tournament. His 0-2 record is a perfect illustration of the earlier point that he isn't getting any younger. If he couldn't beat Mabel in his second match of the night earlier in his career, what makes you think someone the caliber of Edge will be a walk through?

Edge wins a brutal match. If the voting is any indication, I know most of you agree.

 

[Ronin]

I didn't say he didn't deserve to be here. I think he would have beaten Austin because Austin would have walked out rather than let someone like Edge go over. Still voted Austin, because I like him better.

Just because your ego is out of this world, doesn't mean you are the judge of whether your posts are "OMFG" awesome. All you did was post your opinion.

Sorry if I came across as thinking I was better than everyone. Irony ain't it?

End of the day, Edge is pretty awesome, but he is not the best thing ever. Taker is. Joking, I was hoping for Kane to win the whole thing. You know, cause he can sit up. Okay again joking, I was pulling for Rock and Austin. Serious that time.

 

[48.7 is Approximately 49 Times Better Than You]

This is pretty much the worst thing I've ever read. Not at all because its a bad post, but because I now have people trying to imitate me by claiming to be like Me. But naturally, I had to laugh when this guy claimed he was similar or to quote him.. a "silent Will".. then turns around and votes for Taker and has the gull and nerve to claim anyone who votes for Edge is.. mistaken and a, what was the word again "fanboyism".

So, first let's clear something up. You, aren't me, and never will be anything LIKE me.. especially when you take into account how hard I've busted my ass trying to explain why Edge should be exactly where he is. And you've done nothing but "silently voted". Second, if you were even anything remotely close to me, you'd have voted Edge.. because he'd be your favorite, like he is mine. And you'd find every reason in the book, why he could beat someone that "on paper" seems like he could lose to.

You see, Copycat, I'm backing Edge because I believe in the guy. Call me a "mark", call me a "fanboy", call me Will, do anything but call me collect. The fact is, Edge deserves to be here. I've said why, I've posted why, I've explained why and I continue to repeat why.

If you had any sense at all, claiming to be similar to me, you'd have had enough brain cells to understand that.

Now don't take this as me bashing you. I apologize if you do, because I'm not. I'm merely jumping down your throat, for trying to mislead anyone into thinking you're anything like me.. when you're in fact, the polar opposite. For no better reason than I'd never vote against Edge. And to add to that, I'd always, ALWAYS explain why I'm doing what I'm doing.

/rant

I think it'd be hilarious to see me try and prove a fact wrong, or anyone not me, trying to prove a fact wrong for that matter. But alas, nothing is proven and in the world of Professional Wrestling, even when you look at something that's actually happened.. you can never be guaranteed it'll happen the same way twice.

I will fight you day and night that Dennis Dixon never was injured and went on to win the Heisman Trophy and bring the NCAA Championship to Eugene in 2007. It happened, I tell you! It happened.

You're exactly right, though. Simply because someone has a history of winning against someone does not mean they will do it every time. The Red Sox have won every single game against the Yankees this year, but won't go undefeated against them this year.

This is pure opinion based and I respect you for it. I respect everyone for their opinion. But let's just clear up basics. Opinions are like Assholes.. everyone has one, some of them just stink worse than others.

I told someone his opinion was wrong the other day. So far, we seem to be agreeing.

I'd pretty much go off opinion to disagree with most of what you said here. Why? Because I'm backing Edge, silly.

Oh, and he we go, disagreeing again.

Truth is though, you can re-look through all of those threads. Raven, Steamboat, Lesnar, Austin.. and you'll see posts by me, explaining why Edge is here now. It's no different now.

Stop bringing up Lesnar, please. It hurts.

The Undertaker is not better than some of the individuals Edge has already "bested", and to assume Taker wins by popularity is a gross prediction, considering Edge sent home the #2 seed, and the highest voted for Superstar in this entire tournament. (Look at the Elite 8 standings, more people voted for Austin to win overall.. and where is he now?)

You're right, but the victories that Edge has experienced in this tournament have no bearing in real life. He hasn't beaten Brock Lesnar and he hasn't beaten Steve Austin. Besides, The Undertaker is pretty damn good if you ask me, so if he's already gone through two superstars better, then he's gotta have some wear and tear.

So to say Edge loses by popularity is wrong. And my hope is, if Edge gets to the Finals.. enough people will just finally understand what I've been trying to say, and give Edge the respect You & I both know he deserves.

I wouldn't vote for a superstar based on popularity, though I could see an argument made. Typically, superstars that are over win big matches. John Cena, Chris Jericho, Triple H, and The Undertaker win matches because they get a reaction. Charlie Haas isn't wearing a belt right now. If indeed Edge's lead holds and he reaches the finals, I will back him against Bret Hart. I've never discounted Edge, but I've not put him over Lesnar, Austin, or Taker.

I've only been floating through this thread half-assed because most people no longer care for real logic or reasoning. I guarantee you, over half of the individuals who've voted for the Undertaker.. didn't do it because they thought he was better, so much so because they just wanted Edge gone - because of all the drama it's caused lately. Sad, but true.

I contemplated doing such, but I figured it'd give you something to bitch about if Edge loses.

You say it's grasping, yet you didn't try to argue it. I'm sure your reason is because you felt it was weak.. but at the same time, if it was so weak - why didn't you just disprove it, and move on?

You can't disprove a fact. In each of the King of the Ring tournaments since 1991, every single finals match has been a face against a heel. But, as you stated earlier in your post:

even when you look at something that's actually happened.. you can never be guaranteed it'll happen the same way twice.

Nothing is black and white in wrestling. Anything can happen on any given show. John Cena is 0-5 against The Miz, but who says he can't beat him on Sunday?

Fact is, the Undertaker has always been a better face than a heel. I'm not making any of this my prime logic on why Edge wins.. I'm merely saying, in the history of ANY tournament.. you have a face, and a heel in the end. Sometimes you can have two heels, sometimes - rarely - you can get a face against a face. But more often than not, it's a heel against a face.

Hart is a prime time face, and was only a good heel from 97-98. Jericho is a prime time heel, more than he's ever been a face. But the great thing about that is.. Edge and Jericho, both as heels, still can feud because they're both cocky and arrogant enough to despise each other.

But are we going to try and be logical bookers in this tournament? This is wear we choose the outcomes of the matches. There is no one saying that in order for this tournament to have a satisfying final, we have to have a face against a heel. This is a tournament to crown the greatest wrestler of all time. This isn't a "Let's see how logically we can book a King of the Ring" tournament.

The Undertaker isn't the type to even be a thought in this equation, mainly because he's not a top level player - (he is, but isn't) so much as a top level "attraction". The guy is a entertainment value card, more than an actual "Wrestler", if that makes sense.

He's there to draw in people for a one time moment.. whereas guys like Hart, Jericho & Edge can keep their attention, longer than that of a "nifty entrance".

I'm not really sure what you're trying to get at. Are you trying to discount The Undertaker's drawing ability, or his ability to effectively work in storylines? Are you saying that he can't hold the crowd's attention for an extended period of time?

I don't have SlyFox's pie charts, so I can't argue whether or not he is a draw. I can say that he can work in a storyline, though. What was the best storyline on Smackdown through late 2007 and 2008? The Undertaker against Edge. To who's credit is that? It's a matter of opinion. The same goes for holding the crowd's attention. His feuds have always held mine. Whether that is his doing or the superstar that he is working with is up to you and I. I'm of the opinion that both superstars have to carry the load. But, if you think that he's boring or not entertaining, remember that he was given a gimmick that was doomed to fail from the start, yet he's made it work for over 15 years. I'd say that he does quite well at keeping the crowd interested.

Is anything involving a Heel and a Face, ever fair? Hardly. To assume so is naive. You and I both know this.

No, of course not. The heel always tries to undo the turnbuckle, grab a chair, use the ropes, etc. More often then not, the face overcomes.

Shocky has said outside interference doesn't exist, and I've done my part to explain every bit of why even without it Edge could still win. The guy finds ways to cheat, the likes of which not even Eddie Guerrero could come up with.

If he were really a smart heel, he'd bang a chair on the mat and fall down. Even Dolph Ziggler can figure that one out.

And once again, it's a pure crap shoot as to if he'd even need to cheat. I hear all the Taker-nuts screaming 4-2 record, Taker owns Edge, and everything else.. but seriously now.. that means nothing with each new match.

I wouldn't say that it doesn't mean anything. I mean, if you were to place $500 on a football game between USC and Oregon and you knew that USC was 4-2 against Oregon in the last six years, who are you more likely to place a bet on? The person or team that holds a winning record in a match up is more likely to win. Anything can happen, but the odds favor the party with the winning record.

Also, there's a mental aspect. If I was beaten and beaten and beaten over and over by one person, then I'd begin to doubt myself.

If it did, guys like Hardy would never be World Champion. Guys like Edge wouldn't have TWO Championship reigns, taken from the Undertaker.. and guys like the Undertaker, would only be worth a damn if Wrestlemania happened 365 days a year.

Money in the Bank, yo.

Undertaker would be relevant all throughout the year, or at least when he's around. Because when he's around, he wins.

I never ever said he was, and never even meant to suggest it. I'm merely pointing out.. People have claimed Edge has the worst spear there is. Apparently those same people don't have eyes, to witness video proof of 'said' worst spear knocking people down, a lot larger than Taker, including Taker, for a 3+ count and a victory.

I don't see why it matters what your finisher looks like. The Leg Drop was pure shit, but it put EVERYONE away.

I brought Rhyno up, because he was a tough enough opponent for Edge. Shit man, once upon a time I seem to recall him being a tough enough opponent (InVasion storylines) for the Undertaker. So shit or not, he seemed to wear down the guy you voted for.. where as Edge beat him, then advanced to beat an even better technical great in Kurt Angle.

Good on him. Nothing to say here. A fact is a fact.

All any of this proves, that I'm trying to point out.. is that Edge, unlike the Undertaker, can win Tournaments.

Luckily for The Undertaker, then, that this isn't to win a tournament. That's next round.

I'd say based on what era Undertaker, he'd definitely had a bit more juice.. but that doesn't always mean anything. Taker for most of his early career as the "Deadman" was slow as molasses. Because of this, he might of been powerful - but he was definitely beatable.

I don't think anyone is foolish enough to think that the early Deadman was his prime.

I'm confused as to which Era Taker people are trying to go for. I really don't care, he was one big "circus attraction" through-out most of his career, only relying on a flashy entrance, nifty "immortal" powers, and the ability to no-sell like Hogan, only by sitting straight up.

But now, he's compelling and is able to put on great storylines that carry for months.

Edge doesn't need to sit up, he doesn't need a flashy dark and eerie entrance. Edge proves why he's good, INSIDE the ring. Taker's biggest weapon is his ability to scare his opponent before he even gets to the ring. Edge has never been scared of Taker, and HIAC proved that much.

Edge's entrance isn't exactly bland. He's got very loud, explosive music and he's had pyro before. Taker is also fairly good in the ring. Snake eyes, Old School, his suicide dive... All those signature moves get pretty good reactions.

And are you actually convinced that Edge hasn't ever been afraid of Taker? During their whole feud, save for just before Summerslam, Edge was scared shitless of the Undertaker.

I'm so lost on criteria it's ridiculous. Honestly, no clue what people base this shit off of.

I base off of WHOLE careers. Taker's been around longer. Edge's accomplished more. Victory - Edge.

Not sure what people are basing this on either.

As for accomplishments, yes. Edge has more World Titles. Taker is a guy that involves himself in storylines that don't have to do with belts. He's above the title, I'd say. Besides, in order for Edge to have that many world titles, he had to lose more.

Once again, if this were Mania.. Taker'd win, hands down. I don't think even "I" could argue that. But it's not Mania. I lie, I'm sure I could.. but you get my point.

The Undertaker wins the vast majority of his matches aside from Mania as well, whereas Edge loses more than his fair share.

How so? You can confine yourself to it all you want, by proving to me how the Undertaker is a better.. because he's The Undertaker?

Who's Main Evented more Pay per views since Edge has become a Heavyweight contender? Who's had more Heavyweight Championship matches?

I'd wager heavily that it's been Edge.

Well, shoot. Who's headlined more PPV's since Edge has become a main eventer, Hulk Hogan or Edge? It's been Edge. Who's main evented more PPV's in their career? Taker has.

The Undertaker isn't even AROUND for half of each year. How on earth can you consider him to be any type of a reliable draw - when Edge is there headlining the shows.

Wait till Edge is nearly 45.

I'm not gonna say Taker isn't a drawing force. But to say he's leaps and bounds above Edge is ludacris. Again, where is the guy? He has one decent Mania match.. then leaves for months at a time.

You can't hold that against him. Taker was once 37 or so and was there every week, like Edge.

If this is a story to prove who the best Pro-Wrestler is, wouldn't that go to the guy with the better list of accomplishments? (ie. Edge)

If we were judging who is best at losing the World Title, then yes.

I get so lost in what people believe anymore. Its Kayfabe, it's not Kayfabe. It's Primes, it's not Primes. I have no clue, X.. your guess is as good as mine. I just jump in and out of this shit whenever someone brings something to my attention.

Fair enough.

So the circus attraction defeated Hulk Hogan. (with major help from a Steel Chair and Ric Flair, you neglected to mention) He also lost SIX DAYS LATER, to the same guy.

The man who backs Edge is holding The Undertaker receiving outside interference against him?

Taker's beaten every big name through his time in the Company. What a shock, SO HAS EDGE.. whats next, X? We gonna wager who wears more black?

Edge hasn't beaten Triple H. Well, just kidding. He pinned him that one time his wife put him into the match after 20 minutes had passed.

Edge has won way more accolade's than Taker's even had chances at. And both men's characters have gotten them far. With each, changing it up a bit.

And lost more.