WZ Tourney Semi Final: The Undertaker vs. Edge

[D-Man]

my avatar should tell you who i voted for

we love edge because he's ALWAYS willing to "do the right thing" by always WILLING TO BE THE ONE pinned/loser of the match without letting his ego get in the way! would undertaker/HHH want to give J.hardy his 1st Title run by taking the title from them? we all know the anwser to that....

have you ever heard of edge playing the backstage politics? No i havent!

are we forgetting the way edge put his ego away, and gave us priceless "scared looks/faces" while they were fueding? how edge made a man who made his career off an enterence, look scary/dominate?
that is not to say undertakers not a bad-ass dude, we all know that too... but, he sure looks a lot better when in a fued with edge, as a matter o' fact, who doesn't edge make look like gold? he's the ultimate dude to put in a match where they (wwe) want the face to look like he's great. he get's ANY face cheers, without the face even being over!

yeah, HE'S BEEN BOOKED TO LOOK WEAK, what heel hasn't? we can look at individual win/lose records, but i'd bet my paycheck 99% of heels are on the short end of ANY heel/face win/loss record. thats another thing we all know!

i KNOW the undertakers is one of the best of the "big men" that wwe has ever had if not the best, but edge is special too. i wish others would notice that if they could get over the fact that WWE BOOKS edge to have to win with interference, thats just the heel way! im sick of it too....
but edge spears his way to victory in this match

thats my opinon, feel free to quote me, just dont expect me to get into an arguement over it,

if you think edge sucks, i got 2 words for ya

Your passion for Edge on a realistic level from this post is well applauded by me. But that doesn't change the fact that nothing you said has ANYTHING to do with a kayfabe tournament between these two competitors. If you need to understand the meaning of kayfabe, you should look it up.

**

I'd love to see people post why they want to see whomever win, as well. But on this note, I'd like to see those backing Taker.. to do so, without the simple argument of "But he's won more matches against him in the past."

But why not, Will?? Oh, I know why... because it completely destroys any defense argument you have in favor of Edge defeating the Undertaker. How convenient that you want to take this extremely important factor out of the picture?
**

In a kayfabe world, Undertaker owns Edge. He's owned him during MANY encounters in the past that have already been researched throughout this thread. Many posters can sit here, pull the wool over out eyes, kick up the dust, and whip out their smoke and mirrors to distract everyone from the eminent truth (just like Will has done above and continues to do so)... the Undertaker has been victorious in most of their one-on-one encounters. This is kayfabe history between the two, and it is undisputed.

Other posters like Will (sorry to call you out, bro) try to pull this ridiculous defense out of their posteriors, stating that this matchup should never be determined by past encounters between the Taker and Edge. Once again... smoke and mirrors. They're afraid that people will look at facts and make a decision from there the way that they should... by looking at the past in a way that history should repeat itself. If the readers of this thread do not look at things that way, they are just kidding themselves. When someone bets on a football game, a horse race, or some other sports event, they do their research before betting on anything. They determine their bets by looking at how their team (or horse) has done in the past against their current opponent and they make a bet from there. No one in their right mind would stick with their team if they already lost to their opponent 3 times already.

So why are all of you sticking with Edge?!?

VOTE ALL THE WAY!!!

**EDIT

 

[2012isbs]

I'd love to see people post why they want to see whomever win, as well. But on this note, I'd like to see those backing Taker.. to do so, without the simple argument of "But he's won more matches against him in the past."

Ok I'll take that challenge:

I will try to argue for Taker without using his win loss record against Edge specifically, (I will use his WM streak though) call Taker a politicking jerk, but that doesn't matter here because it's kayfabe I will list their accomplishments in a side by side comparison.
Taker Undefeated at WM 17-0 or (16-0 if you only count Kane once )compared to Edge's TLC dominance (he's only lost 1 against Cena I think) both have beaten the other in their specialty, yes WM is Taker's specialty.
Taker has held the wwe belt for 238 days, Edge 139 days
Edge has held the WHC belt for 295 days, Taker 67 days
when you add the days and divide by amount of riegns you get Taker with 50.833 days and Edge with 37.111 days but edge has had more reigns so they tie agian in this.
If prime goes by when your was pushed the most I would say Taker's was 1990-1994 he had an undefeated streak that was one year long won and if edge's cheap shots still count as wins in your book Will then so does Taker beating prime Hulk Hogan(he was heel at the time after all).
Edge's Prime is right now because he is bieng pushed to the moon as a heel so I'd say original Taker, who kicked out of 2 DDT's by Jake the Snake Roberts and that was what he did he just sat up after everything and even survived a visocus assault with Chloroform (this is Kayfabe remember), would destroy Edge and probably take 3 spears atleast (since current old taker, who took 2 and won, is weaker than he was in 1990-1994)then Tombstone him and win.
Vote Taker.
There I did it.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

I'd love to see people post why they want to see whomever win, as well. But on this note, I'd like to see those backing Taker.. to do so, without the simple argument of "But he's won more matches against him in the past."

Bigger, stronger, takes longer to beat down, prone to winning 90% of his feuds.

What are you debating again Will?

I'm still voting for Edge, just to make the final more intresting, but he shouldn't win.

Unless this is the past, or someone can give me solid, 100% proof that Edge will lose here and now, in the present,

100% that he can win a fictional tournament? I don't think that's even possible.

then that argument is tiresome and not valid anymore so than saying "But Edge's beat the Undertaker twice, winning Two Heavyweight Championships from him, and retiring him."

How about this little bit of role reversal, Will. Prove 100% that Edge wins here and now in the present.

You can only really vote on what you've seen. That being Undertaker dominating Edge time and time again. Even in defeat Undertaker has kicked the shit out of Edge, all on his lonesome.

In theory, Jamie Noble could win his next match against The Undertaker. After all, he's probably learnt enough from those defeats to have figured him out by now.

 

[TwistofRKO]

If I may speak for Will, he said that him liking Edge is irrefutable. If that insults your intelligence, then you don't have a very high level of intelligence. Why should I not vote Edge because I like him more? Thats the way I choose to vote and will continue to. And besides, the fact that it pisses you off so much is more than enough reason to vote. I have a challenge for you. you still have some time, make an actual argument without sounding like a 13 year old who just discovered cuss words. You up for it?

That's what I, and nearly everyone has said. If he wants to vote for his favorite, go for it. Reading comprehension goes a long way on message boards.

What insults everyone's intelligence are fluff arguments about how Edge fared against other opponents in 2002, disregarding him being owned by the Undertaker in his (Edge's) prime.

 

[justinsayne]

It really shouldn't matter who you like better, you're auppose to be voting for who you think is the better wrestler, whether you like them better or not, and in this match (as well as the last) Edge is clearly not better, people are just voting based off of blind love instead of looking at all the facts which point toward a Taker victory,


Further more it's rather insulting IMO that so many people can't bother to even make one post in favor of their favorite wrestler, personally for next years Tourny, I'd like to see something done differently with the voting, I'd like to see the people who post and make an argument for who they are voting to have their votes count double (there vote from the poll will get counted, plus their post will get counted as a vote as well) I realize this would make a lot more work for Shocky, but I think it would also lead to lot more people posting instead of just waiting a few days for the polls to open up adn then blindly voting for whoever is popular at the moment, also I should add that I think this should just be done starting with the final 8

 

[D-Man]

Further more it's rather insulting IMO that so many people can't bother to even make one post in favor of their favorite wrestler, personally for next years Tourny, I'd like to see something done differently with the voting, I'd like to see the people who post and make an argument for who they are voting to have their votes count double (there vote from the poll will get counted, plus their post will get counted as a vote as well) I realize this would make a lot more work for Shocky, but I think it would also lead to lot more people posting instead of just waiting a few days for the polls to open up adn then blindly voting for whoever is popular at the moment, also I should add that I think this should just be done starting with the final 8

Justinsayne, not to sound like a broken record, but I agree with your hatred for the fact that Edge has made it to the finals of this tourney by riding the coattails of smoke, mirrors, and horseshit voting. As for your idea giving extra points to people that post legitimate reasoning (beginning with the round of the final 8), I think it's a good idea. But, like you said, I think it's going to get shot down with flying colors because of the amount of work that it will cause.

But, let's face it, as much as I respect the living crap out of everything you write, this idea of yours seems to be result of a sore loss. I know the Edge fans out there want nothing to do with these new rules. Everyone has the right to vote whichever way they want, regardless of whether they choose to post their reasoning or not. Keep in mind, this is only a game. All we can do is rally the troops to have (possibly, but most likely) Bret Hart absolutely destroy Edge in the finals.

 

[Nate DaMac]

A couple of things. One, I do think Edge is a better wrestler than Undertaker. Nothing about that statement can be disputed as it is my opinion. Edge wrestles a style that I prefer to watch. I have given folks a chance to change my mind, for example, I definitely would have voted Lesnar over Edge had I not read Will's posts. There not always fullproof, but they are pretty solid. Since then, I got behind Edge. I don't want the rules changed. Could you imagine all the shit posts? Ugh.

 

[TwistofRKO]

A couple of things. One, I do think Edge is a better wrestler than Undertaker. Nothing about that statement can be disputed as it is my opinion.

That choice of words CAN be disputed.

Edge wrestles a style that I prefer to watch.

So that means you enjoy watching Edge more. By saying he's a better wrestler you'd be wrong/leaving yourself open for debate.

I have given folks a chance to change my mind, for example, I definitely would have voted Lesnar over Edge had I not read Will's posts. There not always fullproof, but they are pretty solid. Since then, I got behind Edge. I don't want the rules changed.

That cannot be disputed, fair enough.

Could you imagine all the shit posts? Ugh.

Like the one's we've had in this thread?

 

[Murfish]

What is legitimate reasoning? You can use any parameters you want to come to your tournament decision. Who's your favorite wrestler? Who's stronger? Who's faster? Who's been to hell more times? Those are all equally legitimate criteria to use. This is a wrestling tournament on an internet forum. What do you expect?

Oh, and if you didn't notice from my post before, the entire stamina argument holds no weight at all.

 

[Nate DaMac]

You could argue that Undertaker is better than Edge, but you can't argue that I disagree. That is the criteria I choose to use. I could go by who has the most syllables in their name if I choose to. I prefer watching fast paced, high flying wrestling laced with a bit of technical wrestling and brawling. Not too into slow paced, striking and botched power moves Taker seems to apply to. Btw, when I say shit posts, I mean grammar and intelligence lacking. Not something I don't agree with.

 

[Tenta]

I can't believe this.... I honestly can not believe this. Not for the fact that Edge is going over in this match, because as I've stated before, Edge is a great wrestler. But I simply don't understand why Edge is going over a man whom The Undertaker has definitely beaten, in a one-on-one match, decisively. Will, you've done a terrific job placing Edge to this point, and admittedly, I helped in the matter of Steve Austin, something I even wonder about now in hindsight. But I seriously can allow no more of this. This has to end here.

Will, I understand what you mean by stating that The Wrestlemania match, in effect, was a specialty match, but I don't agree by any stretch of the means that it was a specialty match. Is the Undertaker undefeated at Wrestlemania? Well yes, but that doesn't make it any more of a specialty match than it already is. The match was a one-on-one contest, between two superstars, and The Undertaker defeated Edge cleanly in the middle of the ring. Arguing that the submission move he used was a choke is irrelevant. It wasn't until after the match that Vickie Guerrero decided the move was illegal, and thus, by the standards of the match, it was a defeat for Edge, right in the middle of the ring. Arguing that just because the Undertaker is unbeaten at Wrestlemania, this match becomes a specialty match is irrelevant. That would be like saying that if Goldberg wrestled anybody at the Bash at the Beach, that it should be a specialty match. It is the only match that we have between these two that is applicable to the match we currently have on our hands right now. We are not dealing with a Hell in a Cell, nor a TLC match, but a one-on-one contest in the which the better wrestler prevails. The Undertaker already has prevailed in this situation, and quite frankly, there's no way that Edge has won a match with Taker without a little bit of help from Vickie, La Familia, or any other source.

What's that, you say? La Familia can get involved here? Well, yes, but from a kayfabe standpoint, I'd argue that Edge has used La Familia at least twice already in this tournament. The standard protocol is that when a heel is not sure if he can beat the other wrester, he will use the aid of his allies. He was in a match against Brock Lesnar, in which part of what makes him effective, the ropes, was cut away from him. No way he doesn't go over Brock without a little bit of help. He also went over Steve in a manner that even I, one of Edge's biggest supporters last round, allowed that he made some help to go over Steve. The logic stands that a heel surely can't go over thrice cheating, because the odds are highly in the favor of a disqualification occurring. And as I've stated before, there has never been a case where Edge went over The Undertaker without some form of assistance.

For those of you that The Undertaker hasn't fared well in King of the Ring style tournaments... Obviously you've never witnessed The Undertaker's one match as being a member of the King of the Ring. There was heavy interference on the part of Kama, which allowed for Mabel to go over Taker. The Undertaker had Mabel dead to rights in the match, and without Kama's help, there's no way to tell exactly how the Undertaker would have done in his following matches. And besides that, Mabel is exactly the type of opponent, as a matter of fact, the only type of opponent, that has given the Undertaker trouble. Which we'll go into now.... As we build

Why The Undertaker Must Go Over Edge

You see, while foes like Mabel, Kane, The Great Khali, and other sort of individuals give The Undertaker trouble, there's one thing you must factor in; these men are all giants. The only men to decisively give The Undertaker trouble are wrestlers that are massive. Opponents who are extremely tall, extremely fat, or flat out monsters. While it's made The Undertaker's career to fight these gargantuan men, it's also been the only true struggles in the Undertaker's career. Will, I understand how much you love Edge, but even you must concur that Edge is no Giant himself. No, as a matter if fact, if anything, wouldn't we have to characterize Edge as a manipulative heel, and more or less a scientific wrestler? I mean, that's not to say that Edge is exactly a technician. Oh, if that were the case, I could be very well be fucked. But above all else, Edge is a man of above-average height with above average technical ability, who happened to get into the position that he's in by scheming his way to the top, and taking the opportunist's route. And a man like The Undertaker makes mince meat out of foes like that.

Need evidence?

A cold, calculated heel, even more so than Edge, but in a very similar manner. And The Undertaker dispatches of Jake, whom would never be the same.

[youtube]xv0P2nu0Lcc&feature=related[/youtube]

[youtube]9soMlIOb5f8&feature=related[/youtube]

This man was as manipulative as they come, and if no one minds me saying this, he's a man that should be coming out of the TNA Bracket. A better wrestler, and just as manipulative.

Again, manipulative heel.... And he was so similar to Edge, they actually put the two together in a tag team.

Oh, and there is one more name that I'm forgetting...

..... Wait, that name doesn't fit, does it, JohnTenta4HOF?
Wrong!

You see, The Undertaker took part in two feuds over the course of 1996. One, of course, was with Mankind, in which he got the better of, and the other was with a rather freakish individual. One that extremely controversial, yet manipulative. Hell, he was able to convince Mankind that he was his mommy. How much more manipulative do you get? He knew that he couldn't beat The Undertaker without some help, so he sought the services of Mankind. That man was Goldust.

How did being Manipulative work for Goldust, you ask?



Now, granted, Edge is a far better wrestler than old Goldy here, but then again, same height, weight, style, and mindset of Edge. And he winds up with an L in a regular match.

And while we have good old Mickey in the room with us, let's ask for his input in the matter. You see, these two have both wrestled The Hardcore Legend. One got a past his prime, gassed wind bag, who really wasn't all to serviceable in the ring, really. The other got an extremely good incarnation of the man.

Let's compare some more matches, people!



Yes, Edge does wind up getting the W here, but not without taking some serious damage from The Mickster. Some people say this is where Edge proved to be a main eventer. I say it was a decent match at Wrestlemania between a pretty good wrestler and a man who was a mere shell of the actual wrestler he use to be.

Now I could use the Hell in a Cell match, but I know you, Will. I know exactly what you're going to say;

"That's a specialty match"

Which is exactly why I'm not taking that match, though it does prove just how sadistic The Undertaker is, and I'm going to use their match at In Your House: Revenge of the Taker.





He took on that exact same man, in what I'd consider his prime wrestling wise, or pretty damn near close, and demolished the man. Edge got the weaker of the versions and struggled, while Taker pounded away at Mankind. Undertaker went against the better wrestler, and won.

Not only that, but this match is in Houston. Edge isn't in Toronto anymore, ladies and gentleman, he's right in the heart of Deadman Land. The Undertaker has taken out the biggest names in Houston, such as Randy Orton, Triple H, and Shawn Michaels, in Houston. That's some pretty good mojo to have coming home. That, plus on a big event, the home boy usually goes over in kayfabe matches. Also, for your argument that it takes a face and a heel to make the tournament finals, from a kayfabe standpoint, you could make the argument that Chris and Bret can both be heels. The only man that's been a face through his kayfabe heights.... Well, that'd be The Undertaker.

Will, I wish you all of the best of luck if Edge does go on. I have a feeling if he goes over here, he'll win this tournament. But I'll do all in my power to make sure that doesn't happen. The Undertaker is the sole reason I'm a wrestling fan. And I will back him to the gates of Hell. Will, I invite a response, as you're very aware how much I love a good debate. And I also welcome debate from anyone else. NateDaMac, I'm looking directly at you, sir. And anyone else that wants to have a spirited chat, I'm all for it. Please, don't let this be solely a Will and Mac debate. I want more.

Vote Taker.

Oh, and just to piss you off, Will...

[youtube]b48KMughfYU[/youtube]

 

[Lee]

I want Taker to win, because seriously I can't be bothered with all your bitching if Edge wins, like we saw when he beat Lesnar AND Austin. Just get over it.

 

[Nate DaMac]

Oh goody. Look you make a lot of good points, and simply put, Will is much better suited to try to pick you apart. I have washed my hands of all the kayfabe scenarios and past accolades and whatnot and have just decided to vote on my 2 personal criterias. One: I like Edge more. Two: I thoroughly enjoy watching everybody cry their eyes out when Edge keeps advancing. If you guys don't agree with my criteria, WAH! Last I heard, I can use whatever criteria I like. Besides, I have witnessed Edge get a 3 count over Undertaker before. All I need to feel justified. If you wanna debate me on my criteria, feel free. Or else just wait for Will.

 

[Tenta]

Sigh.... you leave very little for me to disect there, Nate. Ok, fair enough, those are your reasonings, and while we may disagree, I can respect them. However, there's just one thing I want from you, and it regards this matter

Edge more. Two: I thoroughly enjoy watching everybody cry their eyes out when Edge keeps advancing.

Believe me, I have a hand in watching these people see their favorite wrestler go down... You don't want to go down this road, Nate. Granted, it does make for interesting discussion at the bar room. But voting either for/against someone based on past results in this tournament never adds up to well. I say that becase I know quite a few people that are simply voting for Undertaker to get at Edge. I'll simply say my policy; vote for the wrestler that you see, in all realism, going over in kayfabe.

Besides, I have witnessed Edge get a 3 count over Undertaker before. All I need to feel justified. If you wanna debate me on my criteria, feel free. Or else just wait for Will.

Very well then, it's a simple formula. But consider this... Was the Undertaker's pinfall of Edge more impressive than that of Edge upon The Undertaker? Let's compare:

[youtube]7cdw9ROY7Pc[/youtube]

Or, are you more impressed by this?




And of course, I hope you do consider... The clip of The Undertaker pinning Edge was preceded by an actual match between the two.

 

[Nate DaMac]

I think Edge goes over. Though Taker has his number in one on one matches, this is a tournament. Edge has 2 tournaments under his belt that I can think of, while Taker has none. To the best of my knowledge anyway. I truly feel that, in a kayfabe situation, Edge would go over here. I was thoroughly impressed with his cash in. Cheap? Absolutely! But thats what makes him who he is. If every dirty victory is gonna be discounted then no heel is ever gonna win this thing. Another reason I vote Edge, if he wins it may set a new precedent. Where a victory counts for exactly what it is. A victory. And besides, Taker has NEVER just walked over Edge. He has always been competitive. Btw, I can't watch videos.

 

[Tenta]

Aha.... So I was able to goad you into a debate... Splendid!

I think Edge goes over.

Well, yea, you've made that very apparent. Hope you haven't casted your vote yet. Maybe I can persuade you to as why you're wrong.

Though Taker has his number in one on one matches,

Why yes, yes he does.

this is a tournament.

That's quite the puzzling statement you've made there, Nate. Are you saying that, by making this a tournament match, it changes the fact that it's still a one-on-one match? I'm confused as to how a tournament changes the fact that this is a one-on-one encounter. Do you mean that, perhaps, Edge can get some help in a tournament? Becuase The Undertaker has proven before that he can fight off Edge's help, and still win the match. See his match from Wrestlemania 24. Fought off both the Edgeheads. Or maybe you're saying that The Undertaker is more tired? Is that the thought process? Because I'm primed to think The Undertaker is far more fresh than Edge right now, as Edge just had the biggest win of his life, and perhaps the toughest, by just beating Steve Austin. and Taker cruised past Benoit. How does making this a tournament cover all of Edge's flaws?

Edge has 2 tournaments under his belt that I can think of, while Taker has none. To the best of my knowledge anyway.

Well, he did have the 1991 and 1995 tournament to go upon. you know, back when Edge was Damon Striker, jobbing to Meng and such. But that's not the point.

You do realize this is The Undertaker, right? The guy got buried alive, and we saw him on television the next night. Do you really think three measly matches against three pip-squeak Canadians is going to have that severe an effect on him?

I truly feel that, in a kayfabe situation, Edge would go over here.

but see, here's the thing; Edge has yet to do it cleanly in said kayfabe situation in a one-on-one match. And The undertaker already has beaten Edge/ So don't you truly feel that, in a kayfabe situation... You're already wrong?

I was thoroughly impressed with his cash in. Cheap? Absolutely! But thats what makes him who he is.

At least you admit it's cheap. Will you also admit it's less impressive than The Undertaker's win over Edge?

If every dirty victory is gonna be discounted then no heel is ever gonna win this thing. Another reason I vote Edge, if he wins it may set a new precedent. Where a victory counts for exactly what it is. A victory..

Sigh... I've been over the concept pf cheating, so I'm really not going to repeat myself. I'll throw in my quote I used in my opening argument. But again, I offer this; if you're already offering that your wrestler must cheat to win, aren't you openly stating that he is the lesser man? Are you not openly stating thatin a fair one-on-one match, that your wrestler would not go over? And before you say anything about the heel's mentality, remember; the Undertaker has been heel plenty of times before. Now then, here's my quote on cheating in this tournament;

What's that, you say? La Familia can get involved here? Well, yes, but from a kayfabe standpoint, I'd argue that Edge has used La Familia at least twice already in this tournament. The standard protocol is that when a heel is not sure if he can beat the other wrester, he will use the aid of his allies. He was in a match against Brock Lesnar, in which part of what makes him effective, the ropes, was cut away from him. No way he doesn't go over Brock without a little bit of help. He also went over Steve in a manner that even I, one of Edge's biggest supporters last round, allowed that he made some help to go over Steve. The logic stands that a heel surely can't go over thrice cheating, because the odds are highly in the favor of a disqualification occurring. And as I've stated before, there has never been a case where Edge went over The Undertaker without some form of assistance.

And besides, Taker has NEVER just walked over Edge.

I'm not saying this will be a cakewalk for The Undertaker. i'm just saying he's going to win. plain and simple.

Btw, I can't watch videos.

Oh........... Well......


Vote Taker.

 

[Nate DaMac]

The tournament argument is that Edge just happens to find a way to win tournaments, cheap or clean. Much like Undertaker happens to win at Wrestlemania every year. And I don't recall hearing anywhere that if the voting is one sided that the match was a squash. There is no way in hell that the Deadman just "breezed by" Beniot. Who has for that matter? Just because Taker has beaten Edge more doesn't mean he can't go over now. Example, Kurt Angle beat Taker clean. Edge beat Angle clean. Its not of the realm of discussion to think he couldn't now. At Wrestlemania,Taker would go over. No doubt. In a KOTR setting, I think Edge would go over. Btw, I did already vote. I couldn't be persuaded anyway. Don't feel bad.

 

[Tenta]

Sigh..... Eighteen Minutes... Do I have time to reply to this? Yeah, i'll go for it.

The tournament argument is that Edge just happens to find a way to win tournaments, cheap or clean.

Great, and those tournaments are compiled of one-on-one wrestling matches. And correct me if I'm wrong, but you've already said The Undertaker has a disntinct advantage (Edge's number) in that matter, didn't you?

Much like Undertaker happens to win at Wrestlemania every year.

We'll probably wind up getting into this later, but simply put, The Undertaker wins far more than just at Wrestlemania. If The Undertaker only won at Wrestlemania matches, we'd agree.

And I don't recall hearing anywhere that if the voting is one sided that the match was a squash. There is no way in hell that the Deadman just "breezed by" Beniot. Who has for that matter?

Ok.... Fair enough...

Now then, answer me this; who do you think has had a tougher round; the guy that faced a Canadian midget, who was a masterful technician, but not much else, or the guy that had to face this man...

Do you really mean to tell me that you believe that Benoit > Austin. Please.

Just because Taker has beaten Edge more doesn't mean he can't go over now. Example, Kurt Angle beat Taker clean. Edge beat Angle clean.

I've been over this one, too.... the transitive property rarely works. Look, let's try it like this:

Santino Marella has beaten Umaga.

Santino > Umaga

Umaga has beaten Tripl H

Umaga > Triple H

Therefore.... Santino > Triple H?

See what I've done there? That's the transitive property. And it rarely works, unless you have a common opponent, especially when Santino and Trips have alredy wrestled, and Triple H beat Santino.

At Wrestlemania,Taker would go over. No doubt. In a KOTR setting, I think Edge would go over.

So you don't think this event is more reminiscent of a Wrestlemania? In Houston? In whatever dome that place is called now? In The Undertaker's stomping grounds?

You can call it whatever you want... I call it an Undertaker victory.

Btw, I did already vote. I couldn't be persuaded anyway. Don't feel bad.

Curses.... Foiled again. I'll get you next time, Gadget..... Next Time!!!!

 

[Nate DaMac]

Ah. I feel a little better since you didn't respond to everything. What? You didn't have the time? Like I said before, a win is a win. lol. I totally think Beniot is a tougher opponent than Austin. Not a doubt in my mind. I'm sure the onslaught of weak ass kicks and punches affected Edge a bit. But Beniot has a lot more moves in his arsenal that are way more effective. My overall point is that I believe in a tournament setting, Edge bests Taker. Taker has beat Edge and vice versa. Never in a tourney where Edge excells.

 

[Hacksaw Highway]

I find it odd that the majority of people are voting Edge wehn the Taker has dismantled him everytime they've had a one-on-one, regular match. I fail to see how this situation is any different then Mania, or Backlash, or any other time Taker has beaten Edge. Edge has beaten Taker 2 times; once in his speciatly match, with interference from Hawkins, Ryder, Chavo and Bam, and the other immediatly after Taker went through hell against Batista in the cage and then got beat down by Henry.

 

[Tenta]

You really didn't think I'd be gone for too long, did you?

Ah. I feel a little better since you didn't respond to everything. What? You didn't have the time?

Sadly, no. Dinner time can be a pain in the ass. Fact was, I was hungry, and needed some grub. Now let's see what you've returned with.

Like I said before, a win is a win. lol.

Well, that's all well and good, but answer me this; Does a clean win not reflect better on a wrestler. Does it not conclude that he is not only the better wrestler, but the better man, for not relying on assistance in his matches. What if Hulk Hogan relied on interference for his matches? Would we think of him as invincible as we do? Anyway, that's not the point. The point is that we should conclude that clean wins should be looked as a better achievement than non-clean wins. Therefore, Undertaker's win over Edge is far more of an achievement.

I totally think Beniot is a tougher opponent than Austin. Not a doubt in my mind. I'm sure the onslaught of weak ass kicks and punches affected Edge a bit..

Come on now, even I recognize Austin's ability, and I completely shat all over his run in the Attitude Era. The fact is that Austin was one ornery, tough sumbitch, and didn't know how to quit. Edge may have come out of that match with a win, but he sure didn't come out unscathed.

And as for Benoit, Taker seems to have the number of technicians. Bret never beat him cleanly, but that's neither here nor there. What I'm getting that you're saying is that Chris Benoit is better than Steve Austin. Fair to say, Nate? If not, I'll correct myself, but that seems to be the message that you're going for. In which case, then from a technician standpoint, I'll agree. From a brawling, durability, and an ass-whipping standpoint? I'll give that to Steve. From a kayfabe standpoint? I'll also give that to Steve.

But Beniot has a lot more moves in his arsenal that are way more effective

Yes, and how many moves do you really think are going to be that effective against The Undertaker? How many suplexes do you see Chris locking The Undertaker in? And again, so much of Chris' offense relies on ground work. And when you're dealing with a guy that sits up 92 million times, how do you think that's going to fare for Chris?

My overall point is that I believe in a tournament setting, Edge bests Taker.

Really? Because quite frankly, I read that as, "I don't have any way to rationalize why Edge will win normally. But hey, it's a tournament. Yay!!! Edge wins!!!" Honestly, that's the thought process of someone that gets banned on their first day, in my opinion. you're far better than that, Nate.

Taker has beat Edge and vice versa. Never in a tourney where Edge excells.

Ok.... So both have beaten each other...

Undertaker's wins are far more relevant to the tournament.

His wins have come clean, unlike Edge's.

The Undertaker is one of the best superstars the WWE has to offer, while Edge will probably make the HOF, but never have the status of The Undertaker.

But.....

It's in a tournament!!! Yay!!! Edge Wins!! Edge Wins!!!

Ahem..... no, Nate. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. The better wrestler wins the one-on-one contest. Something edge has yet to do against The Undertaker.

 

[Nate DaMac]

First of all, clean win or dirty win, still has a W in the column does it not? I don't give a shit either way. A win is a win. Perhaps I should spell out my argument a little more. Though this is a one on one match, they have NOT met under these conditions. Has Taker ever beat Edge the same night he beat somebody else in a different match? Don't think so. Nor vice versa, but Edge has beat Rhyno(meh) and Angle(better than Taker, Austin and Lesnar) in one night.... Before his prime! I think it is fair to think he could pull this off. I don't think Taker has ever won two matches in one night. Oh and Beniot is my all time favorite. So that wont be changing.

 

[Tenta]

First of all, clean win or dirty win, still has a W in the column does it not?

I think we're destined to agree to disagree on the matter. I think there should be something said for a wrestler's ability to win without assistance, especially when you consider the other wrestler is cheating the whole way. For me, it comes down to this:

Undertaker at full strength (or relatively close to it) + Edge at full strength (Or relatively close to it) - Weapons + Rules - La Familia = An Undertaker victory.

Wouldn't you agree with that equation

Perhaps I should spell out my argument a little more.

No, you've spelt it out. i just don't agree a damn bit.

Though this is a one on one match, they have NOT met under these conditions.

Ok.... Let me revise my statement:

Tired Undertaker + Tired Edge - Weapons +Rules - La Familia = Undertaker Victory

You make it seem like Edge is an iron man. The Undertaker is the same man that's been wrestling for about 18 years now, and has all of the durability in the world. This is the man that sits up 92 billion times. So how am I not to believe that multiple matches actually don't work in The Undertaker's favor against Edge.

Has Taker ever beat Edge the same night he beat somebody else in a different match? Don't think so..

Has Edge ever done the same? Don't think so. And the only thing we can judge by is his clean loss to the Undertaker.

but Edge has beat Rhyno(meh) and Angle(better than Taker, Austin and Lesnar) in one night.... Before his prime!

You took the words right out of my mouth... It was so far before Kurt's prime, it's not even funny. That version of Kurt is better than The Undertaker, Austin, and Brock Lesnar? Fat fucking chance.

I think it is fair to think he could pull this off.

Fair? Maybe. Realistic, especially with the "evidence" you've supplied? I have a better chance of growing a Narwhal out of my ass.

Look, it's simple... Who do you think is the better wrestler?

 

[Nate DaMac]

I have already stated that I think Edge is the better wrestler and gave my reasons. But if you insist, I will repeat myself. Edge wrestles my style of match. It is usually fast paced with some high flying, technical and brawling styles. Taker seems to prefer the slow methodical strikes and power moves with the annual botched swan dive. Which is fine and dandy, but not my cup of tea. Oh yeah, and I was saying before Edge's prime. To me Angles prime has been his whole career. Thats just me though. I still think my argument is solid. Taker has never won 2 matches in one night. Edge has. If you guys use the argument that Taker has beat Edge more, than mine is just as good. Its all hypothetical.

 

[Tenta]

I have already stated that I think Edge is the better wrestler and gave my reasons. But if you insist, I will repeat myself. Edge wrestles my style of match. It is usually fast paced with some high flying, technical and brawling styles. Taker seems to prefer the slow methodical strikes and power moves with the annual botched swan dive. Which is fine and dandy, but not my cup of tea. Oh yeah, and I was saying before Edge's prime. To me Angles prime has been his whole career. Thats just me though. I still think my argument is solid. Taker has never won 2 matches in one night. Edge has. If you guys use the argument that Taker has beat Edge more, than mine is just as good. Its all hypothetical.

And here's where our opinions dissent, and where I go to bed on, unfortunately. Trust me, i'll be back very soon, though... Just wait and see Mac.

Anyway, yes, we're dealing with hypotheticals. We're not sure how Taker is going to do with theoreticals. I mean, we did crown him champion last year, so I don't think our brethren will exactly agree with what I view as a flawed system. But true, it is a hypothetical.

However, we also have the fact of The Undertaker beating Edge cleanly in the middle of the ring, which is more than I can say regarding Edge doing the same.

Hypothetical? Yes. But we also have facts to help us sort out the hypotheticals. And one of those facts is that in the only clean match between these two, The Undertaker made Edge tap. You can argue your beliefs to a mountaintop. But at the end of the day, you can not dispute a fact.