Analyze This: Greatest of All Times - Page 3 - Wrestling Forum : WWE, TNA, Debate League, Wrestling Videos, Women of Wrestling Forums

View Poll Results: Should Business factors and Drawing ability be a criteria for Greatness?

Yes 25 59.52%
No 15 35.71%
Others (Please elaborate) 2 4.76%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 42. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

Old 11-17-2012, 06:37 PM   #21 (permalink)
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
The Gorgeous One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 644
The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000
Default Re: Analyze This: Greatest of All Times

Quote:
Originally Posted by El Chapo View Post
You're missing the whole point. There is no basis for what GOAT should be based on. It's all a matter of opinion. Sure if someone says Jarrett is greater than Hogan, I would disagree. But, I don't expect to change their opinion.

That is what GOAT is, nothing more than a personal favorite. Reason I say that is because people seem to limit it to American wrestling from 1984 and today. Whereas, a guy who watched in the 70s might have a different answer or a guy who is a big fan of Japanese wrestling. It's nothing more than opinions, based on what people prefer. And I don't want to derail the thread from it's original purpose but if I was to list who I feel is GOAT, dozens of people will step in and completely debate everything I said based solely on drawing. No winner or loser, just strong opinions.

And no, there is no such thing as GOAT, unless you've watched all aspects of wrestling. That's why I find it weird when people make these GOAT lists and leave out plenty of old school and international talents. And based on that, everybody, in some way, shape or form, are going to be biased in favor of what they are familiar with.
Well that just links in to my earlier point. What is correct and incorrect in the world? Everything could be seen as just a matter of opinion. For example, I could say I believe anyone who isn't a white male should be killed. Does that make me wrong? Since it is my opinion. What if governments thought like that, does that make it right? There has to be objectiveness, otherwise it is just an everlasting loop. Shouldn't it be compiled through logic and reasoning instead of opinion? Jake 'The Snake' Roberts is one of my all time favourites, but I wouldn't consider him one of the greatest of all time.

When people make lists of the greatest musical artists of all time, they usually use logic and reasoning to why one artist is better than another. The Beatles usually end up on top of that list, but that doesn't mean every single person who writes them has The Beatles as their favourite artist of all time. Favourite and Greatest are two different things.
The Gorgeous One is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 

Old 11-17-2012, 06:40 PM   #22 (permalink)
Moron
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: “We are each our own devil, and we make this world our hell.”
Posts: 5,127
Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500
Default Re: Analyze This: Greatest of All Times

Your examples are pretty bad, to be fair, but what is wrong & right differ by location, religious beliefs and culture. For example, the recent gay ban in Uganda leading to death or life imprisonment. Is it wrong? Well, it is to people in the United States that have differing beliefs. But it's right to the majority of people in Uganda.

But I don't see how the white male shit ties-in at all, honestly. Like I legit don't know what point you're trying to make. Anything that can not be proven is not a fact. Thus, if it can not be proven, it is either an opinion or a theory. Which leads to subjective ideals and differing viewpoints. Math can be proven factually. Who is the best pro-wrestler can not.

Who is the biggest draw in wrestling? That is not an opinion.
Who is the best in wrestling? That is an opinion.

Last edited by Coffey : 11-17-2012 at 06:44 PM.
Coffey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2012, 06:53 PM   #23 (permalink)
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
The Gorgeous One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 644
The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000
Default Re: Analyze This: Greatest of All Times

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walk-In View Post
No, because you can't see what is not available & you're not going to use the opinions of others to form your own opinion. I mean, is there a hidden surplus of Jerry Lawler in Memphis I don't know about? Because I was born after that era & it predated the internet age. You know what I mean? And if you grew up in the States, you're obviously going to have less access to Puroresu, Lucha Libre or even English/British wrestling.

If anything, that makes it so in-ring is ALL that matters, especially when rating Puroresu where there's a disconnect of both culture & language. If Jumbo isn't a draw, that doesn't make his matches worse.

Maybe I'm not understanding what you're saying though because I feel sort of confused.
Drawing power is a statistic, factual and therefore more accurate than rating someone based on in-ring performance which is completely subjective. I'm not arguing that if you look at wrestling from in-ring performance that GOAT is subjective, but being the greatest and being a favourite are different, greatest should be looked at objectively, trying to evaluate the good and bad, trying to exclude bias, which is why numbers are much more useful.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walk-In View Post
Your examples are pretty bad, to be fair, but what is wrong & right differ by location, religious beliefs and culture. For example, the recent gay ban in Uganda leading to death or life imprisonment. Is it wrong? Well, it is to people in the United States that have differing beliefs. But it's right to the majority of people in Uganda.

But I don't see how the white male shit ties-in at all, honestly. Like I legit don't know what point you're trying to make. Anything that can not be proven is not a fact. Thus, if it can not be proven, it is either an opinion or a theory. Which leads to subjective ideals and differing viewpoints. Math can be proven factually. Who is the best pro-wrestler can not.

Who is the biggest draw in wrestling? That is not an opinion.
Who is the best in wrestling? That is an opinion.
Uganda is less developed and less educated than more modern countries. If they understood science and homosexuality as biological instead of a choice it wouldn't have been banned, but the opinions and beliefs in Uganda are far behind modern countries. In 200 years time people will be looking back and saying those people then didn't understand, just like people say now about people 200 years ago.

The biggest draw in wrestling is what makes the best in wrestling is what I am arguing for though. Like I said favourite and greatest are two distinct and different things. Greatest is objective, favourite is subjective. I have no problem you saying in-ring performance is what makes my favourites, but I don't see how something so subjective can be used for something objective.
The Gorgeous One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2012, 06:54 PM   #24 (permalink)
Been there, done that, and got the T-shirt, son, and you're just doing reruns.
 
Elipses Corter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Washington D.C.
Posts: 10,211
Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500
Default Re: Analyze This: Greatest of All Times

But, why should GOAT have a basis of drawing power? It's automatically going to be biased because if it wasn't, these recent GOAT threads and conversations would be drastically different. People only base it on what they know or their own opinions. Like I said with Japanese wrestlers, it's easy to say those guys don't draw when you're not familiar with them. But fact is, if you base it more on drawing, that allows guys like Konnan, Mistico, Bruno and so many others that deserve to be considered.

Yet on the wrestling side, these guys probably wouldn't be mentioned at all. Answer me this, if drawing was major criteria in determining who was GOAT, do you feel The Sheik is considered 1 of the GOAT? I just want people to realize that if you at least base it on drawing power, look beyond American wrestling after 1984.
Elipses Corter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2012, 06:56 PM   #25 (permalink)
Moron
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: “We are each our own devil, and we make this world our hell.”
Posts: 5,127
Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500
Default Re: Analyze This: Greatest of All Times

Because otherwise you're just wanting to know who is the biggest draw ever and that's not a message forum question. That's go fuckin' look up the numbers because there's no discussion or debate to be had there. So, yeah, what's the point of that at all?
Coffey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2012, 07:05 PM   #26 (permalink)
Been there, done that, and got the T-shirt, son, and you're just doing reruns.
 
Elipses Corter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Washington D.C.
Posts: 10,211
Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500Elipses Corter 9001 - 9500
Default Re: Analyze This: Greatest of All Times

And that is why I feel GOAT discussions are either biased, opinionated or based on assumptions. Because at the end of the day, people are going to be biased in favor of the type of wrestling they prefer, opinionated because they base their argument on the opinions of others or assumptions because they look at reports from guys like Meltzer or whatever the media is presenting and assume that because this guy was a big draw, he's automatically the GOAT.

It all boils down to different preferences, which leads me to believe there is no definite basis for who GOAT is. And in the end, it all becomes an opinion.
Elipses Corter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2012, 07:07 PM   #27 (permalink)
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
The Gorgeous One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 644
The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000
Default Re: Analyze This: Greatest of All Times

Quote:
Originally Posted by El Chapo View Post
But, why should GOAT have a basis of drawing power? It's automatically going to be biased because if it wasn't, these recent GOAT threads and conversations would be drastically different. People only base it on what they know or their own opinions. Like I said with Japanese wrestlers, it's easy to say those guys don't draw when you're not familiar with them. But fact is, if you base it more on drawing, that allows guys like Konnan, Mistico, Bruno and so many others that deserve to be considered.

Yet on the wrestling side, these guys probably wouldn't be mentioned at all. Answer me this, if drawing was major criteria in determining who was GOAT, do you feel The Sheik is considered 1 of the GOAT? I just want people to realize that if you at least base it on drawing power, look beyond American wrestling after 1984.
Because drawing power is more factual than in-ring performance. The GOAT threads on here are people arguing The Rock vs Austin because they look at it subjectively, I'm saying they are wrong for doing that. Obviously looking at it objectively takes a lot of time an research, but isn't that the whole point of evaluating something?

Of course the guys you mentioned should be considered, because they were massive draws, but you evaluate that. On the wrestling side? I wouldn't consider The Sheik a GOAT contender since comparatively speaking he didn't draw at levels of Hulk Hogan or El Santo. When looking at drawing power you look at drawing in terms of that market, whether it be Mexican, Japanese, American and compare them and also look at internationally, how they draw.

Last edited by The Gorgeous One : 11-17-2012 at 07:09 PM.
The Gorgeous One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2012, 07:16 PM   #28 (permalink)
Moron
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: “We are each our own devil, and we make this world our hell.”
Posts: 5,127
Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500Coffey 6001 - 6500
Default Re: Analyze This: Greatest of All Times

When my friends & I compiled our lists, we used a numerical system broken down by category.

On a scale of 1-10, give each guy a number under each category (this way, you can still include drawing power if you want but it doesn't necessarily make someone the greatest).

(1) Ring Work:
(2) Longevity:
(3) Drawing Power:
(4) Charisma And/Or Verbal Skills/Promos: (this category was rough cause we tried to present it in a way that wouldn't exclude non-English speaking performers, hence the lumping of charisma with promo):
(5) Memorable Feuds/Matches:

So then you would answer with, as an example:

Hulk Hogan
(1) - 4
(2) - 8
(3) - 10
(4) - 10
(5) - 10
Total: 42

Someone else might have Hogan at like:

Hulk Hogan
(1) - 6
(2) - 7
(3) - 9
(4) - 9
(5) - 7
Total: 38

So then you get the average of the totals. In this case 40. Then when you write down the popular opinion at the end you would have:

#1 SOME GUY W/ MORE THAN 40 & MORE THAN #2
#2 SOME GUY W/ MORE THAN 40
#3 HULK HOGAN - 40 POINTS
#4 SOME GUY WITH LESS THAN 40 BUT HIGHER THAN #5
#5 SOME GUY WITH LESS THAN 40, LESS THAN #4 & MORE THAN #6
ETC.

If you so desire, you can even make certain categories be more weighted than others, if for example you feel promos mean less and drawing means more.
Coffey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2012, 07:17 PM   #29 (permalink)
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
The Gorgeous One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 644
The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000
Default Re: Analyze This: Greatest of All Times

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walk-In View Post
Because otherwise you're just wanting to know who is the biggest draw ever and that's not a message forum question. That's go fuckin' look up the numbers because there's no discussion or debate to be had there. So, yeah, what's the point of that at all?
Maybe I should have clarified that drawing power is the most important criteria, not the only criteria. Impact is the second criteria, which should be looked at objectively. It's a hell of a lot better than saying guy A is better than guy B because guy A is better in the ring.

Like I said before I don't believe there is a definitive GOAT, I just think there are levels of wrestlers in terms of greatness, which still allows discussion.
The Gorgeous One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-17-2012, 07:20 PM   #30 (permalink)
Getting ignored by SCOTT STEINER
 
The Gorgeous One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 644
The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000The Gorgeous One 501 - 1000
Default Re: Analyze This: Greatest of All Times

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walk-In View Post
When my friends & I compiled our lists, we used a numerical system broken down by category.

On a scale of 1-10, give each guy a number under each category (this way, you can still include drawing power if you want but it doesn't necessarily make someone the greatest).

(1) Ring Work:
(2) Longevity:
(3) Drawing Power:
(4) Charisma And/Or Verbal Skills/Promos: (this category was rough cause we tried to present it in a way that wouldn't exclude non-English speaking performers, hence the lumping of charisma with promo):
(5) Memorable Feuds/Matches:

So then you would answer with, as an example:

Hulk Hogan
(1) - 4
(2) - 8
(3) - 10
(4) - 10
(5) - 10
Total: 42

Someone else might have Hogan at like:

Hulk Hogan
(1) - 6
(2) - 7
(3) - 9
(4) - 9
(5) - 7
Total: 38

So then you get the average of the totals. In this case 40. Then when you write down the popular opinion at the end you would have:

#1 SOME GUY W/ MORE THAN 40 & MORE THAN #2
#2 SOME GUY W/ MORE THAN 40
#3 HULK HOGAN - 40 POINTS
#4 SOME GUY WITH LESS THAN 40 BUT HIGHER THAN #5
#5 SOME GUY WITH LESS THAN 40, LESS THAN #4 & MORE THAN #6
ETC.

If you so desire, you can even make certain categories be more weighted than others, if for example you feel promos mean less and drawing means more.
To your point. Where is the discussion there?
The Gorgeous One is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On


VerticalSports
Baseball Forum Golf Forum Boxing Forum Snowmobile Forum
Basketball Forum Soccer Forum MMA Forum PWC Forum
Football Forum Cricket Forum Wrestling Forum ATV Forum
Hockey Forum Volleyball Forum Paintball Forum Snowboarding Forum
Tennis Forum Rugby Forums Lacrosse Forum Skiing Forums
Copyright (C) Verticalscope Inc Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2
Powered by vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2009 Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
vBCredits v1.4 Copyright ©2007, PixelFX Studios