Joined
·
5,395 Posts
after 20 years, i still can't keep up with what a "good" wrestler means. to me, it's someone that can put on a match that i genuinely don't know who will win and who can sell the match like it's real. while a lot of people consider sabu a "spot monkey", or whatever, i tend to think he was a good wrestler. he wasn't that smooth with his moves, but he seemed to put on matches that "made sense". when sabu would wrestle, he would sell an injury for almost the entire match. if someone was working his arm, he would sell that "bum" arm for pretty much the entire match.
i was trying to explain to someone what i think makes a "good" wrestler, and i found myself referring to sabu a lot. i feel like he gets 0 credit for being a "good" wrestler, yet his matches were great in that a) you didn't immediately know who was going to win, and b) they actually made sense. if someone beat the crap out of his arm, leg, etc. he would work the match as if those parts were actually injured. i'm also not sure what "telling a story" quite means (especially considering what other fans think it means), but sabu was always the type that "made sense". i mean, opponents would work him, and he would sell that so well that i actually thought that whatever part they were working was actually injured.
this may have already been discussed, but i just wanted to get some old school opinions on it. i loved sabu for his high flying and reckless behavior, but i also think he was a great wrestler. to me, all that matters is making it appear as if the match is undetermined and making the match look "real". i felt sabu did both, yet, he never seems to get respect as a "real" wrestler. is it just the new era fans that dislike him, or was he truly a "bad" wrestler? i just respect the fact that he would sell a single injury for the entire match and it would get to the point where i really had no idea whether he was actually injured, or, if he would possibly win.
is it the "new era" fans, or was sabu a good wrestler? i've always been a fan and thought he was terribly underrated as a wrestler, but maybe it's just me... do any other classic fans have any input?
just thought it was a good topic... hope to hear y'all's opinion.
i was trying to explain to someone what i think makes a "good" wrestler, and i found myself referring to sabu a lot. i feel like he gets 0 credit for being a "good" wrestler, yet his matches were great in that a) you didn't immediately know who was going to win, and b) they actually made sense. if someone beat the crap out of his arm, leg, etc. he would work the match as if those parts were actually injured. i'm also not sure what "telling a story" quite means (especially considering what other fans think it means), but sabu was always the type that "made sense". i mean, opponents would work him, and he would sell that so well that i actually thought that whatever part they were working was actually injured.
this may have already been discussed, but i just wanted to get some old school opinions on it. i loved sabu for his high flying and reckless behavior, but i also think he was a great wrestler. to me, all that matters is making it appear as if the match is undetermined and making the match look "real". i felt sabu did both, yet, he never seems to get respect as a "real" wrestler. is it just the new era fans that dislike him, or was he truly a "bad" wrestler? i just respect the fact that he would sell a single injury for the entire match and it would get to the point where i really had no idea whether he was actually injured, or, if he would possibly win.
is it the "new era" fans, or was sabu a good wrestler? i've always been a fan and thought he was terribly underrated as a wrestler, but maybe it's just me... do any other classic fans have any input?
just thought it was a good topic... hope to hear y'all's opinion.