wrestling / Columns
Ask 411 Wrestling 01.05.11: Killing Kayfabe, Forgetting History, & The Top 10 of 2010!
Hello and welcome to this, the first Ask 411 Wrestling of the new year! And how am I celebrating this momentous occasion?
By doing what I’d normally do, maybe a smidge shorter than usual.
*blows party favour*
Anyway, 411mania has loads of stuff about the last year to go read, all of it without one iota of help from me due to my laziness hectic real world life laziness. But trust me, it’s still 100% solid gold awesome sauce, even without my touch.
Perhaps more so.
100% SOLID GOLD AWESOME SAUCE BANNER~!
411 on Twitter!
http://www.twitter.com/411mania
http://www.twitter.com/411wrestling
http://www.twitter.com/411moviestv
http://www.twitter.com/411music
http://www.twitter.com/411games
http://www.twitter.com/411mma
Backtalking
Why Bryan V Khali: Because it’s totally pointless, insane, and WWE always does at least one thing like that every show. Plus I can imagine someone backstage thinking “Let’s see Bryan pull a good match out of this!”. Plus it gets Khali on the card, so India’s taken care of.
Why Orton V Kane: Because there’s always one Inter-promotional match and they were the two biggest names not doing anything that works as a face/heel set up.
Why Punk V Barrett: Because I called it. And this.
Why Miz and Del Rio: Because I honestly think WWE is slowly weaning itself off the major names have to be everywhere thing they had going there for a while when HHH, Cena and Orton main evented like a dozen PPVs in a row, which I attribute to, of all things, HHH gaining power. I’ll admit that looking back it’s not a perfect card, I listened to the hopeful part of me more the cynical bastard. But Del Rio will be a World Champ by this time next year. Unless he gets himself fired for something. But yes, I hereby acknowledge that it’s not
Why put out the Playboy girls like that?: For my own amusement really. The answer given straight would be boring, and I couldn’t put in photos, I’m not allowed to put up fun ones and I already did the “Covering Up” joke last time. So I went super-technical on it.
Superplexes: Yes, more people used the Superplex as a finisher, but I went with the one guy who’s been on TV recently who people would be more likely to know and whom I could find a video for. I never stated Bob Orton was the sole user, just a user.
States: I didn’t list every WWF/WWE PPV held there, just the first.
Your Turn, Smart Guy…
Who am I? I made it into 411’s Top 50 WWE Superstars poll, despite only having a couple of tag reigns to my credit. Although I did hold a major Australian title once. I had several catchphrases, and at least one celebrity involving moment in the ring. A Hall of Fame inductee, and at one point an on air authority figure for a wrestling company, I’ve lost a retirement match and have a namesake in the business right now, sort of. I am who?
The Black Scorpion, in-between doing magic tricks, had this one.
Who am I? I’m Gorilla Monsoon.
In the 1960’s I had success as the U.S Tag Team Champions with “Killer” Kowalski, and became the IWA Heavyweight Champion in Australia. I had to use several of my catchphrases to shut The Weasel up, such as “WILL YOU STOP?” and “You resemble that remark” among “History has been made” and “Stick a fork in him, he’s done!” as well as others. In 1976 Muhammed Ali thought he could go one on one with me after Baron Mikel Scicluna lost via countout, and I hit the airplane spin on him and slammed him on the mat. I told the story of “let the little guys start” at my Hall of Fame induction, and held the title of WWF President for a while, although in real life I held part of the WWF shares for several years. I lost in my retirement match to Ken Patera, who bloodied me and left me in the middle of the ring, and the character of Santino Marella is based after my real life last name… Santino Marella? GIVE ME A BREAK!
Who am I? I debuted on a PPV officially (although a couple of matches took place before the PPV). I’m not on TV right now, although I’ll be back soon. A former WWF Hardcore Champion, despite being mainly known as a singles wrestler, my total WWF tag title reigns outnumber my WWF singles reigns. I’ve had multiple managers in my career, although only 1 is remembered by many (with a second being the answer to a trivia question about my beginning). I took part in a Vince McMahon Kiss My Ass Club segment, and at one point I got screwed at a Survivor Series. Who Am I?
Questions, Questions, Who’s Got The Questions?
Cyrith has waited a long time for this…
I have a question that came up while watching a show this weekend. Has anyone ever been DQed for not getting off the top rope quick enough? It seems like a great bit for a heel ref, but it would also impact the match quality. Thanks for the effort.
Hmmm. I know some people have been DQed for coming off the top rope, mainly in the old AWA days. But even looking at Fonzie’s run in ECW, I couldn’t find anyone getting DQed for such an obscure reason. Closed fists, yes. Not answering a 5 count, happened in WWECW. But not leaving the top rope, that one seems to have not occurred in any large, mainstream company. Unless I’m being extra blind and/or stupid this week…
But perhaps the readers will know one. Richard has some questions I can answer, however.
Hi Matt,
Long time reader of the column (and admirer of your sterling work and effort!)
Anyways to business,
I’ve been thinking about WWE’s rather schizophrenic attitude towards its DVD productions where the quality, content and style will vary wildly from one release to the next and I’ve a few questions about them if you will indulge me:
1. Given the size and scale of the WWE’s archive and that they are willing to do so with biopic DVDs, have they given any business reason as to why they only release their event DVDs as vanilla discs (and the majortiy of them as Tagged classics?) Surely a two disc production of each of the Wrestlemanias (at the very least) including bonus matches and segments that show how or why feuds evolved and a few contemporary interviews from participants (or even Vince himself) as to the importance or significance of what went down, would sell enough copies to justify the production cost. Does it stem back to the Ventura court case or is there some other reason?
The Ventura case does play a part in it, in that it’s an extra cost that has to be factored in, but it’s hardly a deal breaker. Yes, they avoid using him, but not when it’s ridiculous to do so, and the Wrestlemanias, if given the WM3 treatment, would be viewed in that case. Although Wrestlemania 3 being the only event exempt from the costs helped speed that one along.
And there’s several more, small reasons why they don’t, there’s no big main reason. WWE are limited in terms of how many DVDs they put out because of the retailers. DVDs are, for the most part, cheap to make since it’s mostly archive footage. Stuff like the Savage set or the Kane set or whatever are simple to make, one day at most of filming the wraparounds, it’s then just a case of putting together the matches and such that are already on file, and you’re done. The more involved DVDs, with interviews and such, they do require more work, yes, but it’s not back breaking labor. But while WWE would love to put out a DVD every week I’m sure, the retailers would throw a fit.
As well as the retailers, there is a risk of overloading the marketplace. If you did start releasing DVDs all the time (like having online ones, as has been suggested in this column before), you probably won’t see most people increasing their purchases, so you end up spending more to make only a little more money.
And that’s another thing: DVD sales aren’t as huge as you might think. Even the biggest selling WWE DVD set so far, Rise and Fall of ECW, sold a grand total of 165,000 units at full retail price in North America, followed by Hulk Hogan: Ultimate Anthology (125,000 at full price in North America) and The Ric Flair collection (110,000 at yada yada). A fair few WWE DVDs only sell in the few thousands. And while that covers their costs, it’s time and effort taken away from stuff that might sell better. So while the AWA DVD’s 5,000 sales total is enough to see it in the black, and at a number that any concert DVD would be happy with, compared to something that might have done more money for less work (like another Cena set, or a Batista set or whatever), it’s not appealing.
But Wrestlemania III would have been the test run.
In 2007, since it was the 20th Anniversary, they did a ‘Championship Edition’ of the event , as you described. Sales data I couldn’t find (WWE tends to play it close to the chest, and now that Sony distributes them sales are impossible to get, since Sony only deals in units shipped), but presumably, had that one done well, they would have done more of them like it. But, by the looks of it, if the most important Wrestlemania in history couldn’t sell well, then others would be off the table.
Current Wrestlemanias always do well. But by the looks of it, WWE finds is cheaper and more profitable to focus more on easy to make wrestler/themed box sets. Eventually they might well run out of topics and go back to the idea, but here and now Wrestlemanias get that treatment, the older ones don’t.
2. Speaking of the biopics – is there any reason why one release will feature a worker talking out of character and as if the audience is smartened up (e.g. everyone on the Ultimate Warrior DVD…)and the very next release will feature a worker talking in kayfabe about their career. Is this down to different teams being given different remits or is just poor management of the department?
It’s a matter of who it is and their relationship and status in the company. If someone is still active, then it’s much more likely that they’ll be shown in a kayfabe friendly way. If they’re a gimmick focused wrestler, like Taker, then there’s no way they’ll break kayfabe there.
Warrior was a special case, since they were burying the guy as hard as they could, so they had to go full bore smart in order to dig into him for all the crazy stuff they were putting in a bad light if they weren’t outright making it up informing us that he did. But if a guy is no longer active, then you find they tend to be more looking at their career as a whole, Roberts, Perfect, so on and so forth.
So, basically, if they’re active, it’s kayfabe, if they are retired, it’s smart. It’s a matter of protecting guys still working and looking at careers in general.
3. Does Vince (or Kevin Dunn) take micro-management control over DVD release chedules – deciding who should get a DVD release and what should be on it (e.g. would Vince walk in and decide he wants an Undertaker disc that must feature the Bad Blood Hell in a Cell and any ten other fights or would it be a broken down match by match requirement to have a fight featuring Kane, a fight with Austin, one with the Rock?)
Many thanks, keep up the great work
Vince micromanages EVERYTHING in the WWE. Including DVDs. That said, while he might well decide he wants certain matches in sets, he would, more likely, be given a list of possible matches and the logic behind them, and he’ll go “Yes, that match is fine, I think the rematch from Raw they had was better, this set needs a Rocky match”, down the list. He wouldn’t be making lists up from scratch, he’ll rather pick from a list, and/or approve of a list put together by someone else. Like the subject, if it’s a bio disc, Bret and Foley had input on their match listings for instance.
Jonny is a little all over the shop.
good evening, thanks for the weekly column, always good to read the various questions and answers to stuff which otherwise might be forgotten
two or three for ya
firstly; always seemed to me with WWE haveing two seperate tag belts that they missed a trick not having one guy hold a belt with two different people. say for arguement sake Carlito and Primo win the WWE tag team belts, then somehow Carlito and Kofi win the World belts. Carlito has two tag team belts, with two different partners. could have been done with the spirit squad if they’d gave them abit more of a chance. I think this would have been something cool, maybe its just me?
Apart from the fact that this would be breaking the brand extension, it is an interesting idea, yes. And given that WWE broke the damm brand extension all the time, why not?
But they probably wanted to avoid any idea of unifying them until they were ready, and besides, that would be a big push for a guy, so giving it to Primo would be a bit odd…
as far as you’re aware has this situation ever occured in the indys or back in the territories or Japan or anywhere, one guy holding two tag team titles with different guys at the same time?
I’m sure it has happened somewhere, sometime. But I can’t find an official record of it. Most of the time, if you have someone holding multiple tag straps, they tend to stick to the one partner. The Kings of Wrestling, Black and Jacobs, New Age Freebirds, when Indy tag partners are ‘hot’, you tend to bring them in together. But somewhere I know someone’s held more than one tag title with different partners. I humbly ask readers for help on this one.
secondly; injuries and layoffs are as common for women as they are for men, but we never hear of any female wrestler having to take time off because she……. is in the family way. so are WWE Divas/ TNA knockouts encouraged to stay away from guys or take contraception.
… Haven’t we covered this?
Anyway, not in any legally binding way, they haven’t. You start telling women not to have kids/not to sleep around/use protection, then you’ll be sued and called sexist as soon as a woman’s rights activist can find a phone.
But I’m sure they are very, very, VERY strongly hinted not to. After all…
again as far as you’re aware has any Female wrestler ever given up an active schedule to have a baby
When Dawn Marie went on maternity leave and then got fired she sued. She has yet to make any long term comeback. Beulah and, so far, Candice Michelle also fit that. As does Velvet McIntyre, who retired in 1998 after finding out she was pregnant with twins.
hope these questions give you a challenge
thanks
Yeah, but I wanted a challenge I could do!
Rick wants to talk Wrestlemania 2.
Mathew love the column by the way first of all. Have a couple quick questions, I was watching WrestleMania 2 recently and a couple things that occurred during it had me wondering:
1 – In the Moolah/Velvet McIntyre match, did McIntyre get injured on the top rope splash she missed? It seems like a very awkward end to the match.
It’s one of those things that is mentioned in passing but never firmly stated, one way or the other. Yes, it was over a month until Velvet’s next match, but then that match was against Moolah, and it was Moolah’s next match as well. And the landing does look harsh. But then, looking back, it seems that they may well have been running long, and so had to shorten both this and the flag match the followed, since the other two matches in Chicago that night couldn’t really be cut down. So while she may well have suffered an injury, looking back at it, it seems to me to be more a time constraint.
2 – Was the ring announcer for the LA portion of the event Lee Marshall, later of WCW?
Yes, yes it was.
See, I can avoid getting technical when I want to be…
3 – What was the idea behind the 3 site event anyway?
After Wrestlemania had worked, Vince wasn’t totally sure what his next step should be, in that if he was to top it, it had to be bigger, and better. He had to make sure that 2 wouldn’t be seen as a let down. So he went out and got every celebrity he could find, and then he came up with the idea of having the show be SO BIG one sole venue couldn’t hold it, it needed 3! It had to be huge if it had to be spread out across 3 venues that he could sell live tickets to. Plus closed circuit TV was by this time well established and so he could actually pull this off with the live crowds not getting upset.
But basically, Wrestlemania as a concept was not yet established. So they were still experimenting with it, and thus we got this idea that didn’t flop, but was hardly a rousing success. But then the next year fixed that…
Empire of Ownage had a bunch of questions. So we’re gonna answer them.
Hey Mathew,
Long time reader, multiple time writer. Have a few quick questions for you.
1. Has a face ever lost a hair match (other than BxB Hulk recently)? It seems like in America it’s only used to embarrass a heel. (now that I think of it, didn’t Kevin Nash lose one as a face? anyways, other examples would be appreciated).
Yeah, Nash lost one against Chris Jericho in preparation for his role in the Punisher movie.
Off the top of my head (ha), Raven lost one in TNA against Shane Douglas, which led to James Mitchell doing a horrible job on the shave.
If you really want to dig into the dark days of WCW, Vince Russo beat Ric Flair and then shaved his head, which came after a loss. But it wasn’t a hair match for Flair, just for Russo, although it was a handicap match with Russo and David Flair and… ugh.
That’s all off the top of my head. A few faces got shaved after sneak attacks and such, but they rarely lose hair V hair matches.
2. When did it start to become widespread common knowledge that wrestling was predetermined?
That’s open to a hell of a lot of debate. Some people will point to December 15th, 1997.
But would most people agree? Some might point to the Montreal Screwjob a few weeks prior to that famous speech. Others would come up with some other, earlier moment when Kayfabe was broken, Sheik and Duggan getting caught together, that sort of thing.
But honestly, I think by the time the Rock n Wrestling period came around, I think most people knew, but didn’t say it and didn’t really think about it. Sure, some people were total marks, and I’m sure a few still are, but I think most people knowing it was fake is different to people admitting it was fake. Certainly Vince’s speech there was the first major moment when kayfabe got hit for six on TV, and is the point when it turned over, but most people knew prior to that. They just didn’t address it.
After all, everyone growing up who watched wrestling by then had been teased at least once by ‘it’s all fake!’, so that means everyone had heard that by then…
3. Before it was widespread knowledge, did everyone in the company know it was fake or did commentators ever get left in the dark so their broadcast came across as more authentic? (I doubt this happened, but if it did in one or two cases, it wouldn’t totally surprise me). I know in Jericho’s book he mentioned showing up to his first day of training and discovered that a big knee drop was painless and the moves weren’t full contact. An announcer who thought it was all completely real doesn’t sound insanely absurd…
Eric Bischoff did make a habit of not telling announcers what was going to happen (even on the shows when HE knew what was gonna happen), because he wanted that spontaneity. And I’m not about to sit here and say there’s never been one, but that said… Anyone who puts a mark in the commentary box is a (BEEP)ing idiot. Commentary is such an important job, you need someone there who understands the business so they can understand what it is they are supposed to be doing, re telling the story and helping to sell the product. Yes, having someone who hates the heels with a passion of a billion suns sounds good, but they’ll be the first to bring up inconvenient facts, or ignore a subtle story to focus on other things.
A photographer, or a ticket seller, they can be a mark. But anyone who in any way helps shape the product has to understand it. And to understand it, you have to know it’s predetermined.
4. How freakin’ awesome was Doug Williams’ Chaos Theory on Low-Ki reversed into a backflip, landing in a Dragon Clutch on Spanky in the 4-Way Ironman Match at Ring of Honor’s Crowning a Champion in 2002??? Please rate in Dragon heads (whether it’s Danielson, Steamboat, or Puff is up to you).
Someone had put the move up on youtube, but since this was asked, it’s been removed. But, to give a score…
But note, since he’s Dragon Dragon, they count for 2 each.
And finally:
5. Is there any specific reason why Steve Corino never had a run in WWE?
Feel free to use videos or Chandlers if they help answer the questions more efficiently 😉
Thanks!
Keep it fuzzy!
Specific? Not really, no. I mean, he doesn’t have the look they want, his style for a long time wasn’t suitable, he’s stated many times his dislike of their attitude, he refused to take part in any ECW reunion, he enjoys working Japan and has been retired on and off, but in terms of there being any specific, he once only licked HHH’s car clean 10 times instead of the required 12 coats, no, not really.
Ben talks extras.
Hey Big Man –
I was just watching Airplane II. Any idea who these guys are:
I mean, that one dude’s gotta be a Guerrero, but beyond that I’m stumped.
Thanks if you can
If it’s a Guerrero, it’d be Mando, since he was by that point a stunt man in Hollywood when the movie came out, 82, he started as a stuntman in 77. The others would then, logically, be from NWA Hollywood Wrestling, since they’d be local, as the film was made in LA. But no-one seems to know they were.
My Damm Opinion
Felix has a question.
Hopefully you can help me out. If not, no hard feelings! I was wondering about the use of wrestler’s real names backstage. I know most guys in the back would call the Undertaker “Taker” and not “Mark”. But what about two guys who are really close like Triple H and Shawn Michaels? Would they call each other “Paul” and “Mike” since they’re all chummy, or would they still call each other “Hunter” and “Shawn”? Even if you don’t answer my question I’d still like to thank you for a great column every week, and hope you have a happy New Year!
I answer every question I get that I haven’t already answered and/or I can put in here and not get in trouble. Even the ones I can’t actually answer, I’ll at least cop to it in the hopes someone else might.
Now, as for this one, I can’t speak for Shawn and Hunter specifically, and it’s somewhat mixed in terms of people using names backstage. Some people use real ones, others use the gimmick names. I tend to use gimmick names because I have a bad memory with names, and I find it easier to remember their gimmicks. But some people use proper names, and there is a correlation with friendship, if you are really good friends with a guy, you tend to use their real name (especially if you knew them before training). The more you hang out outside of wrestling, the more likely you call them by their real name.
That said, taking a punt, I think Hunter and Shawn would use Hunter and Shawn, unless they have some obscure pet name for each other that is based on some personal story that no-one knows. But in everything I’ve seen from them, they tend to use gimmick names.
But the golden rule: As a fan, never use a real name if they have a gimmick one to their face. It pisses off 99% of all wrestlers.
Joshua has less of a question than an opinion. Hey, he said it himself.
Hey man, keep up the good work. What I want to write about isn’t so much a question, just an opinion. It seems like a heel and a face can have a feud, big nasty feud, but if down the road one of them turns Face/Heel then they are all buddy-buddy (Whether it be heel-heel or face-face)
For example, John Cena/Randy Orton. On tv they say “Oh well we don’t like each other that much” but at Survivor Series they were hugging and before that they were all “I respect you” But wasn’t like 3 years ago Orton kicked Cena’s father in the head? If someone attacked my family to get at me, I don’t think we could ever be chummy with each other.
Another example, Edge/Rey Mystero. They’re called “buddies” on TV but just like 2 years ago they had a huge feud over the fact that Edge married Vicki. Rey claimed Edge only married her for her power since she was GM at the time. So they had these matches and whatnot. In the end Edge admitted to Vicki that he didn’t love her on TV and humiliated her. Now it’s like nothing happened. Could you imagine if your sister married someone then later said that he only married her for what she could do for him and that he never loved her? I mean, could you be tag partners with him?
I’m sure there are 100’s of cases like these. I understand of course it’s all storyline like Days of out Lives, but sometimes I look at these continuity issues and scratch my head.
Yeah, this is a part of wrestling logic that does bug me. And hate him or hate him, but Russo was a rare case of a guy who didn’t buy it, he tended to not forget past hatreds just because people had switched alliance. It’s been dubbed the Three Month Rule, but basically it comes down to Wrestling being a continuous story, that keeps on going, always, so when you have to have people change alliances and alignments in order to keep things fresh, this stuff happens. And, for the most part, the fans are willing to let it slide. Most fans don’t have that great a memory and, more importantly, don’t really care.
That said, how do you justify it? When it’s two heels, that tends to be easier, since you can say that they hate each other still, but they hate their opponents more. Heels are angry people, and they don’t think clearly, they focus more on the here and now rather than past hatred. And if they are thinking clearly, then they are manipulators and/or masterminds, and they are willing to forgive anything if it gets them ahead.
Faces on the other hand tend to just be hand waved out with “They’re trusting them for the fans” or “They’ve made up since the former heel woke up” and such.
Basically, when you’re a face, you trust everyone. When you’re a heel, you don’t care.
But yeah, it bugs me.
And finally, Mike asks a ‘simple’ question.
Hello 411mania,
I was just wondering who are the top ten wrestlers of 2010? And why?
…
Yeah, simple as, huh?
Well, everyone else has been doing lists, why not me?
See, the problem becomes what you judge on. Workrate? Titles? Charisma? If they are Tara or not? What criteria do you use? Because really, any top whatever list anyone comes up with is always predicated on what the person writing the list thinks is the most important.
So, giving my list (because I assume that’s the point of the question…), I say that my criteria are, well, mixed. I’m not counting up lots of numbers, I’m not judging on some scientific measure I can quantify. Rather, I’m viewing the wrestlers of 2010 and seeing who did the most out of what they had. And to that end…
Honorable Mentions: Tara, Motor City Machine Guns, Beer Money, RVD, Santino Marella, Dolph Ziggler, John Cena, Alberto Del Rio, Batista.
Tie #10: El Generico & Kevin Steen:
It’s hard for me to differentiate between halves of a feud. I’m not one to say someone carried a feud, both sides need to hold up their end of the bargain, and I tend to view feud praise as such. And so, El Generico and Kevin Steen, having what I consider to be the best blood feud of the year, are equal in my eyes. Only reason they aren’t higher up is due to their feud being in ROH and thus not being in much of the public eye.
#8: Daniel Bryan:
(waits for bitching to die down)
Look, yes, liking Bryan is a very “IWC Smark” thing, but he still had a heck of a year, proving that Indy guys CAN make it, if they are good enough. And having great matches week in, week out, being US Champ, that’s not nothing.
#7: Sheamus:
He’s had some ups and downs this year, but Sheamus has certainly gotten past his shaky start and is now a main event guy, a multi-time WWE Champion, and all that good stuff. He’d be higher if he’d had more consistency, though.
#6: Kane:
Yeah, this is probably me being a fan of the big guy. But although the reasons may be varied, the fact is, Kane finally got the main event push. And he made it count. He didn’t suck at it. That’s good enough for me. Because I’m horribly biased.
#5: Wade Barrett:
It’s all well and good to start high, dip and then end up back where you started. It’s quite another to start from nothing and then ending up on top of your game, heading into, presumably, a big angle for the new year. This time last year, no-one knew Barrett. Now, look at him.
#4: Chris Jericho:
He’s Chris Jericho, Bitch!
#3: CM Punk:
Sure, his in ring work was pretty damm good, but screw it, his commentary has just been awesomely awesome. And being entertaining is what a wrestler is supposed to do.
#2: Randy Orton:
Consistency. Whereas others rose and fell, Orton managed to maintain himself at the top of his game for almost the whole year, and got over as a face without being neutered. That itself is enough to get him on the list.
#1: The Miz:
Oh, don’t be so shocked. Miz was, without a doubt in my mind, THE man in 2010, and it’s been a pleasure to watch him evolve and rise up. Now, here’s hoping he manages to stick around the top…
But then, that’s my list, here and now. Maybe next week if enough people get pissy I’ll change my mind…
More Trending Stories
- Backstage Notes From This Week’s WWE NXT, Superstars Not Being Drafted to NXT
- Two Top Superstars Reportedly in France Ahead of WWE Backlash France (POSSIBLE SPOILERS)
- Eric Bischoff Talks Ric Flair’s Importance To WCW, Randy Savage’s Impact
- Hulk Hogan Says He Got A Voice Message From Roddy Piper Two Days After His Death
