Ask 411 Wrestling 02.15.12: MSG, TKO, GWF, More!

Welcome to this special Post-Valentine’s Day editon of Ask 411 Wrestling! I hope that you all had a wonderful day yesterday with your significant other.

Shameless Cross Promotion!!!

Juice Diesel has a few questions. So he sent them to me. Good move, that.

Hi Matthew,

First, why do you suppose Vince went forward with the Benoit tribute show before knowing the full extent of the story – I mean, what did he think happened?
Surely, some of the “boys” (Chavo, etc.) had to know something wasn’t right with Benoit, and then to find out he and his whole family are at the very least, confirmed deceased, it seems a bit uncharacteristic of Vince. Thoughts?

In retrospect, sure, you can piece it all together and clearly stuff was going on. But remember, as it’s become clear since that time, Benoit was always… A little different. Yes his behaviour near the end of his life seemed worse, but that was just Benoit being Benoit, right?

And I don’t think they were thinking too clearly in that a man that they thought of as a good friend, and a guy everyone respected, was dead. If you watch Vince there, he’s clearly upset at his loss. Yes, retrospect says that they shouldn’t. But if they’d gone ahead, most of the wrestlers probably would have been distracted at best and possibly refused to go out. And what if it turned out to be a gas leak or a home invasion or something? Then they’re seen as heartless bastards.

But overall I think it was Vince being upset at losing a friend and doing what he felt was right at the time. He should have been more cautious, sure. Easy to say that now. But at the time, it was the right thing to do, in Vince’s heart. It’s just that they’d have preferred to find out a day or so earlier…

Second, completely unrelated, why do wrestlers tape their finger? I’ve seen Naitch and obviously hHh use a thin strip around the pointer finger. Is it similar to the effect of taping one’s wrists?

There’s a whole bunch of reasons to tape wrists and fingers. It’s partly for support, in that wrists and/or fingers that are taped are stronger, and less likely to be injured. Like with wrestling boots, the bigger and longer the taping, the less likely you’ll injure the body part, the official explanation goes.

However the tradition reason is that you hide a blade in there. You tape the finger and then, for matches where you need it, you put the blade inside and then it’s ready and easy for use. And if you’re a heel, you can choke people with it too, if you like.

But it’s officially about supporting the joints.

Sneaking in a third question because I am not a TNA fan and too lazy to look it up – what is the TNA version of Wrestlemania?

Warmest Regards

Ask 411 Wrestling: Influencing Speech Patterns around the world!

Anyway, TNA has two different answers to that, depending on what you mean by ‘their wrestlemania’. If you mean what is their biggest PPV, which PPV is nominally the one they build to all year, if you’re asking what PPV they would have Cena V Rock on if they had Cena V Rock, that would be Bound For Glory in October.

However, unlike WWE, their Wrestlemania didn’t really start their year. The WWE year tends to go from WM to WM. But TNA has Slammiversary in June which is their yearly PPV anniversary.

So you’re probably asking for Bound For Glory, but Slammiversary is the time based one.

Mario brings questions from Croatia!

My questions for you guy(s), I suppose this is the way, am I right?

Indeed, I only take questions via email.

Hi, I’m Mario, I come from Croatia (yes, there are wrestling fans in Croatia), and this is my long ass rant (sorry if English is bad):

1. Recently, I’ve been thinking about KOs, TKOs and Ref Stops in pro wrestling. First of all, what’s the exact difference between KO and TKO? What are rules for KOs and TKOs? I mean, I know about TKOs in spirit (not be able to defend yourself, so ref stops the match), but what’s the deal with that and Ref Stoppages in “rulebooks”? I guess that Ref Stoppage involves KOs and TKOs too. And why do they say “pinfall or submission only”, and not Knockout too? Also, what about “surrender”, because in WCW WarGames, those matches could end by Submit or Surrender only. Can you name some matches that ended via KO or TKO, all I can think about is Austin/Hart from Mania (TKO, I guess), or something fresh – Suzuki/Nakajima from NOAH 2011 (KO).

OK, so let’s go with this step by step.

First of all, the rulebook doesn’t exist as such. It’s only when they need an angle to run that they’ll create a rule, any rule a wrestling company will last until such time as they don’t want to use it anymore, and so they’ll ignore it or, at best, explain the change. So any ‘official’ rule is about as hard and fast as a foam snail.

Now, that said, a TKO is a ref stoppage, in that the ref has decided that the combatant is no longer able to compete. Technically any match that sees someone other than the wrestler decided to give up is a TKO, so, for example, Iron Sheik winning the WWF title is a TKO since Arnold Skaaland said Bob Backlund couldn’t continue. It’s just that it’s normally the referees that decide if a wrestler can’t continue.

A true Knockout on the other hand would be pretty much impossible to see in wrestling on the simple fact that if your opponent is knocked out, cover them. Or toss them outside. Or lock in a submission hold. You wouldn’t leave them be, you’d just get the win via another means since they can’t respond. You would just take advantage. Although, now that I think about it, that’s what the 10 count is. You have till 10 to get up and prove you can still go.

I suppose that when they say “pinfall and submission only” they put knockout into submission since it’s the same thing in the sense of giving up. Just a matter of who is deciding it.

Surrender is a slightly different concept, in that in that match, you can give up without being actively in a submission hold. In Wargames, if you were the only man standing, facing 2 men while one of your partners was knocked out and the others in submission holds, you could surrender for the team. Technically it’s a variation on submission, yes, but it’s still a slightly different concept.

As for matches that end in TKO, Brock Lesnar for a little while would win matches via ref stoppage when he first debuted in WWE.

As mentioned before, Backlund/Sheik is technically a TKO, as is, even more arguably, Backlund/Hart. There’s been a few KO wins, Batista over Jericho, Big Show when getting the punch over, Tank Abbot in WCW, Chris Hero and Bryan Danielson did it in the Indies a bunch, and it’s how Jamie Noble was retired.

And maybe the readers have more.

And now I’m gonna nail it – can you tell me EVERY way to end a wrestling match? Please help me with this!

…

OK, I’m going to assume this is your normal, every day singles match. In which case, the match could end via…

Pinfall
Submission
Referee’s Decision/TKO/10 count
Count Out
Disqualification
Double Count Out/10 count
Double Disqualification
Match Thrown Out/No Contest
Time Limit Draw
Double Pinfall
Contested Decision (Pin/Submission cross over)
Reversed Decision (Which tends to just go from one to another finish, but still)

That is all that I can think of. Readers?

2. There is one detail that really bothers me, and it happens in hardcore matches (No DQ, Cage, Street Fight, Fight Without Honor…). I’m talking about rope breaks. Yes, bloody rope breaks! Let’s see this, you have a No DQ match, wrestler A applies the submission on wrestler B, wrestler B grabs the ropes and ref counts ’til five. Wrestler B is safe now. It happens all the time, in all companies. Few examples:

– Triple X vs. AMW (both cage matches)
– LAX vs. Styles & Daniels (Cage Match)
– MCMG vs. Beer Money (Cage Match)
– KOW vs. The Briscoes (No DQ from Toronto)
– and a shitload of other matches

Well to be fair to WMX7, when Austin had the sharpshooter on, he ignored the ref’s 5 count, to slowly bring across that he was evil now.

But yes, 5 counts in no DQ matches is a logic hole that they rarely address. The common explanation is that the refs and wrestlers are running on instinct. Another possiblitity is that while the match is No DQ or whatever, the ropes still count as a break of the hold and thus they can’t win with it. The ref then tells them to let go since it’s no longer a valid hold. The 5 count is just an attempt to get the wrestler to let go, often when a ref gets to 5 they just try and pull the wrestler off.

As for tag rules, if it’s not a tornado tag rules, then the tags are supposed to be in effect. It’s only in tornado tag match where everyone is legal. So the ref tries to keep the wrestlers in their corners, but it invariably breaks down and the ref forgets who is legal and who isn’t.

3. And my final rant – punches. What’s the “official” take on punches in pro wrestling? I know they tolerate it (kayfabe) in matches and all…

Hopefully you answer some of this shit. Thanks!

Officially, closed fists, i.e. a fist with the fingers in a tight ball, flush against the palm, are illegal. What is legal is an open fist, where the fingers are loose and there is air between the fingers and the palm. So if the ref lets it slide, then he’s satisfied that the punches are open fists. That’s the ‘official’ take.

Manu Bumb has a simple question stemming from last week.

” Herd focused on the talent acquisition, and was actually pretty good at it, as he got a whole lot of young talent. But then again, he couldn’t keep Steamboat around…”

What happened that he couldnt keep Ricky around?

They couldn’t agree on money. Steamboat was signed to a 6 month contract when he came in, so after 6 months, they were set to renegotiate. Steamboat wanted, the figures that I found say, $275K a year. Herd wouldn’t go over $225K. Flair tried to get them to work something out, but they couldn’t, so Steamboat left.

Herd was more focused on signing young, new talent rather than keeping around old guys, which is part of the reason he didn’t get on with Flair, as he wanted to have Flair bow out and make room for the new guys. Which is something you can kinda see the point of, but still, this is Ric Flair…

Kevin reviews 1999 for us.

After getting through September 99 with both WWF and WCW, and doing some research, such as looking back through Alvarez’s book, reading Mooneyham’s and some other stuff from 98-99. I have scoured old Internet articles and watched the WWE produced DVD’s. What I notice is that WCW just got lambasted for EVERYTHING they did in 99.

Do you think WCW sometimes got overly criticized while the WWF got a free pass? After all 99 was so damn successful that it is hard to argue with success.

I think in retrospect that 1999 WWF is looked at poorly by most everyone who doesn’t have jade colored contacts towards the Attitude Era. 1999 was when Vince let Russo off the leash a little, and it shows. But it comes down to a simple idea.

When you’re hot, you can do nothing wrong. When you’re cold, you can do nothing right.

And a related adage that I just made up to explain an idea: When you’re going up, weight isn’t that bad. When you’re going down, it’s worse.

The thing is, 1999 WCW is lambasted more than WWF because by all rights, 1998 should have seen WWF die at their hands. Starrcade 1997 should have been the final major shot, with 1998 a mop up operation to taking WWF out. But 1998 came and went, and WCW made misstep after misstep, while WWF rose and rose.

So then in 1999, when WCW didn’t right itself but instead sped up the crashing, that got more notice than the crap that WWF put out that got lapped up by the people there to see Austin, Rock and titties.

Although I will defend one point: Austin reinstating Vince. (I have this thing for defending Russo’s writing. Good chunk of the time, yes, he’s illogical and stupid. But when he DOES actually have an explanation, like for who rose the briefcase, I want it well known, in some vain attempt to get him to go back to that… Hell, I’m wanting him back in WWE right now. Reunite the Vinces? At least give it a shot…)

Anyway, it’s fairly logical storytelling to get Vince back on TV after he could come back since the company was public and he didn’t have to be off TV.

Raw prior to that video, HHH as Champion is acting like a dick, and then goes after Linda. Vince, being a loving husband (this week) comes out and defends his wife, leading to a brawl, leading to a match with HHH and Austin. Next week on SD, Vince comes out to apologize since he’s not supposed to be out here (wait, I’m defending this?) but it was personal, not business. HHH goads Vince into a match (… WHY?) and then Vince wins the title.

Next week, Vince forfeits the title since, you know, he’s not supposed to be on air, but then Austin points out the clause (well, maybe he wanted to be able to manipulate Vince if he wanted. And speaking of…) and then offers to reinstate Vince for a title shot. Vince agrees, and Austin does so.

Yes, it’s a little tortured. But it’s not for no reason. But overall, the fact is that while Raw and Smackdown did have odd angles and weird stories, it still had Rock, Austin and the rest, front and center. Over in WCW, Goldberg was not front and center. Neither were other popular talent. Both companies had crappy salads as part of their meal, but WWF had it on the side, while WCW had it on top of the meal.

Memphis B-rad asks about Hogan and Cena.

I’m sure you’ve answered these before. Sorry if they are repeats.
1. Michaels-Hogan at Summerslam is one of my favorite matches. I love watching Michaels oversell to that no talent egomaniac. My question is: Did anybody know Michaels was going to do this? Did he get reprimanded for it? Did Hogan ever say anything publically about the match? Did Michaels ever speak about his performance?

Hogan actually did comment on this thing recently, and I quote…

“When Vince wanted Shawn to do the job, we went out and had the match, and everybody said ‘Shawn oversold and he was making fun of you’ and this, that and the other. I can look at it and see why people may say that. If Shawn was really doing that, you’d have to ask him. He’s done it several times, not just with me. The reason the feud then didn’t go any longer was because I shut it down. The next day, on the interview, I was expecting to return the favour. You beat me now I beat you and get the third one and keep it going, because he was such a great worker I thought we were going to have a great run. It could be my fault, maybe I had my feelings too much involved, but I thought his interview was going to be, ‘You know what, I gotta give it to Hogan. He was better than me on that one night. But it will never happen again. I’m faster than him, but just at that moment the crowd were with him and he had the momentum, but it will never happen again’. I thought that was going to be the interview. I thought it was going to be a business interview but he came out and (sarcastically) went ‘ooh, he was too fast, he was too young, he had too much hair’ and I went ‘ugh, I’m out’. I said to Vince ‘Your boy… it’s business’.”

But HBK hasn’t spoken about it outside the WWE DVD about it, where he was upset about how Hogan insisted on heel V face and then complained about HBK ripping him to shreds on the mic. And so, overselling was called for.

2. Has any other wrestler ever gotten a reaction like John Cena? Half the crowd boos & the other half cheers. I can’t think of anybody who’s ever been so noticeably polarizing. Sure, a few fans might cheer for a heel like Christian, but it’s usually very obvious what the crowd thinks of a wrestler.

Great column.

Not consistently, no. Sometimes there have been crowds that were split, but Cena’s the most consistent splitter in history. Guys like Diesel and other tweeners would vary, sometimes cheered, sometimes not, but nowhere near on Cena’s level.

Now, if you disagree with me on this, or any other point, let me know. Until next week, bye for now.