|
I thought "champion advantage" didn't refer to DQ/Count-Out losses being unable to transfer a championship (which has probably been the norm since the 50's), but rather to instances of a draw due to curfew, time-limit expiration, or double pin allowing the champion to retain the title. A prime example being Wrestlemania XII, where Bret tries to envoke the champion advantage to leave with the title.
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2013 22:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 06:46 |
|
|
Cape Cod Crab Chip posted:Twofold question for you wrestling scholars: No idea on the history of it, as others have said it's been around for as long as we can remember. If I had to venture a guess, in kayfabe terms it's probably because it would make a good guy look weak if he wasn't able to pin/make submit a villainous champ and yet still win the title. As far as examples, just look at the majority of Ric Flair's run with the Horsemen during the 1980s. There's a reason the "Dusty Finish" became so infamous (well, besides just eventually far too horribly overused). And even in matches that ended relatively cleanly (i.e., a draw), the announcers often hyped up the "championship advantage" in that the challenger had to pin Flair to get the title, but he didn't have to pin them to keep it, all he had to do was just outlast them to a time-limit draw.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2013 23:05
|
|
|
The title cannot change on DQ rule was implemented around the switch from the National Wrestling Association to the National Wrestling Alliance, and was first prominently used by Lou Thesz in the 50s to do disputed title change angles, the most notable of which were the Edouard Carpentier switch in Montreal and the Leo Nomellini switch in San Francisco. At the time, countouts were not considered disqualifications (and there were title changes on countouts), but countouts were added to the no title change rule a few decades later.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2013 23:35
|
|
|
A recent example is when John Cena decided to cash in his Royal Rumble win for a title shot BEFORE Wrestlemania against Randy Orton at No Way Out 2008, I'm pretty sure Orton got himself intentionally disqualified by slapping the ref during the match.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2013 23:55
|
|
|
Although that kind of thing makes you wonder why the heel champ doesn't just start every title defense by kicking a field goal with the other guy's crotch.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 00:04
|
|
|
DeathChicken posted:Although that kind of thing makes you wonder why the heel champ doesn't just start every title defense by kicking a field goal with the other guy's crotch. If you ask that, you start asking why wrestlers don't use guns in no DQ matches and the whole suspension of disbelief thing just falls apart.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 00:09
|
|
|
DeathChicken posted:Although that kind of thing makes you wonder why the heel champ doesn't just start every title defense by kicking a field goal with the other guy's crotch. This has happened, I can't remember who did it though. It forced whatever authoritative figure existed at the time to get rid of the champ's advantage for his matches.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 00:09
|
|
|
Heels are arrogant and assume they can beat everybody. Plus, there's the possible threat of being stripped of the title or having your next defense be switched to a "DQ means a title loss" type thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 00:10
|
|
|
45ShadesOfDeath posted:This has happened, I can't remember who did it though. It forced whatever authoritative figure existed at the time to get rid of the champ's advantage for his matches. When Fritz Von Erich tried to take WCCW national back in the 80s, one of the kayfabe reasons he gave for leaving the NWA was that they were tired of Flair using the "title cannot change hands on a DQ/countout" rule to his advantage, so from that point on, all WCCW titles could change hands on DQ/countout as well as pinfall or submission. It went over about as well as you'd expect (in that nobody gave a poo poo).
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 01:53
|
|
|
UltimoDragonQuest posted:The earliest mention I could find was 2003. That's some heavy duty DaVinci Code poo poo right here.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 03:45
|
|
|
45ShadesOfDeath posted:This has happened, I can't remember who did it though. It forced whatever authoritative figure existed at the time to get rid of the champ's advantage for his matches. I think Randy Orton kicked Jeff Hardy in the balls once.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 04:05
|
|
|
Fight Club Sandwich posted:If you ask that, you start asking why wrestlers don't use guns in no DQ matches and the whole suspension of disbelief thing just falls apart. Thats a good goddamn question
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 04:37
|
|
|
isnt that right posted:Thats a good goddamn question I'd think it would be hard to conceal squibs unless the guy wore a shirt or something, and since blanks have killed at least one person, it's a bigger risk than it's worth.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 04:48
|
|
|
I'm reminded of that old joke about Heyman. "Who wants to take a bullet? Who wants to get shot for ECW? Tommy, it'll only be a glancing blow."
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 04:56
|
|
|
Renaissance Spam posted:I'm clueless about the history of the championship advantage (although I know that back in the 40's and 50's a title could change hands via DQ or countout), but the most prominent example I can point to of the Advantage coming into play is The Honky-Tonk Man's IC reign; the majority of his defenses were due to DQ or countout as opposed to clean wins over his challengers. Savage's IC reign was before that. I don't think that man ever retained his title cleanly when he was champ. He'd get counted out, intentionally DQ'd, or win after hitting the guy with a foreign object, or grabbing the tights or ropes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 14:00
|
|
|
I always thought it was an unwritten rule that all the assault charges - repeated finishers, chairshots, throwing your opponent off of something high into a table, locking in your submission hold until the opponent's ankle breaks, etc etc are all hazards of the job when you step into the ring. Alternatively, bringing a gun to the ring with the intent of shooting your opponent in the head goes above and beyond that, and a jury of your peers isn't going to give a poo poo that it was a no-DQ match where you committed murder on national television. Anyone with common sense can tell the difference between "Ryback throws Kofi Kingston through a table and puts him in the back of an ambulance" and "Ryback shoots Kofi Kingston in the face with a Desert Eagle and then celebrates over his dead, lifeless corpse".
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 14:39
|
|
|
Hamass posted:Alternatively, bringing a gun to the ring with the intent of shooting your opponent in the head goes above and beyond that, and a jury of your peers isn't going to give a poo poo that it was a no-DQ match where you committed murder on national television. Maybe so, but you'll be going to jail as the NEW WORLD HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPION!!!! Back to the question of why heel champions don't just kick their opponent in the balls at the start of the match, there's a number of good kayfabe explanations. Ego, for one. They want to show the world how much better they are than their goody-two-shoes opponents. Two, being a coward at heart, the heel champ probably knows that if they just keep kicking opponents in the balls at the start of matches, authority figures will pretty quickly start booking them in no DQ matches, or other situations where the face will be perfectly justified to take ball kicking revenge. For that reason, it's in the heel's best interests to wrestle the match and find some more subtlely underhanded way of retaining their title - feet on the ropes, handful of tights, exploiting an injury, etc. And, if all else fails, then you can kick your opponent in the balls. Or, like that one time that Orton pimp slapped the poo poo out of the referee when his opponent started gaining the upper hand.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 15:11
|
|
|
Perry Normal posted:Maybe so, but you'll be going to jail as the NEW WORLD HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPION!!!! Then your next title defense comes in the dreaded "Shower Gauntlet Match".
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 15:23
|
|
|
I remember reading about a TNA match between Jeff Jarrett and Raven. The only thing it said was that Jarrett overcame odds that would make even John Cena blush. What happened in that match?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 15:32
|
|
|
Run-ins by like six people, Jarrett ends up handcuffed and beaten with chairs and sticks and tables. Eventually Sabu teleports in and beats up Raven, Jarrett comes back and wins.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 15:44
|
|
|
The apocryphal story of that match is a bit of an exaggeration, in that it ignores that both guys were beat to hell and back. There were dozens of runins on both sides of the match. It was a ridiculously overbooked match to match any ridiculously overbooked match but it went both ways. Both guys had alies who came to their aide and killed the other. Ultimately Jarrett got the pin which was absurd because he literally had his hands handcuffed behind his back and just fell on Raven, after I think attempting a no handed Stroke. But the real reason that booking was absurd and remembered as Jarrett in full Triple H/Cena mode is that the whole match had been built up for the better part of the year and was basically TNA's biggest match ever and by every piece of booking logic Raven should have won. So if Raven had won it would have been just a ridiculously overbooked match that ended in the proper fashion. Instead it was the defining moment of Jarrett's ego run.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 16:01
|
|
Perry Normal posted:
According to the offical NWA rulebook, the big reason for not constantly getting yourself DQ'd was that anyone who got DQ'd would have their pay for the match withheld.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 17:02
|
|
|
STAC Goat posted:Ultimately Jarrett got the pin which was absurd because he literally had his hands handcuffed behind his back and just fell on Raven, after I think attempting a no handed Stroke. Raven unlocked the handcuffs for no apparent reason Heres the full match https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iN3MopWUFxU
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 17:07
|
|
|
Skinty McEdger posted:According to the offical NWA rulebook, the big reason for not constantly getting yourself DQ'd was that anyone who got DQ'd would have their pay for the match withheld. Also a very good reason. Man, I wish commentators talked about the winner and loser's share of the purse more often.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 18:04
|
|
|
Taff posted:Raven unlocked the handcuffs for no apparent reason You're right, but he had a reason. He couldn't get Jarrett's shoulders down. The whole thing was still stupid.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 18:10
|
|
|
i remember a team 3d vs mcmg match that had 20+ people run in (no exaggeration) and johnny rodz cleared house. possibly the best tna moment ever
cool-haired luke fucked around with this message at 18:18 on Jun 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 18:15
|
|
|
I remember Team 3D feuding with the Machine Guns and the entire X Division so things would routinely get crazy. I don't remember Rodz though. Sure you're not thinking of Johnny Devine, who turned on the division and joined with the Dudleyz?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 18:32
|
|
|
I thought that they turned the TNA ring into 4 sided AFTER they swapped to the TNA World Championship. What was going on in that video?
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 18:33
|
|
|
They started with a 4 sided ring and only switched to the six sided ring a few years in. Jarrett/Raven was one of the earlier programs in the first year or two of TNA's history. I kind of miss the six sided ring. Is that weird? I blame it on Awesome Kong since I watched a shoot from her and last week and she really emphasized how pissed she was when Hogan came in and just straight away trashed it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 18:35
|
|
|
six sided ring was cool as hell. ultimate x looks weird as gently caress in a 4 sided ring and the six sides of steel looked cool too
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 19:06
|
|
|
now watch some goober post the tiny 6 sided irng that was used once
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 19:06
|
|
|
cool-haired luke posted:now watch some goober post the tiny 6 sided irng that was used once  yes how dare someone use facts/reality as reason against something 
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 19:57
|
|
|
I said it way back in 2008/2009 and I'll say it again: the six-sided ring was absolutely stupid on TNA's part. It attracted zero new fans, existing fans either didn't care for it or thought they were ripping off one of the Mexican promotions that used six-sided rings (and I don't think even AAA or CMLL use them any more), and TNA did absolutely nothing to capitalize on it or use it in any meaningful way. It made zero impact (no pun intended) on match stips or anything else. It looked different, but other than throwing off guys who had been wrestling in four-sided rings for years, it had no effect whatsoever on matches or match types. A cage match is a cage match regardless of whether or not there are four or six sides. Two strands of cable criss-crossing each other still look like an "X" no matter if the ring beneath them is a square or a circle. The only reason they used it was in a futile attempt to differentiate themselves from WWE, which made zero sense when they did absolutely nothing else otherwise to make people think they were better/less terrible than WWE. Of all the horrible things Hogan did upon entering TNA, insisting that they get rid of the six-sided ring was actually one of his better moves. E (for actual content purposes): speaking of wrestling rings, I do wonder why WWE decided to go with a 20" ring instead of the 18" rings that most every other fed tends to use. I've read various times about how guys would get thrown off because the WWE ring was a bit bigger than the rings they were used to working in. Is it just because they felt a bigger ring makes things look more "epic" or some such thing? Sydney Bottocks fucked around with this message at 20:13 on Jun 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 20:09
|
|
|
So what was the genesis behind WWEs Are You Serious? I would say that Vince wanted to just constantly poo poo on WCW, but the fact that they actually aired stuff mocking the WBF (which considering when it occurred and the outcome...as opposed to say the XFL) seemed like something Vince wouldn't do and no one would want to test it. Even if it was just burying people, making fun of smarks, and well making fun of WCW,it was well funny and enjoyable and honestly it was using stuff that you weren't really going to see too often (Repo Man promos and high-quality OZ lol). I guess I'm wondering is who pitched the show, who approved it, and who was writing it? As a concept its a good idea for an eventual WWE network and how to use material that has otherwise limited use and value and generate original content.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 20:52
|
|
|
I'd imagine the (assumed, but I've heard it mentioned once or twice in Bryan Alvarez interviews with wrestlers) backstage popularity of Botchamania played a role.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 21:40
|
|
|
I would also assume that Vince has no idea it existed. It was probably written by a few members of the creative team, but I highly doubt Vince McMahon was involved at all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 21:53
|
|
|
Are You Serious was apparently HHH's baby. Nobody really knows if he watches Botchamania himself, but its pretty open knowledge that Road Dogg is a big fan of those videos, so its safe to assume that somewhere along the way he showed them to Trips.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 22:15
|
|
|
Does anyone have a link to the old Matt Hardy thread? I want to read some highly informative Matt Facts.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 22:20
|
|
|
Rodney the Piper posted:I'd imagine the (assumed, but I've heard it mentioned once or twice in Bryan Alvarez interviews with wrestlers) backstage popularity of Botchamania played a role. That seems to make sense, I also think Cheap Seats, and MST3K (the conceit that they're stuck under Titan Towers and tormented by Puppet H) played a role. Cromulent posted:I would also assume that Vince has no idea it existed. It was probably written by a few members of the creative team, but I highly doubt Vince McMahon was involved at all. Now that makes a lot more sense. I can't imagine him having much of a sense of humor about WBF...even though its very fertile grounds. Now I could see him just creating a program to bury WCW...more than a decade later. Still some of the references are really obscure, so I'm just wondering he material was selected. Skinty McEdger posted:Are You Serious was apparently HHH's baby. Nobody really knows if he watches Botchamania himself, but its pretty open knowledge that Road Dogg is a big fan of those videos, so its safe to assume that somewhere along the way he showed them to Trips. Well I have to give him some credit. While WWE doesn't control the indies, which are a very good source of material, they control pretty much all the other sources for it that are available and don't have to worry about takedowns. I would love to see a reoccurrence or some evolution of the concept for a show on the WWE network...if it ever launches. I am saddened that the Fabulous Ones music videos had to be dubbed over, but I can totally understand what music clearance hell, the WWE library is like (though I'm less tolerant of stuff WWE created). Those videos were a really nice recurring gag...seriously when were those made and for what group? Marshal Prolapse fucked around with this message at 22:55 on Jun 2, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 22:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 06:46 |
|
|
I believe Dave or someone else somewhat reputable was saying that someone important in the front office was a Botchamania fan, and everyone here figured that Hunter was a more likely candidate than Steph, Vince, or Dunn. And while it was HHH's idea Vince is too much of a control freak not to have been aware of it. I actually bet he found it hilarious.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2013 22:47
|
|
