The W
Views: 99844958
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
20.10.07 0630
The 7 - Pro Wrestling - Main Event Style Register and log in to post!
(4267 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (20 total)
LotusMegami
Salami
Level: 32

Posts: 98/218
EXP: 204743
For next: 1701

Since: 22.9.03
From: Indiana

Since last post: 3420 days
Last activity: 3420 days
AIM:  
#1 Posted on 11.11.03 2155.36
Reposted on: 11.11.10 2155.59
What is main event style?

What ever it is, it clearly does not do it for me.
Promote this thread!
Gugs
Bierwurst
Level: 83

Posts: 687/1857
EXP: 5359946
For next: 72298

Since: 9.7.02
From: Sleep (That's where I'm a viking)

Since last post: 515 days
Last activity: 16 hours
AIM:  
Y!:
#2 Posted on 11.11.03 2211.16
Reposted on: 11.11.10 2211.35
"Main event style" is one of the IWC buzzwords thrown around to explain why RVD and other smaller, faster guys don't get main event pushes. Generally, "main event style" is seen as a slow, deliberate (plodding) match designed to have the heel stop the face's momentum and hammer away at him with strikes and the occasional power move. Most people say that RVD got depushed because his punches were weak and he couldn't work "main event style." I think that a mesh of styles would be ideal in the main event. A "pound and ground" attack of John Cena versus a mat tactician like Kurt Angle or Chris Benoit.
SEADAWG
Boudin rouge
Moderator
Level: 47

Posts: 18/501
EXP: 720181
For next: 46028

Since: 5.7.03

Since last post: 629 days
Last activity: 82 days
#3 Posted on 11.11.03 2253.16
Reposted on: 11.11.10 2253.40
You should ask Raven. He'll talk your ear off, though.

EDIT:

Upon further reflection, my reply above was not terribly informative. Here's what Raven had to say on the subject in a Torch Talk interview with the Pro Wrestling Torch's Wade Keller:

---------------

Keller: How would you define "WWE style"? You hear that term a lot. Chris Jericho went there and he didn't know WWF style, people said. Same with Rob Van Dam.

Raven: Honestly, it's simple basic psychology there. Here's what the stupid kids today don't get. This is the whole concept of the business in a nutshell and this is WWE style. The babyface outwrestles the heel. He outwrestles because he is either a little better, he's got a little more heart, a little more intestinal fortitude, so he outwrestles the heel. The heel finally has to cheat because the heel is either deep down a coward, an arrogant bastard, he has some fault or foible that is exposed, so finally because he can't get the advantage because the babyface is either a little bit better or has a little more hearth, he cheats. Now he has some heat. Then he can beat the crap out of him and get the heat. Boom boom boom boom boom. Heat. Finally, when the babyface has had enough through sheer intestinal fortitude and the people are getting behind him, and that emotional connection is there, he has a big comeback. It's that simple. That's the business. And the whole match is geared and based toward the comeback. And that's why you have to have faces and heels like I talked about before, because a match is built toward a comeback. You keep delaying the gratification until the right moment, and then when it's the right moment you blow the big comeback and that's how the people get their rocks off.

Keller: Did you watch enough of Jericho's early work in the WWF to agree that he didn't know that style yet?

Raven: RVD definitely didn't. I can't remember Jericho because that was during the lost years. But I think if you talk to Jericho now he'll definitely say there is a definite WWE style, but to me it's just basic common sense. That's just how the business was. For the most part, maybe not everybody does it, but that's what WWE style is supposed to be. But it's really wrestling style, Wrestling 101. What's happened is, people don't understand that, so they just do some crazy spots and I'll do some crazy spots, and then we'll go home (to the finish).

Keller: Does that sum up Rob Van Dam's style?

Raven: It does, but they molded him into the WWE style, then they never gave him a chance to capitalize on it. Honestly, when he came in, I hated his style because he hurt you, he was stiff, he didn't get the psychology of it, but to me, even so, he had such a connection with the people that they should have pushed him anyway because he would have been nothing but money. If they would have let him go with Austin during the Alliance deal, that would have been huge. For whatever reason, it didn't happen. There's definitely something to - and I'm sure this is what your next question is going to be - the main event style. Abso-f---in-lutely. The difference is, it's so hard to explain... First of all, as a main eventer, they have to believe you are willing to pull some guy's eyeball out and eat it to win. You have to function on a different level because they're going to suspend disbelief on a different level in the main event. You have to know how to build the people. You have to have Wrestling 101 down to a science. It's about presence. It's about carrying yourself. I'll give you the best example. I love Chris Daniels. He's a very good friend of mine in the business. I think he's one of the most superb, pure athletes in the business. And I think in six months or a year he'll be a main eventer, no doubt about it. But you read some of the sheets for years and they were saying he should be in WWE main eventing, blah blah blah. But no, he shouldn't because he's never been a main event style worker. He never carried himself like a main eventer. It's a whole different level. Obviously people see now, it's like a lot of guys who were exposed once they were put in a main event spot. All of a sudden people go, we thought he was supposed to be a main eventer, and they put him there, but people realized, "Oh, wait, that doesn't work." That's because there's something completely different to it. I have no doubt that Chris will be there in no time. What's really good about Chris is that he asks for advice and he listens. That's better than the guys who ask for advice and don't actually listen. He takes criticism really well. I love the guy. He's a tremendous athlete. He's smaller, but you can compensate for that. Look at Low Ki, who is 150 pounds? He carries himself with such a presence and such an authority that you're like, whoa! You can expose him with a 270 pounder, but he's totally believable in the right circumstances. He doesn't quite get the main event style yet, but he has the presence which goes a long way. Chris is getting the match psychology, but he doesn't have the presence yet because it's not just one or the other. There's definitely something to needing the main event style, because so many guys have failed. The converse, there were a ton of guys who couldn't work main event style, and part of the job of the guys who can work is to carry the guys who can't. If you're a really good worker, the worse the guy is, the more you can carry him.

---------------

He goes on and on and on about it, but that's a pretty good little snipit.

(edited by SEADAWG on 11.11.03 2258)
jwrestle
Lap cheong
Level: 77

Posts: 356/1591
EXP: 4120693
For next: 70455

Since: 4.4.03
From: Nitro WV

Since last post: 164 days
Last activity: 4 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#4 Posted on 11.11.03 2333.37
Reposted on: 11.11.10 2333.44
    Originally posted by gugs
    "Main event style" is one of the IWC buzzwords thrown around to explain why RVD and other smaller, faster guys don't get main event pushes. Generally, "main event style" is seen as a slow, deliberate (plodding) match designed to have the heel stop the face's momentum and hammer away at him with strikes and the occasional power move. Most people say that RVD got depushed because his punches were weak and he couldn't work "main event style." I think that a mesh of styles would be ideal in the main event. A "pound and ground" attack of John Cena versus a mat tactician like Kurt Angle or Chris Benoit.


***Breaks out a piece of paper and begins to write furiously.*** I'm still living under a rock and I'm asking nicely PLEASE pick the rock up because heck I thought I was a smark until now. Didn't even have the thought that there was "Main Event Style". Now I know and knowing is half the battle. GI JOE!!!

(edited by jwrestle on 11.11.03 2134)
darkdragoon
Bockwurst
Level: 49

Posts: 481/537
EXP: 828946
For next: 54943

Since: 26.8.02

Since last post: 3693 days
Last activity: 3693 days
#5 Posted on 12.11.03 0358.08
Reposted on: 12.11.10 0358.52
Yeah that's what it really is. But people tend to confused when wrestlers drop moves etc.
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator
Level: 213

Posts: 3235/16293
EXP: 142539460
For next: 827447

Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス

Since last post: 15 hours
Last activity: 5 hours
AIM:  
ICQ:  
Y!:
#6 Posted on 12.11.03 1614.58
Reposted on: 12.11.10 1615.29
If you missed seeing Seadawg's edited post, go back and reread this thread. That's a lot of typing. ;)
astrobstrd
Bockwurst
Level: 52

Posts: 483/612
EXP: 1027272
For next: 56576

Since: 13.3.02
From: Loveland, OH

Since last post: 2577 days
Last activity: 2544 days
AIM:  
#7 Posted on 13.11.03 0027.54
Reposted on: 13.11.10 0029.01
I guess my biggest complaint with the "Main Event Style" is one that hasn't been touched on yet, and I think, one of the reasons I tend to get frustrated with a lot of the main events in the WWE. The WWE has trained it's fans to pop huge for finishers, goofy moves, and "HOLY SHIT!" moves and little else, so we have a tendancy to see very little variety from main event performers. They play the safe route and movesets shrink considerably. As awesome as Angle is, it seems as though the variety of offense he pulls out has shrunk about 40% or so in the past two years. He used to use a variety of submissions, a moonsault, and a wider array of suplexes but now it seems as though instead of putting on matches that feel spontaneous, everything feels kind of scripted (yes I know the irony here). I don't want constant spot fests (though the occasional one can be fun), but I don't see how dropping half of your game makes for better matches.

(edited by astrobstrd on 13.11.03 0128)
Excalibur05
Knackwurst
Level: 102

Posts: 1877/2927
EXP: 10805975
For next: 284030

Since: 19.1.02
From: Minnesota

Since last post: 9 days
Last activity: 2 days
AIM:  
#8 Posted on 13.11.03 0144.59
Reposted on: 13.11.10 0145.36
Well, I think the problem with Angle's moveset is that it has been limited due to the injuries to himself and to other workers. There's only so many ways you can drop a guy who's had neck surgery, and right now that list is growing pretty long. Plus a lot of the stuff he was doing is best served for special occasions anyway. The moonsault is impressive enough that you can tease it and not use it and let it get a big pop in a bigger match (and not have him injure anyone else with it ). The Germans had gotten to the point where it was not odd to see 10 Germans (sometimes by the same guy in a row) in two matches on the card, and it was like that for a year. I know I'm in the minority who was really sick of the move (one that I think was at least partially responsible for Edge's injury), but really, you're better off treating it as more than just a transition move, especially one that's only REALLY impressive if you're doing it to someone much bigger (making it visually impressive) or to someone much smaller (adding impact). The overhead belly to belly falls in much the same area, except that it is even worse, because once that guy is over your head, you have no control over him.

As for his more varied submissions...I don't like submission based wrestling for the very reason that most of the time, it just kills the crowd because there's nothing going on. Yes, it tells a story of guy getting worked over, but once a guy gets locked in there, he can scream all he wants, but the fact is both guys are litterally just standing or laying in the same spot and not doing much of anything. So, for a submission to ultimately be effective as anything but a resthold, you have to make the crowd believe that it's going to get somebody to tap. Really, Angle has only gotten two submissions over like that (the Ankle lock and the crossface chickenwing) and in the case of the crossface, it's not really applicable, because once his angle with Backlund was over there was no point in using it anymore because he had a more readily available and easier to apply finisher (the Angle Slam) which was already more over. So really, he'd have to spend some time getting yet another submission over as dangerous, and that takes more time than it's worth the effort.
Sean Carless
Cotechino
Level: 22

Posts: 6/86
EXP: 50680
For next: 7671

Since: 30.9.03
From: Mean Streets of Canada

Since last post: 1630 days
Last activity: 1625 days
#9 Posted on 13.11.03 0150.06
Reposted on: 13.11.10 0153.57

As astrobstrd also stated, my biggest problem with the "WWE Style" is that the fans for the most part are conditioned to only pop and suspend disbelief for the finishers, gimmick moves (People's Elbow, Worm) and crazy high spots while literally sitting on their hands for the matches build.

Mick Foley stated in his 2nd book, Foley is Good, that during his retirement HITC with HHH, that he was puzzled by the crowds apparent lack of interest in the beginning stages of the bout, only to later realize that the fans were just waiting for the big spots on top of the cage. This is sad if your any kind of wrestling purist or at least appreciate the storytelling of a great, well built match-up.

I'm not going to be one of those people who tell you that the "golden Age" of wrestling was better, because quite frankly for every Steamboat/Savage or Bret/Owen clinic, there was a Mabel/Diesel or Sid/Hogan stink-bomb. I will however say that I for one kind of miss the variety of creative finishes of some of the WWF's main event stars of the past.

Bret Hart's been criticized before by some for the "5 moves of doom" but during his heyday Bret atleast cultivated different finishes for different opposition.
You knew when you watched a Bret Hart match that he could finish the bout in a number of ways.

So in closing I'd like to say that I can stomach the Main Event style as it stands, but would at least like to see some not so predictable finishes in the future (ie: using eachother's finisher or the dreaded chairshot/sledgehammer of DEATH)

End Rant.

(edited by Sean Carless on 12.11.03 2352)
Hogan's My Dad
Andouille
Level: 88

Posts: 662/2089
EXP: 6416641
For next: 234049

Since: 8.6.02
From: Canada

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 2 days
#10 Posted on 16.11.03 0737.44
Reposted on: 16.11.10 0739.38
On Confidential they had Terri saying one of her favourite matches of all time was the Rockers versus the Orient Express, forever proving that the people are told what matches to say they like. Anyway, the match really showed the difference between the styles of today and yesteryear. The finish was Marty Jannetty being slingshot by one Orient Express guy into the other, who was supposed to chop him. Instead, Marty turns into into a sunset flip and pins him, while Shawn takes out the other guy.

I contrast that with today. I can't think of one tag-match that hasn't ended with a lame, heels cheat finish, always with a foreign object. I could not think of one finish to a tag-match in ten years that was as creative as that.

The main event is different because I can't recall a time when main event finishes weren't just, a guy's finisher for the ending. It hasn't happened in WWE in my lifetime, from Hogan, to Bret, to Shawn, to Austin, to Rocky, to Angle they all pretty much only win with their finishers. That's great for TV, but on PPV you have an awesome oppotunity to shock the crap out of people by ending the match on something unique. It also helps create good will with your PPV customers b/c they're seeing stuff that differs from weekly TV.

And add me to the list of people who are sick of german suplexes. Get over it, it's not that impressive. There are at least 4 other types of common suplex you can do in a match that aren't any more dangerous. Mix it up, I paid 35 bucks for this shit. I'm also violently sick of powerbombs. But this is all you seem to get these days. That and lots of soupbones, after the 3rd of which the match becomes ridiculously unrealistic. I mean, really, how many punches can a person take?


AlboDude
Tocino
Level: 18

Posts: 16/59
EXP: 28768
For next: 1130

Since: 8.10.03
From: Georgia

Since last post: 2982 days
Last activity: 2801 days
#11 Posted on 16.11.03 1010.44
Reposted on: 16.11.10 1013.06
One of the reasons why I generally prefer the undercard to the main event on Raw is for 2 simple reasons. #1 the undercard generally has better workers, and #2 whats the point of watching a main event if I already know beforehand that Triple H is going to retain the belt, via by DQ or screwjob. I like to watch matches where I at least don't know who is going to win. The problem with wrestling is that it has gotten to be wayyyy too predictable. At least in the days of Saturday morning jobber squashes (WWF Superstars) it would at least lead up to a big payoff at the PPV's. Nowadays with nobody wanting to do the J.O.B. you have no established pecking order and no sense of which wrestler is higher on that ladder than another (with the exception of the big guys.. HHH, Goldberg, etc.. This has led to the result of talented workers not getting pushed and a very boring federation
Doc_whiskey
Frankfurter
Level: 57

Posts: 317/777
EXP: 1446103
For next: 39834

Since: 6.8.02
From: St. Louis

Since last post: 4 days
Last activity: 4 days
AIM:  
#12 Posted on 16.11.03 1130.03
Reposted on: 16.11.10 1130.12
I think collectively, just about everyone in this thread is right. I think it is 100% correct that you need to have the so called face in peril in the match because that makes the fans more into it. If they are trying to cheer the face on against the heel, then they are involved, the crowd is hot, and the finish will be tremendous. The problem as stated is that we dont have the random finish anymore, and we have way to many screw job finishes by heels, and way to many run ins. The Guerreros use cheat to win as their slogan, and that is what every heel should be doin. Sometimes cheating does involve run ins, but not all the time. A simple pull of the tights, chair while the ref is out, foreign object, or feet on the ropes can have the same effect, and can get the crowd to boo loudly. If you have ever noticed, sometimes the loudest boos come in tag matches where the face makes the tag, but the heels distract the ref so he doesnt see the tag. Then when the hot tag comes later, you have a nice pop. I also agree that too many people are using the same moves, which comes to another point. When we had matches when I was a kid between teams like the Rockers and some big muscle team (i.e. barbarian and Warlord, they sucked but I cant think of a better example), the high flying team was allowed to use their quickness to gain the upper hand. However, it was established that one power move would put the heels in the driver seat. Today they are making cruisers and smaller guys use power moves, instead of letting them establish their own style. As long as the psychology is there and its not all high spots that take a lot of suspension of disbelief to set up, then you will still get a great match.
Mild Mannered Madman
Toulouse
Level: 71

Posts: 806/1274
EXP: 3089421
For next: 77708

Since: 1.3.02
From: Westminster, CA

Since last post: 466 days
Last activity: 184 days
#13 Posted on 16.11.03 1311.02
Reposted on: 16.11.10 1314.03
    Originally posted by Hogan's My Dad
    The main event is different because I can't recall a time when main event finishes weren't just, a guy's finisher for the ending. It hasn't happened in WWE in my lifetime, from Hogan, to Bret, to Shawn, to Austin, to Rocky, to Angle they all pretty much only win with their finishers.


Picking a nit...

Off the top of my head... Survivor Series '95.
Bret fakes being essentially dead. As Diesel grabs him for a powerbomb, Bret cradles him for 3.
darkdragoon
Bockwurst
Level: 49

Posts: 487/537
EXP: 828946
For next: 54943

Since: 26.8.02

Since last post: 3693 days
Last activity: 3693 days
#14 Posted on 16.11.03 1601.47
Reposted on: 16.11.10 1603.48
Problem with using a non-regular finisher is it allows too much 50/50 stuff. The only real good use of an alternate finisher this year IMO was A-Train vs. Benoit.
Hogan's My Dad
Andouille
Level: 88

Posts: 663/2089
EXP: 6416641
For next: 234049

Since: 8.6.02
From: Canada

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 2 days
#15 Posted on 16.11.03 1727.36
Reposted on: 16.11.10 1728.16
    Originally posted by Mild Mannered Madman

    Picking a nit...

    Off the top of my head... Survivor Series '95.
    Bret fakes being essentially dead. As Diesel grabs him for a powerbomb, Bret cradles him for 3.



Lol, I thought of that as I was posting. I didn't count it though, as I chalked it up more to Nash being too arrogant to go out to Bret's finish, a submission. I'm sure lots of heels have done it, too.

    Originally posted by darkdragoon

    Problem with using a non-regular finisher is it allows too much 50/50 stuff. The only real good use of an alternate finisher this year IMO was A-Train vs. Benoit.



Could you expand on that? I don't understand what you mean by "50/50 stuff".
Big Bad
Scrapple
Level: 146

Posts: 2443/6740
EXP: 37822549
For next: 690837

Since: 4.1.02
From: Dorchester, Ontario

Since last post: 14 hours
Last activity: 6 hours
#16 Posted on 16.11.03 1855.27
Reposted on: 16.11.10 1855.34

    The main event is different because I can't recall a time when main event finishes weren't just, a guy's finisher for the ending. It hasn't happened in WWE in my lifetime, from Hogan, to Bret, to Shawn, to Austin, to Rocky, to Angle they all pretty much only win with their finishers. That's great for TV, but on PPV you have an awesome oppotunity to shock the crap out of people by ending the match on something unique. It also helps create good will with your PPV customers b/c they're seeing stuff that differs from weekly TV.


Also to nitpick....Flair/Savage from Wrestlemania VIII ended on a roll-up, Hogan/Warrior from Wrestlemania VI ended on a big splash (which I guess was technically one of Warrior's finishers, but it came out of nowhere).

Nevertheless, I agree with your point. 'Main event style' was used to such an extent to hide the weaknesses of bad-neck Austin, Undertaker, HHH, Rock, etc. that now everyone is forced to adhere to it. There's a big difference between hiding weaknesses and playing to one's strengths.
darkdragoon
Bockwurst
Level: 49

Posts: 491/537
EXP: 828946
For next: 54943

Since: 26.8.02

Since last post: 3693 days
Last activity: 3693 days
#17 Posted on 17.11.03 0104.14
Reposted on: 17.11.10 0106.41
I mean as in a non-decisive win. It means a lot more to win after hitting the finisher than just some random rollup. or having a bunch of people run-in.


Especially in WWE i don't there are are enough moves that look credible enough to allow that unless it used to be a finisher anyway. like people's elbow for rock or the super angle slam for Kurt.
SEADAWG
Boudin rouge
Moderator
Level: 47

Posts: 19/501
EXP: 720181
For next: 46028

Since: 5.7.03

Since last post: 629 days
Last activity: 82 days
#18 Posted on 17.11.03 0108.24
Reposted on: 17.11.10 0108.53
I think we might be talking about two different topics, bros and broettes.

If someone... preferably someone who'd know, like a wrestler or a Dave Meltzer... is bringing up Main Event Style, they're probably referring to the kinds of things that Raven was talking about. X-Pac did an interview a while back and said some of the same stuff. This is when it's used in ways like "the feeling in WWE is that Wrestler X doesn't know the Main Event Style". It's more about characteristics that the specific wrestler may or may not have, not the actual matches. If it's not a wrestler or a Meltzer saying it, then it's probably someone trying to throw around a "buzzword" like an earlier post said, and that does nobody any good.

But if you ARE talking about the matches themselves, like how they're too predictable or always end with a guy's finisher, I think you're probably talking more about the Main Event Formula (for lack of any better term). Kinda like... you know how, back around 1998 or so, most WWF PPV main events would end up as no-DQ matches and had a lot of brawling through the crowd and things like that? That was the formula for the main events, and every month they'd just plug two new guys into that formula.

So going back to the original question, if Lotus is unhappy with the main event matches then it's probably the formula that you don't like. If you don't like certain main event wrestlers, and think other non-main eventers should be there instead, it's probably the notion of the Main Event Style that you disagree with.

Did this post make any sense? I hope so, but I can't make heads or tails of it.
Michrome
Head cheese
Level: 39

Posts: 306/330
EXP: 393480
For next: 11295

Since: 2.1.03

Since last post: 3829 days
Last activity: 2896 days
#19 Posted on 17.11.03 0110.34
Reposted on: 17.11.10 0111.26
While it was seemingly created to hide weaknesses, some of the matches that came out of it were brilliant. Austin-Foley from OTE 98 was a masterpiece, and so was Austin-Rock from WM X-7.
darkdragoon
Bockwurst
Level: 49

Posts: 493/537
EXP: 828946
For next: 54943

Since: 26.8.02

Since last post: 3693 days
Last activity: 3693 days
#20 Posted on 17.11.03 0338.20
Reposted on: 17.11.10 0340.03
Yes, but those 3 had it down to a T not to mention Austin and Foley having the experience of many other styles.
ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE
Thread ahead: Ed Leslie mark here
Next thread: HOLY CRAP
Previous thread: A couple of TNA questions
(4267 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Pro Wrestling - Main Event StyleRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.773 seconds.