|
|
|
|
|
Submitted by Xan on Sunday, October 30, 2005 at 12:29 PM EST
 "Life is so constructed that the event does not, cannot, will not, match the expectation."--Charlotte Bronte I've found over the years that your expectations going into a wrestling show can really influence how you feel about it once it's come and gone. It would be nice if we could go in cold, not knowing what in the world to expect, but we're humans. Everything we experience is influenced by everything we have experienced. While we never know exactly what's going to happen(or at least we shouldn't, the IWC makes all possible, it would seem), we draw on what has come before and what appears to be available to make an estimation of what we are about to witness--or if the event happening is something we're interested in shelling out money in order to view. Take last night for instance, when my brother dropped me off at my house after work, I planned on taking the dog out, watching a taped L Word,(yeah, I like it. Sue me.) checking my e-mail, and then laying down on the couch to watch RAW. However, I figured I would absolutely hate RAW, because it's been going downhill ever since Homecoming, so my plans seemed to involve a bit of misery. That's the problem with the addiction I have that I spoke on last week. Even if I think I'm in for an awful show, I'm still going to watch, because I love pro wrestling. I'm starting to fall a bit away from the "sports entertainment" aspect at this point, for reasons I don't know because that's what's always attracted me to the business. Well, actually, I probably do know. It's probably because the sports entertainment aspects have sucked ass. I expected to love the return of the McMahons, because I've honestly always thought Vince, Steph, and Shane were great at what they do, but because so much has been focused on J.R. and The Coach, there's been nothing to love. J.R.'s a great commentator, but that doesn't mean he should be the focus of yet another angle, and The Coach could be being eaten alive by rabid dogs and the only thing I'd do is pour some fresh animal blood on him to make sure they got every little scrap of skin. By the way, I hate the motherfucker. So, I expected to hate the show, but was still going to watch it because...well...I feel compelled. So imagine my surprise when aside from a few things, I thought it turned out pretty well. I think Kane should have won the Triple Threat match(Michaels just doesn't need the support.), Flair shouldn't have been begging for a cage match, and I could have done without both the Coach and the JR segments, but that still leaves half a show for me to enjoy, and enjoy the rest I did. This is exactly the opposite of the way I felt about ECW One Night Stand. I went in with huge expectations and left hugely disappointed. Even though I liked the show, I was disappointed because I expected to love it. I realize that I'm in the minority here, and that 99% of the IWC apparently thought it was the greatest Pay Per View since Wrestlemania X7 and it's been suggested to me that the reason for my lack of agreement with this assessment is because I was expecting so much. I can't argue with that hypothesis at all, but I will say that I did greatly enjoy the final two matches on the card, so if that was the case, I apparently came around towards the end. Bound For Glory completely turned my theory about expectations influencing your experience on its head. For weeks I've been so excited about the card that I've been raving about it. I've been saying it has a chance to be the greatest Pay Per View of all time in ETA, and I said the same thing to my good friends, Random and B(ig) C(asino), the latter of which had had his plans to go to it live fall apart for the same reasons that my Wrestlemania plans did. They both agreed that it looked like a great show, and really, how could we not be of the same mind on this? How can you go wrong with a show that features Samoa Joe vs. Jushin "Thunder" Liger, Christopher Daniels vs. AJ Styles in a 30-minute IronMan match, an Ultimate X Match with the 3 of the top cruisers in the world including Petey Williams, Chris Sabin, and Matt (Michael Shane) Bentley, America's Most Wanted vs. Team 3D, and Monster's Ball II? Hell, even with Kevin Nash vs. Jeff Jarrett as the main event, it looked like there was nothing that could keep this from being great. But, Big Sexy found a way to throw a monkey wrench into the plans of Total Nonstop Action and he didn't even have to wrestle to do it. "Keep on going, and the chances are that you will stumble on something, perhaps when you are least expecting it. I never heard of anyone ever stumbling on something sitting down."--Charles F. Kettering Because Nash found himself stuck in a hospital Sunday, with no medical clearance to compete for the World Heavyweight Championship, TNA found itself in a quandary. Wrestling cards are always promoted with the caveat "Card subject to change", and this time nobody in the organization had a choice. The challenger they'd been promoting for four weeks could physically not go, and something would have to be done. The decision was made to book a 10-man gauntlet to determine the #1 contender, which created a time crunch. I'm still not sure why they didn't just scrap the completely unpromoted six-man tag that feature the Diamonds in the Rough vs. Sharkboy, Apollo, and Sonny Siaki, but I would have to assume it's because they still pay their wrestlers on a per diem basis and people's gots to eat. One also has to wonder why they didn't just have Zbysko reply in the affirmative when Raven asked him if he gets the title shot, but I'll go ahead and attempt an answer for this, as well: they were unwilling to swerve away from the angle of Raven being the denied man of destiny constantly on the outside looking in. Eventually he'll get his shot, of course, but they want the suspense at a fever pitch when he does. They were also hurt by the existence of the pre-timed IronMan match, and could do nothing about it. As the most hyped match on the card, it had to come off according to plan, so the match that was scheduled to be the longest they could do nothing to shorten. This meant they had to find another solution, and apparently the solution was to cut into one of the matches that most pure wrestling fans were looking to be killer: Liger vs. Joe. It was still a good match, with each of the guys showing a few of their primary offensive moves and the right guy really did go over; however, it was clearly cut short and turned into a squash towards the end. To make matters worse, it was officially the first match on the Bound For Glory card(I say officially because there was a 4-way X match in the free 30 minute portion) and as it was not as good as one would have expected, one started to wonder if disappointment would be the theme. The two six-man matches failed to excite. Monty Brown vs. Lance Hoyt was better than expected and had some nice psychology, so was a plus. The Ultimate X match had some nice spots and was starting to rev up, but then the wheels came off--technically the "X" came off--and it ultimately failed. The Team 3D/America's Most Wanted match never was announced and instead we got AMW vs. The Naturals in a tag title rematch that should have been a treat but never really turned into a tag match; instead it was basically a two on two plus extras brawl. The Monster's Ball was great, and I dare anyone to tell me otherwise. Going back and reading some comments on the show afterwards, I saw where people said it saved the show. Then we got the aforementioned AJ vs. Daniels in a psychological war that I probably would have labeled a great match if the further along it got the more I kept thinking "Is it going to have the same finished Davey mentioned from Australia?", so unfortunately I kind of ruined the match for myself. So, as far as I was concerned, the show at that point was a major disappointment, and I was of the belief that I had wasted my money. "Whatever course you decide upon, there is always someone to tell you that you are wrong. There are always difficulties arising which tempt you to believe that your critics are right. To map out a course of action and follow it to an end requires...courage."--Ralph Waldo Emerson But then, it happened. TNA showed what it's made of. Instead of rolling over and playing dead without half of their main event, they used the show they've been promoting as their grandest stage to make a bold move. For those of you who don't know, I've been watching TNA since the second show of the promotion. While this was only the second of their monthly PPV's I've seen(Unbreakable was the first), I used to order their shows every other week starting with the second one ever and I almost never missed an episode of Impact! I watched the incredible 4-man double elimination match that saw AJ Styles crowned the first ever X champion. I watched America's Most Wanted grow into the elite tag team they are today. I saw Raven and Sports Entertainment Xtreme come in and try to dominate the promotion, and the unfortunate occurrence when Raven was denied the World Title because of a contract dispute. I was watching live when the ill-advised double turn of Styles and Jarrett happened causing AJ to become NWA World Heavyweight Champion for the first time. I saw the three greatest matches of 2003--Triple X vs. AMW in a steel cage, Teddy Hart vs. Juventud Guerrera, and AJ vs. Low Ki for the World's Heavyweight Title--Benoit v. Angle be damned. I've seen Chase Stevens and Cassidy Riley go from the "Hotshots" to being one half of the Naturals and Raven's #1 follower. I watched Abyss become the most dominant big man in the business, Lance Hoyt going from the Notorious K.I.D.'s bodyguard to a superstar in his own right, I saw Michael Shane out-hustle Frankie Kazarian and Chris Sabin to win the original Ultimate X match, and I saw Jeff Jarrett climb the top of the ladder and hang the belt to become the first ever King of the Mountain. I was there to watch this promotion grow, and as I live and breathe I tell you right now that Bound For Glory was their finest hour. They had a problem to solve and they solved it. Instead of pulling out an old standby like Monty Brown, Abyss, or Jeff Hardy; instead of putting on a four-way; instead of destroying the angle they've been building with Raven; instead of playing it safe and keeping the strap on Jeff Jarrett they showed some heart and some courage. They went out and created a superstar to do everything they could to solidify their future. Yes, Rhino first become a major player in ECW and was the last man to hold both the TV Title and the World Title there, but that was nearly 5 years ago, my friends. That's five fucking years since Rhino's been World Champion. Five years of wasting away in an organization that never recognized him for what he could do for them. Five years where the best he could be used for is jobbing to Batista in less than a minute or teaming up with another wasted talent--Tajiri. Do you know what it's like to emerge from a coma after 5 years? Well, neither do I, but I'll bet if we asked him Rhino would tell us it is [i]glorious.[/i] He doesn't have to worry about the McMahon politics anymore, he doesn't have to wonder when or if he's ever going to get his push, he doesn't have to ask "don't they respect my talent?" Because the answers have all been given to him. He was put over as unstoppable last Sunday night. He was made out to be THE MAN. I've read others say since that this is a quick trip for Rhino, that Jeff Jarrett will be World Champion either at or before Genesis, and to them I'd like to take this moment to laugh in their faces. Rhino didn't just win the World Heavyweight Title at Bound For Glory, and we didn't just watch a stop-gap measure to keep TNA fans happy. No, this was something else. Those of us who watched this Pay Per View were privileged enough to witness an [i][b]Ascension[/i][/b]. Rhino became the future of TNA October 23, 2005. You don't have a man destroy 3 others in a hardcore war, dominate a match featuring 9 more, and then ANNIHILATE the longest reigning World's Heavyweight Champion in many years, who was rested up and had 3 people's assistance and then just throw that away. I don't believe this is a short reign for the man-beast. I believe TNA management was faced with a major crisis and showed the courage needed to not only overcome what could have been tragic, but raise their company to another pedestal by doing it. Bound For Glory did not turn out to be the watershed event that I proclaimed it might be in "Final Table", or the greatest PPV of all time like I also said it might be, but I do believe it's the best Pay Per View event I've seen since Stone Cold closed out Wrestlemania 17 by destroying the Rock with a chair. If Total Nonstop Action Wrestling becomes a huge success, which I believe they will, then we will look back on this day as their launch point. The day when they proved that they weren't willing to rest on their laurels, that they knew how to build one of their players into a major star and aren't afraid to do whatever necessary to ensure that their organization survives and thrives. This is the day they resolved to not let "Bound For Glory" be just a title or a slogan. I was right that it would be a great event, but I was right for all the wrong reasons. Let October 23, 2005 be emblazoned as TNA's "Glory Day." anjohns writes: Why is it that your column seems to never be about wrestling? I don't normally read it for just that reason, but I was bored this morning, and read this one where you on and on about that no-skill fad variant of poker that is sweeping the nation, pulling in gullible youth all along the way? Isn't this a WRESTLING site? Yes, of course it's a wrestling site, and my column this week was almost entirely about wrestling. Just because I didn't mention the terms "wrestling" or "wrestlers" doesn't mean it wasn't about the sport of kings. Once I finished the first section,(which I hope you see it's important sometimes to tie the real world in) everything was about how much I've always stuck by the WWF, as it's always been there for me, but that I'm starting to look elsewhere, towards ROH and TNA and that tonight Bound For Glory has a very good chance to bring me all the way back as a wrestling fan. I simply used Texas Hold 'Em as an allusion. As for your initial question, there's only been one week that The Northern Star has not focused on wrestling EVER, and that was "Have a Care". When I say ever, I mean in the entire two year history of writing it, but here's the list of what I've written so far since I've been on the Main Page: Week 1 Destined--Focuses on destiny in wrestling Week 2 Drugs or Jesus--How wrestling has always been there for me and serves as an intro to who I am. Week 3 Antidepressant--Jarrett's world title win and the direction TNA's headed Week 4 The X 100--rating the 100 wrestlers I'd take in order if starting my own promotion Week 5 On The Ball--regarding the Edge/Hardy situation Week 6 Have a Care--The one where I didn't focus on wrestling. I mentioned it and how it relates to Cody, but didn't focus on it. Week 7 The X-Change--Pt2 and I discuss the state of titles. Week 8 Final Table--I've already explained to you. Now, that means that out of 8 weeks on the Main Page and around 100 writing the Star altogether, there's only been one time where my column didn't focus on some aspect of wrestling. Should the % be zero? If that's how you feel, this is an argument I can't win. However, I will answer another question, which is "If the column was about how much I've enjoyed what Vince has presented but now may be leaning the other way; why didn't I just say that?" I feel that part of the challenge of writing is to explore new avenues. Using a complete column as an allusion is one avenue I've never tried before, and a challenge I wanted to undertake. With the way I've been feeling at the moment now seemed as good a time as any. I apologize if the concept went over your head. I never meant to, which is why I used "Mac" for Vince McMahon and named off all the other major to semi-major promoters who have challenged him by their first name. I did the same for wrestlers; Dwayne was The Rock, etc. Thank you for the honest feedback. Be well. Big Brother is back to write: I understood all the poker analogies you made. This was good. Although, I'm not quite sure everybody understood it as clearly. And quite frankly, It took me a few paragraphs to understand it myself. As a side note, you're a bad poker player man. You have to understand one of the most important principle of poker : Knowing when to fold. That's the most important move in poker (even if it's the most boring move you can hope to do) because a good poker player needs to fold the hands that he'll lose anyway. Raising, re-raising and going all-in might give some good television on ESPN because it's exciting, but on the long run, you need to know when you're supposed to be aggressive, and when you're supposed to wait until the time is right. There is no sense going all-in with no hand on a player who've got a full-house. So what do you do then ? You fold your hand. And you forget about it as soon as you can. And next time, you try it again. Poker is all about understanding your opponents, your competition. Because you'll have to face them each and every hand, you'll have to know where they stand. Are they solid as a rock and they really have the best hand possible (in which case you have to be as solid as them to beat them) or are they loose players who have nothing but your oh-so-famous flash and sparks (in which case you only have to play well without doing too much). Another very important thing in poker is not to become too predictable. If everybody knows that you bluff all the time, well, you'll get caught a lot of times. And the opposite is also true, you can't play without some bluffs here and there otherwise, you'll be too predictable. I think you didn't do quite a good job of looking at your friend Mac and his plays. Yes, he might have been the kind of aggressive player in the past but he also always played the best hand (or so he taught). Did he really play aggressively when he had nothing ? Was he really bluffing all the time or did he have the goods to back it up ? Did he took some decisions that were really out of hand or did he took a path that seemed like a bad decision in order to set the table for a future play (kind of like when you run 6 times before a playaction in football). The way I see it, Mac played his cards very well, maybe better than people give him credit for. I mean, I'm sure you know of a couple of hands, even lately, that seemed sure to cost him a lot but instead proved to be the right cards to play. And lately, you might have the impression that he as become more passive but, on the other hand, does his bluffs work more ? Have he become less predictable in the process ? And lastly, one of the most important thing to know in poker is at which table to play. I've seen many players trying their hand at tables with very high stakes and coming back broken. And at the same time I've seen many play at tables with very low stakes but been very successful in the process. Is it possible that Paul made that mistake ? I mean, from what I've heard, he was an unpredictable player who played his cards right most of the time, but could it be that he wasn't ready to play with such high stakes at the table ? Don't forget man, the best plays in poker are when you fold at the right time, but when you actually got something, it's to use it to it's full potential. Again, great column and I'm not sure how many people will understand your column (and my feedback) but there is one thing for sure : I loved it as it was one of the most imaginative columns I've read yet. Take care man ! When I wrote last week about the time 14 years ago when Vince had the Weapons of Mass Destruction, I was referring to the pair of pocket aces that were Hulk Hogan and Ric Flair and how after everything that came into play, after all the build-up for those two to have a feud, it didn't really happen. What looked like a sure-fire Wrestlemania match instead turned into Savage/Flair and Sid/Hogan. This is a great example of McMahon folding even though he had a real hand. You're right, I definitely should have mentioned that. I honestly don't know how good a poker player I am. I've only played two "real" games of Hold 'Em. Was the first out in the first game, won the second; against the same people. I agree with you that knowing when to fold is important, but I'm not a big fan of folding before the flop, no matter what cards you have in your hand. It all depends on the action in front of you, of course, but I like to play a bunch of hands, and so do those I consider some of the best players in the world: Daniel Negreanu, Phil Laak, TJ Cloutier, Jennifer Tilly(who won both the Womens' World Title and Ladies Night 2005 by playing aggressively no matter what she had), Gus Hansen, Phil Ivey, etc. Being aggressive when you have nothing but imagination can win you a lot of hands. But, as you said, you have to be able to read your opponents and get a feel for how they play before you can do that. For those I confused last week, let me list out a few terms I mentioned and what they mean: The Flop is the first 3 of 5 community cards. The River is the last of these community cards. Aces full of Kings means you have a full house(3 of one kind, pair of another) with 3 Aces and 2 Kings. The Weapons of Mass Destruction are a pocket pair(The two cards only you are dealt to play with) of Aces. The Hilton Sisters are a pocket pair of queens. Deuce-seven off-suit is considered the worst starting hand because they are the lowest two non-consecutive cards that force you to get 4 straight of a suit or 4 straight numbered to make a flush or straight. I think you're right, Paul did play at the wrong table. Great feedback, Big Brother! Catch you later. Benny Russ writes: G'day Xan, With regard to the latest column, all I can really say is "very nicely done". I'm more of a 500 man myself, and like Morphy, some of the poker references went a bit over my head, but that hardly detracted at all from the column, which makes it that much better. Once again "very nicely done". In reply to your e-mail. No worries on the delayed response. I agree that your last column worked better without the other sections, although it leaves the status of Streak number 2 up in the air. I agree that the big belts are always important, but their relative importance does go up and down from time to time, in terms of the storylines that are being portrayed. But I think this okay, as long as their importance doesn't dip too far. Which they tend not to, but the midcard belts do at times become less important than they should be. And you're right, it was better in the good old days, when the belts were always important. I'm optimistic in terms of the US title, I think a good long feud between Benoit and Booker T over it would do it the world of good. However, if they remove Benoit from the equation too quickly then yeah, it'll probably suck. In terms of the IC belt, you're probably right. I thought they should have kept HHH face for a few weeks, and then have the turn on Flair cost him the IC title. It is damaging having the IC champion in a feud where the belt isn't mentioned. We all know that HHH doesn't hold the IC belt in high regard, but that could have been the reason he turned on Flair, which in some ways it was, but that is why he should have cost him the title. As the importance of the straps appears to be cyclical, I think the young kids will understand they are important, although they may not consider them as important as we do. But every generation of fans is always going to be different. I'm not so sure people would notice if the CW strap went away, as most people aren't even aware of whom the champion is, and it tends to change hands without there ever being a feud over it. Tag belts, yeah up and down on both shows, but I think they're both regaining importance, although I agree moreso for Smackdown than Raw, but that's probably as you said, because Smackdown is more wrestling based. That'll do for now I'm thinking. Later mate, Cheers and Beers Benny Russ I edited out a few comments regarding TNA, because it's basically just an ongoing discussion of our feelings on Jarrett, and half the conversation was cut out because there was no Comment Box last week. Hopefully some of the clarifying terms I used above will help those who, like you, I confused the hell out of last week. I'm glad you still enjoyed it, regardless. I think it wouldn't be fair to say streak 2 ended, since it was simply that I didn't have the necessary time to do the Comment Box last week. We'll consider it intact. I think just taking Benoit off the title has messed up the U.S. Title picture. I was planning on doing something on Booker today, but Rhino's win blew that idea out of the water. Simply put, I believe he's highly over-rated and another U.S. Title reign is going to do nothing for him or for the belt. I would have much preferred Benoit and Charmelle swerve Booker to kind of re-create the Benoit/Sullivan feud from the mid-90's. Your take on the Flair/HHH feud is an interesting assessment, but where does something like that leave the I-C Gold? Around the waist of Carlito? If that's the case, I'd rather it be around that of Flair even without being used, I mean how often did C-cubed ever use it? The fucking punk. It would be great if this war could be about the Intercontinental Title at least partly, but it doesn't appear that's going to happen. I wonder if many fans even remember that Ric's the champ right now, and it's sad that I have to. That damned belt used to mean something, and it's sickening that it doesn't much now; cyclicalicism be damned. Yes, I made a new word. Well, you've got a point there, as I forgot Nunzio didn't have it(even though I watched him lose it at No Mercy) until he was out there with Big Vito demanding a tag team title shot. I still think there'd be a war cry from the IWC if it ever disappeared, though I would have absolutely no problem with it. Catch you later, Benny. These are the columns that I believe to be the best posted in the LOP Columns Forum over the last 7 days. I suppose you could call them plugs, but these are the recent columns I see as shining examples of stellar work: The Genesis: Angle vs. Benoit Struggle For Power #12 - Taboo Tuesday Stuff Topica: "Lost in the Supermarket" Quiet Time with Hush Please e-mail any feedback to me at XanManX@hotmail.com, with the words "Northern Star" or "feedback" in the subject line. The Northern Star will rise again in 7 days. Until then, I bid you... Long days, pleasant nights *NEW GALLERY* She's Still XTREME! Hot New Pix of Former WWE Diva BROOKE ADAMS!!!
|
|