| Author |
 Topic  |
|
gregh
9516 Posts |
 Posted - 08/01/2004 : 14:10:43
|
I would like to explore the role of gimmick matches in the world of wrestling. Many of the the current wrestling promotions including ROH present many different kinds of gimmick matches - often in a creative way. I would like to present my thoughts on the matter before turning the floor over to you all. Allow me to start by defining my use of the term gimmick match.
Historically wrestling was a form of athletic competition where the combatants in an athletic manner vied using strength, speed, quickness and various other physical skill as well as a technical knowledge to combat each other until one had triumphed over the other by either pinning the shoulders of the opponent or forcing them into some form of submission(even death). Such wrestling was even used to settle disputes. However the competition was a one on one competition with the victor receiveing some kind of award or accolade. It's clearly been shown that wrestling competitions have occured for thousands of years and was a staple of the Olympics competitions of yesteryear as well as in modern day times. Most people are familiar with stories of Davy Crockett and Abe Lincoln as proficient wrestlers.
Professional wrestling was fairly popular in the first half of the 20th century. Prior to that it was more of a circus act, but it came into it's own as entertainment as early as 1900. The professional wrestling craze took off with the advent of television. The modern day wrestling product became much more prominent with TV as a medium. It was also at this time the showmanship and the extra-curriculars of the wrestling product surfaced with the antics of the legendary Gorgeous George. Still wrestling was primarily a one on one competition. I'm not sure exactly when the concept of 2 on 2 competitions started(the so called tag-teams -I will let someone else research that)but they definitely came into prominence in the 50's and sixties and pretty much up until the 90's tag-teams wrestling was every bit as popular as singles wrestling. Now please don't nitpick me on the historical accuracy of everything that I just said because that is not the purpose of this topic. The purpose is coming.
The most basic form of professional wrestling was this one on one or two on two competition with a winning individual or a winning team who would win by pinning the opponent(s) or forcing the opponent(s) to submit. Unfortunately there was another less satisfying way a match ended and that was with the so called DQ(disqualification)due to breaking the rules. And then another ugly end to a match was a time limit draw. So my own personal subjective definition of a gimmick match is any wrestling competition that is not structured as just described. Let me divide gimmick matches into two classes:
STIPULATION MATCHES
I remember stipulation matches as early as the 60's. The most prominent one that comes to mind was the Texas death match(no DQ's, no countouts). Then there was the various chain matches, cage matches, no time limit matches, Texas bullrope matches, four corners matches, handicap matches and the such. There has probably been more than a hundred stipulation matches in the last 40 years. In these matches the standard rules and regulations were redefined.
MULTIPLE PARTICIPANT MATCHES
Sometime in the 60's I saw my first 6 man tag-team match. Then came Battle Royales, Survivor Series, Royal Rumbles and so forth. The 90's brought us 3 way dances, four ways and now we have have scrambles and on and on.
So my own personal definition of a gimmick match is any match that has stipulations and/or multiple participants with the winner(s) determined in a non-traditional way. So why do we have them? There are many reasons and i am sure that you all can help me with that. I will offer two:
1)Professional wrestling is entertainment and successful entertainment must sometimes offer variety and diversification to entice fans to stay involved. Considering the ephemoral nature of the wrestling fan, it's prudent that promoters and bookers be creative in giving the fans different concepts. The challenge is for those people to select the right gimmick matches and certainly not to overdo it.
2)The second big reason for gimmick matches is more subtle. Endlessly promoters have had to deal with the problems of offering a product with credible performers. Certainly stars are established for the most part based on their ability to be successful in the ring. The most useful way to get over a monster heel or a superhero face is to have them triumph in the ring. However for every winner there is a loser. A wrestler who loses a lot clearly loses some credibility in the eyes of the fan. Now the fans prefer to see the best wrestlers face off against each other and they like to see clearcut winners and losers. The copout style of promoting is to continually have the matches between the best performers end with no suitable conclusion.(DQ, time limit expirations, cheating, etc)If a promoter does that too often, then fans start to fall by the wayside. The finesse factor means that the booker finds a way for there to be a clearcut victor without the defeated wrestler losing very much face or credibility in the eyes of the fans. So that is the challenge of good booking.
Promoters often seize upon Gimmick matches as a way of offering entertaining matches without sacrificing the credibility of its wrestlers. Losing via a stipulation or in a mutiple match just doesn't quite seem as bad as being pinned 1,2,3 by your oppponent.
So here is my question. How many gimmmick matches should there be on a wrestling card? If there are zero, then the promoter is not using an effective tool to make his product attractive. If there are too many then the promoter risks making gimmick matches commonplace and mundane and risks a backlash from the fans. So my question to you is how many gimmick matches(on average)should there be on a card of 8 matches? If you wish to offer your opinion in terms of a percentage of the matches on the card, that's fine also. I will offer my own opinion later. |
Edited by - gregh on 08/02/2004 21:05:02 |
|
|
Hail Sabin
Ghana
5519 Posts |
Posted - 08/01/2004 : 14:20:35
|
| I think 2 gimmick matches is a good average for a 8 match card. |
 |
|
|
Evenflow_DDT
USA
2749 Posts |
Posted - 08/01/2004 : 14:23:15
|
at most, on just an 8 match card, there should only be one added stipulation match.
Reason being this gives the opportunity for the live crowd to see something different and not overdo it.
If the stipulation match is switched up every other time, it keeps the idea fresh and people don't get sick of it.
Had Scramble Tag Matches not been done at every show for the better part of 2 years with the same teams, do you think there'd still be a fair place for them in ROH Today?
The sometimes exception to the rule I'd say would be WWE House Shows. When building up to a major gimmick match they often have "Practice Time" during House Shows. I remember last year they were going to have a RAW Feature an RVD vs Kane Steel Cage Match. In the 3-4 House Shows Prior to the TV Match, RVD and Kane faced off in each of them in a Cage Match. The only problem with this idea is that after seeing the House Show version...if we didn't like it..we're not going to want to watch the Televised Version.
Back onto the ROH Topic..and regressing. Had the idea for Four Corner Survival and 6 Man Mayhems been around at the beginning of ROH rather than joining in some time later, does anyone else think if they switched them up and didn't run them consistantly.
Say..Scramble..then 4 way..then 6 Way..then 4 Way..then 6 Way..then Scramble..etc..people wouldn't have tired out of Scrambles while the 4 ways and 6 ways stayed fresh...the only problem I can see is if they pattern it too much and end up booking the same match a couple times in a row in the same city.
and thats all I can think of..I just woke up..I need food... |
|
|
|
professoryeti
USA
1162 Posts |
Posted - 08/01/2004 : 14:26:38
|
I'd say 3 out of 8, with at least one from each type. If you have 2 multi-man matches, then only have one stip match, and vice versa. I wouldn't mind 1 or 2, but 4 is WAY too many and 0 is a little boring. I think a four corner survival, a scramble, and a no DQ match on the same card isn't overkill.
And speaking of gimmick matches, what does everyone think about the lack of true ladder matches? I know we get the FWH stuff like Unscripted and FB03, but isn't it kind of strange that the most wide spread gimmick of the last 10 years hasn't happened in ROH yet? Personally, I'd kinda like to see it be the final fall of ultimate endurance II. |
|
|
|
sansjason
801 Posts |
Posted - 08/01/2004 : 14:27:41
|
| Simply put, I agree that two is a good average. |
|
|
|
gregh
9516 Posts |
Posted - 08/01/2004 : 14:29:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hail Sabin
I think 2 gimmick matches is a good average for a 8 match card.
So maybe 1 out 4 is the right ratio, you're saying. On a 12 match the 3 might be reasonable. I am still planning my own answer. it hasn't quite formulated yet. |
|
|
|
gregh
9516 Posts |
Posted - 08/01/2004 : 14:36:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by professoryeti
I'd say 3 out of 8, with at least one from each type. If you have 2 multi-man matches, then only have one stip match, and vice versa. I wouldn't mind 1 or 2, but 4 is WAY too many and 0 is a little boring. I think a four corner survival, a scramble, and a no DQ match on the same card isn't overkill.
And speaking of gimmick matches, what does everyone think about the lack of true ladder matches? I know we get the FWH stuff like Unscripted and FB03, but isn't it kind of strange that the most wide spread gimmick of the last 10 years hasn't happened in ROH yet? Personally, I'd kinda like to see it be the final fall of ultimate endurance II.
Can you name one big ladder match guy who hasn't had major injury problems since they became popular? I personally think that ladder matches offer little more special skills beyond what you find in hardcore matches and that is to take foolish health-threatening risks to amuse the fans. If I never saw another ladder match I would not shed a tear.
P.S. I am really excited about you coming on Saturday. |
|
|
|
Evenflow_DDT
USA
2749 Posts |
Posted - 08/01/2004 : 14:40:30
|
Well nobody in the big leagues ever got really injured in a Ladder Match...but it did help build up to a point they needed surgery.
Actually has D-Von taken any time off since any of the TLCs to rehab injuries? |
|
|
|
gregh
9516 Posts |
Posted - 08/01/2004 : 14:47:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Evenflow_DDT
Well nobody in the big leagues ever got really injured in a Ladder Match...but it did help build up to a point they needed surgery.
Actually has D-Von taken any time off since any of the TLCs to rehab injuries?
Well let me express my second objection to ladder matches beyond the health issues. Clearly gimmick matches are a variation of the classic wrestling theme. A little variation, a stip here and there is fine. If you want to have an occasional 8 or 10 wrestler match, that's OK too. I just don't see a ladder match as wrestling in any form. It's just too off the topic in my opinion. |
|
|
|
Hail Sabin
Ghana
5519 Posts |
Posted - 08/01/2004 : 14:57:37
|
| Gregh maybe that's why we have not seen a Ladder match in ROH. |
|
|
|
gregh
9516 Posts |
Posted - 08/01/2004 : 14:59:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hail Sabin
Gregh maybe that's why we have not seen a Ladder match in ROH.
Thank God! Good point! |
|
|
|
professoryeti
USA
1162 Posts |
Posted - 08/01/2004 : 15:02:17
|
that's a good point Greg. However, I certainly don't think they are any more dangerous than SCM will be, and there was no ladder involved in Fleisch and Slim J's double moonsault off the scaffold. I definately don't want one every third show, but I think it's odd that ROH has never done a legit ladder match.
By the way buddy, you have any front row tickets left? any spots left in the trivia challenge? |
|
|
|
Evenflow_DDT
USA
2749 Posts |
Posted - 08/01/2004 : 15:07:08
|
The best thing for a Ladder Match is simply to give people a higher place to come off of for cool little spots and also provides a devastating weapon to use against your opponents. If a Ladder had never come into play in ROH..would we have seen say...the Backflip Kick onto Masada that ended Izzy? up in a moonsault to the floor.
The Paul London running Somersault into the crowd? Half the stuff from Walters/Xavier.
Granted all these matches ended in some kind of pin the Ladder Match simply allows for added spots while having a non-pin come into play much like a Bullrope/Strap Match with the corner touches or a First Blood match..all of these are just big brawls with some weapon usage for punishing opponents..no real wrestling here either.
At least with a Ladder Match there is an element of Wrestling involved as guys are going to be very strategic with their moves and try to wear down an opponent to climb the ladder..much like submission wrestling..but I am in NO WAY comparing the two other than the weardown idea....
If ROH did a Ladder Match..and honestly to make it seem more of a legitimate match..who would want to see a Hybrid Ladder/Texas Death Match?...that is being forced to first PIN your opponent in the ring...THEN grab and climb the ladder to retrieve the title. |
|
|
|
gregh
9516 Posts |
Posted - 08/01/2004 : 15:11:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by professoryeti
that's a good point Greg. However, I certainly don't think they are any more dangerous than SCM will be, and there was no ladder involved in Fleisch and Slim J's double moonsault off the scaffold. I definately don't want one every third show, but I think it's odd that ROH has never done a legit ladder match.
By the way buddy, you have any front row tickets left? any spots left in the trivia challenge?
Didn't I already confirm you on 2 front row tickets? |
|
|
|
Hail Sabin
Ghana
5519 Posts |
Posted - 08/01/2004 : 15:14:05
|
Well if you go by belts only the ROH title and Tag titles could be in ladder matches, and the ROH title will not be defend in a ladder match so that leaves the Tag titles.
|
|
|
|
gregh
9516 Posts |
Posted - 08/01/2004 : 15:16:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hail Sabin
Well if you go by belts only the ROH title and Tag titles could be in ladder matches, and the ROH title will not be defend in a ladder match so that leaves the Tag titles.
Sabin, You and Unevenflow are starting to scare me! |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Gimmick matches - Analysis and opinion
