# Lesnar Q&A



## vandalian (Oct 14, 2006)

> *Your U.F.C. Questions Answered*
> By STEPHEN J. DUBNER
> 
> Brock Lesnar
> ...


Source: http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/14/your-ufc-questions-answered/


----------



## MalkyBoy (Nov 14, 2007)

I really like his interviews he is usually humble and down to earth


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

Keith Herring? I'm gonna hazard a guess that this interviewer isn't a very avid MMA fan.

And:


> Also, why a “no-rules” U.F.C. wouldn’t provide the proper incentives:
> 
> The fighters need to live to fight another day; otherwise, you wouldn’t see the top guys in the world compete with each other. The risk would far outweigh the reward.


Did this quote seem out of nowhere to anyone else? I mean, its true but im confused about why its in the article. Did Lesnar really have to explain this to the interviewer or what?


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

Great post though Vandalian!


----------



## bigdog89 (Oct 17, 2007)

i saw the site this was off of and the questions didnt come from one interviewer ot came from fans on the site and ya


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

I started a thread on Monday about the Freakonomics Q&A (when questions were still askable), but it seems to have been deleted. I wonder why?



> Did this quote seem out of nowhere to anyone else? I mean, its true but im confused about why its in the article. Did Lesnar really have to explain this to the interviewer or what?


 The Freakonomics blog and book are about applying economic theory to real world systems. This is exactly the type of question they deal with. How do the addition and expansion of rules affect the supply and demand of athletes and fans? What are the tradeoffs between more rules and less (athlete health, government intervention, $, etc.).


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

ah, ok. Thanks for the info.


----------



## cplmac (Nov 14, 2007)

Thanks Vandalian, I'd rep you but I've got to spread it around. Honestly not very good questions for the most part but some decent answers.


----------



## Benge (Mar 8, 2008)

bigdog89 said:


> i saw the site this was off of and the questions didnt come from one interviewer ot came from fans on the site and ya





> Q: Do you consider ultimate fighting significantly more or less dangerous than W.W.E. wrestling?
> 
> Do you consider ultimate fighting significantly more or less dangerous
> 
> ...


Ignorance is no excuse for idiocy. Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.

(in case of confusion; not directed at you, bigdog)


----------



## bigdog89 (Oct 17, 2007)

Benge said:


> Ignorance is no excuse for idiocy. Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.
> 
> (in case of confusion; not directed at you, bigdog)


oh dont worry bout it lol i kinda figured lol 
some of the people on the site thankfully they didnt show all the questions....but some of them were just plain numb


----------



## _RIVAL_ (Mar 7, 2008)

HexRei said:


> ah, ok. Thanks for the info.


HEX, I see you're a lifetime member now. Lookin good in gold. Welcome to the premium side.:thumbsup:


----------



## JT42 (Dec 31, 2006)

Cool interview overall. After his decimation of Herring I am actually really excited to see Lesnar back in the Octagon. Going to decision was really good for him as far as ring time and knowing how his cardio holds up. Really hoping they set up Lesnar/Kongo


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

J.P. said:


> HEX, I see you're a lifetime member now. Lookin good in gold. Welcome to the premium side.:thumbsup:


Had to join the club sooner or later, thanks man!




jtaylor42 said:


> Cool interview overall. After his decimation of Herring I am actually really excited to see Lesnar back in the Octagon. Going to decision was really good for him as far as ring time and knowing how his cardio holds up. Really hoping they set up Lesnar/Kongo


Completely agree. Cardio was a big question for me and he answered it pretty well. I still wonder if he can do 25 mins against a guard like Nog's though.


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

Tssss... He's making it sound like WWE is for real. Common, have u ever seen a WWE wrestler with a cut or even a bruise after a "fight"?? I guess his contract with WWE still wouldn't let him say the truth on this farce.


----------



## vandalian (Oct 14, 2006)

Xerxes said:


> Tssss... He's making it sound like WWE is for real. Common, have u ever seen a WWE wrestler with a cut or even a bruise after a "fight"?? I guess his contract with WWE still wouldn't let him say the truth on this farce.


Don't kid yourself. These guys take a beating. They perform like 300 nights a year and work hurt all the time.


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

vandalian said:


> Don't kid yourself. These guys take a beating. They perform like 300 nights a year and work hurt all the time.


Take a beating?? Do you think they would be able to perform 300 nights/year if they were hurt after a fight, I mean, a show? All I know is the average mmartist has a hard time just taking 4 bouts/year. 
I just found it moronic that the interviewer compares WWE (not wresting, WWE) and UFC, they're 2 different worlds and there is no relevancy is such comparison. WWE is like going to the theater. Everything is 100% set and planned weeks ahead. Commentators just need to read their script like phone interviewers do when they call out people. I wonder if they even need to watch what is going on in the ring lol


----------



## vandalian (Oct 14, 2006)

Xerxes said:


> Take a beating?? Do you think they would be able to perform 300 nights/year if they were hurt after a fight, I mean, a show? All I know is the average mmartist has a hard time just taking 4 bouts/year.
> I just found it moronic that the interviewer compares WWE (not wresting, WWE) and UFC, they're 2 different worlds and there is no relevancy is such comparison. WWE is like going to the theater. Everything is 100% set and planned weeks ahead. Commentators just need to read their script like phone interviewers do when they call out people. I wonder if they even need to watch what is going on in the ring lol


I didn't say it was the same thing. I said it's tough. Things are planned out, but there are still injuries, and some are quite serious.

This guy might not know a ton about MMA, but Brock has been in both worlds, so asking him to compare the two is a pretty logical thing for an interviewer to do.


----------



## MalkyBoy (Nov 14, 2007)

Xerxes said:


> Take a beating?? Do you think they would be able to perform 300 nights/year if they were hurt after a fight, I mean, a show? All I know is the average mmartist has a hard time just taking 4 bouts/year.
> I just found it moronic that the interviewer compares WWE (not wresting, WWE) and UFC, they're 2 different worlds and there is no relevancy is such comparison. WWE is like going to the theater. Everything is 100% set and planned weeks ahead. Commentators just need to read their script like phone interviewers do when they call out people. I wonder if they even need to watch what is going on in the ring lol


Many pro wrestlers are or addicited to pain killer or drugs, which they take to work thru the pain. Many pro wrestlers have dropped dead in recent years and a lot of them have been thru heart failure. Which is a sign of serious drug use through out life.

Steve Austin damn near broke his neck, Chris Benoit did break his neck, as did Kurt Angle. Davey Boy crushed two vertabrae, Shawn Michaels needed to have two vertabrae fused.

These are just a few of the injuries I can remember off the top of my head.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

MalkyBoy said:


> Many pro wrestlers are or addicited to pain killer or drugs, which they take to work thru the pain. Many pro wrestlers have dropped dead in recent years and a lot of them have been thru heart failure. Which is a sign of serious drug use through out life.
> 
> Steve Austin damn near broke his neck, Chris Benoit did break his neck, as did Kurt Angle. Davey Boy crushed two vertabrae, Shawn Michaels needed to have two vertabrae fused.
> 
> These are just a few of the injuries I can remember off the top of my head.


I think his original point was that although pro wrestling does produce injuries, the point of pro wrestling is to perform synchronized acrobatics in which each wrestler does his best to NOT hurt the other guy... MMA is the opposite. 

Sure, pro wrestlers get hurt, but in MMA a fighter can expect to go to the hospital after most of their fights unless they are one of the tiny % that is so good (like anderson silva) that they can finish a fight without takin a serious injury on a regular basis.


----------



## swellin (Dec 30, 2007)

In pro wrestling you can expect to go to the hospital as well, i mean cmon jumping do back flips off of a ring onto tiny mats, or through splintered tables is extremely dangerous, i can tell you this, the death toll is pro wrestling compared to MMA is much higher, take that into consideration before saying pro wrestling is easier.


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

_"I think his original point was that although pro wrestling does produce injuries, the point of pro wrestling is to perform synchronized acrobatics in which each wrestler does his best to NOT hurt the other guy... MMA is the opposite. 

Sure, pro wrestlers get hurt, but in MMA a fighter can expect to go to the hospital after most of their fights unless they are one of the tiny % that is so good (like anderson silva) that they can finish a fight without takin a serious injury on a regular basis."_

Yeah. My other point was a former wrestler can't say anything about the planning and setting up of WWE events even after retirement. We can see it from Lesnar's answers, how he can't clearly answer some questions. I guess he's still under a contract with WWE somehow.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

swellin said:


> In pro wrestling you can expect to go to the hospital as well, i mean cmon jumping do back flips off of a ring onto tiny mats, or through splintered tables is extremely dangerous, i can tell you this, the death toll is pro wrestling compared to MMA is much higher, take that into consideration before saying pro wrestling is easier.


if you're trying to suggest that they go to the hospital eveyr night after performing... 300 nights a year... cmon.

Also, I'm not really sure how death tolls are all the relevant. Mostly when pro wrestlers die its the result of freak accident or accumulated heart trauma from drugs and steroids...

Also pro wrestling has been going about forty years longer than MMA. That's a lot more time to rack up casualties.


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

_"In pro wrestling you can expect to go to the hospital as well, i mean cmon jumping do back flips off of a ring onto tiny mats, or through splintered tables is extremely dangerous, i can tell you this, the death toll is pro wrestling compared to MMA is much higher, take that into consideration before saying pro wrestling is easier."_

"jumping.. back flips..."

You just said it my friend, WWE guys are stuntmen.
Don't get me wrong though, I was a big WWF fan (when I was 10).


----------



## Rygu (Jul 21, 2008)

Xerxes said:


> _"In pro wrestling you can expect to go to the hospital as well, i mean cmon jumping do back flips off of a ring onto tiny mats, or through splintered tables is extremely dangerous, i can tell you this, the death toll is pro wrestling compared to MMA is much higher, take that into consideration before saying pro wrestling is easier."_
> 
> "jumping.. back flips..."
> 
> ...



I remember a few Hardy Boys ladder matches from years ago where some of those falls had to be a little painful at the very least lol.


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

Xerxes said:


> Yeah. My other point was a former wrestler can't say anything about the planning and setting up of WWE events even after retirement. We can see it from Lesnar's answers, how he can't clearly answer some questions. I guess he's still under a contract with WWE somehow.


Um, no?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5RDQCTOsXA

I had to come back and edit this, you can't be serious? You didn't actually mean what you said did you? Pro-Wrestlers do shoot interviews all the time, even before they retire. What are you talking about?



Xerxes said:


> "jumping.. back flips..."
> 
> You just said it my friend, WWE guys are stuntmen.
> Don't get me wrong though, I was a big WWF fan (when I was 10).


Professional wrestling is far more dangerous than MMA. It's not even close.


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

TheNegation said:


> Um, no?
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5RDQCTOsXA
> 
> I had to come back and edit this, you can't be serious? You didn't actually mean what you said did you? Pro-Wrestlers do shoot interviews all the time, even before they retire. What are you talking about?
> ...


Are you kidding? Lesnar said in the video: "They're getting hurt, not every night, but it happens". It happens yeah. Just likes stuntmen happen to get hurt in some movies. 
WWE guys can sometimes get hurt because they have to throw each other in spectacular acrobatics to make the show. Most of them are so huge (many under steroids btw) so they can throw the opponent and also get minimum hurt when thrown. The goal is to give minimum damage to the partner but still provide a good show but in MMA you want to hurt the opponent the maximum to weaken them and get a KO or submission. 
If you think WWE is more dangerous than UFC, then answer this question: why Lesnar performs so much less in the UFC as he used to do with WWE? Because eventhough the guy is strong, he'd die after a few weeks in the octogon, receiving punches, elbows and knees in the face every other night. 

Also it's not like he gave an obvious answer on the setting up of events or script writing, so my point still stands. You get sued if you talk about that.


----------



## bigdog89 (Oct 17, 2007)

MalkyBoy said:


> Many pro wrestlers are or addicited to pain killer or drugs, which they take to work thru the pain. Many pro wrestlers have dropped dead in recent years and a lot of them have been thru heart failure. Which is a sign of serious drug use through out life.
> 
> Steve Austin damn near broke his neck, Chris Benoit did break his neck, as did Kurt Angle. Davey Boy crushed two vertabrae, Shawn Michaels needed to have two vertabrae fused.
> 
> These are just a few of the injuries I can remember off the top of my head.


'


Angle broke his neck doing ncaa wrestling not pro
Benoit actually broke sabus neck too i think 



HexRei said:


> if you're trying to suggest that they go to the hospital eveyr night after performing... 300 nights a year... cmon.
> 
> Also, I'm not really sure how death tolls are all the relevant. Mostly when pro wrestlers die its the result of freak accident or accumulated heart trauma from drugs and steroids...
> 
> Also pro wrestling has been going about forty years longer than MMA. That's a lot more time to rack up casualties.



Pro wrestling has been going on a lot longer than fourty years.


Xerxes said:


> _"In pro wrestling you can expect to go to the hospital as well, i mean cmon jumping do back flips off of a ring onto tiny mats, or through splintered tables is extremely dangerous, i can tell you this, the death toll is pro wrestling compared to MMA is much higher, take that into consideration before saying pro wrestling is easier."_
> 
> "jumping.. back flips..."
> 
> ...



Pro wrestlers in the united states are members of the actors guild .And yes they get injured maybe not severe ones every night but the fact is you cant take those landings night in and night out and not take some bumps and bruises and they add up.

Bubba ray devon has taken several concussions and ironically so has lesnar.His match against angle where he missed the shooting star press and landed on his head.Yes the big lug went for a shooting star press.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

bigdog89 said:


> '
> Pro wrestling has been going on a lot longer than fourty years.


How long then? I'm interested since it just further proves that particular point i was making


----------



## XitUp (Jan 11, 2007)

Xerxes said:


> Are you kidding? Lesnar said in the video: "They're getting hurt, not every night, but it happens". It happens yeah. Just likes stuntmen happen to get hurt in some movies.
> WWE guys can sometimes get hurt because they have to throw each other in spectacular acrobatics to make the show. Most of them are so huge (many under steroids btw) so they can throw the opponent and also get minimum hurt when thrown. The goal is to give minimum damage to the partner but still provide a good show but in MMA you want to hurt the opponent the maximum to weaken them and get a KO or submission.
> If you think WWE is more dangerous than UFC, then answer this question: why Lesnar performs so much less in the UFC as he used to do with WWE? Because eventhough the guy is strong, he'd die after a few weeks in the octogon, receiving punches, elbows and knees in the face every other night.
> 
> Also it's not like he gave an obvious answer on the setting up of events or script writing, so my point still stands. You get sued if you talk about that.


That's the point, it's more dangerous _because_ they are taking those bumps every other night.


----------



## bigdog89 (Oct 17, 2007)

HexRei said:


> How long then? I'm interested since it just further proves that particular point i was making


since early 1900s at least gotch vs hackensmidt the second match and afterwards is when things started going towards works more.Carnival matches had been happening throughout the us for while before that.
And the fact is most the deaths that your hinting at regards to drugs and that sort of stuff didnt happen during matches (exhibitions is what theyre classified under) mostly during training adn theyre everyday lives.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

XitUp said:


> That's the point, it's more dangerous _because_ they are taking those bumps every other night.


Most pro fighters are training combat skills 5 or 6 days a week. It's not like they're just sitting around drinking for the three months before their fight (unless they're tank abbott) they're doing stuff in the gym that is pretty dangerous and i hear about fighters getting seriously injured in training all the time. Hell, I can't remember the last time I went to my gym and sparred or rolled and didn't have at least half a dozen mat burns, sprains, jams, and bruises afterward.


----------



## bigdog89 (Oct 17, 2007)

HexRei said:


> Most pro fighters are training combat skills 5 or 6 days a week. It's not like they're just sitting around drinking for the three months before their fight (unless they're tank abbott) they're doing stuff in the gym that is pretty dangerous and i hear about fighters getting seriously injured in training all the time. Hell, I can't remember the last time I went to my gym and sparred or rolled and didn't have at least half a dozen mat burns, sprains, jams, and bruises afterward.


Mat burns on your face sucks big time


----------



## XitUp (Jan 11, 2007)

HexRei said:


> Hell, I can't remember the last time I went to my gym and sparred or rolled and didn't have at least half a dozen mat burns, sprains, jams, and bruises afterward.


Yup, that's just the same as jumping through a table or having a 250lb guy land on you.

I hate pro wrestling, but you can't deny that it's a risky business.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

XitUp said:


> Yup, that's just the same as jumping through a table or having a 250lb guy land on you.


Actually it HAS included a 250 guy jumping on me (although not too often since I roll with guys my own size usually). You think MMA doesn't have 250 lb guys? I'm about 200 myself. And jumpin through a table aint that dangerous, unless you're worried about splinters 



> I hate pro wrestling, but you can't deny that it's a risky business.


It is. Just a different level and type of risk than MMA.


----------



## bigdog89 (Oct 17, 2007)

HexRei said:


> Actually it HAS included a 250 guy jumping on me (although not too often since I roll with guys my own size usually). You think MMA doesn't have 250 lb guys? I'm about 200 myself. And jumpin through a table aint that dangerous, unless you're worried about splinters
> 
> 
> 
> It is. Just a different level and type of risk than MMA.


Tell that to hardcore hollys back nice slice taken out of it.
I know these things a cus i used to be into it and b my little bro still loves it.


----------



## XitUp (Jan 11, 2007)

HexRei said:


> It is. Just a different level and type of risk than MMA.


There is a reason that a lot of pro wrestlers are addicted to pain killers.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

bigdog89 said:


> Tell that to hardcore hollys back nice slice taken out of it.
> I know these things a cus i used to be into it and b my little bro still loves it.


Eh, I said it wasn't *that* dangerous, not that it was completely safe. You can hurt yourself doing just about anything.


----------



## bigdog89 (Oct 17, 2007)

HexRei said:


> Eh, I said it wasn't *that* dangerous, not that it was completely safe. You can hurt yourself doing just about anything.


Ya i know i was just making the statement because of the splinters comment


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

XitUp said:


> There is a reason that a lot of pro wrestlers are addicted to pain killers.


Before they began issuing serious penalties for testing dirty for them, many MMA fighters were also (Kerr and Rutten come to mind). Heck, I'd bet some still use them like crazy to get through training although I don't know that for sure.


----------



## bigdog89 (Oct 17, 2007)

HexRei said:


> Before they began issuing serious penalties for testing dirty for them, many MMA fighters were also (Kerr and Rutten come to mind). Heck, I'd bet some still use them like crazy to get through training although I don't know that for sure.


Whatr u talking about rutten being addicted to pain killers?


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

bigdog89 said:


> Whatr u talking about rutten being addicted to pain killers?


have you seen his list of positive drug tests? I don't have a link off hand but I have seen it and it was a parade of painkillers.


----------



## bigdog89 (Oct 17, 2007)

HexRei said:


> have you seen his list of positive drug tests? I don't have a link off hand but I have seen it and it was a parade of painkillers.


this i have to see to believe


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

google around for it, I aint making it up. In fact he tested positive for morphine in his last fight, vs Ruben VIllareal.


----------



## bigdog89 (Oct 17, 2007)

HexRei said:


> google around for it, I aint making it up. In fact he tested positive for morphine in his last fight, vs Ruben VIllareal.


only thing i found was on mmajunkie and it didnt list any drugs just mentioned he failed a test.the rest was just a whole thing bout california not testing for steroids but testing for recreational drugs.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

bigdog89 said:


> only thing i found was on mmajunkie and it didnt list any drugs just mentioned he failed a test.the rest was just a whole thing bout california not testing for steroids but testing for recreational drugs.


I actually think I may have read about it here.

But here is a link I found with a quick search that shows Bas results from his last test:

http://www.mmaweekly.com/absolutenm/templates/dailynews.asp?articleid=3704&zoneid=13


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

Xerxes said:


> Are you kidding? Lesnar said in the video: "They're getting hurt, not every night, but it happens". It happens yeah. Just likes stuntmen happen to get hurt in some movies.
> WWE guys can sometimes get hurt because they have to throw each other in spectacular acrobatics to make the show. Most of them are so huge (many under steroids btw) so they can throw the opponent and also get minimum hurt when thrown. The goal is to give minimum damage to the partner but still provide a good show but in MMA you want to hurt the opponent the maximum to weaken them and get a KO or submission.
> If you think WWE is more dangerous than UFC, then answer this question: why Lesnar performs so much less in the UFC as he used to do with WWE? Because eventhough the guy is strong, he'd die after a few weeks in the octogon, receiving punches, elbows and knees in the face every other night.
> 
> Also it's not like he gave an obvious answer on the setting up of events or script writing, so my point still stands. You get sued if you talk about that.


Lol. Ah....time to get explanatory.

You see, the fact that these guys have to perform so much less than Pro-Wrestlers is one of the reasons it is safer.

That interview was a response to that strange ramble you had about Pro-Wrestlers not being able to speak about the buisness, it wasn't part of my "Pro-wrestling is dangerous" argument.

They do not get sued, hell maybe they can if they signed a specific contract that says something along those lines, but with the huge amounts of shoot interviews, auto-biographies etc. etc. lying about I don't think too many guys have:thumb02:



HexRei said:


> Actually it HAS included a 250 guy jumping on me (although not too often since I roll with guys my own size usually). You think MMA doesn't have 250 lb guys? I'm about 200 myself. And jumpin through a table aint that dangerous, unless you're worried about splinters
> 
> 
> 
> It is. Just a different level and type of risk than MMA.


Yes, it's a much greater risk. 
Would you like me to go drag up some lists of dead, dying, drugged up and injured Pro-Wrestlers for you, so we can compare? I can limit it to guys who have been hurt since MMA came to prominence if you like

Unless you've got 200+ pound men jumping from 20ft Balconies to concrete though tables(which aren't more dangerous, they are there to make the spot safer) on top of you, I don't think you can really make a comparison.


And for gods sake people, Pro-Wrestling does not = WWE.


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

HexRei said:


> I actually think I may have read about it here.
> 
> But here is a link I found with a quick search that shows Bas results from his last test:
> 
> http://www.mmaweekly.com/absolutenm/templates/dailynews.asp?articleid=3704&zoneid=13


Here is Rutten's response, for those interested:
http://www.mmanews.com/other/Bas-Rutten-Responds-To-Drug-Use-Allegations-From-CSAC.html


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

jasvll said:


> Here is Rutten's response, for those interested:
> http://www.mmanews.com/other/Bas-Rutten-Responds-To-Drug-Use-Allegations-From-CSAC.html





jasvll said:


> I love Bas enough to believe him.


 

i myself am a little skeptical, I love bas to death to but it seems like every fighter has an excuse after he gets caught.


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

TheNegation said:


> Lol. Ah....time to get explanatory.
> 
> You see, the fact that these guys have to perform so much less than Pro-Wrestlers is one of the reasons it is safer.
> 
> ...


I got your point about free talk. It's obvious it's stated in their contract that they're not allowed to talk about certain things happening in the backstage. There are still some people and many kids that think WWE is not set up and outcomes are undecided, so talking out could mess up their business among certain audiences. And business = contract. 

About dangerousness, that's your perspective. Mine is if they can perform so much during a year, it's because the nature, the discipline itself IS safer than MMA. 
I agree, performing 300 nights/year can make it dangerous. But you can use this argument for all other sports. If soccer or tennis pros (and let's forget about football..) would perform 300 nights/y that would make it dangerous for the players too. They'd get so much injuries, body fatigue and would need to take diff kinds of drugs and pain killers. 
Being in WWE may be more dangerous than being in the UFC because you have to perform every other night, but that's valid for pretty much all sports. And this doesn't mean wrestling itself as a discipline is more dangerous than MMA. 

Just ask yourself this question: do you think someone would rather perform 300 times/y in WWE or 300x/y in UFC? Hell I think Brock got his answer.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

TheNegation said:


> Yes, it's a much greater risk.
> Would you like me to go drag up some lists of dead, dying, drugged up and injured Pro-Wrestlers for you, so we can compare? I can limit it to guys who have been hurt since MMA came to prominence if you like
> 
> Unless you've got 200+ pound men jumping from 20ft Balconies to concrete though tables(which aren't more dangerous, they are there to make the spot safer) on top of you, I don't think you can really make a comparison.


Once MMA is a more mature sport I think we'll see a lot of MMA fighters that are "dead, dying, drugged up and injured" too. We haven't even had a full generation of MMA fighters yet (unless you're counting Vale Tudo, which is *undeniably* more dangerous than pro wrestling) so we don't have many aging fighters with thirty years of career injuries. But we will.

And sure, there is a capacity for great injury in Pro Wrestling but the serious ones are few and far between, because they are accidents. An MMA fighter can expect to get injured every time he fights, not to mention in training between fights. The whole point of the fight is to hurt the other guy.

If pro wrestlers were getting injured as often as MMA fighters they wouldn't be performing every other night- a big part of the reason MMA fighters fight so infrequently is the long recovery times (and the suspensions that are a direct result of their injuries) following a bout.

But Im sure none of this is news to you, you have a lot of great posts under your belt.


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

It's not perspective, look at the Injury rates for gods sake. How is it perspective where there are facts and statistics that back up what I am saying?:confused02:

You have seen their contracts? Sorry sir I was unaware. I guess wrestling organisations are just too lazy to go about enforcing any of these contracts then?

Hexrei it's total news to me. Not about MMA, but about Pro-wrestling. The fact is, I'm not ignorant on MMA, but a whole lot of people are very ignorant on what it is Pro-wrestlers do and go through.

And the sort of things that can keep MMArtist from fighting do not often stop Pro-wrestlers from performing, you are not taking that into account.

I mean christ how can you say serious injuries are few and far between? They simply are not, if you look at almost any wrestlers career they will have had some really bad stuff in the course of it.


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

TheNegation said:


> It's not perspective, look at the Injury rates for gods sake. How is it perspective where there are facts and statistics that back up what I am saying?:confused02:
> 
> You have seen their contracts? Sorry sir I was unaware. I guess wrestling organisations are just too lazy to go about enforcing any of these contracts then?
> 
> ...


My whole point is just pro wrestling is not dangerous because of the nature of the discipline, it can be dangerous because they perform every other night. And actually they can perform at this pace because the discipline is not dangerous on its own. Just like soccer, tennis, or any other sports could be risky if they were performed at this pace. MMA itself as a sport is so dangerous that you can only fight 3/4 times a year. Any MMArtists that would perform every other night would die after a month, any soccer or tennis pros performing 300x/year would get as many or maybe more injuries than WWE guys. 

So wrestling is not dangerous itself, performing at this pace is, just like for all other sports.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

TheNegation said:


> And the sort of things that can keep MMArtist from fighting do not often stop Pro-wrestlers from performing, you are not taking that into account.


Certainly... performing pro wrestling with an injury is safer because most performances go off without a real injury. Both guys are trying hard not to injure each other. Going into a fight with a serious injury would be straight stupid since the whole point of the fight is injure your opponent. And a lot of MMA fighters do it anyway. 

I think that perhaps rather than me underestimating the amount of injuries a pro wrestler gets over a career, you might be underestimating how many injuries an MMA fighter has over a similarly long career.



> I mean christ how can you say serious injuries are few and far between? They simply are not, if you look at almost any wrestlers career they will have had some really bad stuff in the course of it.


"some really bad stuff" and "few and far between" are not necessarily incompatible, but unfortunately they are both relative terms so I'm not sure we're going to be able to reconcile this debate.


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

Thats not what you were saying, not at all.

Would you like to retract your earlier statements and make a new one?

You don't seem to realise that the amount they perform is a part of the buisness. As is pushing things to the next level and doing dangerous bumps and moves.

This is like the equivalent of me saying MMA isn't dangerous and then getting called on it and saying I only meant MMA besides the strikes and submissions aspect.


And you are still wrong, Pro-wrestling, as a discipline is dangerous. Poeple don't get injured becuase they perform so much, it just increases the probability of it happening. Actually I shouldn't say that, obviously some injuries are the result of it.



HexRei said:


> Certainly... performing pro wrestling with an injury is safer because most performances go off without a real injury. Both guys are trying hard not to injure each other. Going into a fight with a serious injury would be straight stupid since the whole point of the fight is injure your opponent. And a lot of MMA fighters do it anyway.


Pro-wrestlers are not tested(well, now the vast majority are not) like MMA fighters allowing them to pump themselves full of drugs to make their shows. I don't see this happening in MMA to the same extent.



HexRei said:


> I think that perhaps rather than me underestimating the amount of injuries a pro wrestler gets over a career, you might be underestimating how many injuries an MMA fighter has over a similarly long career.


I doubt it. Plus, how exactly do you propose an MMA fighter goes about having a career as long as a Pro-wreslter? The vast majority do not/will not.





HexRei said:


> "some really bad stuff" and "few and far between" are not necessarily incompatible, but unfortunately they are both relative terms so I'm not sure we're going to be able to reconcile this debate.


Well would you like to be more specific when you state that injuries in Pro-wrestling are few and far between?


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

TheNegation said:


> Professional wrestling is far more dangerous than MMA. It's not even close.


That's what you said in post 25 and since then, 80% of my point was based on that statement and dangerousness of MMA compared to Wrestling. All you need is read carefully my posts. So don't start saying _"Thats not what you were saying, not at all... You're making a new statement"_ just because you have no better arguments to what I wrote. 

I know it's part of business for pro-wrestlers to perform 300 nights a year, just like it is for MMA fighters to perform only a few times a year. 

You also said _"You see, the fact that these guys have to perform so much less than Pro-Wrestlers is one of the reasons it is safer."_ 
That's totally wrong!! It's the exact opposite. MMA fighters perform only a few times a year because the sport is way more dangerous by nature. The average MMA fighter gets 5 to 10K per fight and that's peanut. Don't you think they would like to make more money? They want to but they couldn't, because it's unthinkable for a MMA fighter to perform even 15 or 20 times per year. And every other day like wrestler would just kill them after a month. 
If wrestling was that dangerous, the commission would have decreased the pace of events long time ago for wrestlers' safety, just like the MMA commission had to regulate their discipline 10 years ago.
(Just fyi, at the beginning the UFC was banned from regular TV and even from PPV. Even today, after many regulations, MMA is still not legal in several western countries, states or provinces of Canada, because it's still considered too violent and dangerous as a sport). 

I think you need some rational mathematical demonstration to get this dangerousness point. I'm gonna show you with figures how much more dangerous MMA is compared to Wrestling. Let's say both sport's commission tolerates roughly the same threshold of damage for each fighter in a year. 

*1) Wrestler Joe performs 300 times a year and get damage x. 
2) MMA fighter Jim fights 4 times a year and get the same damage x. 
3) Therefore MMA is 75 times more dangerous than Wrestling (300/4=75). In other words, if MMA fights were performed at the same pace than pro-Wrestling events in a 1 year period, we would have 75 times more damage, injuries and deaths in MMA than in Wresting. *

There you go, you just got mathematical evidence that MMA is way more dangerous than Wrestling. And it's not 2 times, 10 times or even 50 times more dangerous, but 75 times!


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

This would be hard enough if you could speak English properly.......

I'm just going to stop OK, since you don't even seem top be able to understand a simple statement like "You see, the fact that these guys have to perform so much less than Pro-Wrestlers is one of the reasons it is safer."?

I do suggest you actually try to educate yourself a small bit on the subhject if you actually want to talk about it though.


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

TheNegation said:


> This would be hard enough if you could speak English properly.......
> 
> I'm just going to stop OK, since you don't even seem top be able to understand a simple statement like "You see, the fact that these guys have to perform so much less than Pro-Wrestlers is one of the reasons it is safer."?
> 
> I do suggest you actually try to educate yourself a small bit on the subhject if you actually want to talk about it though.


http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/


----------



## djants (Jun 19, 2008)

In MMA a match gets stopped when a fighter taps out, gets knocked out or has something drastic like a broken limb, it gets stopped by a doctor. In pro-wrestling this is not the case. The match must go on.

Anyone seen the hideous Sid Vicious leg break? His leg proper snaps, yet that match continued for another 3-4 minutes before help arrived. Mick Foley has been knocked out and continued (Hell In the Cell) and many other wrestlers have been forced to continue their matches with torn ligaments and broken bones. They dont have the luxury of tapping out, the match is over when it is scheduled to be over. And then the next day, they have to do it again.

No doubt if MMA fighters DID work the same schedule, then it would be more dangerous, but they dont and never will, so therefore, pro wrestling IS more dangerous.


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

jasvll said:


> http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/


I'm not even sure which part of my post you are reffering to with that.


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

TheNegation said:


> This would be hard enough if you could speak English properly.......
> 
> I'm just going to stop OK, since you don't even seem top be able to understand a simple statement like "You see, the fact that these guys have to perform so much less than Pro-Wrestlers is one of the reasons it is safer."?
> 
> I do suggest you actually try to educate yourself a small bit on the subhject if you actually want to talk about it though.


I probably have much more education than you (MBA) and can speak several languages. How many can you?
I just see that you have no better arguments to what I say than attacking me on a personnal level. 

We all conclude that you're totally wrong from A to Z.


----------



## djants (Jun 19, 2008)

He isnt wrong.

The facts are simple...MMA guys fight 3/4 times a year, pro wrestlers have matches in the 300 mark (as you yourself pointed out). The heavy touring schedule means that there is no time to recover for the athletes involved, and also the extra pressures caused by heavy pain medication etc. Pro Wrestlers have dropped like flies over the past few years from things associated with their profession.

Your point is that if MMA guys had the same schedule as pro wreslters then it would be more dangerous...no doubt, but that is speculation since it isnt reality. The reality is that pro wrestling is a much more dangerous, less regulated profession.


----------



## Manga Okami (Aug 12, 2008)

I hate people who talk without knowing a damn thing with a PASSION! Lesnar said himself they are equally dangerous except in wrestling you arent given time to recover, as an ex-hardcore wrestling fan I will try to reason with the ignorant. 1st off there is no clause in ones contract about talking about the WWE and the backstage nuances or have you. During WWE programs wrestlers have revealed shoots during matches. Reliving son of WWE Chairman Vince McMahon, Shane McMahon vs Kurt Angle, Kurt revealed that Shane told Kurt to throw him threw a door(or maybe it was glass, don't recall) and Mick Foley's books(hell, even the titles break keyfabe) he reveals many things most notably his infamous shoot where he instructed "The Undertaker" to throw him off the top of the cell, which he responded "Mick do you WANT to die? So point failed. Second off, since you think Pro Wrestling is just a bunch of armdrags into cushion here's some things for you to research.

Sabu(countless injuries and rediculous amount of medical bills in which he still finishes the match)
New Jack (like fellow wrestler DVon Dudley has an indent in his forehead from constant blading that's cutting yourself with something in your sleve in case you didnt know, and an incident in which a rookie asked for New Jack to blade him, the guy moved or something and got cut to deep and ended up dying)
Mick Foley ( I have a feeling you'd actually learn something studying up on Foley)
Muta Scale (Blading accident which involved an ENORMOUS amount of blood loss, match still finished despite almost dying)

Also, WWE is still very dangerous and a grind but its a cakewalk to the hardcore wrestling organizations in Japan. Learn to not talk out of your ass.


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

Xerxes said:


> I probably have much more education than you (MBA) and can speak several languages. How many can you?
> I just see that you have no better arguments to what I say than attacking me on a personnal level.
> 
> We all conclude that you're totally wrong from A to Z.


No, you simply know nothing about Pro-wrestling. You are more Educated than me, and I only speak two languages(well, three if you want to count my shitty knowledge of Irish, my native tongue), but your comments on Pro-Wrestling and Pro-wrestlers show you know nothing about it.

And repped to the two guys above me......


----------



## Prone_to_rage (Jan 2, 2007)

ok this has been a debate my friends and i have had many times. i am 19 years old and i train in mma, however i train in mma as a passion i also go to a professional wrestling school and can tell you that training for professional wrestling is just as painful and tiring as mma. in mma u get hit u hit back u get hurt broken bones in ur face are possible andd many other possible sprains and tears. all of these injuries are equally as possible in professional wrestling however u dont heal u get back in the ring and keep going. to be honest there is no possible way to get dropped on ur back over and over and not get hurt. professional wrestling is veryy dangerous andd cann hurtt u just as easily as mma and for people like me trying to make a living in one or the other i can hope i make it in mma for a chance to have my body work normally for longer then it would if i made it in professional wrestling


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

To both of you guys, we're not going to have a debate about this for a whole week + we're going in circles over and over. So this will be my last post on this thread, take it or leave it. 

You say Wrestling is more dangerous than MMA, I say no and explained why several times. The sport of MMA itself is way more dangerous, for the simple reason an average MMA fighter is only able to take a few bouts a year or his body would just collapse, compared to hundreds of shows per year a Wrestler can take. 
What makes pro-wrestling (ie WWE) dangerous for the body is mostly if not only due to the high pace of the events, and it's not due to the actual nature of the discipline. *The discipline on its own is actually so safe that it allows wrestlers to perform hundreds of shows per year.* 
Any other sport (tennis, soccer..) would be at least as dangerous as wrestling if they were performed so intensively. And this is definitely more true for MMA because the human body can only stand a few fights per year. It would just be suicide to take a fight every other night in MMA like pro-Wrestlers do, *because MMA as a sport is way more dangerous than Wrestling*. 

If you doubt it, just wonder why Brock Lesnar doesn't take more fights in the UFC, like he used to do in WWE? You got the answer. 

These are just facts, no speculation on that, just use your judgement, be honest and admit it.


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

Nobody is debating the fact that MMA fighters could fight as often as Pro-wrestlers perform you idiot, why are you making that point, we are saying that *because* Pro-Westlers perform so much it's one of the reasons that it is dangerous. Understand? Nobody has said Pro-wrestling is more dangerous in spite of this fact.

Even so, saying tennis of all things would be just as dangerous as Pro-wrestling if it was performed at the same intensity....lol......


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

TheNegation said:


> Nobody is debating the fact that MMA fighters could fight as often as Pro-wrestlers perform you idiot, why are you making that point, we are saying that *because* Pro-Westlers perform so much it's one of the reasons that it is dangerous. Understand? Nobody has said Pro-wrestling is more dangerous in spite of this fact.


Good to see you kinda starting to agree. Keep working. 



TheNegation said:


> Even so, saying tennis of all things would be just as dangerous as Pro-wrestling if it was performed at the same intensity....lol......


300 tennis or soccer pro matches per year? That for sure, the body could hardly stand that much.


----------



## vandalian (Oct 14, 2006)

Educated of not, I'm pretty sure Brock is more qualified than any of us to compare professional wrestling and MMA.

And I doubt he's scared of McMahon. He already defied his former boss when he violated his non-competition clause.


----------



## Chileandude (Jan 17, 2008)

Xerxes said:


> To both of you guys, we're not going to have a debate about this for a whole week + we're going in circles over and over. So this will be my last post on this thread, take it or leave it.
> 
> You say Wrestling is more dangerous than MMA, I say no and explained why several times. The sport of MMA itself is way more dangerous, for the simple reason an average MMA fighter is only able to take a few bouts a year or his body would just collapse, compared to hundreds of shows per year a Wrestler can take.
> What makes pro-wrestling (ie WWE) dangerous for the body is mostly if not only due to the high pace of the events, and it's not due to the actual nature of the discipline. *The discipline on its own is actually so safe that it allows wrestlers to perform hundreds of shows per year.*
> ...


Of course a single MMA match is more dangerous than a pro-wrestling match. But your claims of MMA as a sport being more dangerous than p.wrestling as a "sport" are laughable at best.

The crazy schedule of p.wrestling is inherent to it-

sure, an MMA fighter wouldnt be able to stand taking a MMA schedule like a p.wrestling one, but you are not even allowed to do it because of the medical suspensions.

in conclusion a single MMA fight is much more dangerous than a pro wrestling match, but as a career prowrestling is more dangerous because of its nature.


----------



## XitUp (Jan 11, 2007)

Chileandude said:


> in conclusion a single MMA fight is much more dangerous than a pro wrestling match, but as a career prowrestling is more dangerous because of its nature.


He'll still try to find a way to change what your saying to fit his argument.


----------



## djants (Jun 19, 2008)

Id just like to reiterate that pro wrestling matches do not end because of tap-out, injuries or in some extreme cases, knockouts. MMA is very highly regulated to protect the fighters, pro wrestling isn't.

Everyone else has covered the other gorund.


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

Xerxes said:


> Good to see you kinda starting to agree. Keep working.


I agree? I said the exact same thing I did earlier:confused02:
I haven't agreed with you at all, I'm making the exact same point.

I'm not going to reply to you anymore, you have said so many stupid things about Pro-Wrestlers contracts, their injuries, calling it a sport and talking about athletic commisions input to it to show me that you really know absolutely nothing about the subject.


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

TheNegation said:


> I agree? I said the exact same thing I did earlier:confused02:
> I haven't agreed with you at all, I'm making the exact same point.
> 
> I'm not going to reply to you anymore, you have said so many stupid things about Pro-Wrestlers contracts, their injuries, calling it a sport and talking about athletic commisions input to it to show me that you really know absolutely nothing about the subject.


Saying there is a commission regulating a discipline or a form of entertainment doesn't necessarily makes it a sport you dumb ass. Obviously "Mr. Educated" never heard of athletic and entertainment or pro-wrestling commissions in different states. 
How can you call pro-wrestling a sport when you know the outcome is decided weeks ago before the event?? I even wonder why they give out belts to their stuntmen...
But yeah as you say it's a matter of education. Can I ask you in which school do you get the degree in pro-Wrestling? I just hope you didnt pay too much for that. :laugh:


----------



## _JB_ (May 30, 2007)

Manga Okami said:


> I hate people who talk without knowing a damn thing with a PASSION!
> 
> An incident in which a rookie asked for New Jack to blade him, the guy moved or something and got cut to deep and ended up dying)



Incorrect.....


----------



## Chileandude (Jan 17, 2008)

Chileandude said:


> Of course a single MMA match is more dangerous than a pro-wrestling match. But your claims of MMA as a sport being more dangerous than p.wrestling as a "sport" are laughable at best.
> 
> The crazy schedule of p.wrestling is inherent to it-
> 
> ...


Xerces im waiting for your stellar reply.


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

Xerxes said:


> To both of you guys, we're not going to have a debate about this for a whole week + we're going in circles over and over. So this will be my last post on this thread, take it or leave it.
> 
> You say Wrestling is more dangerous than MMA, I say no and explained why several times. The sport of MMA itself is way more dangerous, for the simple reason an average MMA fighter is only able to take a few bouts a year or his body would just collapse, compared to hundreds of shows per year a Wrestler can take.
> What makes pro-wrestling (ie WWE) dangerous for the body is mostly if not only due to the high pace of the events, and it's not due to the actual nature of the discipline. *The discipline on its own is actually so safe that it allows wrestlers to perform hundreds of shows per year.*
> ...


This argument assumes that primary cause behind the limited schedule for MMArtists is the physical toll of competition. A little analysis shows that this isn't the case. 

First, there's the market differences. Pro wrestling's, especially WWE's, business model offers far more opportunities for matches than MMA promotions. Many fighters would like and are physically capable of competing more often, but there are far fewer financially viable fights than there are fighters. The biggest promotion, UFC, offers fewer events in a year than WWE offers in a month. There's also the exclusivity and first option aspects of many fighter contracts, limiting things even further.

Second, there's differences in regulation. Pro wrestling isn't regulated by athletic commissions. When a MMArtist acknowledges an injury, no matter how minor, he/she can find themselves suspended for months or longer, whereas the same injury on a pro wrestler wouldn't be an issue. Fedor's thumb injury is a recent example. He's suspended for 6 months for an injury that wouldn't cause a pro wrestler to miss a show.

Third, there's the economic factor. A MMArtist's record is a primary determinant of his/her net worth. 3 or 4 losses in a row, and their career may be over, so they obviously needs to be in top condition before entering the ring/cage. 3 or 4 losses in pro wrestling is a storyline, and injuries too severe to ignore can easily be incorporated into that story.

If MMA is more dangerous than pro wrestling, it's not proved by the difference in volume of matches alone.


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

Xerxes said:


> Saying there is a commission regulating a discipline or a form of entertainment doesn't necessarily makes it a sport you dumb ass. Obviously "Mr. Educated" never heard of athletic and entertainment or pro-wrestling commissions in different states.


I didn't? What makes you think that?



Xerxes said:


> How can you call pro-wrestling a sport when you know the outcome is decided weeks ago before the event?? I even wonder why they give out belts to their stuntmen...
> But yeah as you say it's a matter of education. Can I ask you in which school do you get the degree in pro-Wrestling? I just hope you didnt pay too much for that. :laugh:


I didn't call it a sport. See, this is the problem when one person can't understand English.

Oh one thing Jasvll, with the WWE in particular athletic commisions have attempted to gain greater control over the regulation of Pro-wrestling since events like the deaths of Guerrero and Benoit(in Georgia for instance), however it is still obviously mostly internally regulated.


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

Xerxes said:


> How can you call pro-wrestling a sport when you know the outcome is decided weeks ago before the event?? I even wonder why they give out belts to their stuntmen...


 ...or why they give out medals to gymnasts.


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

**JB** said:


> Incorrect.....


Well, technically the guy did end up dying


----------



## bigdog89 (Oct 17, 2007)

jasvll said:


> ...or why they give out medals to gymnasts.


not even close to being a good comparison because gymnastics is an actual athletic contest.

Pro wrestling first off people have died broken necks and concussions on a not infrequent basis correct.How many injuries along those lines have occurred in mixed martial arts regulated events ?No Deaths.No broken necks leaving athletes paralyzed.

Brock lesnar himself is lucky for not breaking his...well if he had much of one he probly would have.
Pro wrestlings schedule is a bit of a factor in the injury frequency due to lack of time to heal and recouperate.

Mixed martial arts as its regulated by athletic commisions requires its athletes to take time to heal from major injuries and if a fighter is concussed in a fight they have to be medically cleared to fight again.And thats not counting the suspension they have to take in regards to time before next fight.

And so far as fighters schedules...Good god look at jeremy horns record awhile back and travis fulton even.Both have a lotttt of fights because theyd fight almost every week if they could get a fight.Horn has gone on record as saying hed fight for free to help out friends promotions .

Pro wrestling is scripted and some thing about the industry probably arent allowed to be talked about totally openly.We dont know what theyre contracts contain in regards to non disclosure documents because i highly doubt that a single one of you belongs to any organization as an active pro wrestler.


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

bigdog89 said:


> not even close to being a good comparison because gymnastics is an actual athletic contest.


 The fact that it's considered an athletic contest is the point.  After all, people don't use the pre-defined routines of gymnasts to prove it's not a sport, do they?

Add point values, difficulty ratings, and judges and pro wrestling becomes a sport in the same sense as gymnastics.

Pre-determined outcomes isn't the reason pro wrestling isn't a sport.


----------



## bigdog89 (Oct 17, 2007)

jasvll said:


> The fact that it's considered an athletic contest is the point.  After all, people don't use the pre-defined routines of gymnasts to prove it's not a sport, do they?
> 
> Add point values, difficulty ratings, and judges and pro wrestling becomes a sport in the same sense as gymnastics.
> 
> Pre-determined outcomes isn't the reason pro wrestling isn't a sport.


Ok first off i have to say that pre determined by one person what they are going to do and choreographed by two people to form a whole "match" is two different things.


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

bigdog89 said:


> Ok first off i have to say that pre determined by one person what they are going to do and choreographed by two people to form a whole "match" is two different things.


How so?


----------



## bigdog89 (Oct 17, 2007)

jasvll said:


> How so?



In wrestling the outcomes the winners all of it are predetermined.
In gymnastics an indivuals routine is chosen ahead of time to score the most points.Like fighters game plan almost.


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

bigdog89 said:


> In wrestling the outcomes the winners all of it are predetermined.
> In gymnastics an indivuals routine is chosen ahead of time to score the most points.Like fighters game plan almost.


 Maybe I wasn't clear. The winners in the hypothetical sport of pro wrestling would be determined by similar criteria as gymnastics judging. The 'winner' of the match would obviously have to be irrelevant, unless selecting the 'winner' was determined by previous winning performances, much like the leaders going into gymnastics finals are given the advantage of knowing the score they'll have to beat.


----------



## _JB_ (May 30, 2007)

TheNegation said:


> Well, technically the guy did end up dying


Not from a scripted wrestling act.


----------



## djants (Jun 19, 2008)

I think his point is that you could apply the same model to pro wrestling. Like figure skating. Two people perform a routine and are marked on how well they excecute certain moves. An easy enough model to transfer to a pro-wrestling 'routine'.

The difference is that pro-wrestling is a much bigger industry with higher emphasis on entertainment.

Every sport has its 'characters' from Alex Higgins in Snooker, or Ronnie O Sullivan to Dennis Rodman in Basketball. Pro-Wrestling took those elements and combined them with a smidgen of greco-roman and some gymnastics.

The whole MMA is more dangerous than pw argument is based on "IF MMA fighters fought the same schedule etc" In theory that is correct, but it isnt the case. They dont, and pro-wrestling as it is, and as MMA is, is definately more dangerous for the participants.


----------



## bigdog89 (Oct 17, 2007)

jasvll said:


> Maybe I wasn't clear. The winners in the hypothetical sport of pro wrestling would be determined by similar criteria as gymnastics judging. The 'winner' of the match would obviously have to be irrelevant, unless selecting the 'winner' was determined by previous winning performances, much like the leaders going into gymnastics finals are given the advantage of knowing the score they'll have to beat.


The winner of the exhibition is predetermined before the match begins.And unless your not realizing something else the winner is irrelevant its a story line all planned out like a script because its oh yes thats right scripted.


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

**JB** said:


> Not from a scripted wrestling act.


No, but that Particular wrestling act wasn't exactly scripted anyway.


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

bigdog89 said:


> The winner of the exhibition is predetermined before the match begins.And unless your not realizing something else the winner is irrelevant its a story line all planned out like a script because its oh yes thats right scripted.


You are clearly missing his entire point.
Try re-reading his post.


----------



## djants (Jun 19, 2008)

Ive worked in pro-wreslting for a couple of years as a commentator/ heel manager role, and I have yet to see a script. Usually wrestlers have an idea of what 'spots' they want to do in the match, and what the outcome is and work it on the fly, such is their craft.
Doing it that way allows them to pick up the pace/milk a reaction to their leisure.


----------



## bigdog89 (Oct 17, 2007)

TheNegation said:


> You are clearly missing his entire point.
> Try re-reading his post.


No i clearly didnt He talked about scoring.Pro wrestlings winner is pre determined.Gymnastics isnt .End of story.


----------



## djants (Jun 19, 2008)

He said that you COULD add a scoring system to a pro-wrestling bout and it would be a legitamte sporting routine in the same vein as gymnastics.

I then drew comparisons to doubles figure skating.

The two wrestlers would be working AS A TEAM to achieve a score.

He wasnt saying that it was currently like that.


----------



## bigdog89 (Oct 17, 2007)

djants said:


> He said that you COULD add a scoring system to a pro-wrestling bout and it would be a legitamte sporting routine in the same vein as gymnastics.
> 
> I then drew comparisons to doubles figure skating.
> 
> ...


Well thats how it came off and truth be told were not talking about how it could be we could add real strikes and submissions and allow full contact with the weapons and make it a sport too but the fact is thats not what it is .


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

bigdog89 said:


> The winner of the exhibition is predetermined before the match begins.And unless your not realizing something else the winner is irrelevant its a story line all planned out like a script because its oh yes thats right scripted.


 Think about why I put 'winners' in quotes sometimes, but not others. That's a key distinction that you're leaving out and which I've spent a few posts trying to clarify for your sake.


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

bigdog89 said:


> No i clearly didnt He talked about scoring.Pro wrestlings winner is pre determined.Gymnastics isnt .End of story.


No, you clearly are. The "winners" the way you are talking about them in Pro-wrestling would be irrelevant in his hypothetical so yes clearly you are.


----------



## bigdog89 (Oct 17, 2007)

TheNegation said:


> No, you clearly are. The "winners" the way you are talking about them in Pro-wrestling would be irrelevant in his hypothetical so yes clearly you are.


Ok then why dont you go f**king read up where i claified what i meant by it.

And im talking facts not hypothetical.

Heres something Hypothetical for you.Ok pigs could grow wings and fly but real world fact is they dont.


----------



## djants (Jun 19, 2008)

bigdog89 said:


> Well thats how it came off and truth be told were not talking about how it could be we could add real strikes and submissions and allow full contact with the weapons and make it a sport too but the fact is thats not what it is .


True. But the whole point is that the competitors do display a certain degree of athleticism that an average person does not. A career in pro-wrestling requires training and conditioning like any other sport.

Many people simply dismiss it as 'fake fighting', because the results of the bouts are pre-determined, but the same dangers are present in that industry as any other sport.

An argument as to wether or not you can class it as a sport depends entirely on your perspective. Are bouts proper sporting contests? Of course not. But if you do view the bouts as a routine performed by two people with a common end then it very well could be.


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

bigdog89 said:


> Ok then why dont you go f**king read up where i claified what i meant by it.
> 
> And im talking facts not hypothetical.
> 
> Heres something Hypothetical for you.Ok pigs could grow wings and fly but real world fact is they dont.


Don't get pissy with me, it's not my fault you can't understand a simple hypothetical:dunno:

Geez, the one time I try to be nice and actually explain something and not just point out that someone is a moron......


----------



## djants (Jun 19, 2008)

Oh and whilst there are no scores, wrestlers gain positions on cards according to their popularity, usually gained by in-ring prowess and impressing the fans (I stress USUALLY, John Cena aside). So while the bouts themselves are not competitive, the performers are.


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

Sadly it seems to have been a long time since in ring prowess has had anything to do with impressing the fans......


----------



## djants (Jun 19, 2008)

Yeah, thinking about it that was a kind of dumb point to make....

Kurt Angle and Brock Lesnar were both respected a lot for it though.


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

Chileandude said:


> Xerces im waiting for your stellar reply.


I read your post, you make some good points but I dont agree with everything. I might have submitted 10 hell long posts on this thread and Im starting to get tired and lazy now. So to you and everybody else, you think your way and I think mine. It's just a question of opinion, noone is going to change their mind so no point of talking for days and waste more time. 



TheNegation said:


> I didn't? What makes you think that? I didn't call it a sport. See, this is the problem when one person can't understand English.


I never said you call pro-wrestling a sport. But YOU said in your previous post I called it a sport and I replied NO and I said "How can someone call pro-wrestling a sport when the outcomes are determined months before..." to tell you there is no way I consider pro-wrestling as a sport. It's just a show, a form of entertainment, that's it. You just need to read my post more carefully, it seems clear for most people here except for you (for the reasons you and now me know..). 



jasvll said:


> ...or why they give out medals to gymnasts.


Because the outcomes are not determined. 

Now to everybody here saying pro-wrestling (ie WWE) is a sport, you are all wrong. The primary goal of players in all sports is to win by being better than the opponent(s). If the outcome is already determined (for marketing, business purposes or whatever) just like it is all the time for pro wrestling events, it can't be considered as a sport anymore. 
(however that doesnt mean pro wrestler cant be considered as pure athletes obvi, just pro wrestling cant considered as a sport for these reasons, it's rather a show, a form of entertainment).


----------



## raymardo (Jun 21, 2006)

Xerxes said:


> Now to everybody here saying pro-wrestling (ie WWE) is a sport, you are all wrong. The primary goal of players in all sports is to win by being better than the opponent(s). *If the outcome is already determined (for marketing, business purposes or whatever) just like it is all the time for pro wrestling events, it can't be considered as a sport anymore. *


To play devil's advocate, under that rationale, would a "fixed" boxing match qualify as sport? Boxing is a sport, but with the outcome being secretly predetermined, would the match be considered sport?


----------



## djants (Jun 19, 2008)

Xerxes said:


> Because the outcomes are not determined.
> 
> Now to everybody here saying pro-wrestling (ie WWE) is a sport, you are all wrong. The primary goal of players in all sports is to win by being better than the opponent(s). If the outcome is already determined (for marketing, business purposes or whatever) just like it is all the time for pro wrestling events, it can't be considered as a sport anymore.
> (however that doesnt mean pro wrestler cant be considered as pure athletes obvi, just pro wrestling cant considered as a sport for these reasons, it's rather a show, a form of entertainment).


The outcome of a gymnast's routine, or a figure skater's routine are both pre-determined too, and well rehearsed ahead of time. The only real difference between a bout between two pro-wrestlers and a figure skating pair is the fact that there are judges scoring the figure skating. They are scored on how well they perform the routine, pull of the moves and flow them together.Take the judges and pyrotechnics/spectacle out of the picture for a second and tell me whether or not you think there is any real difference between a pro wrestling out and a gymnastic/ figure skating routine?

It seems to me that the only argument against pro-wreslting being a 'proper' sport is a semantic one on how it is viewed.

Personally, I think that a toned down version could very well be an olympic sport.


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

Xerxes said:


> Because the outcomes are not determined.


 That's already been painstakingly addressed. Review my recent posts as necessary. :thumbsup:



> Now to everybody here saying pro-wrestling (ie WWE) is a sport, you are all wrong. .


 Did anyone here say it was a sport?


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

raymardo said:


> To play devil's advocate, under that rationale, would a "fixed" boxing match qualify as sport? Boxing is a sport, but with the outcome being secretly predetermined, would the match be considered sport?


That's a good question. This special case is cheating in sport and in my opinion, a fixed match doesn't belong to sport anymore since the "winner" didn't "win" because he was better or more skilled, but for some other reasons that have nothing to do with sport. You see how the "winning" team in a fixed boxing match gets blamed by the fans, punished by the commission and how they sometimes erase the win off the record, take back the title etc.? That's because it's cheating, it's illegal, it doesn't belong to sport and the fight shouldn't count anymore. 
On the other side, modern pro Wrestling can't be sport because everything is pre determined. The "winner" will "win" (notice the quotation signs) at the end because he's the most charismatic, popular, spectacular wrestler and the outcome was decided by the WWE CEO or whoever, mostly if not totally for business reasons. The guy didn't win because of his pure wrestling skills, athleticism etc (eventhough Im aware wrestler are athletes and this aspect can somehow counts) but he won for some other reasons that have nothing to do with sport. Who wins or looses in Wrestling is all about show and business but in sports, it's all about skills, intelligence and talent. So if you cheat in boxing, you didnt win because of your skills and it's not sport anymore. Sport is all about "the best, smarter or most talented athlete, team will win at the end" and "fixing" the match is betraying what sport truly is. Hope it's clear.


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

jasvll said:


> That's already been painstakingly addressed. Review my recent posts as necessary. :thumbsup:
> 
> Did anyone here say it was a sport?


Some people including yourself, indirectly suggested this idea. I'm just arguying why there is no way pro-Wrestling can be considered as a sport. 



djants said:


> The outcome of a gymnast's routine, or a figure skater's routine are both pre-determined too, and well rehearsed ahead of time. The only real difference between a bout between two pro-wrestlers and a figure 2skating pair is the fact that there are judges scoring the figure skating. They are scored on how well they perform the routine, pull of the moves and flow them together.Take the judges and pyrotechnics/spectacle out of the picture for a second and tell me whether or not you think there is any real difference between a pro wrestling out and a gymnastic/ figure skating routine?


You're totally right, if the outcome was pre determined (by removing the judges or whatever), meaning no matter how well everybody performes, no matter how good everybody is, we'll have this person or this team winning at the end because for some reasons it's been decided so then yeah, it would be just like wrestling. But as far as I know that's not the case, so there is no way of comparison between pro wrestling and gym/fig skating. I don't even know why you bring gymnastic and fig skating up here since the outcomes in those 2 sports are as undetermined as in any other one. 



djants said:


> Personally, I think that a toned down version could very well be an olympic sport.


You're not serious are u?? I hope that was on the bold part. Personnally, I'm happy with Greco-Roman wrestling.


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

My god this guy is stupid. I mean I see a lot of stupid stuff being posted on this forums but this guy is taking the cake at the moment.

The gymnasts and figure skating analogy wasn't that mind bogglingly difficult was it?:confused02:


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

Xerxes said:


> Some people including yourself, indirectly suggested this idea.


 Nonsense, I pointed out what changes would be necessary in order to consider a particular non-sport, in this case pro wrestling, to be a sport. It seems it would take considerable effort to confuse this with suggesting, indirectly or otherwise, that I feel pro wrestling is a sport despite lacking the very requirements I proposed.



> I'm just arguying why there is no way pro-Wrestling can be considered as a sport.


 I know. This is the reason I asked you if anyone had taken the opposite stance, since it seemed to me you were battling windmills.



> You're totally right, if the outcome was pre determined (by removing the judges or whatever), meaning no matter how well everybody performes, no matter how good everybody is, we'll have this person or this team winning at the end because for some reasons it's been decided so then yeah, it would be just like wrestling. But as far as I know that's not the case, so there is no way of comparison between pro wrestling and gym/fig skating. I don't even know why you bring gymnastic and fig skating up here since the outcomes in those 2 sports are as undetermined as in any other one.


 Again (and again and again and again), gymnasts/skaters win by performing a pre-defined routine better than anyone else's predefined routine. The outcome of their routine is predetermined as is every step in between. In fact, straying from this routine costs them performance points. It's a sport of performance, not a race. A judged pro wrestling sport would fall under the same category as gymnastics and figure skating.




> You're not serious are u?? I hope that was on the bold part. Personnally, I'm happy with Greco-Roman wrestling.


 Obviously, this theoretical sport would have no bearing on the combat sports and certainly wouldn't fall under that category.


----------



## djants (Jun 19, 2008)

Xerxes said:


> You're totally right, if the outcome was pre determined (by removing the judges or whatever), meaning no matter how well everybody performes, no matter how good everybody is, we'll have this person or this team winning at the end because for some reasons it's been decided so then yeah, it would be just like wrestling. But as far as I know that's not the case, so there is no way of comparison between pro wrestling and gym/fig skating. I don't even know why you bring gymnastic and fig skating up here since the outcomes in those 2 sports are as undetermined as in any other one.
> 
> 
> 
> You're not serious are u?? I hope that was on the bold part. Personnally, I'm happy with Greco-Roman wrestling.



Forget about the notion of a pro wrestling bout having a winner and loser. Its a non-point. Everyone knows that the two athletes involved are working TOGETHER to achieve the same result. Its a routine, the same as a gymnast or figure skater performs a routine. A gymnast can blow a move, a figure skater can slip and a wrestler can do the same things. How well they perform the routine is the case in point, and if gymnasts and skaters are perfectly acceptable olympic events, then by adding judges and a system of scoring unique to pro wrestling, then it could be the same thing.

It is called sports ENTERTAINMENT. I doubt there is anyone out there that seriously believes that bouts are real. People who constantly feel the need to point out that "wrestling is fake" only serve to prove that they aren't that clever and that they don't have the finger on the pulse of popular culture.

The only thing that separates this from other performance based sports is the fact that it is not viewed by a panel of judges. Although there are publications, such as powerslam, that frequently critique a wrestler based on their athleticism and performance/the ability to 'sell' the story they are supposed to be telling. Watching through those eyes does make it competitive.


NB. I watched Summerslam last night...first time I have watched WWE in ages. It was appalling. 50% of those people invloved are the reason no-one can look at pw as anything other than tat for idiots...


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

You fool, stick to ROH and Japanese Orgs.

I don't follow WWE anymore, but the little bits of it I do know I was glad to see them finally push Mark Henry(seriouly mishandled individual, even though he can't wrestle) and I wonder how they can't do more with Umaga, the man has the tools.


----------



## bigdog89 (Oct 17, 2007)

djants said:


> Forget about the notion of a pro wrestling bout having a winner and loser. Its a non-point. Everyone knows that the two athletes involved are working TOGETHER to achieve the same result. Its a routine, the same as a gymnast or figure skater performs a routine. A gymnast can blow a move, a figure skater can slip and a wrestler can do the same things. How well they perform the routine is the case in point, and if gymnasts and skaters are perfectly acceptable olympic events, then by adding judges and a system of scoring unique to pro wrestling, then it could be the same thing.
> 
> It is called sports ENTERTAINMENT. I doubt there is anyone out there that seriously believes that bouts are real. People who constantly feel the need to point out that "wrestling is fake" only serve to prove that they aren't that clever and that they don't have the finger on the pulse of popular culture.
> 
> ...



=And yet again you go and put it up there with skating and gymnastics.THERES ONE HUGE FLAW gymnasts for example are competing against the other gymnast.Oh yes that word competing do you know what that means. TO go against the opposition.Were it to be like pro wrestling then the opposition would know what the gymnast was going to do ahead of time which makes it a non point for you to say its the same dman thing.And the figure skating think about it figure skaters go against another team with their routine competing against another PAIR OF SKATERS.SO QUIT THE DMN COMPARISON ITS NOT THE SAME THING .


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

I would have an easier time accepting that these posters are just trolling than I would that they really don't understand the concept of judging a performance rather than declaring the winner of a fake fight. 

Makes you wonder how they came to be convinced that pro wrestling matches were fake in the first place.


----------



## valvetronix (Feb 3, 2008)

In other news, cool interview...


You guys are like little freaking kids!


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

valvetronix said:


> In other news, cool interview...
> 
> 
> You guys are like little freaking kids!


 Don't worry, you can play, too.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

So, are you guys saying the the pro-wrestler who will receive the belt at the end of an event is not pre-determined? That the wrestler who performs best during the match will receive the belt?

Because I was under the impression that belt was awarded according to a storyline written before the event occurred, which does seem to be a glaring difference between that and say, competitive figure skating or gymnastics. Yes, they have similarities, but the awards process is quite different, so much so as to be practically irrelevant in pro-wrestling (at least in comparison to gymnastics).

IF it were judged, I suppose it could be a competitive sport (albeit an odd one), but the judging would have no thing to do with the current belt awarding processes in place. I'm not sure pro wrestling fans would be particularly receptive to it either since they seem quite happy to see belts awarded according to storyline right now.

In answer to Raymardo, yeah, I'd say that if a boxing match is fixed, then its no longer a *competitive* sport. It could still be called an entertainment performance, but it is not a competition. Whether its a sport or not is debatable since sport has a wide variety of meanings (including "fun" or "game") but its definitely not competitive if the winner is predetermined, and not based on the actual boxing skills of the boxers.


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

HexRei said:


> So, are you guys saying the the pro-wrestler who will receive the belt at the end of an event is not pre-determined? That the wrestler who performs best during the match will receive the belt?


 The belt would have nothing to do with it. The judged winners would get a cookie or medal or something. 



> Because I was under the impression that belt was awarded according to a storyline written before the event occurred, which does seem to be a glaring difference between that and say, competitive figure skating or gymnastics.


This is why it makes no sense to compare pro wrestling as is to figure skating or gymnastics, and why it would help things a lot if posters on the skeptical side stopped trying to do that. The storyline wouldn't even be necessary in the hypothetical sport.

Try to visualize two performers pretending to compete against each other in the 'match' but performing with each other in the actual competition. The real world winners would be the two that were judged to have given the best performance based on a given set of criteria. The 3 count is simply part of the performance.

None of this matters, really, since the whole thing started with a one off comment meant to show that when the term 'sport' is broad enough to include ribbon dancing, it wouldn't be that difficult to reform pro wrestling into something that could be called by the term.


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

These people *are* trolls. Nobody is this stupid.


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

TheNegation said:


> My god this guy is stupid. I mean I see a lot of stupid stuff being posted on this forums but this guy is taking the cake at the moment.


You're starting to show serious lack of respect you little kid. If you don't agree with me either explain why and give arguments like an adult or just ignore what I have to say. But please say polite because it's easy for anybody, even a rocky ***** like urself to troll and insult people behind a computer. Show some more maturity and respect. 



jasvll said:


> gymnasts/skaters win by performing a pre-defined routine better than anyone else's predefined routine. The outcome of their routine is predetermined as is every step in between.


Not only determined on this aspect but also determined on the choice of the routine itself (how risky, how artistic it is etc). Also, unlike in pro wrestling, routines are secretly decided and rehearsed by each team and not all together with the other competitors which makes the outcome even more unpredictable. And as you said, how well each routine is executed will determine the outcome too. 



djants said:


> Forget about the notion of a pro wrestling bout having a winner and loser. Its a non-point. Everyone knows that the two athletes involved are working TOGETHER to achieve the same result. Its a routine, the same as a gymnast or figure skater performs a routine. A gymnast can blow a move, a figure skater can slip and a wrestler can do the same things. How well they perform the routine is the case in point, and if gymnasts and skaters are perfectly acceptable olympic events, then by adding judges and a system of scoring unique to pro wrestling, then it could be the same thing.
> 
> Of course, I don't see anything wrong with that, as long as we judge on how well they each perform the routines or whatever and we'll have a winner (because there must be a winner in pro sport) based on that and nothing else, it would become a sport.
> 
> ...


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

Not only is it easy, it's also fun. I did provide counter arguments, which you ignored to a large extent or else tried to change your argument. But honestly, something as stupid as your equation to prove the dangerousness of MMA compared to wrasslin, I mean jesus, I wouldn't even know where to begin providing an argument against something like tha, especially since it was in response to a point of mine you mis-understood.

You are ignorant on this, you have shown that much, and your failure to understand simple arguments leads me to believe you are none too bright either.

I have no reason to respect, so I shall not, okay?


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

TheNegation said:


> Not only is it easy, it's also fun. I did provide counter arguments, which you ignored to a large extent or else tried to change your argument. But honestly, something as stupid as your equation to prove the dangerousness of MMA compared to boxing, I mean jesus, I wouldn't even know where to begin providing an argument against something like tha, especially since it was in response to a point of mine you mis-understood.
> 
> You are ignorant on this, you have shown that much, and your failure to understand simple arguments leads me to believe you are none too bright either.
> 
> I have no reason to respect, so I shall not, okay?


Yes u should because it's very easy behind a computer. I can call u stupid as much as u call me but I wont because I dont need a computer to do what I cant do in real life.


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

Xerxes said:


> Yes u should because it's very easy behind a computer. I can call u stupid as much as u call me but I wont because I dont need a computer to do what I cant do in real life.



You are obviously very tough and scary then. Kudos to you.


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

jasvll said:


> The belt would have nothing to do with it. The judged winners would get a cookie or medal or something.
> 
> This is why it makes no sense to compare pro wrestling as is to figure skating or gymnastics, and why it would help things a lot if posters on the skeptical side stopped trying to do that. The storyline wouldn't even be necessary in the hypothetical sport.
> 
> ...


I see your point.


----------



## djants (Jun 19, 2008)

Xerxes and Bigdog. If you are going to argue...read every word of peoples posts...

~sigh~ here we go again.

People compared pro wrestlers to gymnasts, since there is a fair amount of gymnastic ability involved.

I compared it also to figure skating, because they have partner events where TWO people are involved. Neither of these two are the winners or losers, but both working TOGETHER to obtain a high score.

In this theoretical pro-wrestling as sport notion that we are talking about, the two wrestlers in a match ARE A TEAM...the match itself is the performance, so therefore it would be the MATCH competing against OTHER MATCHES. Each one involving a team of two, like figure skating.

None of us arguing this point are looking at a pro-wrestling bout as a combatative bout, but as a co-operative display. At present such bouts aims are to impress a crowd, not to prove that either participant is a dominant 'fighter'. The combat element is the 'theme' of the routine, again in a similar manner to figure skating routines that have a theme to them.

Replace the crowd with a panel of ten judges scoring each TEAM of two wrestlers, hey presto! Real sport.

Using last nights summerslam as an example...

There was The Undertaker vs Edge. Whilst it is advertised as being undertaker VERSUS Edge, it is in fact Undertaker and Edge AS A TEAM putting on a performance to overshadow previous matches.

Please...at least ONE of you get this very, very basic notion....


ps to Negation..Mark Henry was showcased for a grand total of 30 seconds...lol.


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

Oh, I didn't watch Summerslam, I just saw recently, in the last few months it seems they have been making use of him. I mean, theres a guy who is a legitimately really, really strong dude, why not show it off and have him gorilla press slamming the big men left right and centre instead of wasting him with stupid gimmicks like they did years ago and having him lose to everyone?


----------



## djants (Jun 19, 2008)

I haven't followed it for quite a while now. I agree that someone like that can easily be portrayed as a monster, 
but squash matches are only entertaining for a while, and then you have to endure the abysmally slow paced efforts when they are required to work for more than two minutes...

Last night more focus was given to Tony Atlas, and Jeff Hardy running in for Matt than Mark Henry. It just made him look worse.

And it was an ECW title match that ended by DQ...missing the point or what? lol.


----------



## TheNegation (Jun 11, 2007)

I can't bring myself to watch any of that new "ECW" stuff without wanting to kill myslef.
Were not gonna see New Jack suicide diving off a balcony at any of those shows, I can tell you that much.....


----------



## Manga Okami (Aug 12, 2008)

Oh yeah, ahahaha when I read the article a long time ago, I guess I skipped words, but still, the guy got messed up from the blade. Negation you made me laugh though when you owned the guy for saying he was a big, tough guy in real life. :thumb02:


----------



## djants (Jun 19, 2008)

The original One Night Stand gave me some high hopes...I knew it wouldnt be the same and would have a WWE spin on it, but I nver thought it would become what it has...


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

TheNegation said:


> You are obviously very tough and scary then. Kudos to you.


Don't be jealous.


----------



## Manga Okami (Aug 12, 2008)

Xerxes said:


> Don't be jealous.


I think saying "kudos" would imply he wasnt jealous.


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

Manga Okami said:


> I think saying "kudos" would imply he wasnt jealous.


Some jealous people give fake "kudos" to hide their jealousy.


----------



## Manga Okami (Aug 12, 2008)

Some trolls troll..


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

Manga Okami said:


> Some trolls troll..


Exactly. and fire burns :thumb02:


----------



## Chileandude (Jan 17, 2008)

Xerxes said:


> I read your post, you make some good points but I dont agree with everything. I might have submitted 10 hell long posts on this thread and Im starting to get tired and lazy now. So to you and everybody else, you think your way and I think mine. It's just a question of opinion, noone is going to change their mind so no point of talking for days and waste more time.


So we both agree that a MMA fight is more dangerous than a Pro-wrestling match.


but you still think that the career of the average UFC Fighter is more dangerous than the one of the average WWE Performer?


----------



## Xerxes (Aug 14, 2008)

Chileandude said:


> So we both agree that a MMA fight is more dangerous than a Pro-wrestling match.
> 
> but you still think that the career of the average UFC Fighter is more dangerous than the one of the average WWE Performer?


MMA as it is today (booming sport with bunch of fighters) is still too young to be able to judge. Once we`ll have this full generation of aging fighters with 15/20 or more years of career behind them, with life injuries, damage, drugged, dying or dead then we`ll be able to tell.


----------



## cplmac (Nov 14, 2007)

Pro-wrestling is more dangerous than MMA and it's not even close. The kinds of injuries that can and do happen in pro wrestling are considerably more severe than MMA. Worst damage you are going to see in an MMA bout is a broken arm and that's only happened a handful of times, typically it's stitches and possibly a busted nose or orbital. Not only is it inherently more dangerous the schedule is brutal. It's not a very fair comparison being that pro wrestling is essentially a stuntman circuit, whereas MMA is a competitive highly regulated sport. What in the hell does any of this have to do with "Lesnar Q&A"?


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

cplmac said:


> What in the hell does any of this have to do with "Lesnar Q&A"?


 When asked, Lesnar said both careers were equally dangerous. Of course, the internet had to come alive to tell a man who has done both he was wrong. :thumb02:


----------



## Chileandude (Jan 17, 2008)

jasvll said:


> When asked, Lesnar said both careers were equally dangerous. Of course, the internet had to come alive to tell a man who has done both he was wrong. :thumb02:



it was just an interview, im pretty sure he didn't analyze it, and he couldn't put one above the other because of the publicity.


----------



## jasvll (Mar 28, 2007)

Chileandude said:


> it was just an interview, im pretty sure he didn't analyze it


 I'm pretty sure his answer suggests otherwise:


> *A*: They are equally dangerous. You are putting yourself at risk every time you step into the octagon or a pro wrestling ring. With fighting — beyond the obvious risks associated with an actual fight — no matter how careful you are, there is a possibility of injury every time you train. One advantage with fighting is that you can take some time off to let injuries heal up and, generally, you’re not traveling excessively. In pro wrestling, being on the road and taking bumps in the ring almost every night takes a real toll on the body.


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


> he couldn't put one above the other because of the publicity.


 Yeah, Lesnar's known for his PR skills. 



Lesnar said:


> "I don't like gays. Write that down in your little notebook. I don't like gays."


http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=1830855


----------

