well it must be me then i just like my wrestling you know...decent, Match quality is THE most important thing, if you can't preform in the ring i am not interested, so to me as the matches in the OZ tour will be ranging from terrible to sh*te if i was in oz i would give it a miss.

But you like womens wrestling? That is by far the worst type of wrestling, as far as quality goes. Women simply cannot wrestle. Most struggle to sell basic things like clotheslines and can't run against the ropes, yet you have sone kind of "wrestling elitist" attitude. It's be like me saying "I only ever listen to great music" and my iPod being full of shite like Crazy Frog.

 

There isn't one good female wrestler alive. It's physically impossible for women to be talented wrestlers.

 

The fans of SHIMMER are seedy perverts who use the clever marketing to guide their disgusting thoughts.

There isn't one good female wrestler alive. It's physically impossible for women to be talented wrestlers.

 

The fans of SHIMMER are seedy perverts who use the clever marketing to guide their disgusting thoughts.

 

how one man can be so wrong in so few words is awesome but i guess its your gimmick.

how one man can be so wrong in so few words is awesome but i guess its your gimmick.

I think you should break down how I'm wrong.

 

What do you mean "gimmick"?

I think you should break down how I'm wrong.

 

What do you mean "gimmick"?

 

1) You are using sterotypes to sum up why people watch things and a general fan base. Are all WWE fans children are all ROH fans smarks. The answer is no. so to say

 

The fans of SHIMMER are seedy perverts who use the clever marketing to guide their disgusting thoughts.

 

Is actually wrong, from my experience of shimmer fans (and i can wager its a lot more informed than yours) they seem to be a group of men and women who like watching female wrestling without the negative side of the industry and booking with respect to the in ring action and the ladies themselves

 

2)

 

That is by far the worst type of wrestling, as far as quality goes. Women simply cannot wrestle

 

Aside from the sexist view of this comment in my opinion i don't agree i have seen countless females matches that have been better than male matches. i accept this is a subjective subject but to me there are some good female wrestlers (del ray, Kong, Melissa to name but a few) sure in the ring if you compare men to women the size does make harder for the women to come across the same way but there are examples of times they have also if you watch a whole female card for example a shimmer event then the contraste isn't there and the in ring action looks good.

 

Jack as i said before i find your "opinions" if they are really yours and not playing a online character which i am still not convienced you aren't (hence gimmick) are both sexist and misguided

 

but hey continue sharing them with us, i really like a good laugh :good222:

Yeah, it's a stereotype but it's right. May be a bit exaggerated but it's still right. The majority of ROH fans are smarks. Is each and every one? No, but to say "ROH is aimed at smarks" is hardly a huge point. Unless you're a pedantic f*cking c*nt. Which you are. It's pretty ironic though, that you are pedantic, considering how abysmal your posts are.

 

But whatever.

 

I would LOVE to listen to SHIMMER fans justify tree perversion by claiming they respect the women! The only people I accept are actually wrestling fans who like any old shite, which SHIMMER is, are those who will watch anything. ROH, CZW, whatever. These people probably just like all wrestling but the majority that just watch SHIMMER are perverts.

 

It's not even like Prazak ever denied it. That's something you should answer. What makes you right, when the booker admits that what I'm saying is right?

 

What I'm saying isn't sexist. It's just right. There are certain jobs women shouldn't do and it's absolutely pathetic to say that men and women are truly equal because we aren't. Why is it sexist to suggest that women, who can't run off the ropes, do not make good wrestlers?

Yeah, it's a stereotype but it's right. May be a bit exaggerated but it's still right. The majority of ROH fans are smarks. Is each and every one? No, but to say "ROH is aimed at smarks" is hardly a huge point. Unless you're a pedantic f*cking c*nt. Which you are. It's pretty ironic though, that you are pedantic, considering how abysmal your posts are.

 

yeah keep the gimmick going well done.

 

 

I would LOVE to listen to SHIMMER fans justify tree perversion by claiming they respect the women! The only people I accept are actually wrestling fans who like any old shite, which SHIMMER is, are those who will watch anything. ROH, CZW, whatever. These people probably just like all wrestling but the majority that just watch SHIMMER are perverts.

 

again i don't think you know enough to judge

 

It's not even like Prazak ever denied it. That's something you should answer. What makes you right, when the booker admits that what I'm saying is right?

 

Dave has never denied, but has he said it was the case? Also Shimmer's mission statement is American Joshi. you know like Japanese Joshi....you know which is highly respected in Japan.....or maybe you don't as you see to know little about things anyway

 

What I'm saying isn't sexist. It's just right. There are certain jobs women shouldn't do and it's absolutely pathetic to say that men and women are truly equal because we aren't. Why is it sexist to suggest that women, who can't run off the ropes, do not make good wrestlers?

 

There are many women who can run off the ropes so your point is void.

 

The biggest irony here is you started this by claim i have a "wrestling elitist" attitude when you seem to be 10 times worst but nice try jack a** (see what i have done)

Edited November 18, 200915 yr by Jayfunk

The idea that I'm a gimmick is complete nonsense. I've posted on here for...5 years? Always been the same. I think most people know that if I like someone, then I'm fine, but if I don't, I won't cower away, put up with your nonsense and not say anything back.

 

 

I think I do know enough to judge. Is that all your gonna say? Shame :(

 

 

To say I don't know what joshi is, is ludicrous. Whatever. Your posts are bullshit anyway. For the record, Prazak did admit it. I have an old WO lying about from a few years ago, with him admitting it. Makes you look ridiculous, eh?

 

 

Why don't you actual prove me wrong, instead of these stupid, condescending posts? You clearly can't. Either make a decent argument or don't reply to me again.

Either make a decent argument or don't reply to me again.

 

I will when you do, as you have actually proved nothing yourself.

 

To say I don't know what joshi is, is ludicrous. Whatever. Your posts are bullshit anyway. For the record, Prazak did admit it. I have an old WO lying about from a few years ago, with him admitting it. Makes you look ridiculous, eh?

 

Not at all. His booking doesn't support what your saying at all. if that was true then we would have GLOW, or WEW or heck the DIVA's but shimmer is different than that its more like ROH for women. I as a fan don't watch shimmer for the reason that your sexist mind comes up with i watch it for the reason i have given beacuse it is the best female wrestling in the US today there effort to try to make women's wrestling on par with men and to show what women can you is actually a decent goal and noble thing. And i for one have need see a shimmer DVD that i didn't like

Edited November 18, 200915 yr by Jayfunk

 

Why don't you actual prove me wrong, instead of these stupid, condescending posts? You clearly can't. Either make a decent argument or don't reply to me again.

 

irony much....

This is the most rubbish argument I've seen on this board considering neither of you have so far any evidence whatsoever to back up anything you're saying.

 

For starters Jack you can't say the majority of people who watch SHIMMER are perverts as a fact because you can't back that up with shock horror facts. Not to mention isn't a good female wrestler alive? So Manami Toyota's abysmal is she? Who's been given how many 5 star matches by WO exactly? That's pretty good for somebody who's useless don't you think?

 

So yes you are being sexist, that's a fact considering there is plenty of evidence to suggest women can be excellent wrestlers. It's not physically impossible and you know it. If you don't....then you're being sexist simple as that.

 

Plus stop having a go at Jayfunk for posting condescending posts...when you're doing just the same. Jesus Christ the hypocrisy is ridiculous. If he's lied or can't admit something, go for it, but picking on him for doing something you're also doing, just what the f*ck? I mean so far you've said make a decent argument to him or don't reply? Where's your decent argument? "Women can't be good wrestlers it's physically impossible". Utterly dreadful reasoning, backed up with no facts, no evidence and just bile. Seriously I can see why Jayfunk would think your a gimmick with that kind of stuff. Your a much better poster than that...so show it.

 

And Jayfunk, as I've just shown it's not too difficult to find a decent argument against his posts, so try that instead of unbelievably uncreative insults which just make you look like a pleb and that you haven't a clue.

 

Honestly. It's like the Tyson Tomko v Stevie Richards of debates. I don't which one of you is dumber.

 

Conclusion, your both wrestling fans with intelligence...So what the living f*ck are you doing?

Edited November 18, 200915 yr by Jung

There's a lot of posters who I flat out refuse to debate with. Like I mentioned earlier, ice been here years and I realize the futility of arguing with some people. Jayfunk is one of those. Yeah, it may be condescending from me, but I couldn't care less. I'm a hypocrite, shoot me. I'm not going to waste time arguing with someone who refuses to post a worthwhile response. It's pointless.

 

Anyway, onto your points.

 

Like I said, I think the people who aren't hardcore wrestling fans, watch womens wrestling for sexual reasons. I don't think the quality is good enough to really be a fan and thats it. I backed it up by Dave Prazak's admission of the exact same thing I just said. Seeing as you seem to miss the point over and over again, Dave Prazak, SHIMMER booker, has said my opinion is right. Thats a fact. So if you choose to disagree with me on that, you're also disagreeing with the person whose opinion has the most weight behind it.

 

I couldn't care less about Meltzer's ratings. Since when did his opinion become fact? If he chooses to put just one little star next to the greatest match of all time, that must mean it's a complete dud, right? Because Meltzer said so?

 

Meltzer is just a mark. Thats it. I couldn't care less about his opinion. It's not fact and it doesn't mean more to me, than anyone elses opinion. Apart from Jaydunk's.

 

As for Toyota, I have seen her matches and I don't like them. Wrestling is theatre and the key to good wrestling is making it believable. I've seen her matches years ago, when I didn't think wrestling was a complete joke, and having just checked one of her matches, still have the same opinion. Her strikes are weak. Her slams or any other "wrestling" move are weak. Her selling is far too loud. When she is thrown to the mat, there is too little impact.

 

The problem is that women are held back by their physical limistions which is why Aja Kong or others like her, are more realistic. A 9 stone woman is physically unable to have a match and make it look realistic. Because of the lack of strength and weight, womens wrestling is contrived.

 

It's not sexist to say that women can't do certain jobs. It's just fact. Women are held back by their natural physical disadvantages.

So if you choose to disagree with me on that, you're also disagreeing with the person whose opinion has the most weight behind it.

 

Since when did his opinion become fact?

 

:good222:

 

 

Sorry but just because the booker believes it doesnt make it true either dude. Me, I dont care as I dont watch wrestling pretty much at all. Though if I did I'd give Shimmer as much of a try as any other company. I've seen a lot of good womens wrestlers, also a lot of shit ones. Same as the men really.

 

edit: Good God, that smilie is far more sarcastic than I thought it would be. Should have stuck to the winker.

Lots of insulting and condescending language being thrown about. How many warnings/infractions have been handed out I wonder?:lol:lol

There's a lot of posters who I flat out refuse to debate with. Like I mentioned earlier, ice been here years and I realize the futility of arguing with some people. Jayfunk is one of those. Yeah, it may be condescending from me, but I couldn't care less. I'm a hypocrite, shoot me. I'm not going to waste time arguing with someone who refuses to post a worthwhile response. It's pointless.

 

So I assume then nobody should argue with you because you didn't post a worthwhile justification for any of yours?

 

Like I said, I think the people who aren't hardcore wrestling fans, watch womens wrestling for sexual reasons. I don't think the quality is good enough to really be a fan and thats it. I backed it up by Dave Prazak's admission of the exact same thing I just said. Seeing as you seem to miss the point over and over again, Dave Prazak, SHIMMER booker, has said my opinion is right. Thats a fact. So if you choose to disagree with me on that, you're also disagreeing with the person whose opinion has the most weight behind it.

 

No your missing the point. Can Dave Prazak talk for all the fans then? Has he asked every single one of them why they watch it? I couldn't give a crap if he says thats why people watch it. Ask Vince McMahon why he still does the Chavo/Hornswoggle segments despite the fact, critically it's mauled and commercially it does f*ck all to. And the fact you hold one person's opinion as gospel and say this...

 

I couldn't care less about Meltzer's ratings. Since when did his opinion become fact?

 

Makes it even more ridiculous. So one person says an opinion and it's fact (because you agree with it) yet another person gives an opinion but because you disagree with it, it's not a fact? Sorry can't have one and not the other. So both are opinions, I'm not wrong that you can't state for fact that most people, who aren't uber hardcore wrestling fans, watch it for sexual reasons. Neither can Prazak.

 

If he chooses to put just one little star next to the greatest match of all time, that must mean it's a complete dud, right? Because Meltzer said so?

 

Meltzer is just a mark. Thats it. I couldn't care less about his opinion. It's not fact and it doesn't mean more to me, than anyone elses opinion. Apart from Jaydunk's.

 

So hang on you use Dave Prazak to suggest you're right, yet I use Dave Meltzer, arguably the landmark critic in what is good/bad wrestling, and it's not valid? Again, you can't just change the rules to suit you.

 

As for Toyota, I have seen her matches and I don't like them. Wrestling is theatre and the key to good wrestling is making it believable. I've seen her matches years ago, when I didn't think wrestling was a complete joke, and having just checked one of her matches, still have the same opinion. Her strikes are weak. Her slams or any other "wrestling" move are weak. Her selling is far too loud. When she is thrown to the mat, there is too little impact.

 

The key TO YOU is making wrestling look believable. That's the point here. If you think she's crap, good for you. But there's a difference between saying that and saying "it's physically impossible for a women to be a good wrestler" because that's plain bullsh*t. I mean you say her selling is far too loud and slams are weak, so I guess Ric Flair's also crap then as he sells very loud and does the ridiculous over the turnbuckle bump which isn't believable in the slightest?

 

The problem is that women are held back by their physical limistions which is why Aja Kong or others like her, are more realistic. A 9 stone woman is physically unable to have a match and make it look realistic. Because of the lack of strength and weight, womens wrestling is contrived.

 

But it's wrestling, how is anything supposed to look super realistic? Seriously go watch pretty much any match ever and you'll find things that aren't realistic, doesn't matter who's in ring. Does that mean every wrestler is crap then? Wrestling isn't about making everything realistic or else you wouldn't even be able to throw a punch. First one thrown would then have to be a knockout no or someone falls to the ground groggy and gets pinned? That's realism! Nothing else is realistic if we are talking about what you'd actually do in a fight.

 

It's not sexist to say that women can't do certain jobs. It's just fact. Women are held back by their natural physical disadvantages

 

But they aren't held back in wrestling...because it's not real fighting. If it's 2 9 stone people against each other, then where is the physical disadvantage? What's the difference between that and two 20 stone men going against each other?

:good222:

 

 

Sorry but just because the booker believes it doesnt make it true either dude. Me, I dont care as I dont watch wrestling pretty much at all. Though if I did I'd give Shimmer as much of a try as any other company. I've seen a lot of good womens wrestlers, also a lot of shit ones. Same as the men really.

 

edit: Good God, that smilie is far more sarcastic than I thought it would be. Should have stuck to the winker.

There's a difference between one mans opinion on a match and a booker, whose job is it to find everything about his target audience and aim the product just for those fans. One is an opinion based on preference, the other an opinion based on what the fans actually want.

I can't quote posts, sorry.

 

 

 

 

People can choose to disagree or want to argue with me. Would I have argued with someone who posted the same way as I did? No, I wouldn't. I couldn't care less what people think of my posting style though, honestly. If I choose to be argumentative to make a point, I will, if I choose to spend hours researching to build a watertight argument, I will.

 

 

McMahon knows his market. I don't care if everyone on here hates it because smarks are a minority of the WWE's audience. The product is now aimed at kids. Who do kids love? Hornswoggle. It's good business sense because he's catering to the majority, regardless of whether you like it or not.

 

 

McMahon, like Prazak, knows what his audience wants from more than his own opinion. How can you not see the difference between Meltzer's opinion on a match and McMahon and Prazak's opinion on what will draw?

 

 

Wrestling doesn't always have to be believable. The odd spot doesn't need to be. Wrestling, by definition of what it us, needs to appear believable. This argument from you is completely ridiculous. You're being argumentative for the sake of it, if you need me to explain why wrestling should be realistic.

 

 

Every match in history has had bits which looked unrealistic but it's still the object for it to seem as realistic as possible.

 

 

Which do you think looks and sounds better. Two men, say, Triple H's size, going for a suplex. Or two women the size of Trish Stratus? Wrestling is about deception. Everything has to look exaggerated and hurtful. Two men suplexing will sound like it's going to break bones. Two women could do it and it would lack the impact. Thats why women are held back physically. As I said, which you conveniantly avoid, it's different for Kong.

McMahon knows his market. I don't care if everyone on here hates it because smarks are a minority of the WWE's audience. The product is now aimed at kids. Who do kids love? Hornswoggle. It's good business sense because he's catering to the majority, regardless of whether you like it or not.

 

Except now he doesn't. Do kids love Hornswoggle? If so why don't they sell loads of merch for him? Why isn't he one of the main stars of the show then?

 

It's not catering to the majority, because he doesn't draw, doesn't appeal to most of the audience. It's not smarks who don't love him, it's most of the general audience too or else why doesn't Raw get better ratings because of him? Why isn't he pushed on PPV or promoting more things? My point is just because a booker does something, doesn't mean that they know exactly what the audience wants. If that's so why isn't WWE drawing as much as it did? Why doesn't TNA do better? Surely the bookers know what the audience wants, so why don't they give it to them then?

 

McMahon, like Prazak, knows what his audience wants from more than his own opinion. How can you not see the difference between Meltzer's opinion on a match and McMahon and Prazak's opinion on what will draw?

 

Because neither is fact! If McMahon and Prazak know what will draw, then why aren't either of them drawing? Ultimately they are both an opinion, informed by years of being in a business. They can't be right all the time, but both have weight to their words. There isn't any difference that's my point. Vince has at times known what will draw just as Meltzer can give his viewpoint on what is a great match based on years being in the business. Does that make either of them right? No.

 

Wrestling doesn't always have to be believable. The odd spot doesn't need to be. Wrestling, by definition of what it us, needs to appear believable. This argument from you is completely ridiculous. You're being argumentative for the sake of it, if you need me to explain why wrestling should be realistic.

 

Why is it ridiculous? Please explain. Wrestling needs to appear to be believable, but all of the reasons you gave for why women can't be a good wrestler...you can apply to men. And you have to have a suspension of disbelief when watching wrestling. I don't need you to explain anything apart from when there's a set of rules for men why do you have another set of rules for women, despite the fact they both have the same principles?

 

Which do you think looks and sounds better. Two men, say, Triple H's size, going for a suplex. Or two women the size of Trish Stratus? Wrestling is about deception. Everything has to look exaggerated and hurtful. Two men suplexing will sound like it's going to break bones. Two women could do it and it would lack the impact. Thats why women are held back physically. As I said, which you conveniantly avoid, it's different for Kong.

 

They both look believable! Seriously you've got to be kidding me? Why is HHH suplexing say Batista more believable than Manami Toyota suplexing Kyoko Inoue? Two men suplexing only sounds different to two women because of the weight. Does that mean there is any less impact on the person being given the move? Course not.

 

It's not different for Kong, and it's not different for anybody, I'm perplexed as to why a suplex performed by men is believable but the very same move performed with women is not? Apart from weight, what's the difference? Does that mean women's boxing isn't believable because it doesn't have the same impact as men? Seriously though, if it's the same move being performed, it's equally believable.

 

You watch Manami Toyota get powerbombed by Combat Toyoda and tell me that doesn't look painful/exaggerated/hurtful etc.

Edited November 18, 200915 yr by Jung

Except now he doesn't. Do kids love Hornswoggle? If so why don't they sell loads of merch for him? Why isn't he one of the main stars of the show then?

 

Thats where I will disagree...

 

Hornswoggle is massively over with the kids, he was mobbed in Sheffield City Centre on the Monday of Raw...

I'm not disputing he isn't over with the kids. But the kids aren't the biggest part of the audience, even with the PG thing. WO recently said that in terms of percentages, there is a smaller percentage of kids watching today than there was 10 years ago.

 

Ok lol Hornswoggle was a bad example. But either way, my point was while Vince pushes Hornswoggle every week (for the children) does he realise despite being PG, it's more popular with adults and young adults than it is with children? Because then surely he doesn't know his market?

 

If Vince knows his market, does he know that kids aren't actually the biggest percentage of fans?

Thats where I will disagree...

Hornswoggle is massively over with the kids, he was mobbed in Sheffield City Centre on the Monday of Raw...

 

OFT. I really believe that's the only reason he still has a contract. Once the parents stop buying the merchandise, Hornswoggle will be a memory.

Hornswoggle doesn't draw because he's a novelty act. He's a dwarf who is limited to what he can achieve in wrestling. He's just there to make the kids happy and he suceeds at that. They like him and are the reason why he's pretty over. His merchandise sells ok but he's limited because he will always be just a novelty act.

 

A better example would be Cena. McMahon stuck with him and didn't turn him heel when all smarks hated him and it worked. Cena made him money because he was aimed at the bulk audience, not smarks.

 

Your original point was that McMahon doesn't know his audience because he pushes wrestlers smarks dislike, such as Hornswoggle, however Hornswoggle makes money. Vince also pushed Cena who smarks disliked and Cena made money.

 

 

 

Knowing what will draw is only part of the equation. Fedor vs. Brock would draw, Klitschko vs. Klitschko would. I know they would but neither will happen. The WWE isn't drawing because wrestling is uncool and the roster is dire.

 

Can you see the difference between me saying Fedor vs. Brock would draw, an opinion, and Meltzer saying something is a 5* match, also an opinion?

 

 

It's different between men and women because famale wrestlers lack the impact which is essential to make whatever they are doing seem legitimate. Yes, you can look at certain moves but overall, a 20 stone man slamming another will seem to cause more pain than a 9 stone woman slamming another. It's simple.