Herochat

The Bret Hart Categories thread!

Imperial

  • Was once the Greatest of All Time
  • ******
  • 2271
  • +2/-0
    • View Profile
Re: The Bret Hart Categories thread!
« Reply #60 on: June 07, 2017, 10:34:28 PM »
I don't know about getting to 9 in each, but Seth Rollins and Shelton Benjamin come to mind as guys that look good and wrestle well but are not known for being especially charismatic.

Though Seth is not actually bad in charisma, and Shelton though handsome and cut is no 9 in look.
Avatar : Elsa Hosk
Sig : Elvira and Jessica Nigri

Thom Hartmann : "How can you have a functioning nation when you don't believe in science or education?"


herochat

  • *****
  • 6917
  • +101/-77
  • The People's Martyrator
    • View Profile
Re: The Bret Hart Categories thread!
« Reply #61 on: June 07, 2017, 11:23:24 PM »
Yeah, I'd say Shelton Benjamin is probably the closest. Dolph was the first one who came to my mind, though he's definitely no 9 in skill
The tree grows high but the oxygen fails to reach all the branches.


Not BAMF

  • ********
  • 4416
  • +6/-10
    • View Profile
Re: The Bret Hart Categories thread!
« Reply #62 on: June 08, 2017, 09:31:14 AM »
I wouldn't put Shelton, Seth, or Dolph ANYWHERE NEAR a 9 in Look. And I'd give each of them higher Charisma than Look.

Imperial

  • Was once the Greatest of All Time
  • ******
  • 2271
  • +2/-0
    • View Profile
Re: The Bret Hart Categories thread!
« Reply #63 on: June 08, 2017, 02:44:27 PM »
Ahem........

Then you must really hate Shelton's look because he has the charisma of a piece of cardboard.

"Big Jay" voice out.  :P
Avatar : Elsa Hosk
Sig : Elvira and Jessica Nigri

Thom Hartmann : "How can you have a functioning nation when you don't believe in science or education?"


Not BAMF

  • ********
  • 4416
  • +6/-10
    • View Profile
Re: The Bret Hart Categories thread!
« Reply #64 on: June 08, 2017, 03:47:02 PM »
Well I don't know about HATE, but he's SUPER pedestrian looking. He's a 5. Maybe 6 once he went gold up top just for the effect.

Jabroniville

  • *****
  • 1676
  • +1/-2
    • View Profile
Re: The Bret Hart Categories thread!
« Reply #65 on: June 09, 2017, 03:55:24 PM »
Challenge:

The two easiest combinations to find, it seems to me, are Looks/Charisma and Skill/Charisma. You could find a lot of guys that excel in those areas while falling a bit short in the third.

But who do think is the best combination of Looks/Skill (at least a 9 in each) while maybe being short on Charisma?
This is a tough one. Anyone who comes to mind is actually a bit lower in one or the other. Brock Lesnar is/was an obvious 10 in Look, and his Skill was good, but never a 9. His Charisma was his worst thing.

Benoit had the Skill, but was too small for a maximum Look.

Dolph & Seth are nowhere near "9" in Look OR Skill.

Sean O'Haire had the Look in spades, but his Skill was actually overrated- he's probably no better than a "7".

The problem is, a high Look means you usually have to be huge, which means you're not always the best worker, unless you use a completely different categorization and separate "Big Man" workers into their own thing.

herochat

  • *****
  • 6917
  • +101/-77
  • The People's Martyrator
    • View Profile
Re: The Bret Hart Categories thread!
« Reply #66 on: July 07, 2017, 05:47:15 PM »
Nods to me

The Man Called Sting

Surfer

Look: 10. It seriously doesn't get better than this for a pro wrestler. Ridiculously handsome, muscled to the gills without losing mobility, the face paint and brightly colored tights, and a hairstyle that his young fans could easily copy? If anyone could get a Look over 10, Sting would be in that minority

Skill: 7. Arguably a 6 before he added a retinue of suplexes (suplays, maybe? Ask Gordon Solie) after teaming with/against the Steiners for years

Charisma: 10. Men wanted to be him and their wives wanted to fuck him. And he had a fucking stranglehold on the key pro-graps merchandising demo: kids

Total: 27. About as good as we've ever seen


Crow

Look: 10. Despite his superhuman physical attributes declining due to the ravages of age, the new makeup/tights/baseball bat/duster etc more than made up for it

Skill: 6. Again, ravages of age and adapting his style to it. I wouldn't argue if someone said 7, though. Not everybody can adapt like Muta

Charisma: 8. The ever-present tradeoff in pro wrestling: the inverse relationship of adult preference and kid preference. He gained a shit ton of adult male fans during this era, but losttthe kids. Or the other way of looking at it is that his kid fans grew with him, but he lost the appeal to gain the new generation of younger fans

Total: 24. Still easily top tier. And actually having a score even this low makes me think I'm misremembering something
« Last Edit: July 07, 2017, 05:50:24 PM by Wyntyr »
The tree grows high but the oxygen fails to reach all the branches.


herochat

  • *****
  • 6917
  • +101/-77
  • The People's Martyrator
    • View Profile
Re: The Bret Hart Categories thread!
« Reply #67 on: July 07, 2017, 05:52:34 PM »
I think I might actually change Crow to a 9 in Charisma. Crowds were fucking DEAFENING every time he showed up after his sabbatical
The tree grows high but the oxygen fails to reach all the branches.


Sick Nick

  • **
  • 452
  • +3/-0
    • View Profile
Re: The Bret Hart Categories thread!
« Reply #68 on: September 28, 2017, 11:57:23 AM »
Yeah, he was more popular than ever. The Apter mags used to blah on about Sting being more popular than Hogan but he never came close during the Surfer days. During the Monday Night War, though, he became SUPER popular.

One other thing is Sting became a LOT better at promos as he went on. He was never particularly weak at promos but he became pretty damn good in late-era WCW and at TNA, with the only drawback being that he used to say his opponent's name about six times during every sentence.

Sting was great during the Surfer era though ... consistently JCP/WCW's most over guy, apart from Flair and maybe Steamboat, an incredible athlete and just bursting with energy. You never got the sense he was going through the motions out there, he gave it his all every time, and while he was no technical wizard, he could have a decent match with anyone from Barbarian to Muta.

Jabroniville

  • *****
  • 1676
  • +1/-2
    • View Profile
Re: The Bret Hart Categories thread!
« Reply #69 on: September 29, 2017, 06:30:26 AM »
Sting's only issue was a comparative lack of drawing power - reading the Observer reports from his WCW run in the late '80s, early '90s makes it clear he never moved the dials that much. That's part of what keeps him out of the Observer's Hall Of Fame.

Though he was REALLY popular in "Nitro" era WCW- not a lot of guys could have gotten over by not saying anything. It was only kind of a shame that once he started wrestling again... he'd start hooting and hollering and behaving exactly as he'd done before.

herochat

  • *****
  • 6917
  • +101/-77
  • The People's Martyrator
    • View Profile
Re: The Bret Hart Categories thread!
« Reply #70 on: September 29, 2017, 02:15:43 PM »
Yeah, I admit I definitely undersold his Crow Charisma.

Do you guys agree with my Skill assesments or nah?
The tree grows high but the oxygen fails to reach all the branches.


Sick Nick

  • **
  • 452
  • +3/-0
    • View Profile
Re: The Bret Hart Categories thread!
« Reply #71 on: October 09, 2017, 11:54:09 AM »
Yeah, I admit I definitely undersold his Crow Charisma.

Do you guys agree with my Skill assesments or nah?

Pretty much. The Stinger was never a scientific maestro but he was a damn sight better than the Ultimate Warrior or even Lex Luger. He was one of those guys who didn't have a massive arsenal of trademark moves but would use his opponents' moves against them and he usually executed moves pretty well, at least in his Surfer days.

Sting's problem wasn't lack of moves or sloppy execution ... it was that, according to Samoa Joe, he'd sometimes be forgetful in the ring and had to be led.

Jabroniville

  • *****
  • 1676
  • +1/-2
    • View Profile
Re: The Bret Hart Categories thread!
« Reply #72 on: October 10, 2017, 01:36:50 AM »
I'd say 8/7/8-9 is good for Sting. 23-24 overall, which is very good.