Best Wrestler Nominations
Jan 29, 2008 16:05:51 GMT -5
Post by Batman on Jan 29, 2008 16:05:51 GMT -5
Lucky: Nah. I think I'll stick with smiting psychofish for nominating neither Angle NOR Flair.
Dev: I don't get the distinction you're making between "personal opinion of best" and "personal favorite." If I'm understanding you right, you're saying that we decide who we think is best based on qualifications we can debate, but we decide who our favorite is based on . . . nothing?
I don't base who my favorite is on nothing. I base it on specific moments that made me go "wow" and made me mark out and made me a fan of that particular guy. I can talk about those moments and how they effected me, and why I think they are important. I can't prove that my favorite is "right" and yours is "wrong," because they're our opinion, which I think is what leads to your objection to this criterion. But I can sway you . . . hmm, bad example. I could sway someone's opinion or they could sway mine by talking about the cool moments in a wrestler's career and why we think they were so cool, making the other say "Hey! I forgot how cool that was," or "I never really looked at it that way, that is really cool," and perhaps re-evaluate how much they favor that wrestler.
I didn't rank Rock, and I'm not a Rock hater. I enjoy the Rock. But I like William Regal better, and he never drew--nor will he ever draw--a dime. I like his punches, they look really good. He can be funny and he can be intense, and he's a real sport about showing ass. He has great facial expressions and body language, which I think is very important in wrestling. He has amazing technical skills, and--though he's no broomstick-carrier--he can have a great technical match with anyone who's a decent chain wrestler. (Otherwise, he can just punch them a lot, which is fine too.) All of that is more important to me than the things I like about the Rock. I won't say that the Rock's popularity has no impact, but only to the extent that the way that he plays off the crowd entertains me.
Dev: I don't get the distinction you're making between "personal opinion of best" and "personal favorite." If I'm understanding you right, you're saying that we decide who we think is best based on qualifications we can debate, but we decide who our favorite is based on . . . nothing?
I don't base who my favorite is on nothing. I base it on specific moments that made me go "wow" and made me mark out and made me a fan of that particular guy. I can talk about those moments and how they effected me, and why I think they are important. I can't prove that my favorite is "right" and yours is "wrong," because they're our opinion, which I think is what leads to your objection to this criterion. But I can sway you . . . hmm, bad example. I could sway someone's opinion or they could sway mine by talking about the cool moments in a wrestler's career and why we think they were so cool, making the other say "Hey! I forgot how cool that was," or "I never really looked at it that way, that is really cool," and perhaps re-evaluate how much they favor that wrestler.
I didn't rank Rock, and I'm not a Rock hater. I enjoy the Rock. But I like William Regal better, and he never drew--nor will he ever draw--a dime. I like his punches, they look really good. He can be funny and he can be intense, and he's a real sport about showing ass. He has great facial expressions and body language, which I think is very important in wrestling. He has amazing technical skills, and--though he's no broomstick-carrier--he can have a great technical match with anyone who's a decent chain wrestler. (Otherwise, he can just punch them a lot, which is fine too.) All of that is more important to me than the things I like about the Rock. I won't say that the Rock's popularity has no impact, but only to the extent that the way that he plays off the crowd entertains me.