Sirsok wrote: » Just had a gander at whiplash tv....that ref lools quite familiar... Galloway V Shemus is a bit mad to see considering they went onto bigger things, and not that long after......wonder what ever happened to that ref?
leggo wrote: » Instead it became a team endeavour with rival promotions and schools pushing each other to be better to the point that now we have the wonderful abundance of choice we have today.
leggo wrote: » That is the exact merit to gauge whether it was ‘good’ or ‘bad’, because that was the actual situation. You don’t have to enjoy or like it, mind, nobody is saying you should. But if you want to be taken seriously it’s something you need to get your head around.
leggo wrote: » If there had never been wrestling in Philadelphia before Chikara, it’d be a fair comparison. But that wasn’t the case: up until the year before, one of the biggest promotions in the world was based there!
SquidLad wrote: » And once again, for about the 100th time, an explanation of why something is bad is not an argument for it being good. I say "IWW wasn't so good", you say "well IWW had this obstacle and that road-bump and it wasn't a different time...." and so on and on and on. I get that, I get all of this. I understand why IWW was what it was, but that has no bearing on a retrospective appraisal of its quality. If it did, 'Robot Monster' would probably be the greatest film of all time. After all, the logic of minimal resources somehow sheltering a piece of art from negative criticism can be taken to any ludicrous extreme. And no, I'm not asking you to criticize Chikara. I'm using it as an illustration of how something can be low budget, have minimal resources and still be good. You keep making excuses, and that's what they are, excuses, for why the comparison to Chikara, OTT is unfair. But you have never once attempted to defend IWW on it's own merits. I would genuinely be interested in hearing that. But I suspect the reason why you haven't is because you can't. Which is why you're forever relying on the 'poor IWW, go easy on them, they had a rough go of it' tactic. Which if I somehow haven't made it clear yet, I really really don't care about.
Sirsok wrote: » leggo wrote: » To be fair, I completely agree there too, he just took a gig that anyone else would. We've all dressed up our CVs and exaggerated in interviews! There's an amazing story (that I wasn't present for) about AJ Styles taking a seminar and asking where the hell the guys learned to bump and run the ropes because it was completely wrong. Apparently the trainer quickly disappeared out the back door, never to be seen there again! The Bagpipe report is up on youtube I just seen , there he is interviewing AJ Styles....and his page has him actually with stu in the dungeon
leggo wrote: » To be fair, I completely agree there too, he just took a gig that anyone else would. We've all dressed up our CVs and exaggerated in interviews! There's an amazing story (that I wasn't present for) about AJ Styles taking a seminar and asking where the hell the guys learned to bump and run the ropes because it was completely wrong. Apparently the trainer quickly disappeared out the back door, never to be seen there again!
leggo wrote: » Not the same. I mean you're trying to put me in a box I'm not willing to be in where I almost have to criticise Chikara to validate my point, and I love what Chikara have done, they deserve the upmost respect for it. But it's a completely different set of circumstances. For a start, say what you want about Americans, but there's a lot of them and the Irish indie scene simply couldn't facilitate a company as high concept as Chikara. Maybe it could today, maybe, but not in 2002-4. It would've been absolutely mental to try! A company based in Philadelphia post-ECW isn't the same comparably to a company based in Ireland post....nothing. There was zero road map for what could work in Irish wrestling and nobody experienced to teach people who wanted to start that project. IWW had to basically train their own roster with whoever they could find that was willing to teach, learn how to promote, figure out what fans wanted and how to give it to them, find locations to perform in and build up these towns themselves, try get any media to cover them and help with exposure, then figure out stuff like what mediums it would work (so TV/DVD) by simple trial and error. In NWA, they had the knowledge Fergal Devitt and Paul Tracey had had bestowed on them by Andre Baker in Hammerlock to work off building a roster. In IWW, they had a dude who lied about his level of training in the Dungeon, occasional guest seminars from indie A-listers, a BritWres journeyman who got kicked out of Sheamus' home for stealing and had to live in the gym for the few months he stuck around before getting the boot (because they couldn't find another trainer), another BritWres journeyman (Greg Burridge) who was excellent but only starting his own career and couldn't commit long-term, then the lads teaching themselves based off whatever scraps they could pick up. In other words, we all had scraps to work off and were trying to start a fire with two rocks. And yet between IWW, NWA and what was going on up North, we started a fire that's now, by proxy, led to OTT and an exploding scene. Again, everyone else can comprehend this nuance, yet you can't. So that's why you're taking L's around the board whenever you just write it off as 'bad'. The truth of the matter is what people got was better than it had any right to be! The scene now is also overachieving in a huge way too. Even with the advantages OTT has going for them that others didn't, they're still knocking it out of the park in building on that and evolving it into something else entirely.
leggo wrote: » I've been involved in my own collection of not-too-flattering experiences as a young leggo so would be the last to judge anyone else.
brianblaze wrote: » Hahahaha, oh the dark days.... In fairness, can't blame a guy for seeing an opening and slotting himself in there... At least that ended quickly, and the guys got some amazing trainers in for seminars like Doug/ D'Lo/ AJ/ Raven back in the day... (But also, he was a joke! I think this came off as defending him!)
leggo wrote: » I've said way too much. :pac: Ah I'm not looking to slate people, I was just trying to give perspective on how hard it was to find people to actually train wrestlers in Ireland back in the day. I'd imagine they had an easier time of it in Philly.
Cherry_Cola wrote: » Who supposedly trained in the Dungeon?
SquidLad wrote: » I don't understand why you won't defend anything on it's own merit. Instead of "Ballymun Bruiser was good because..." it's always "it's not fair to say Ballymun Bruiser was bad because...".
SquidLad wrote: » No, your making the same fallacy that you did before. That being that "old + low budget = low quality" which I disagree with. And I'll bring up the same example that I did a few months ago. Mid 2000s Chikara. Which had one trainer, handful of rookies, no productions values, crap venues and still managed to be a fantastic product in it's own way.
leggo wrote: » Great summary. Another thing a lot people don’t necessarily appreciate, and I only had this discussion the other day, is that it’s actually a lot easier to do and sell over 18’s, whereas that’s only become a thing in recent years. We’d have all KILLED to be able to do that stuff way back, wrestle indie style matches (well, not me, people who were arsed bumping), do worked shoots or meta comedy stuff, the kinda creatively free stuff that really we could only ever do at gym shows that drew 20 people, because that was the ‘smart’ audience then. Now the people who watched as kids back then are grown up so there’s an actual full market to do that and OTT can just mine away at that market without having to worry about pulling back. Back then you didn’t have kids or adult shows, you looked out from the curtain before bell time and took a swing at what kinda crowd you’d work and catered your match accordingly, then whoever would be in the opener would tell you what it’s like and you adjust again because you had to play the hand you were dealt. So to say ‘Session Moth now is better than Ballymun Bruiser was then’, for example, is harsh because Martina knows right away what kinda crowd she’s got and can just zone in character wise, whereas Bruiser had to do an over-18’s gimmick to whatever crowd he was in front of that night. They’re two similar gimmicks but two completely different set of circumstances and challenges. Of course everyone is entitled to like/dislike whatever they want, taste is subjective, but it’s when those big sweeping statements come into play it gets contentious.
Omackeral wrote: » IWW was what it was. It was lads and girls doing their absolute best for a niche audience and families. It had some good talent in it and some great workers. It's a lot easier now to generate hype and buzz around 'underground' things with social media. Without sounding like a prick, you can then show everyone online how cool and alternative you are by hashtagging and checking in at these things. You've the likes of Lovin' Dublin and Joe.ie giving them column inches. It can be marketed as a night out now too. Then you the general feeling towards indies now, not just in the UK and Ireland but in the States also. You've got the gritty product, the workrate, the characters you can relate to as well as legit world class athletes and the possibility of seeing the next starts to be signed by WWE. It's night and day and I don't think many would argue with that.
SquidLad wrote: » Yeah, sure, absolutely. IWW was what is was. It was a different time and they didn't have the same opportunities that OTT have today. But there still such a thing as something being objectively good/bad.
leggo wrote: » And this is why biases get called into play, because anyone with the slightest concept of perspective can see that there’s a difference in something that started from nothing and something that came from years of work, experience and learning. It’s like slagging an FA Cup Final from the 1920’s and saying it’s no comparison to one today because the players are better now. Well, duh. Anyway, we’re going round in circles again, let’s not.
SquidLad wrote: » I had this arguement with Leggo a couple of months ago who made this exact point and my answer is the same. I don't consider 'It was x amount of years ago' as an acceptable defense against criticism.
weareallmarks wrote: » Lads, you cant compare something from 2005 to what is happening in 2018. It is like comparing the avengers 17 (or whatever the new one is) to gone with the wind. Both are good but both are different. In terms of wrestling, there wouldnt be anything on this island without the crew who stared it. All comparisons are stupid. massive changes have happened since..... But if you liked it you are right, if you hates it then you are also right.
Omackeral wrote: » My missus has been to two OTT shows, she loves it. One in Suir Road and one in the National Stadium. She asked if the Basketball Arena would be a good spot for a show. I remember going there in 2002 extremely hungover and sick as a dog so can't recall what the atmosphere was like. Would it work for an OTT show? I remember the show was cool though, had Jody Fleisch vs Jonny Storm in a battle and a half!
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/6e77937cf9c89982c9a911857aafddd4.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w4.vanillicon.com/v2/4c2f272c464d99a9eee64a80fbe71a0c.svg)
