English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Undertaker has so far failed to defeat The Great Khali today. But if this were 1991 and the Undertaker was at the top of his game, things may have been different.

2006-07-29 17:11:01 · 8 answers · asked by WWE/DXrulz,VKM/TNAsucks 2 in Sports Wrestling

8 answers

Are u crazy hell yea The undertaker can defeat The great khali undertaker is the best that wwe can offer he never taped out the great khali is strong but once again he will rest in peace.

2006-07-29 17:24:51 · answer #1 · answered by David f 2 · 2 1

Of course,Undertaker defeated Giant Gonzales in his prime.Giant Gonzales is taller than great Khali.If it was 1991 Undertaker can defeat The Great Khali.

2006-07-29 17:30:05 · answer #2 · answered by WWE Champ 5 · 0 0

Hell yeah! Undertaker could defeat the Great Khali, whether as a badass or a deadman.

2006-07-29 17:17:03 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The Undertaker would eat Khali alive in his prime.

2006-07-29 17:17:14 · answer #4 · answered by ric m 3 · 0 0

I frequently hate questions like that one because they're 2 completely diverse video games. One is genuine combating and the different is Staged. it is actual that no common guy on the streets ought to do what Undertaker and Khali ought to do. nonetheless, it is not any longer even genuine Wrestling. If both were genuine wrestlers, then it ought to count upon the guidelines. Are they making use of gloves? If no longer, than Mike Tyson is at a draw back. in the adventure that they are, they the strive against may no longer very last lengthy in any respect. At that aspect, it ought to count upon even if Tyson has ANY variety of understanding of wresling. If he would not then he's in massive difficulty. If he has the skill, which i imagine he does, to do staple products, like destroy a carry lengthy adequate to throw some punches, then he wins. you need to appreciate that grappling is one among the most useful variety of combating. It does no longer mean that a boxer or martial artist couldn't beat a grappler. yet grappling is composed of extremely each and each and every and bigger. Wrestling, if done properly, is in the route of grappling than boxing is. If a sturdy wrestler can take a punch even marginally properly, he ought to be able to defeat a sturdy boxer. to that end, i ought to wager that, if both of those adult males were genuine wrestlers, they does no longer have a lot of an side because even if they're more advantageous than Mike, they're VERY sluggish. Mike ought to KO both because he ought to be able to a minimum of destroy a worry-free carry. If he were combating between the others, Steve Austin, The Rock, John Cena, adult males with somewhat better athletic skill, and in the adventure that they recognize genuine Wrestling, then Mike ought to be in difficulty.

2016-11-26 23:07:22 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

The Great Khali Is only winning so the wwe will get a bigger pay per view bur @ summerslam

2006-07-29 17:18:12 · answer #6 · answered by xblee1 5 · 0 0

yes

2006-07-29 17:22:28 · answer #7 · answered by john cena 2 · 0 0

ANY DAY OF WEEK THE TWO TIME ON SUNDAY GO DEATHMAN!!!;-]

2006-07-29 17:32:21 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers