I was just wondering, with the lack of submissions in WWE (and at times TNA), is there a such thing as technical wrestling?
Matter fact, are there any technical wrestlers?
I know that high fliers get over with the crowd pretty easily, but not every wrestler can do back flips on end, and wrestling is not all about impressive flips.
Do you think there is technical wrestling today?
2007-12-13 06:23:22 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Wrestling
What I mean by technical wrestlers, in case you don't understand, are wrestlers like Dean Malenko, Chris Benoit, and Bret Hart.
A modern-day example is Bryan Danielson.
2007-12-13 06:32:06 · update #1
nach- I agree about fans giving technical moves the "boring" chant. Not every night can wrestlers nearly kill themselves. If they want that, they should watch CZW.
Kalice C- There really needs to be a line drawn.
Candle, Kjors- I like your answers. Nothing less of what is expected.
2007-12-13 07:14:47 · update #2
In college and highschool.
If you would want to see some good wrestling televised, you'll have to wait for next years Summer Olympics.
The Rat
2007-12-13 06:31:57 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
DH Smith could end up being a good techincal wrestler. then again if my dad was the bulldog and my uncle was bret i would be a good technical wrestler too. i would say DH is the only real technical wrestler left in the wwe, angle in tna and danielson in roh. i guess punk is a also a technical wrestler along with samoa joe. so yeah theres a couple left. in this day and age everyone wants to be spot monkeys so no one cares about the high flyers anymore. perfect example go look at videos on youtube all people do there is the high flying moves. you never see anyone sumbit a video saying what do you think of my submission move.
wish they would bring technical back though.
starred cuz i still love technical wrestling.
also i forget the kids name but the kid who trained with dave taylor could be a good technical wrestler.
also finlay is more of a brawler now but was a technical wrestler back in the wcw.
regal and taylor are probaly 2 of the best the wwe has and they rarely wrestle.
2007-12-13 06:42:28 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
I tend to agree with the Prophet -- technical wrestling isn't extinct - yet -- just lurking in the background. Too many fans, as I think was recently mentioned by King Kjors in a post, only want to see the high-flying, aerial type, cool manuevers match, or tlc, hiac, or hardcore matches. A line needs to be drawn in the proverbial sand sometime. I would so much love to see "real" (read : technical) wrestling again as a staple of a promotion. I think there are some up and coming guys who are good - not only some already listed, but keep an eye out for Reed Flair too.
2007-12-13 07:04:14 · answer #3 · answered by Kalice 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
You could say Danielson, but I don't consider him a GOOD technical wrestler. The kid can't put a match together to save his life, it's just an hour of one technical spot after another with no real transition or story telling.
Someone said Angle, and Angle is a great technical wrestler, probably the best ever regardless to what you think of his politics. There's also Joe to an extent. You also have guys like Dave "Fit" Finlay and Dave Taylor, and this newcomer coming up the ranks named Drew McIntyre is supposed to be a traditionalist technical guy from what I understand. Porter's no slouch in the ring, either, and although he hasn't locked in any big submission moves on the main stage, I'd mark him down as technical.
Cruiserweights and X-Divisioners have a degree of technical prowess. Kids like Alex Shelley and Colt Cabana are really good, old school, chain wrestlers with a little strong style flair.
There are guys like BJ Whitmer, Roderick Strong, and Brent Albright who are human backbreaker and suplex machines
I can understand where you're coming from though, technical wrestling has really lost it's spotlight, but no, technical wrestling isn't an extinct breed...it's just gone underground.
2007-12-13 06:45:41 · answer #4 · answered by Candle 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
no i dont think so .dean malenko and chris benoit were some of the best . you dont get wrestlers like that anymore.wrestlings all about entertainment these days i wish it wasnt .i kinda miss the good old days where you could sit and watch a match with your family and watch the wrestlers style of wresting etc not what it is today.
2007-12-13 07:03:53 · answer #5 · answered by ...... 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Regal but he is a GM now really.
Charlie Haas
Randy Orton uses his fair share of submission moves
Technical wrestling is hard to get over now a days, younger fans find it boring and with more and more fans being younger than before, its harder for technical stars to get over. Benoit just happened to be an exception.
The main two are Regal and Haas, which is actually quite embaressing.
2007-12-13 07:03:23 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Finlay is good technical wrestling....and an extreme wrestler tommy dreamer is a good technical wrestler...they have just never shown in the old ecw but you can really see his ability in the new ecw
2007-12-13 07:39:25 · answer #7 · answered by The man of a 1005 holds 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
yes i think it does but not on television. People (kids) don`t want to see technical matches anymore. They want to see wrestlers set on fire, thrown off 20 ft ladders, and powerbombed on thumbtacks. Not that I mind those matches but a balance of technical and extreme would be in the best interest of WWE and its wrestlers.
2007-12-13 07:06:30 · answer #8 · answered by Red X 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Kurt Angle is still very good.
In the WWE, the only guy that comes to mind who can wrestle a technical match is M.V.P. Chris Benoit really brought out the best in him.
2007-12-13 06:34:40 · answer #9 · answered by acfahmy 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Technical spots usually get the "bore-ing"chant.The American fans want high spots and high impact.It's like their attentoin span is too short for the classic chess game of what a wrestling match really is.
2007-12-13 07:06:07 · answer #10 · answered by Nach667 4 · 5⤊ 0⤋