Wrestling All-Time Draft IV - DISCUSSION THREAD **SEND CARDS TO CHRIS CUTTER VIA PM**

[JackSlater]

My opinion is that the best put together matches shouldn't need someone to spell out to me the details of the build up etc because it should make sense to me why they're put together without too much explanation. Whether that be character dynamic, in ring dynamic, two big names in a "dream match", heel vs face etc.

The best matches in this game to me will stand out without anyone needing to hold my hand to guide me. I think it's more powerful for the fans/voters to have the autonomy to think about the possibilities of the names involved and interpret it as best they can imagine it.

I don't see it this way at all when it comes to actually having a storyline for a show. Wrestling is good in that it can be pure athletic exhibition or it can be like a soap opera of sorts, and at best a mix of the two. There are going to be nearly 200 matches presented on these cards, and realistically I am not going to be able to come up with a reason for most of those matches to happen, or at least not a good one, leaving most of them in the exhibition category like you might find on an episode of HEAT. You're correct that the best matches don't need a story, but most matches aren't going to be best, and even if a story isn't needed it can almost always enhance the situation by increasing the stakes or bringing up a point that was not previously considered. By the very same token, a bad story can reduce the quality of a card to me and make it like a TNA production.

Some interesting viewpoints.

I particularly like what The Gongshow said about letting the viewer imagine who they'd want to win or potentially how the story would develop. While to a degree that doesn't work for me, I still like the idea from a voting perspective.

I actually disagree with Morozov's point to a degree about matches being put together making sense. Looking at cards in the past and even pulling them up now they don't all make sense to me. In fact a lot of matches don't. I realize that I'm not the most well versed guy here when it comes to wrestling, but I go back pretty far in terms of what I watched and when. I also have spent more time than I want to realize re-watching old matches or even matches/promos of guys I hadn't seen much of. Still I look at some of the matches and I think "looks like the draft forced them into this match."

On top of that I see matches where I'd love to get a story to go with it. I think I came across Bray Wyatt and Stone Cold. That's somewhat easy to surmise how that would be a match, and a main event at that, and how it got there. Still whoever put that together (Morozov I think) might have come up with some great back story.

For me if I ever get a chance to participate will be thinking more longevity and almost from the standpoint of a brand and not just one card. In fact were I in either Group of this draft, but primarily Group A, I could have easily put together one PPV worth card, but multiple PPV worth cards. Not only that though, I could have continuous storylines that begin, end and then you get new storylines with different guys. I even had one guy in particular who you'd have seen in all three of his main guises. Actually I think that would be a more complex but more interesting draft idea for the future.

Anyway, to each their own. And like somebody else said, my card would be for me as opposed to trying to win.

Yeah, that pretty much matches what I think. If someone can see the purpose of a match right away and can envision a good reason for it happening then more power to them, but I can't do that for most of ~200 matches. I see no story as neutral, a good story as a benefit, and a bad story as a negative. I considered it as you did where I had a wrestling promotion and tried to make it seem like this show is part of a larger whole. I said that I made the card for me, and that's really the only realistic way I could have interest. Others have another way, and good for them. I consider it a positive that the criteria is quite open.

 

[Emperoreddy]

I'm just about done so I will send it in a few hours. Had to cut a couple matches. Card was way too long.

 

[Emperoreddy]

I'm of the opinion that the best physical card is the main reason to vote as well. I go in sssuming there is a good build

I do appreciate the flavor, but I don't think it would sway me. I toned my stuff way back to just short descriptions of what the video package basically would be.

 

[HandsomeHollywood]

The way I see it, is that the inclusion of story is optional. If you feel it shouldn't impact your vote, then don't let it and stop reading. If you do like it, then read it.

I don't hold any single component to a PPV against or for its entirety. It's a bit of fun.

I don't like the argument of the fans filling in the details themselves. They can imagine how the match would go physically, sure, but we're trying to pick the best ppv, not just the roster. I wouldn't expect to have a say in the booking of last night's TakeOver, but I'm not going to ignore it if there's matches I'm not excited for on paper, a good story can make me decide if I'm going to tune in.

All of my stories can be taken as set up, and explores the finish from a suggestive standpoint, similar to asking if you want fries with that. You can ignore if you didn't.

 

[Morozov]

You say people can imagine how the match can go physically, why can they then not also imagine the build up.

I barely follow RAW now, I can still look at the PPV cards and know if I think it looks good or not. I don't need the build up to make that decision because I know the workers well enough to think if a card is worth watching or not.

Most stories in wrestling are pretty **** really and you're never going to capture the good bits like the genuine emotion of something like the DB train in this game because you aren't actually going to be part of that process slowly unfolding, it's just going to be all put in front of you at once. I really doubt anyone is going to craft a story on here so great that it would negate my initial negativity towards a match, I know what I like and what I enjoy watching.

I never judge the quality of my meal by someone asking if I want fries with it, I can make my decision off a menu without a long explanation of the origins of each of the meals though.

It's not like I'm going to punish people in my voting for adding a big background, but to me it's no different than adding pictures etc, if you enjoy it then more power to you, have as much fun with this game as you want, but it's just fun extras on top nothing more.

But one of the fun intricacies of this game from the outset has been that we're trying to please a big audience who like different things and this plays into that too.

 

[JackSlater]

You say people can imagine how the match can go physically, why can they then not also imagine the build up.

I barely follow RAW now, I can still look at the PPV cards and know if I think it looks good or not. I don't need the build up to make that decision because I know the workers well enough to think if a card is worth watching or not.

Most stories in wrestling are pretty **** really and you're never going to capture the good bits like the genuine emotion of something like the DB train in this game because you aren't actually going to be part of that process slowly unfolding, it's just going to be all put in front of you at once. I really doubt anyone is going to craft a story on here so great that it would negate my initial negativity towards a match, I know what I like and what I enjoy watching.

I never judge the quality of my meal by someone asking if I want fries with it, I can make my decision off a menu without a long explanation of the origins of each of the meals though.

It's not like I'm going to punish people in my voting for adding a big background, but to me it's no different than adding pictures etc, if you enjoy it then more power to you, have as much fun with this game as you want, but it's just fun extras on top nothing more.

But one of the fun intricacies of this game from the outset has been that we're trying to please a big audience who like different things and this plays into that too.

I haven't noticed anyone saying what you seem to be rallying against, which is the idea that you cannot choose to imagine the build up yourself. Go ahead if you like. Your analogy of the restaurant is terrible though. I know the ingredients of a given meal, but I want to have an idea of how things are going to be cooked. I wouldn't judge a meal based solely on a list of ingredients. I can assume that it will be cooked a given way, but learning of a new way might be better or worse. If I follow what you say to its conclusion I should apparently be almost offended by what matches you organize, since I might prefer a different matchup of wrestlers and assume that I know all of the participants well enough to know what is best. If shows were just judged based on the quality of the performers involved then we would all be watching NWA wrestling on Monday nights and ECW would be a promotion that none of us had ever heard of.

But again, it's an exercise with no criteria, which is probably a good thing. If someone prefers no context or somehow has the mental dexterity to think of a good reason for ~200 matches then more power to them. I certainly agree that the best matches need very little description at all, and it's unlikely that any story is going to elevate or drop one show that is clearly superior/inferior to another.

 

[Morozov]

I haven't noticed anyone saying what you seem to be rallying against, which is the idea that you cannot choose to imagine the build up yourself. Go ahead if you like. Your analogy of the restaurant is terrible though. I know the ingredients of a given meal, but I want to have an idea of how things are going to be cooked. I wouldn't judge a meal based solely on a list of ingredients. I can assume that it will be cooked a given way, but learning of a new way might be better or worse. If I follow what you say to its conclusion I should apparently be almost offended by what matches you organize, since I might prefer a different matchup of wrestlers and assume that I know all of the participants well enough to know what is best. If shows were just judged based on the quality of the performers involved then we would all be watching NWA wrestling on Monday nights and ECW would be a promotion that none of us had ever heard of.

But again, it's an exercise with no criteria, which is probably a good thing. If someone prefers no context or somehow has the mental dexterity to think of a good reason for ~200 matches then more power to them. I certainly agree that the best matches need very little description at all, and it's unlikely that any story is going to elevate or drop one show that is clearly superior/inferior to another.

I'm not rallying against anything. I'm simply posting my thoughts on it. I always encourage people to do whatever extras they like, this is a game, it's meant to be fun, people enjoy things like making the graphics etc then go for it. I enjoy when people do those extras, they just don't impact my vote. For some people it may, that's all part of the game. When we established this game I was one championing the idea that we throw the vote open to everyone with no judging criteria.

My "analogy" was simply a response to the one already given so it wasn't really my analogy at all and it would seem you've misread how tongue-in-cheek that comment was.

Why on earth would you be offended by any of it lol? if you think the wrestlers on a card could be matched up better then that may well come into your consideration when judging. In fact I'm pretty sure I recall people making such comments when evaluating cards previously. I'd hardly say it's reason to be offended. If anyone is getting offended by anything in this game they're taking it much too seriously

I really don't think it requires much mental dexterity to find a reason for these matches to happen. Again, the reasons for a wrestling match to happen really don't need to be all that enthralling. It can be as simple as this guy is a good guy, this guy is a bad guy. It's really not all that difficult to figure it out. Sometimes it's as simple as these two people would put an awesome match on. I also think most people are drafting with matches in mind, not drafting individuals and then trying to make matches with them. It's not exactly far-fetched to think if one fan sees the reason to put that match together that other people will also unless you're coming up with something really out there.

 

[OmniSens]

Who's my first rounf opponent and when is this thing starting?

 

[JackSlater]

I'm not rallying against anything. I'm simply posting my thoughts on it. I always encourage people to do whatever extras they like, this is a game, it's meant to be fun, people enjoy things like making the graphics etc then go for it. I enjoy when people do those extras, they just don't impact my vote. For some people it may, that's all part of the game. When we established this game I was one championing the idea that we throw the vote open to everyone with no judging criteria.

My "analogy" was simply a response to the one already given so it wasn't really my analogy at all and it would seem you've misread how tongue-in-cheek that comment was.

Why on earth would you be offended by any of it lol? if you think the wrestlers on a card could be matched up better then that may well come into your consideration when judging. In fact I'm pretty sure I recall people making such comments when evaluating cards previously. I'd hardly say it's reason to be offended. If anyone is getting offended by anything in this game they're taking it much too seriously

I really don't think it requires much mental dexterity to find a reason for these matches to happen. Again, the reasons for a wrestling match to happen really don't need to be all that enthralling. It can be as simple as this guy is a good guy, this guy is a bad guy. It's really not all that difficult to figure it out. Sometimes it's as simple as these two people would put an awesome match on. I also think most people are drafting with matches in mind, not drafting individuals and then trying to make matches with them. It's not exactly far-fetched to think if one fan sees the reason to put that match together that other people will also unless you're coming up with something really out there.

There's obviously some miscommunication here. I have no idea who mentioned the meal analogy before you, and I am in agreement that no one should be offended. I took your recent posts (particularly that you don't need anyone to "hold your hand" and asking rhetorically why the audience can't make it up themselves after no one suggested that they couldn't) as an indication that you are almost offended by the idea of someone telling you the buildup of a match since you apparently automatically know a good buildup for most potential feuds. Offended is probably too strong a word, but in any event that is how I understood (or misunderstood perhaps) your post. I perfectly understand simply ignoring a write up.

To cite an example of what I mean, you mentioned that anyone familiar with Austin and Jake the Snake could come up with a compelling reason for them to feud if they know the wrestlers. I know the wrestlers pretty well (having watched Austin since his WCW days and owning the Jake the Snake Tonka wrestling buddy) and I don't have a compelling reason for them to feud off the top of my head. Jake = bad guy and Austin = good guy doesn't particularly interest me. I would be much more interested in seeing such a match if I was given a reason to have interest. For less talented wrestlers it is a bigger issue. In any event I don't expect this to be a widely held opinion, as everyone can fortunately make up their own criteria for what they want to watch.

 

[les Habs]

Yeah, I have to say that I don't think that meal analogy really makes sense here.

I also don't see that much of a draw of Austin vs Roberts. Austin vs Wyatt for me would be far more interesting. I know that both Austin and Roberts had both face and heel runs, but I remember them both more as faces. Either way I just don't see the build up to that match as all that interesting either without knowing more.

I actually get the impression that people are drafting with specific people in mind, but in a lot of cases they end up getting someone else and then have to make it work or they go with a backup option that may still work. Or I see people seemingly drafting without much of plan. I'm basing this on some of the older cards I saw. Some of the matches I could see, others less so. At the end of the day though I think that the voting to some degree surely saw it as best of the two.

Thing is though this is more about the card itself to me from what I've seen. I find that less interesting, but then I also wouldn't be quite as traditional with cards as some seem to be. For example the likelihood of my having a women's match is not at all likely. I might not get votes then, but I wouldn't care.

At the end of the day this is far more subjective a draft than say an all-time hockey draft where you can cite statistics more (though stats never tell the whole story). That said I found this ranking of the all-time greatest tag teams I stumbled across interesting because a lot of the reasoning given seemed to be about title reigns which left some talented tag teams further down the pecking order than they really should have been when you consider their actual talent and performances.

 

[nameless1]

Now I am curious to see where Mahal would be drafted next year.

 

[Morozov]

The women's match aspect I've always found quite interesting because for me and I assume many of others I don't really find the women's wrestling all that compelling but I feel like it makes the card more complete to have one, so when people make one that does seem good then it does have a little value to me when I'm looking the cards over.

 

[Le Barron de HF]

Who's my first rounf opponent and when is this thing starting?

Still missing four cards.

 

[HandsomeHollywood]

The women's match aspect I've always found quite interesting because for me and I assume many of others I don't really find the women's wrestling all that compelling but I feel like it makes the card more complete to have one, so when people make one that does seem good then it does have a little value to me when I'm looking the cards over.

For me, women's wrestling can be good, obviously. But the issue is that a lot of their stock is too high for me, which is why I have no women's matches.
If you remove the genders of wrestlers being a factor, for me to have a women's match on my card it means passing on other people who I view as better, or in higher regard. I'm willing to book women's matches if I get the right pieces, I just find the price of those pieces too high, which is probably a result of me rarely branching out of North America. In any case, I made a plan and stuck to it. I decided when the best time to draft certain people were and didn't deviate based on who was available at the time of my picks (which was quite hard given the high volume of talent that was, and is still available).

I'm the ill-fated one who first made the food analogy, though the point wasn't literally food, it was to illustrate the value of having options and the ease there is to ignoring said options. Definitely got stretched too far.

 

[Morozov]

Haha my response to said analogy was tongue-in-cheek as said. Meal analogy is running wild now.

 

[Le Barron de HF]

OK, for those who haven't sent their cards yet (Habsrule, GKJ, KEEROLE & nameless1), you have till tomorrow at midnight. Deadline was last Friday and I'm getting tired of waiting. If it's not sent, I'll try to make the best cards with the pieces that are there.

 

[PeterSidorkiewicz]

Haha my response to said analogy was tongue-in-cheek as said. Meal analogy is running wild now.

Watcha gonna do brother watcha gonna do when the meal analogy runs wild on yoooou?

 

[Dr Pepper]

C'mon, slackers, get those cards in!

 

[les Habs]

How about I draft a card with whatever is left and I can take one of their places? Please!??!

 

[Le Barron de HF]

How about I draft a card with whatever is left and I can take one of their places? Please!??!

Worst case scenario, I guess we can do that.

 

[les Habs]

Worst case scenario, I guess we can do that.

I'd need a bit of time and notice, but doubt I could put something truly worthwhile together. Unless of course I took someone's draft already done. It'd depend on the group.

I'm sure the guys will come around and if not maybe you can do a different format (group stage or something).

 

[GarbageGoal]

Out the slackers! Shame them!

 

[Le Barron de HF]

I'd need a bit of time and notice, but doubt I could put something truly worthwhile together. Unless of course I took someone's draft already done. It'd depend on the group.

I'm sure the guys will come around and if not maybe you can do a different format (group stage or something).

Tbh, I would simply not put them in the qualifying rounds. And yeah you'd definitely have to use the person's card, not make whole new one.

 

[JackSlater]

Haha my response to said analogy was tongue-in-cheek as said. Meal analogy is running wild now.

The meal analogy is a tweener.

I'd need a bit of time and notice, but doubt I could put something truly worthwhile together. Unless of course I took someone's draft already done. It'd depend on the group.

I'm sure the guys will come around and if not maybe you can do a different format (group stage or something).

There is still good talent available between the two drafts, particularly looking at guys who were drafted in only one of the two drafts. Not top end though. You a high end version of the low end independents that visit small towns.

 

[CHGoalie27]

nameless has been working round the clock for the last 9 days to get everything organized.

As the Wrestling AND Hockey gods see it, we might all face consequence to our first borns if we don't wait for him.