Which was better: Punk/Cena or Triple H/Undertaker?

[Rabid619]

WWE.com listed Triple H vs The Undertaker as the #1 match of 2011 over the Cena vs Punk from Money In The Bank which they placed #2. Which match would you have voted for as #1?

[Big Red Machine]

Punk vs. Cena

[yourcrapsweak]

Quack vs. Kingston.

[Rabid619]

Quack vs. Kingston.

Not an option, please vote again. :p

[cero2k]

i personally like Punk/Cena more, for me Taker/Trips was a spotfest with awesome psychology.

I do wanna say that this is like comparing a hardcore match to a technical match. they're both made great for different aspects, even if they share some others.

[Rabid619]

Triple/Undertaker would have been something more if Taker had lost, it was just another win for him. I knew he was going to win. It was too slow for me, psychology be damned. I know it wasn't supposed to be fast paced but it didn't pull me in which is what a good or great match is supposed to do. I knew from the start that Undertaker was winning it, hands down no questions asked.

Punk/Cena had you REALLY guessing as to who was going to win, and the outcome sent shockwaves through wrestling. That makes it epic and creates an impact Taker/Trips didn't come close to. Punk walks out of Chicago as the WWE Champion, it was huge. The match itself was nothing short of greatness. Showed us how great Punk is and how Cena is such a good worker.

[badnewzxl]

Punk v. Cena had me on the edge of my seat; Taker v. HHH had me yawning and cussing. If two other wrestlers put on the same match as Punk v. Cena, it'd still be a good match. If two other wrestlers put on the HHH v. Taker match, NO ONE would have watched it; they damn sure wouldn't consider it a MOTY candidate.

My vote goes to Punk v. Cena.

[Lynas]

Triple/Undertaker would have been something more if Taker had lost, it was just another win for him. I knew he was going to win. It was too slow for me, psychology be damned. I know it wasn't supposed to be fast paced but it didn't pull me in which is what a good or great match is supposed to do. I knew from the start that Undertaker was winning it, hands down no questions asked.

Punk/Cena had you REALLY guessing as to who was going to win, and the outcome sent shockwaves through wrestling. That makes it epic and creates an impact Taker/Trips didn't come close to. Punk walks out of Chicago as the WWE Champion, it was huge. The match itself was nothing short of greatness. Showed us how great Punk is and how Cena is such a good worker.

Actually I pretty much found it to be the other way around... perhaps not before the event... but certainly during, the way they hyped up Punk, you almost knew that part way through the match, Punk was going to win it... It was written...

...yet during the Undertaker v Triple H match, at certain points, I actually was sucked in and was believing Triple H was going to do it, and when Triple H hit the Tombstone I started my own count to three, I believed it could be done, (and from a Smark point of view, it would always be Triple H to end it if it was to end)... I was sucked in, I believed it.

Anyone who knows me, knows I'm a HUGE fan of psychological wrestling and psychological wrestling angles, I love mind games, I love it... to me, Triple H vs Undertaker was match of the year for that very reason (to me, not everyone else)... I can see why everyone else around prefers the Punk/Cena match, it too had good psychology, it was 5 star quality and showed both guys to be at the top of their profession... but Triple H & Taker had it all, and drew more pops for me in one match than any match I've seen in 5 or more years... It just had it all, timed to perfection, great spots, great psychology, great end... Undertaker could have won no other way, it was great, every little touch, from Triple H shouting at Taker to "just stay down" and "die" to the point in the submission when Triple H dropped his signature sledgehammer... it left me awe inspired, EVEN if there wasn't much technical ring action...

My favourite match of the year, without a doubt.