It's come to my attention that Ric Flair did indeed break something in his elbow during the Sting vs Flair match, and it got me thinking. We know for a fact that many of the elder wrestlers have bodies that are not what they used to be, time and bumps have taken its toll. We know about the many injuries and surgeries that some of the guys have, yet still they keep coming back to the ring.

Is this ethical ?? we just saw how Edge was forced to retire for injuries, yet still we see Flair get in the ring and injure himself, we know Hogan can barely walk now, are we OK with him getting in the ring again??

what do you think? Is it ethical to allow elder wrestler (that are potentially injury prone) get in the ring and have a match??

We know that many wrestlers don't care and they still wanna wrestle, but if Edge was stopped from wrestling, than surely anyone can.

I say they shouldn't. As people get older it becomes less believeable that they can win a match. Muhammad Ali is possibly one of the greatest boxers of all time yet I doubt if he was to box now he would survive long or even 30 years ago. Same for George Foreman. And I hate to say it but my man Manny Pacquiao has gone over the peak of his career and he is only 32.

Earth Child wrote:I say they shouldn't. As people get older it becomes less believeable that they can win a match. Muhammad Ali is possibly one of the greatest boxers of all time yet I doubt if he was to box now he would survive long or even 30 years ago. Same for George Foreman. And I hate to say it but my man Manny Pacquiao has gone over the peak of his career and he is only 32.

I think there's a very few guys who still get in there, whether it's because of love for what they do, the fact they know nothing else OR just straight up need the money, there's a general unwritten rule in pro wrestling when it comes to age. It doesn't apply everywhere or for everyone, but this it seems is how it goes.

between the age of 18-22. You job, you put guys over, you pay your dues, you make the other guys look good.

23-27. You start to focus on yourself, build your own character, start getting your own feuds, work on yourself. Chase some midcard titles.

27-36. You're in your prime, you've perfected yourself, you've worked your craft, you know your fanbase, you know yourself, you're a world champion or world tag champion, you are in regular feuds.

36-43. You wind it down, you can still have the world title, but you begin to put some younger guys over in your feuds.

43-47. You wind it down even more, you're not needed every week for every show, take a small backstage role, only go in feuds if you're putting the guy over, the occasional "legend vs legend" match is okay, but that's not your main focus, midcard titles are okay, but only if you're putting a guy over with it.

47-50. Yo ass needs to be putting guys over and nothing else. No belts.

50+. For God's sake get out of the ring.



And there are my rules wrestlers should live by.

Earth Child wrote:I say they shouldn't. As people get older it becomes less believeable that they can win a match. Muhammad Ali is possibly one of the greatest boxers of all time yet I doubt if he was to box now he would survive long or even 30 years ago. Same for George Foreman. And I hate to say it but my man Manny Pacquiao has gone over the peak of his career and he is only 32.

George Foreman is officially the oldest boxer to ever be world champ; he won it in 94 when he was 45 years old. If a man of 45 years, who'd been boxing for at least twenty, can win the world title in a sport that ISN'T staged; I'd say it's okay for older guys to wrestle. I feel like it's more of a case to case thing. Again, imo it all goes back to whether or not the person wants to do it....

badnewzxl wrote:

Earth Child wrote:I say they shouldn't. As people get older it becomes less believeable that they can win a match. Muhammad Ali is possibly one of the greatest boxers of all time yet I doubt if he was to box now he would survive long or even 30 years ago. Same for George Foreman. And I hate to say it but my man Manny Pacquiao has gone over the peak of his career and he is only 32.

George Foreman is officially the oldest boxer to ever be world champ; he won it in 94 when he was 45 years old. If a man of 45 years, who'd been boxing for at least twenty, can win the world title in a sport that ISN'T staged; I'd say it's okay for older guys to wrestle. I feel like it's more of a case to case thing. Again, imo it all goes back to whether or not the person wants to do it....

Boxing is different, you may be 70 yrs old and still have a KO strike that kills, you just need to connect one. Wrestling you have to work a full match, and this is not really whether it's believable that they can win, but whether companies should allow elder wrestler to fight, being that the chances they get injured are far higher than someone on their prime.

and again, it's not about them wanting to do it. Flair wants to keep fighting, plain and simple. But is it ethical for TNA to allow him to fight knowing how old he is??

cero2k wrote:

badnewzxl wrote:

Earth Child wrote:I say they shouldn't. As people get older it becomes less believeable that they can win a match. Muhammad Ali is possibly one of the greatest boxers of all time yet I doubt if he was to box now he would survive long or even 30 years ago. Same for George Foreman. And I hate to say it but my man Manny Pacquiao has gone over the peak of his career and he is only 32.

George Foreman is officially the oldest boxer to ever be world champ; he won it in 94 when he was 45 years old. If a man of 45 years, who'd been boxing for at least twenty, can win the world title in a sport that ISN'T staged; I'd say it's okay for older guys to wrestle. I feel like it's more of a case to case thing. Again, imo it all goes back to whether or not the person wants to do it....

Boxing is different, you may be 70 yrs old and still have a KO strike that kills, you just need to connect one. Wrestling you have to work a full match, and this is not really whether it's believable that they can win, but whether companies should allow elder wrestler to fight, being that the chances they get injured are far higher than someone on their prime.

and again, it's not about them wanting to do it. Flair wants to keep fighting, plain and simple. But is it ethical for TNA to allow him to fight knowing how old he is??

1. no disrespect, but your thoughts on boxing are totally WRONG; if it were true Foreman wouldn't be the only former champ who won the belt at such an old age (Larry Holmes is the only other guy who was even a contender at that age) . I can't even think of a single professional sport where players perform at the age at which professional wrestlers can. 40 is usually the cut off in almost all other sports; in wrestling it is quite customary for a talent to wrestle well beyond that age.

2. keeping with the boxing analogy though, I think I see what you mean. Boxers HAVE to stay in IMPECCABLE condition to even be able to contend; wrestlers don't necessarily. Boxers CAN'T even begin to use the drugs and supplements and other potentially harmful stuff bc most of those things hurt your body; wrestlers can sacrifice
their health a lot of times and thrive off it. Bc of this I see the danger in having elder (and in that case even notoriously clumsy wrestlers) continue to perform. But are we really gonna talk Ethics in professional wrestling?

Furthermore, when I was growing up I've always heard the pro wrestling industry described by the performers themselves(and I haven't really heard it explained this way for a while now, or even referred to in the manner. Hell, maybe the times have changed and I'm OLD now) as the world's largest fraternity. I was in a frat in college; there are a lot of things that are respectful to do; there are things that are disrespectful to do. If an RA or anyone ever walked up to an alum while I was/am around and told him to get outta here bc you're too old, me and that person would have a problem. I feel the same is true in wrestling; how dare someone tell Flair he may not wrestle when HE is totally up for it. I don't find it unethical to allow an older guy to wrestle; it WOULD be if he were being PRESSURED into it. I feel like one of the best matches of all time is Sabu v. Terry Funk in the barbed wire match. Ppl could look at that one way and say "that guy is too damn old to be in there; let alone in such a dangerous match," but the same guy continued to wrestle just about as regularly as anyone else did at the time and still wrestles occasionally twelve or thirteen years later. His doctor told him he shouldn't be wrestling (or even moving comfortably) in 97; in 2000 I saw him doing moonsaults to the outside on WCW; then he fought CM Punk in 2003, and main evented both of the first ECW One Night Stand cards. He's a shining example of why elder wrestlers SHOULD be allowed to wrestle.

Now, Ric Flair on the other hand; not so much. He can do whatever he wants to his own body and he should be allowed to perform so long as he can be used. But he's used terribly, he's absolutely ridiculous (which I like, but I always feel myself just laughing AT him and never actually cheering or booing him), AND he keeps getting hurt. I think it's more about how often a performer gets severely injured. You're bound to get hurt at some point in your wrestling career, but when you reach the point where you're constantly injured, your body obviously needs a rest....

IN wrestling, if you can prove you can still take bumps and have a match with less then a handful of botches at a decent pace then i'd say you're ok to stay in the ring AS LONG AS you stay the F*CK away from the world title. Yes Stinger i'm looking right at you!! Over 50 who should spend his time putting over the kids without taking the belt that shouldn't have anymore away from them. Sting isn't what he used to be, neither is Flair. Sting can be in the ring just not often. If Flair wants to be in the ring, it better be to cut a f*cking promo. Nobody wanted or wants to see Sting/Flair right now. Back in the 80s and early 90s yes, NOT NOW!!!

badnewzxl wrote:
1. no disrespect, but your thoughts on boxing are totally WRONG; if it were true Foreman wouldn't be the only former champ who won the belt at such an old age (Larry Holmes is the only other guy who was even a contender at that age) . I can't even think of a single professional sport where players perform at the age at which professional wrestlers can. 40 is usually the cut off in almost all other sports; in wrestling it is quite customary for a talent to wrestle well beyond that age.

2. keeping with the boxing analogy though, I think I see what you mean. Boxers HAVE to stay in IMPECCABLE condition to even be able to contend; wrestlers don't necessarily. Boxers CAN'T even begin to use the drugs and supplements and other potentially harmful stuff bc most of those things hurt your body; wrestlers can sacrifice
their health a lot of times and thrive off it. Bc of this I see the danger in having elder (and in that case even notoriously clumsy wrestlers) continue to perform. But are we really gonna talk Ethics in professional wrestling?

Furthermore, when I was growing up I've always heard the pro wrestling industry described by the performers themselves(and I haven't really heard it explained this way for a while now, or even referred to in the manner. Hell, maybe the times have changed and I'm OLD now) as the world's largest fraternity. I was in a frat in college; there are a lot of things that are respectful to do; there are things that are disrespectful to do. If an RA or anyone ever walked up to an alum while I was/am around and told him to get outta here bc you're too old, me and that person would have a problem. I feel the same is true in wrestling; how dare someone tell Flair he may not wrestle when HE is totally up for it. I don't find it unethical to allow an older guy to wrestle; it WOULD be if he were being PRESSURED into it. I feel like one of the best matches of all time is Sabu v. Terry Funk in the barbed wire match. Ppl could look at that one way and say "that guy is too damn old to be in there; let alone in such a dangerous match," but the same guy continued to wrestle just about as regularly as anyone else did at the time and still wrestles occasionally twelve or thirteen years later. His doctor told him he shouldn't be wrestling (or even moving comfortably) in 97; in 2000 I saw him doing moonsaults to the outside on WCW; then he fought CM Punk in 2003, and main evented both of the first ECW One Night Stand cards. He's a shining example of why elder wrestlers SHOULD be allowed to wrestle.

Now, Ric Flair on the other hand; not so much. He can do whatever he wants to his own body and he should be allowed to perform so long as he can be used. But he's used terribly, he's absolutely ridiculous (which I like, but I always feel myself just laughing AT him and never actually cheering or booing him), AND he keeps getting hurt. I think it's more about how often a performer gets severely injured. You're bound to get hurt at some point in your wrestling career, but when you reach the point where you're constantly injured, your body obviously needs a rest....

1. non taken. I think we got derailed with the boxing analogy, they're two different worlds, in one you actually get in the ring against someone who will hurt you, while in the other you're against someone who will protect you. But I still believe that a old man can get in the boxing ring and have a legit chance with a dodgy game and looking for a KO in the first rounds. anyway, irrelevant. I've seen Rocky way too many times.

2. I think there has to be a point where you simply know that a wrestler can't get in the ring without getting hurt and at the same time have a decent quality match. WWE retired Edge cuz he simply can't compete anymore, I'm pretty sure that almost every indy would bypass that and book him. Hogan is a good example, we know about his hip problems, would it be wise to let him wrestle?? I mean, chances are the match will suck somewhat, and yet still there's the potential that this could sideline Hogan just for getting back together. Or better yet, WWE has Taker fight during WM and then let him take of for almost a year, not because he's injured, but just because he needs to get together again for next WM. These men are fragil, regardless whether they wanna get in the ring again, maybe they shouldn't be booked at all if we know the match will surely hurt them. One last example is Steamboat, he looked great against Jericho some yrs back, but then he got injured during the Nexus attack, he's old, it's not easy taking 450 splashes.

going back to the fraternity thing, there has to be a time where reason comes before respect. If Hogan or Bret Hart wanna get in the ring and redo Ladder War or Ringmaster's Challenge, someone honestly needs to talk to them and tell them no.

I guess to this point there is some white space between what we consider elderly.

Rabid619 wrote:IN wrestling, if you can prove you can still take bumps and have a match with less then a handful of botches at a decent pace then i'd say you're ok to stay in the ring AS LONG AS you stay the F*CK away from the world title. Yes Stinger i'm looking right at you!! Over 50 who should spend his time putting over the kids without taking the belt that shouldn't have anymore away from them. Sting isn't what he used to be, neither is Flair. Sting can be in the ring just not often. If Flair wants to be in the ring, it better be to cut a f*cking promo. Nobody wanted or wants to see Sting/Flair right now. Back in the 80s and early 90s yes, NOT NOW!!!

I can't argue with anything you said bc the way you said it has me in stitches =)) =)) =))

I would have disagreed with you if you didn't put it so awesomely. NOW you're speaking my language, Rabs....