Indy Style vs. WWE Style: 200 Moves Don't Make a Good Match

[cero2k]

Source: Bleacher Report
By Justin LaBar (Featured Columnist) on September 6, 2012

Pro wrestling: What's considered a five-star match by one is looked at as dumb by another.

A 200-move match with no purpose isn't a match― it's a demonstration that has a referee in the ring.

A match has a story to it with emotion involved.

The indy style versus the WWE style.

A bad indy-style match is often one that is supposed to be 10 minutes, goes over in time because the wrestlers wanted to get all of their cool spots in and you feel the same after the match as you did when it started.

A high amount of fast-paced sequences and flashy moves with no glue to piece them together.

Too often matches get revered as this amazing match because fans chanted “this is awesome” on four separate occasions because the wrestler(s) nearly killed themselves.

The match gets looked at as a five-star match because it was the first time anybody had ever attempted the combination of moves A, B and C...and then they both fell into thumb tacks.

The “shoot” promo that's the coolest because whenever anything that sounds like it wouldn't be written into a script gets cheered by fans even if they have no idea why they're really cheering. It's always bashing the company, a fellow roster member (but call him by his real name), Vince McMahon or WWE in general.



The fans have no idea, have never met or worked with particular wrestler or company, but because it's that cult-like mentality, they cheer the “controversial” wrestler who “shoots.”



The point is, you can have entertaining sequences. You can have a “this is awesome” moment. You can have a first-time-ever move combination. You can have blood and guts.

The key is doing them at the right time for the right effect.

I once saw a match in a small promotion in Indiana that tossed thumb tacks on the mat three minutes into the match, fell on them and the match went on for another 7 minutes.

Backstage after the match, I asked both wrestlers why they did that. They said they were worried people would get up once the match started. They felt nobody would care about their match because of its placement on the card so they wanted to get the audience's attention quickly.

I understood their concern. I then said, why not pull the bag of tacks out early, tease the tacks but hold the bump until later, you know, for the finish? You would have gotten the audience's attention and it wouldn't have over shadowed how illogical the rest of the match was.

WWE sends every talent to developmental, even if for a few months, before coming to the main roster. CM Punk and Daniel Bryan both spent a little less than a year in developmental before coming to the main roster.

WWE doesn't care how many accolades on the indy scene you have, they make you start over. They want you to do things the WWE way. If you can make them happy plus keep your style/entertainment value in the ring―this is what makes you “the best in the world.”

CM Punk can perform a lot of moves successfully. He is capable of not only doing the moves but knows when to do them. He knows how to build the match. There are some moves you no longer see in his repertoire since coming from indy to WWE, but for the most part he's kept his style as well as pleased WWE. WWE is where you make the top money. All this combined makes him the best in the world.



Some independent wrestlers never figure it out. They can practice their agility and courage all day in the ring or trampoline, but they need to piece it all together.

If you don't know why or when to do a move, you're as good as not doing the move in the first place. The crowd might chant “this is awesome” but if you don't learn the match psychology, you'll be performing in front of the same crowd until you retire.

The current WWE audience craves for the cruiserweight division to return. The biggest time of glory for cruiserweights in front of the American audience is the late 90s in WCW. Every Nitro and pay-per-view started off with a fast-paced, high-flying match.

The trouble with so many of these matches: no story or emotion.

First off, most of the guys have masks over their faces, so emotion has been taken out of the equation.



Secondly, if you do all of these intense moves one after another, it can be a frustrating match to follow.

A Triple H versus The Undertaker WrestleMania match is the kind of match that's tough to follow, but you appreciate.

Tons of backstory. Tons of emotion. Reversals, combinations, a hardcore element and a finale. No wasted motion. Every bit of motion and sequence had a point to the progression of what was going on.

Michaels and Hart did it at WrestleMania 12.

Flair did it every night with Rhodes.

John Cena haters don't want to hear it or know how to see it―Cena has had some outstanding matches with CM Punk. I'm not saying the matches were in the same category as Rhodes/Flair or Hart/Michaels, but they were solid stories told in the ring.

I'm not bashing the independent scene or its performers. At least not all of them. I work in different capacities in the independents myself, most notably with Prime Wrestling which can be found on DirecTV every Sunday night.

There is a great primitive beauty to independent wrestling. It's like watching AA baseball. The ballpark isn't a 50,000-person stadium. The players aren't making millions or on a video game. However, you're seeing natural talent and love for the game at its best.



That's what good independent wrestling is. Love and natural talent for professional wrestling at its best.

Every independent wrestling show is going to have someone or some matches that carry that indy style. You have to expect it. Many young wrestlers spend years working on getting the physical spots learned, working on their look and improving their conditioning.

When you hear an older veteran say, “He hasn't figured out how good he can be yet,” a lot of times this means that the guy is working on a lot of the things you see on the surface, but hasn't figured out how effective they truly can be.

They haven't figured out the match psychology. When and when not to do something. Or what they would try to get out of the crowd with 30 moves, they can get out of it in 15 with the right timing and emotion.

This is why some of those “king of the indy's” make it to WWE.

CM Punk, Daniel Bryan, Seth Rollins, Dean Ambrose, Antonio Cesaro.

They have so much talent in the ring. They understand how to build a match and tell the story. They can do it all while working the cameras, staying safe and making the most of their motions.

They don't need a “this is awesome” chant, because they do it every night and know it's awesome.

[Big Red Machine]

I don't think anyone disputes that. Some of the greatest indy matches have tons of story. Go watch Tyler vs. Davey. Not every indy match is a super-spotfest, and not every fast-paced match is a spotfest. This article kind of pissed me off. This is like saying that all indy wrestling is ultra-violent garbage wrestling. It is playing off of a half-informed stereoytpe.

[yourcrapsweak]

Not that I don't agree with this article, but... Isn't the whole point of it all to entertain? I mean, if they do a match with 200 moves and no story, and the crowd is on their feet chanting "this is awesome," who is to say the fans are not being entertained?

[RedSon]

i agree that any good match needs a good story being told, but when it comes to indy wrestling, you can't just tell a story for 60 minutes and not pull off 200 moves, otherwise it's gonna be armbar followed by a reverse armbar, then another armbar. i think that a story is somewhat separated from the amount of moves executed, the best wrestlers in the world can tell you a great story and still have a large-useful moveset. There's a reason people don't believe in guys like cena and his 5 moves of doom even if he's a great storyteller

[757XTra-TesT]

i agree that any good match needs a good story being told, but when it comes to indy wrestling, you can't just tell a story for 60 minutes and not pull off 200 moves, otherwise it's gonna be armbar followed by a reverse armbar, then another armbar. i think that a story is somewhat separated from the amount of moves executed, the best wrestlers in the world can tell you a great story and still have a large-useful moveset. There's a reason people don't believe in guys like cena and his 5 moves of doom even if he's a great storyteller

To be honest dude, I think the reson why people don't believe in Cena's 5 moves of doom is not because 5 moves aren't believable but because it's the SAME story. But still the 5 moves make you feel things because of how they're placed. And it's actually quite easy to tell a story for an hour with a limited move set. I mean i've seen matches go on 3 minutes or so before either wrestler even touched the ropes. Think of it this way, I was always tought that if you highlight everything you don't highlight anything and it's those highlights in the match that make you react to the match. People BS about Cena only having 5 moves but you know what those 5 moves are! so you would go "oh Cena's coming back!". Whereas if a guy has 200 special moves they all just feel the same. It also helps with longevity. Who do you think would last longer in their wrestling career, Mr 5 moves of doom or Mr 200 supreme?

[RedSon]

i agree that any good match needs a good story being told, but when it comes to indy wrestling, you can't just tell a story for 60 minutes and not pull off 200 moves, otherwise it's gonna be armbar followed by a reverse armbar, then another armbar. i think that a story is somewhat separated from the amount of moves executed, the best wrestlers in the world can tell you a great story and still have a large-useful moveset. There's a reason people don't believe in guys like cena and his 5 moves of doom even if he's a great storyteller

To be honest dude, I think the reson why people don't believe in Cena's 5 moves of doom is not because 5 moves aren't believable but because it's the SAME story. But still the 5 moves make you feel things because of how they're placed. And it's actually quite easy to tell a story for an hour with a limited move set. I mean i've seen matches go on 3 minutes or so before either wrestler even touched the ropes. Think of it this way, I was always tought that if you highlight everything you don't highlight anything and it's those highlights in the match that make you react to the match. People BS about Cena only having 5 moves but you know what those 5 moves are! so you would go "oh Cena's coming back!". Whereas if a guy has 200 special moves they all just feel the same. It also helps with longevity. Who do you think would last longer in their wrestling career, Mr 5 moves of doom or Mr 200 supreme?

i get what you're saying, but you don't have to be mr 200 moves, you just need to innovate in your matches, i don't expect them to have a lot of specials, but at least be able to work different body parts with good moves and not just keep going for the same things over and over. and you can still have the same effect of the 5 moves of doom even if you're doing a lot more moves, there were still come a time where you set up a specific move that will give that reaction.

[Bob-O]

I think there's a time and a place for both. It's silly for the author to call the 200 Move Style "indy" then use WCW's Cruiser Weight division as an example. He said they could be a tough act to follow, but shouldn't that be the goal of EVERY performer?

I also want to clear up something else real quick. WWE doesn't limit the movesets of their performers so they can focus on psychology, they do it to streamline matches and protect their performers.

[badnewzxl]

I think there's a time and a place for both. It's silly for the author to call the 200 Move Style "indy" then use WCW's Cruiser Weight division as an example. He said they could be a tough act to follow, but shouldn't that be the goal of EVERY performer?

I also want to clear up something else real quick. WWE doesn't limit the movesets of their performers so they can focus on psychology, they do it to streamline matches and protect their performers.

1. I totally agree; there isn't just one recipe for a great match, it's all about how the ingredients work together.

2. Imo, the true driving force behind WWE limiting movesets is that they're tired of being sued by kids' parents after those kids ignore the 'don't try this at home' commercials. The limitation coincided with the rise of their PG Era if you notice. I think the idea was to make sure that the kids of today didn't do the crap the kids of the attitude era (such as myself) did; they don't want kids imitating WWE in their backyards. I understand their concern, but as a 90's fan, I prefer the violence....

[757XTra-TesT]

He said they could be a tough act to follow, but shouldn't that be the goal of EVERY performer?

Nope! A good wrestling card has high points and low points to give the fans a break in between. It also makes the other makes look better. If every wrestler went out ther to try and put a 5* match on the same card, the fans would lose interest. It could even cause problems backstage

[Bob-O]

He said they could be a tough act to follow, but shouldn't that be the goal of EVERY performer?

Nope! A good wrestling card has high points and low points to give the fans a break in between. It also makes the other makes look better. If every wrestler went out ther to try and put a 5* match on the same card, the fans would lose interest. It could even cause problems backstage

I get what you're saying, but that shouldn't be up to the talent. The booker and the writers set up the card, they should be setting the pace of the night. If a guy is put into one of those "low point" matches, you'd think his goal would be to go out there and get noticed, otherwise he'll be spending the rest of his career as the cue to take a piss break.

Take the WWE Divas for example. They've been my cue to grab another beer for a few years now. Shouldn't their goal be to change my mind? Shouldn't they be out to show everyone why they SHOULDN'T be sandwiched between Title Matches?

[badnewzxl]

He said they could be a tough act to follow, but shouldn't that be the goal of EVERY performer?

Nope! A good wrestling card has high points and low points to give the fans a break in between. It also makes the other makes look better. If every wrestler went out ther to try and put a 5* match on the same card, the fans would lose interest. It could even cause problems backstage

I get what you're saying, but that shouldn't be up to the talent. The booker and the writers set up the card, they should be setting the pace of the night. If a guy is put into one of those "low point" matches, you'd think his goal would be to go out there and get noticed, otherwise he'll be spending the rest of his career as the cue to take a piss break.

Take the WWE Divas for example. They've been my cue to grab another beer for a few years now. Shouldn't their goal be to change my mind? Shouldn't they be out to show everyone why they SHOULDN'T be sandwiched between Title Matches?

excellent point with a perfect example. What 75 says is true also; but it's a fairly recent thing. there weren't "smoke break" matches on a ppv card during the 90's and the early 2000s; the card was designed to just build up. I like it the old way, personally, bc the lower card guys could set the pace of the show. When the Cruiserweights would come out at the beginning of a WCW ppv and set the building on fire, all the matches afterward tried to match it in some way. That's why I loved WCW during the 90's; the PACE of their show was quick, and I feel like that added to the excitement. It gets kinda boring when you keep going up and down. WWE is going for this roller coaster of an experience with their ppvs and it's just not as effective. I feel like a show is (or at least seems) better when it just builds and builds and ends at the climax; then you watch to see what the consequences are.....

[Bob-O]

I like it the old way, personally, bc the lower card guys could set the pace of the show.

Me too. The phrase "...spot on the card..." was just that.

But, in the current scheme, whoever sets up the card knows what they're dealing with, the builds and the anticipation for each match as well as the potential for everyone involved. In the unlikely event that they have MULTIPLE breakout performances in these matches, I can only see the back office celebrating a successful show not scolding their undercarders for tiring the crowd out.

[757XTra-TesT]

I get what you're saying, but that shouldn't be up to the talent. The booker and the writers set up the card, they should be setting the pace of the night. If a guy is put into one of those "low point" matches, you'd think his goal would be to go out there and get noticed, otherwise he'll be spending the rest of his career as the cue to take a piss break.

Take the WWE Divas for example. They've been my cue to grab another beer for a few years now. Shouldn't their goal be to change my mind? Shouldn't they be out to show everyone why they SHOULDN'T be sandwiched between Title Matches?

Honestly It SHOULD be up to the bookers, but as you know we have some real Divas in wrestling and i'm not talking about the women. And i'm sure that some wrestlers wish that they had the freedom to try and get themselves noticed. But the plan for the match is written for a reason and a wrestler who dosen't follow that plan would find himself in a Goldberg vs Regal type match. I know that isn't what you meant by "get noticed" but it can happen. Besides some wrestlers prefer the "cold point" matches because they feel that they cannot compete at a certain level.

there weren't "smoke break" matches on a ppv card during the 90's and the early 2000s; the card was designed to just build up. I like it the old way, personally, bc the lower card guys could set the pace of the show. When the Cruiserweights would come out at the beginning of a WCW ppv and set the building on fire, all the matches afterward tried to match it in some way. That's why I loved WCW during the 90's; the PACE of their show was quick, and I feel like that added to the excitement. It gets kinda boring when you keep going up and down. WWE is going for this roller coaster of an experience with their ppvs and it's just not as effective. I feel like a show is (or at least seems) better when it just builds and builds and ends at the climax; then you watch to see what the consequences are.....

Trust me dude, there were cards with high and low points in them even in the 90s and 2000s. Now i never watched WCW so i'm going to take your word for it but WWE has had cards like that for as long as i can remember. Now it would be nice to have cards that are constantly "high action" but sadly some wrestlers can't compete at certain levels for one reason or another. A high point match is made to get the wrestlersover. So if a cold point match is better, on the indies especially, we're gonna have some problems backstage.

[Big Red Machine]

Piss breaks and slow points are different. You can have a great match with a slow pace that fulfills the slow point on the card or slows down the pace of the show. A piss break is something like a squash or a Divas match that is placed on the card so people won't miss anything important when they take a piss or get some popcorn or whatever.

[badnewzxl]

Piss breaks and slow points are different. You can have a great match with a slow pace that fulfills the slow point on the card or slows down the pace of the show. A piss break is something like a squash or a Divas match that is placed on the card so people won't miss anything important when they take a piss or get some popcorn or whatever.

exactly; the first match on the card should (imo) be the lowest priority match; let the card build. Of course there could be intermissions and/or interviews and segments in between, but don't throw in a non-ppv quality match right before the main event just so it might not pale in comparison to the match right before it.

[cero2k]

Piss breaks and slow points are different. You can have a great match with a slow pace that fulfills the slow point on the card or slows down the pace of the show. A piss break is something like a squash or a Divas match that is placed on the card so people won't miss anything important when they take a piss or get some popcorn or whatever.

exactly; the first match on the card should (imo) be the lowest priority match; let the card build. Of course there could be intermissions and/or interviews and segments in between, but don't throw in a non-ppv quality match right before the main event just so it might not pale in comparison to the match right before it.

this is the optimal way of doing things, but i remember reading in a Michelle McCool interview that they were told to never out-perform the guys

[Big Red Machine]

Piss breaks and slow points are different. You can have a great match with a slow pace that fulfills the slow point on the card or slows down the pace of the show. A piss break is something like a squash or a Divas match that is placed on the card so people won't miss anything important when they take a piss or get some popcorn or whatever.

exactly; the first match on the card should (imo) be the lowest priority match; let the card build. Of course there could be intermissions and/or interviews and segments in between, but don't throw in a non-ppv quality match right before the main event just so it might not pale in comparison to the match right before it.

I think you are misreading the whole "buffer match" thing a bit. It's not so much to make the main event look better by comparison as it is to cool the crowd down after the other big match on the card (the WHC match or WWE Title match not involving Cena or whatever) so that they won't be burnt out for the main event. Personally I don't think it really should be that much of a concern, but I get why they are doing it.

I also have to disagree with you about the opener being the lowest priority. I actually like the concept of... not necessarily a hot opener like a big feud match (think Steen & Generico at DBD VIII or Roddy vs. Elgin at Final Battle this year), but something that will get the crowd hot. Either a fast-paced match or a match with someone who is great getting the crowd into things like Truth or Generico or Konnan or the Dudleys as babyfaces.