Kazuchika Okada is the greatest singles wrestler in the history of wrestling.

Talk Puro, Lucha, Europe and "I FOLLOWED WRESTLING IN AUSTRALIA/PACIFIC ISLANDS/CARIBBEAN/AFRICA"
User avatar
mlev76
Posts: 2571
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:32 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Re: Kazuchika Okada is the greatest singles wrestler in the history of wrestling.

Post by mlev76 » Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:30 pm

armsofsleep wrote:
This is actually a great point, because while The Beatles and Shawshank Redemption are great for budding fans to seek out, they are not the end all be all. I mean, The Godfather is great, but I wouldn't put it higher than a lot of the best of Bunuel, Tarkovsky, Fellini, etc. It's like Coppola's third best movie even! And Sgt Peppers is great but it pales compared to something like Pet Sounds or the best Zombies stuff. I mean, even check Rolling Stones' best ever albums list with another long running publication like P4K. It's extremely extremely different. We can't treat Dave like he's the only show in town just because he treats it that way (hell, I trust the "expert taste" of many of the reviewers on this very site over his, simply because I trust their POV and knowledge of the current graps landscape more.)
Sgt. Pepper's is inarguably the Beatles third best album behind Abbey Road and Revolver.

User avatar
BoxingRobes
VOW Staff Member
Posts: 1502
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 1:02 pm

Re: Kazuchika Okada is the greatest singles wrestler in the history of wrestling.

Post by BoxingRobes » Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:33 pm

armsofsleep wrote:
BoxingRobes wrote:
armsofsleep wrote:Imagine determining the best band ever by what ratings they got in Rolling Stone. Imagine determining the best movie ever by its IMDB rating. This is I-N-S-A-N-I-T-Y. Using any one publication's numerical ratings as a determination for quality is insanely dumb. Using one PERSON's ratings, no matter how many ways you try to justify it, is fundamentally flawed in every single possible way. No other industry or art form would use criticism in this way.

There is an argument here. I don't love Okada, but you can try and argue him as an all time talent if you want. Bringing WON ratings into it instantly invalidates the argument though. MAYBE if Dave watched every promotion and was a completely unbiased reviewer and journalist you MAYBE could make a case for including his ratings as one criteria in a huge range of arguments. But that isn't the case at all.
Rolling Stone's #1 album of all time, last time I checked, was Sgt. Peppers.
IMDBs #1 movie of all time goes back and forth from The Godfather and Shawshank Redemption.

While I respect your opinion, brother ARMS, you're talking nonsense because those publications usually rate films generally considered great.

The Beatles are of the greatest bands of all time...maybe THE greatest to many...one of the supporting pieces of documentation you'd present in their case is how many of their albums were critically acclaimed, along with other pieces of evidence.

If you are determining great directors. If you say its Martin Scorcese or Alfred Hitchcock, you will use, as a piece of documentation to support your point, the number of critically great films they have.

While you may have an argument...yours kind of sucks...because, its wrong, its not I-N-S-A-N-I-T-Y, because, what you said is insane, is actually very much what happens. Critically acclaimed piece of art / entertainment are judged, on the whole, by what others think of it, not just you.

Unfortunately, considering most here are refugees from Dave's site, have your own opinion of Dave himself and its going to cloud your judgment. Yeah, using Dave is flawed, but he's the industry standard. It is, what it is.
This is actually a great point, because while The Beatles and Shawshank Redemption are great for budding fans to seek out, they are not the end all be all. I mean, The Godfather is great, but I wouldn't put it higher than a lot of the best of Bunuel, Tarkovsky, Fellini, etc. It's like Coppola's third best movie even! And Sgt Peppers is great but it pales compared to something like Pet Sounds or the best Zombies stuff. I mean, even check Rolling Stones' best ever albums list with another long running publication like P4K. It's extremely extremely different. We can't treat Dave like he's the only show in town just because he treats it that way (hell, I trust the "expert taste" of many of the reviewers on this very site over his, simply because I trust their POV and knowledge of the current graps landscape more.)
All of that is great but its YOUR opinion, not what albums are critically acclaimed. If you're going to make a stance for other films...what datapoints are using to back it up other then, its like your opinion, man. FWIW, Pet Sounds is #2 on the list. lol. If you look at Pitchfork versus Rolling Stone...Pitchfork has been around for 20 years, Rolling Stone for 50(!!). It would be the equivalent of saying "Okada has 60 matches rated **** or better on VoicesOfWrestling, but 0 for Misawa."

The issue here, is, Dave IS the only game in town with historical content. But ffs, I really don't want to make this a Dave thread, as it takes away from it being a OKADA thread. Everything else is hindsight. I compare Dave to Mel Kiper in many ways. Yeah...there is a lot inherent flaws with using him as a datapoint, but really, when you want to make statements about which prospects are the highest rated of all time...you've only got one throughline, and its Kiper. Or...in this instance, its Dave.

User avatar
Rich Kraetsch
Site Admin
Posts: 2173
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 7:12 pm
Location: Wheaton, IL
Contact:

Re: Kazuchika Okada is the greatest singles wrestler in the history of wrestling.

Post by Rich Kraetsch » Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:34 pm

Alan4L wrote:The scary thing is I think he has had similar great output to 2017 in a bunch of other years. His 2013 was unreal.
This is still my favorite Okada year if only because of the varied opponents he had. This year will eclipse it when it's all said and done but that 2013 will always hold a special place in my heart.

User avatar
Rich Kraetsch
Site Admin
Posts: 2173
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 7:12 pm
Location: Wheaton, IL
Contact:

Re: Kazuchika Okada is the greatest singles wrestler in the history of wrestling.

Post by Rich Kraetsch » Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:36 pm

As far as the larger topic at hand. I'm not ready to anoint him there yet. Is he on a trajectory and a path to become that? Absolutely. But right now, if he retired tomorrow, he's not the greatest singles wrestler in the history of wrestling. He's just not. There's too many other guys with too lengthy of resumes for me to put him in that slot right now.

You can argue with the amount of top-tier matches he should be there but as others have said, using Dave's ratings as a barometer has flaws. Dave doesn't watch everything and thus it's not a fair 1:1 comparison and in now way does the raw # of X star matches tell a full tale of someone's career. Does it help enhance it? No doubt. Dave has created enough cache with his ratings that a case can be made # of X star matches is a resume builder but it's not THE resume (if that makes sense).

He's on the path. Absolutely. He's in the conversation. I'd like some more time though before we officially crown him.

User avatar
BoxingRobes
VOW Staff Member
Posts: 1502
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 1:02 pm

Re: Kazuchika Okada is the greatest singles wrestler in the history of wrestling.

Post by BoxingRobes » Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:40 pm

soup23 wrote:
BoxingRobes wrote:
soup23 wrote:
I have a masters degree and never was able to present a thesis with only one piece of supporting documentation.
If you'd like to bring any documentation to the table, the floor is yours.
What of me having a master's degree of your original hypothesis?

If it is the latter, I think the corresponding comments have debunked the notion well enough. Your best defense so far has been discussing the storytelling aspects of Okada and how that is a strength for him in your eyes.

The claiming of Meltzer as the sole authoritative voice in your eyes to use as star rating evidence I feel has been debunked based on the fact that Dave may have star ratings dating back 30 years but he has A LOT of holes in there for most of the other likely candidates that would make a GWE list. Maybe Dave would go back and have those Danielson, Flair matches ranked ****+, maybe not, but the truth is that we have a review and star rating attached for almost every big Okada match he has performed in and don't for the other candidates with the exception of Misawa and Kobashi. Even with those two, Dave is missing things like not having a ranking for Misawa vs Akiyama 2/27/00.

So the above argument is if I would concede that the methodology of using a sole voice (Meltzer) as definitive proof of greatness. I think that is bogus and think my personal ratings absolutely have as much merit in my eyes as Daves. I am not looking to have that validated by anyone else but can and have debated the merits of wrestlers candidacies via the Greatest Wrestling Ever project at Pro Wrestling Only.

Getting the star ratings as the sole metric discussion out of the way, you keep referencing the "forest from the trees" in regards to not including tag matches and the such but I think that is also ridiculous and do think Misawa/Kobashi perform wonderfully if comparing tag team output vs. Okada.
I don't really think "Dave sucks" debunks using him as a historical datapoint.

"...my personal ratings absolutely have as much merit in my eyes as Daves."...this is where we can't continue this discussion. Otherwise, I can start posting nonsense like "I think Okada has 1000 matches **** or better...Misawa has 12"...we are trying to have a discussion about empirically quantifying greatness to what Okada is doing. Yeah...there is a historic lack of datapoints, but lets try and avoid nonsense like that, please.

The reason why I am not including tag matches, etc. is due to that creating an era-adjustment discussion that defeats the purpose of the discussion at hand. Common era NJPW does not value multi-man matches and use it as undercard fodder. For the same reason you'd make the claim that Danielson spent a big chunk of his potentially most formidable years working undercard in WWE, which, we all would agree, is not being put in the best position to succeed, so, why open that can of worms? It is not a productive discussion. What data do we have available? What does that data say? The conclusion is in the OP. If you want to make a case that those things matter...then...you'll be siding with Misawa and Kobashi for this discussion. Cool. However, I think by the time Okada is done, he'll come awfully close to those raw totals with singles matches, which we'll discuss in a decade, I guess. I'll bump the thread.

User avatar
SenorLARIATO
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 9:53 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Kazuchika Okada is the greatest singles wrestler in the history of wrestling.

Post by SenorLARIATO » Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:41 pm

Jumbo, though. The stage at which he could be considered a great came so early in his career, he was working with some of the absolute best guys the wrestling world had to offer and more than holding his own. I think there's some obvious similarities to Okada there, but I find it really hard to quantify these things - when someone asks me my all-time fave five, it's always inevitably going to be made up of wrestlers who's careers are complete. Looking back I feel certain that for a good 10 years Jumbo was one of the best in the world, arguably the best at one point, but I doubt I would have been able to say the same in the moment.

So while Okada is undoubtedly one of the best of his generation, my favourite big match wrestler in the world right now and a safe bet to be in the GOAT conversation when all's said and done, for now I'm just content to say he's fucking amazing and that few in wrestling today are his equal.

User avatar
BoxingRobes
VOW Staff Member
Posts: 1502
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 1:02 pm

Re: Kazuchika Okada is the greatest singles wrestler in the history of wrestling.

Post by BoxingRobes » Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:43 pm

Rich Kraetsch wrote:As far as the larger topic at hand. I'm not ready to anoint him there yet. Is he on a trajectory and a path to become that? Absolutely. But right now, if he retired tomorrow, he's not the greatest singles wrestler in the history of wrestling. He's just not. There's too many other guys with too lengthy of resumes for me to put him in that slot right now.

You can argue with the amount of top-tier matches he should be there but as others have said, using Dave's ratings as a barometer has flaws. Dave doesn't watch everything and thus it's not a fair 1:1 comparison and in now way does the raw # of X star matches tell a full tale of someone's career. Does it help enhance it? No doubt. Dave has created enough cache with his ratings that a case can be made # of X star matches is a resume builder but it's not THE resume (if that makes sense).

He's on the path. Absolutely. He's in the conversation. I'd like some more time though before we officially crown him.
Rich has the GOAT equivalent of the FIVE STAR FEAR.

Rich...or BROTHER FED...you, of all people, want to give him the crown. I know you do. DO NOT BE SCARED. When you discuss this topic on the POD next week, tag me in, I'll take on foreign heel LANZA.

Especially being a basketball guy, I know you know this discussion too often when the oldheads refuse to acknowledge the greatness in front of them until its too late and they are already late to the party. Don't be that guy, Rich.

User avatar
saviorofstrongstyle
Posts: 217
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2015 10:16 am

Re: Kazuchika Okada is the greatest singles wrestler in the history of wrestling.

Post by saviorofstrongstyle » Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:55 pm

BoxingRobes wrote:
armsofsleep wrote:
BoxingRobes wrote: All of that is great but its YOUR opinion, not what albums are critically acclaimed. If you're going to make a stance for other films...what datapoints are using to back it up other then, its like your opinion, man.
I've got some bad news for you, but, uh, that critic's review of "x" album/art/movie/pro wrestling match/whatever is just, like, their opinion man.

User avatar
soup23
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 3:21 pm

Re: Kazuchika Okada is the greatest singles wrestler in the history of wrestling.

Post by soup23 » Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:59 pm

BoxingRobes wrote:
soup23 wrote:
BoxingRobes wrote:
If you'd like to bring any documentation to the table, the floor is yours.
What of me having a master's degree of your original hypothesis?

If it is the latter, I think the corresponding comments have debunked the notion well enough. Your best defense so far has been discussing the storytelling aspects of Okada and how that is a strength for him in your eyes.

The claiming of Meltzer as the sole authoritative voice in your eyes to use as star rating evidence I feel has been debunked based on the fact that Dave may have star ratings dating back 30 years but he has A LOT of holes in there for most of the other likely candidates that would make a GWE list. Maybe Dave would go back and have those Danielson, Flair matches ranked ****+, maybe not, but the truth is that we have a review and star rating attached for almost every big Okada match he has performed in and don't for the other candidates with the exception of Misawa and Kobashi. Even with those two, Dave is missing things like not having a ranking for Misawa vs Akiyama 2/27/00.

So the above argument is if I would concede that the methodology of using a sole voice (Meltzer) as definitive proof of greatness. I think that is bogus and think my personal ratings absolutely have as much merit in my eyes as Daves. I am not looking to have that validated by anyone else but can and have debated the merits of wrestlers candidacies via the Greatest Wrestling Ever project at Pro Wrestling Only.

Getting the star ratings as the sole metric discussion out of the way, you keep referencing the "forest from the trees" in regards to not including tag matches and the such but I think that is also ridiculous and do think Misawa/Kobashi perform wonderfully if comparing tag team output vs. Okada.
I don't really think "Dave sucks" debunks using him as a historical datapoint.

"...my personal ratings absolutely have as much merit in my eyes as Daves."...this is where we can't continue this discussion. Otherwise, I can start posting nonsense like "I think Okada has 1000 matches **** or better...Misawa has 12"...we are trying to have a discussion about empirically quantifying greatness to what Okada is doing. Yeah...there is a historic lack of datapoints, but lets try and avoid nonsense like that, please.

The reason why I am not including tag matches, etc. is due to that creating an era-adjustment discussion that defeats the purpose of the discussion at hand. Common era NJPW does not value multi-man matches and use it as undercard fodder. For the same reason you'd make the claim that Danielson spent a big chunk of his potentially most formidable years working undercard in WWE, which, we all would agree, is not being put in the best position to succeed, so, why open that can of worms? It is not a productive discussion. What data do we have available? What does that data say? The conclusion is in the OP. If you want to make a case that those things matter...then...you'll be siding with Misawa and Kobashi for this discussion. Cool. However, I think by the time Okada is done, he'll come awfully close to those raw totals with singles matches, which we'll discuss in a decade, I guess. I'll bump the thread.
The era adjustment in this case though seems to only favor Okada though right? If you push the statistics in one way, that provides a false negative. Even though NJ doesn't emphasize tag team wrestling as much as 90's AJ, I can't discount those classics that Misawa/Kobashi engaged in throughout the division. In addition, I actually think the tags Okada competes in does help him vs someone like Tanahashi as I find Okada to be a better tag worker than Tana. In regards to Misawa, a negative you can place on him is the Tiger Mask work in the 80's that only has a sprinkling of good stuff throughout the early part of his career.

I think you failing to see anyone else as a voice of authority besides Dave is hindering the discussion. Here is a thread on PWO with multiple people giving ***** and ****3/4 matches - http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?/ ... 4-matches/ I think if you read that thread you will see that the people that are heavily entrenched in the current product have a nice smattering of Omega matches within that tip top ranking barometer. Certainly no one here has operated a newsletter for 30 years like Dave has but again that just points the evidence into one answer when the focus is that narrow.

"However, I think by the time Okada is done, he'll come awfully close to those raw totals with singles matches, which we'll discuss in a decade, I guess. I'll bump the thread."

This is a point I can agree with and really where I wanted to point the entire discussion to begin with. Arguments stating essentially the same thing has had you claiming they are "LeBron'ing Okada". Okada could catch a shoot headbutt on Night 1 of the G-1 and be done as a performer, we saw it happen with Shibata. If that happens, is he the greatest of all time?

User avatar
BoxingRobes
VOW Staff Member
Posts: 1502
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 1:02 pm

Re: Kazuchika Okada is the greatest singles wrestler in the history of wrestling.

Post by BoxingRobes » Thu Jun 15, 2017 7:04 pm

soup23 wrote:
BoxingRobes wrote:
soup23 wrote:
What of me having a master's degree of your original hypothesis?

If it is the latter, I think the corresponding comments have debunked the notion well enough. Your best defense so far has been discussing the storytelling aspects of Okada and how that is a strength for him in your eyes.

The claiming of Meltzer as the sole authoritative voice in your eyes to use as star rating evidence I feel has been debunked based on the fact that Dave may have star ratings dating back 30 years but he has A LOT of holes in there for most of the other likely candidates that would make a GWE list. Maybe Dave would go back and have those Danielson, Flair matches ranked ****+, maybe not, but the truth is that we have a review and star rating attached for almost every big Okada match he has performed in and don't for the other candidates with the exception of Misawa and Kobashi. Even with those two, Dave is missing things like not having a ranking for Misawa vs Akiyama 2/27/00.

So the above argument is if I would concede that the methodology of using a sole voice (Meltzer) as definitive proof of greatness. I think that is bogus and think my personal ratings absolutely have as much merit in my eyes as Daves. I am not looking to have that validated by anyone else but can and have debated the merits of wrestlers candidacies via the Greatest Wrestling Ever project at Pro Wrestling Only.

Getting the star ratings as the sole metric discussion out of the way, you keep referencing the "forest from the trees" in regards to not including tag matches and the such but I think that is also ridiculous and do think Misawa/Kobashi perform wonderfully if comparing tag team output vs. Okada.
I don't really think "Dave sucks" debunks using him as a historical datapoint.

"...my personal ratings absolutely have as much merit in my eyes as Daves."...this is where we can't continue this discussion. Otherwise, I can start posting nonsense like "I think Okada has 1000 matches **** or better...Misawa has 12"...we are trying to have a discussion about empirically quantifying greatness to what Okada is doing. Yeah...there is a historic lack of datapoints, but lets try and avoid nonsense like that, please.

The reason why I am not including tag matches, etc. is due to that creating an era-adjustment discussion that defeats the purpose of the discussion at hand. Common era NJPW does not value multi-man matches and use it as undercard fodder. For the same reason you'd make the claim that Danielson spent a big chunk of his potentially most formidable years working undercard in WWE, which, we all would agree, is not being put in the best position to succeed, so, why open that can of worms? It is not a productive discussion. What data do we have available? What does that data say? The conclusion is in the OP. If you want to make a case that those things matter...then...you'll be siding with Misawa and Kobashi for this discussion. Cool. However, I think by the time Okada is done, he'll come awfully close to those raw totals with singles matches, which we'll discuss in a decade, I guess. I'll bump the thread.
The era adjustment in this case though seems to only favor Okada though right? If you push the statistics in one way, that provides a false negative. Even though NJ doesn't emphasize tag team wrestling as much as 90's AJ, I can't discount those classics that Misawa/Kobashi engaged in throughout the division. In addition, I actually think the tags Okada competes in does help him vs someone like Tanahashi as I find Okada to be a better tag worker than Tana. In regards to Misawa, a negative you can place on him is the Tiger Mask work in the 80's that only has a sprinkling of good stuff throughout the early part of his career.

I think you failing to see anyone else as a voice of authority besides Dave is hindering the discussion. Here is a thread on PWO with multiple people giving ***** and ****3/4 matches - http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?/ ... 4-matches/ I think if you read that thread you will see that the people that are heavily entrenched in the current product have a nice smattering of Omega matches within that tip top ranking barometer. Certainly no one here has operated a newsletter for 30 years like Dave has but again that just points the evidence into one answer when the focus is that narrow.

"However, I think by the time Okada is done, he'll come awfully close to those raw totals with singles matches, which we'll discuss in a decade, I guess. I'll bump the thread."

This is a point I can agree with and really where I wanted to point the entire discussion to begin with. Arguments stating essentially the same thing has had you claiming they are "LeBron'ing Okada". Okada could catch a shoot headbutt on Night 1 of the G-1 and be done as a performer, we saw it happen with Shibata. If that happens, is he the greatest of all time?
I'm simply accounting for singles matches, which, is kind of the historic standard. If you want to include the rest, I included it in the raw total numbers. If you favor that stuff...cool...but if I make a statement about someone being the greatest singles wrestler of all time, I am not sure why any of that matters.

I've seen the thread and read it plenty.

And...to answer your hypothetical...I'd still say yes. His volume, through only five years, is better then pretty much anyone else. It was a short run, but it was the greatest run. I'd equate it to like...Jim Brown. Short run, but it was as dominant as anyone ever, so much so, he's still pretty much the GOAT at the position.

User avatar
mlev76
Posts: 2571
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:32 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Re: Kazuchika Okada is the greatest singles wrestler in the history of wrestling.

Post by mlev76 » Thu Jun 15, 2017 7:06 pm

BoxingRobes wrote:
armsofsleep wrote:
BoxingRobes wrote:
Rolling Stone's #1 album of all time, last time I checked, was Sgt. Peppers.
IMDBs #1 movie of all time goes back and forth from The Godfather and Shawshank Redemption.

While I respect your opinion, brother ARMS, you're talking nonsense because those publications usually rate films generally considered great.

The Beatles are of the greatest bands of all time...maybe THE greatest to many...one of the supporting pieces of documentation you'd present in their case is how many of their albums were critically acclaimed, along with other pieces of evidence.

If you are determining great directors. If you say its Martin Scorcese or Alfred Hitchcock, you will use, as a piece of documentation to support your point, the number of critically great films they have.

While you may have an argument...yours kind of sucks...because, its wrong, its not I-N-S-A-N-I-T-Y, because, what you said is insane, is actually very much what happens. Critically acclaimed piece of art / entertainment are judged, on the whole, by what others think of it, not just you.

Unfortunately, considering most here are refugees from Dave's site, have your own opinion of Dave himself and its going to cloud your judgment. Yeah, using Dave is flawed, but he's the industry standard. It is, what it is.
This is actually a great point, because while The Beatles and Shawshank Redemption are great for budding fans to seek out, they are not the end all be all. I mean, The Godfather is great, but I wouldn't put it higher than a lot of the best of Bunuel, Tarkovsky, Fellini, etc. It's like Coppola's third best movie even! And Sgt Peppers is great but it pales compared to something like Pet Sounds or the best Zombies stuff. I mean, even check Rolling Stones' best ever albums list with another long running publication like P4K. It's extremely extremely different. We can't treat Dave like he's the only show in town just because he treats it that way (hell, I trust the "expert taste" of many of the reviewers on this very site over his, simply because I trust their POV and knowledge of the current graps landscape more.)
All of that is great but its YOUR opinion, not what albums are critically acclaimed. If you're going to make a stance for other films...what datapoints are using to back it up other then, its like your opinion, man. FWIW, Pet Sounds is #2 on the list. lol. If you look at Pitchfork versus Rolling Stone...Pitchfork has been around for 20 years, Rolling Stone for 50(!!). It would be the equivalent of saying "Okada has 60 matches rated **** or better on VoicesOfWrestling, but 0 for Misawa."

The issue here, is, Dave IS the only game in town with historical content. But ffs, I really don't want to make this a Dave thread, as it takes away from it being a OKADA thread. Everything else is hindsight. I compare Dave to Mel Kiper in many ways. Yeah...there is a lot inherent flaws with using him as a datapoint, but really, when you want to make statements about which prospects are the highest rated of all time...you've only got one throughline, and its Kiper. Or...in this instance, its Dave.
Dave's opinions are still just that.They're not raw data and cannot be claimed to be such to counter a claim that you perceive to be opinions.

This is your opinion, not fact.

User avatar
BoxingRobes
VOW Staff Member
Posts: 1502
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 1:02 pm

Re: Kazuchika Okada is the greatest singles wrestler in the history of wrestling.

Post by BoxingRobes » Thu Jun 15, 2017 7:08 pm

saviorofstrongstyle wrote:
BoxingRobes wrote:
armsofsleep wrote:
I've got some bad news for you, but, uh, that critic's review of "x" album/art/movie/pro wrestling match/whatever is just, like, their opinion man.
That kind of makes them a professional, and an authority on the matter. One of the pillars of claim testing.

User avatar
mlev76
Posts: 2571
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:32 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Re: Kazuchika Okada is the greatest singles wrestler in the history of wrestling.

Post by mlev76 » Thu Jun 15, 2017 7:09 pm

Rich Kraetsch wrote:As far as the larger topic at hand. I'm not ready to anoint him there yet. Is he on a trajectory and a path to become that? Absolutely. But right now, if he retired tomorrow, he's not the greatest singles wrestler in the history of wrestling. He's just not. There's too many other guys with too lengthy of resumes for me to put him in that slot right now.

You can argue with the amount of top-tier matches he should be there but as others have said, using Dave's ratings as a barometer has flaws. Dave doesn't watch everything and thus it's not a fair 1:1 comparison and in now way does the raw # of X star matches tell a full tale of someone's career. Does it help enhance it? No doubt. Dave has created enough cache with his ratings that a case can be made # of X star matches is a resume builder but it's not THE resume (if that makes sense).

He's on the path. Absolutely. He's in the conversation. I'd like some more time though before we officially crown him.
Beyond watching, Dave has certainly not rated every match of every wrestler. Access and availability works to Okada's favor much moreso than previous generation wrestlers. Remember, people say that Flair/Steamboat had matches that blew away the 89 series that never made tape.

User avatar
Headlock
Posts: 123
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2015 7:26 pm
Location: Germany

Re: Kazuchika Okada is the greatest singles wrestler in the history of wrestling.

Post by Headlock » Thu Jun 15, 2017 7:12 pm

First of No He isn't because to be the greatest because of a few simple reasons
To be the greatest you have to be great in every year you are active, Okada was not great in 2011, 2010, 2009 etc. Now you can make the Argument that He was inexpirienced but look at El Lindaman, Shingo Takagi, CIMA and Konosuke Takeshita everyone of these were already amazing in there 1st year as a pro, Okada wasn't.
Now the 2nd reason He is still active, what if Okada starts to have shit matches starting with G1, like Bone Solider level Bad and that for the Rest of his carrer, it's higly unlikly but not impossible, so it's to early to make a verdict let's wait 15-20 years
Call me leon

User avatar
BoxingRobes
VOW Staff Member
Posts: 1502
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 1:02 pm

Re: Kazuchika Okada is the greatest singles wrestler in the history of wrestling.

Post by BoxingRobes » Thu Jun 15, 2017 7:12 pm

mlev76 wrote:
BoxingRobes wrote:
armsofsleep wrote:
This is actually a great point, because while The Beatles and Shawshank Redemption are great for budding fans to seek out, they are not the end all be all. I mean, The Godfather is great, but I wouldn't put it higher than a lot of the best of Bunuel, Tarkovsky, Fellini, etc. It's like Coppola's third best movie even! And Sgt Peppers is great but it pales compared to something like Pet Sounds or the best Zombies stuff. I mean, even check Rolling Stones' best ever albums list with another long running publication like P4K. It's extremely extremely different. We can't treat Dave like he's the only show in town just because he treats it that way (hell, I trust the "expert taste" of many of the reviewers on this very site over his, simply because I trust their POV and knowledge of the current graps landscape more.)
All of that is great but its YOUR opinion, not what albums are critically acclaimed. If you're going to make a stance for other films...what datapoints are using to back it up other then, its like your opinion, man. FWIW, Pet Sounds is #2 on the list. lol. If you look at Pitchfork versus Rolling Stone...Pitchfork has been around for 20 years, Rolling Stone for 50(!!). It would be the equivalent of saying "Okada has 60 matches rated **** or better on VoicesOfWrestling, but 0 for Misawa."

The issue here, is, Dave IS the only game in town with historical content. But ffs, I really don't want to make this a Dave thread, as it takes away from it being a OKADA thread. Everything else is hindsight. I compare Dave to Mel Kiper in many ways. Yeah...there is a lot inherent flaws with using him as a datapoint, but really, when you want to make statements about which prospects are the highest rated of all time...you've only got one throughline, and its Kiper. Or...in this instance, its Dave.
Dave's opinions are still just that.They're not raw data and cannot be claimed to be such to counter a claim that you perceive to be opinions.

This is your opinion, not fact.
An opinion by an authority is valid. And, of course they can be considered raw data for a discussion. The same can be said for things like film. The Godfather is a great film. Roger Ebert gave it four stars. You'd use that in a discussion of Godfather's greatness, because Roger Ebert is a long standing authority on film.

Post Reply