bigtplaystew Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 In pro wrestling, I feel like KNOWING the result does take things away a little bit. Smart wrestling fans tend to be able to see around most of the corners on your little journey through a wrestling match. The thing is, they do throw swerves in there and that suspension of disbelief kicks in. Even though you know it's fake and you know one thing is probably going to happen, if you let your mind believe in the character it makes the experience much more fun. KNOWING the outcome takes away all suspension of disbelief. I think that match should have happened at a PPV. It would have stood out and been remembered. They kind of wasted it on a pre-taped event when everyone knew what was gonna happen. I mean I think they did it to hype the show honestly. Just a ploy to boost some ratings. I don't know if it worked, but the younger audience probably tuned in when they heard Kofi was going to win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hashasheen Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 Quite simply, part of wrestling is the wrestlers trying to make people feel like it's not planned ahead of time. If you know Guy A wins the match, then every time Guy B goes for a pin... even if it's after three finishers and a run-in... you know it's not going to happen. It takes away from the drama. How many times have you watched a PPV match, and been pretty sure Guy A was going to win, when Guy B kicks out of his finisher and makes a comeback? You're not so sure Guy A is going to win anymore. You're more interested in what happens next. But if you know the outcome already, you're not as involved. If that's the case, then there's no point in watching any older shows, right? No reason I should watch Chi-Town Rumble, or Wrestlemania 3, or Money in the Bank, or anything besides what's going on right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djthefunkchris Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 If that's the case, then there's no point in watching any older shows, right? No reason I should watch Chi-Town Rumble, or Wrestlemania 3, or Money in the Bank, or anything besides what's going on right now. Outside of Nostalgia reason's, most people don't watch it to see what happened, but to see what it was they loved about it when they seen it the first time, or what other's loved about it when they watched it and why it was considered such a great PPV. As for shows, they did already announce who won and all on WWE.com before the show aired, and it was all over the place (the results). But some people like to watch wrestling as they would any other show. For example, one of the few shows I watch outside of wrestling is Supernatural. I don't want to know what happened before I watch it, because I love the surprises... I never know what's going to happen before I watch it. It's not the same thing watching wrestling vs. watching MMA or Boxing. Meaning, you know there is no real competition in the wrestling match, as there is in the others... So it's all about the "show", the "entertainment" of it. It's like watching a movie, like say The Avengers. IF someone comes along and tells you everything about the movie before you see it, it can take away from it. Same thing with wrestling. Some (like myself) don't care, going to watch it anyways and form my own opinions about it. Some (like my wife) cares quite a bit, as it ruins the whole thing if someone is explaining to her everything going on or tells her ahead of time.... "What's the point now?" is her reaction. To sum up all of the above: "Different strokes for different folks!" "What you talkin' about Willis!!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cappyboy Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 You have to remember that not everyone watches wrestling for the wrestling, as odd as that sounds. Some prefer the stories, the characters, and/or the "surprise" of the results. Indeed. When I watch a show I'm trying to watch it as markishly as possible. You give me your typical Ring of Honor TV match and I'm down to watch it. But you give that same Adam Cole vs Tadarius Thomas match some context and it adds extra juice. Which makes me even more likely to watch it. Wrestling is not a zero/sum game for me. If I have to give up context for the sake of action, I may or may not watch. Ditto if I have to give up action for the sake of context. I ideally want a decent mix of both. But what Bigpapa's saying is an an example of why i hate watching Mr. Anderson. He takes me out of being able to wrap myself in TNA's story world. The man hasn't mananged to do or say much of anything over the length of his career (or at least the prominent part of it) that has felt organic to me. He can have all the showmanship he wants while saying it. He can get people chanting his catchphrases every single sentence. I don't believe he believes a word he says. And that keeps me from caring what happens to him. There was a moment a couple years ago in the TNA thread where he'd been knocked out seconds into the segment and I declared it the most entertaining thing I'd ever seen him be part of. Which blew some minds. But I meant it and that was because it was one of the few moments I'd seen of his that felt real to me. Or if you want to say E specific, it's why I hated some of the stuff in the Attitude Era and turned them off during that period. Like when the Dudleys where raining "defenseless" valets through tables. It wasn't as much that I was offended that they were violating the old-school values of not beating up a woman. Although I will admit there were tinges of that in the mix. It was the fact I had to step out of the story and purposefully remind myself they weren't literally defenseless. That they had been trained on how to perform the spot. Those spots were making me think about stuff I feel is not my place to think about in the moment. If the show's over and I'm discussing that kind of thing of Grey Dog, okay. All well and good. But if I'm thinking about that stuff mid-show, the promotion is doing it wrong. I'm supposed to believe what I see while I'm seeing it. If I'm not allowed that opportunity, I'm not watching. Thread title says it "may contain spoilers." Don't get pissed off at me because you chose to ignore the warning. Besides, WWE has been talking about it on Twitter/Facebook/WWE.com all day. All well and good as well. But this is why I hate these threads and at times refuse to even be part of them. Many times there are multiple conversation threads going on at once. And if I'm trying to actually be a part of the WWE Universe or the TNA audience, I don't want to come in here and accidentally have a show spoiled because I'm looking for the next point in the conversation about Marty Jannetty's place in WWE history or the next counterpoint in a debate on real world booking theory that sprung out of a recent storyline. Truth be told, I hate the Official Discussion threads. It was a lot easier to avoid unwanted spoilers on here when this section of the site was littered with umpteen different WWE or TNA related threads. Only reason I ever visit them is because I have to in order to discuss the promotions on here. And if one has to cross their fingers and pray they can tip toe past the spoilers to discuss other elements? That's pretty much the chance they have to take. Their ability to not get unwanted spoilers relies solely on discretion of others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rone Rivendale Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 As a general rule, spoiler tags for shows that haven't aired in the US would be a good idea. Yes, this exactly. Of course this are spoilers in this thread sometimes, but most people are polite enough to set them in spoiler tags so people who don't want to know ahead of time can skip it and still be a part of the actual discussion. This isn't the WWE results thread, it's the WWE discussion thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hive Posted October 19, 2012 Share Posted October 19, 2012 As a general rule, spoiler tags for shows that haven't aired in the US would be a good idea. Why? As soxfan93 points out: there's a spoiler warning in the *thread title* itself! It's not his fault that you and others want this thread to be something else than what the title itself clearly states that it is. If you have a problem, then don't go into the thread untill the show has aired. It is what it is. Simple as that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djthefunkchris Posted October 20, 2012 Share Posted October 20, 2012 All well and good as well. But this is why I hate these threads and at times refuse to even be part of them. Many times there are multiple conversation threads going on at once. And if I'm trying to actually be a part of the WWE Universe or the TNA audience, I don't want to come in here and accidentally have a show spoiled because I'm looking for the next point in the conversation about Marty Jannetty's place in WWE history or the next counterpoint in a debate on real world booking theory that sprung out of a recent storyline. Truth be told, I hate the Official Discussion threads. It was a lot easier to avoid unwanted spoilers on here when this section of the site was littered with umpteen different WWE or TNA related threads. Only reason I ever visit them is because I have to in order to discuss the promotions on here. And if one has to cross their fingers and pray they can tip toe past the spoilers to discuss other elements? That's pretty much the chance they have to take. Their ability to not get unwanted spoilers relies solely on discretion of others. I hated them at first, maybe for a different reason though. I felt like there was going to be competition in which thread would get the higher numbers as if it would actually "proove" something, (which it wouldn't have). However, as time goes by I actually love them this way. I can read all the on goings in either company (or MMA) and not have to ask or post or whatever it is I felt compelled to do before. I actually post alot less because of these threads, as I can read other's having the same opinion as I did, and feel that my points were already debated and a conclusion (and to be honest, even if I didn't agree with it at first) was made using all the things I would have wanted weighed in. A quick example is the one with Ryback and "since the John Cena promo in "next" or FCW was dramatically changed, then so is the Ryback chants on live RAW. It was obvious the conclusion I made was the obvious choice without me having to explain anything (there have been just as many conclusions made that I didn't agree with in the first place, that I ended up agreeing with, without me making a single post). End of debate for me: I agree that spoilers should be, in the least, warned before posted... Doesn't mean I think they should be made in "white" or something, just means I think someone should post "SPOILER" just like I just did , before telling everyone what they know. If said poster was unaware it was a spoiler to begin with, I don't feel that they should be exposed as someone that is trying to ruin an event/tv show/ for someone else. Recent example: Main Event show being told before it happened on TV. I don't think the person that said something about it really thought anyone else would have been looking forward to, or unaware that, the event was already out there via WWE.com itself (much like they sometimes do for Smackdown "Sheamus won the World Title tonight at Smackdown, Tune in Friday Night to see how it all went down!" So although I feel your pain, I can see quite a bit of things, just from myself, that weren't thrown out in the 'old way' of doing things. Hopefully you can see some of that in your own thoughts. Although the official headline says "May Contain Spoilers", I still think a little bit of common sense should be upheld, and I also think a little bit of "Well, your right, it was already officially announced at their own websight, I can let this slide." should take place as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigtplaystew Posted October 20, 2012 Share Posted October 20, 2012 I don't really want to fight about this, but that story was all over the sites when Kofi won. So of all the places you could have went to and had this spoiled, you clicked on the one place that SAYS IN THE TITLE, "May Contain Spoilers"... then get pissed when there are spoilers... If you want to avoid spoilers for live events that tens of thousands of people saw live and hundreds of thousands if not millions talked about on the internet, the burden is on YOU to avoid the spoilers. Could he have been cool and warned everyone? Yes. I just don't see a compelling reason why he has to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teh_Showtime Posted October 20, 2012 Share Posted October 20, 2012 I dont really wanna fight about this, but that story was all over the sites when Kofi won. So of all the places you could have went to and had this spoiled, you clicked on the one that place that SAYS IN THE TITLE, "May Contain Spoilers"... then get pissed when there's spoilers... If you want to avoid spoilers for live events that tens of thousands of people saw live and hundreds of thousands if not millions talked about on the internet, the burden is on YOU to avoid the spoilers. Could he have been cool and warned everyone? Yes. I just don't see a compelling reason why he has to. not to mention it was ON WWE'S WEBSITE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rone Rivendale Posted October 20, 2012 Share Posted October 20, 2012 Well, that settles it. If it appears on a completely different site from GDS, it's known to the whole world and doesn't need spoiler tags. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bull Posted October 20, 2012 Share Posted October 20, 2012 While I agree that arguing about a spoiler that WWE reveal themselves is pointless. To avoid arguments like this in the future why don't we just go ahead and put tags on any post that someone might consider a spoiler? Somebody might be trying to have a discussion about an unrelated topic and they will obviously be upset if they come across a spoiler that wasn't tagged, so instead of making unnecessary posts about whether it should be done or not, just do it and save everyone the time of arguing about it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milamber Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 I have no problem with spoilers on here, so long they aren't posted until they have at least been aired on TV somewhere in the world. I've learnt to schedule looking in this thread around the shows/PPVs to avoid spoilers. I also don't post here until I know most people on here have seen the show in question (namely SD due to timezone difference). The Main Event spoiler was bad, IMO, but luckily I don't watch it so it didn't bother me personally. WWE can share the blame on that one, too. Back on topic. Smackdown was a lot of fun and did a good job of putting over several feuds and keeping a few other wrestlers relevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hive Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Well, that settles it. If it appears on a completely different site from GDS, it's known to the whole world and doesn't need spoiler tags. Oh quit being a drama queen already, it was on THEIR OWN website. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigtplaystew Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Once it's aired, it's not really a spoiler anymore. No warning needed. This really is a case of WARNING: THIS COFFEE IS HOT ::sips coffee:: OUCH! Someone should have warned me this coffee is hot! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hive Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 OThis really is a case of WARNING: THIS COFFEE IS HOT ::sips coffee:: OUCH! Someone should have warned me this coffee is hot! So in other words, you think the offended people should sue soxfan93 for several million dollars? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigtplaystew Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Totally Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 Going to underline this now... It's common courtesy to not post spoilers of TV shows before they have aired on TV and as such, it would be appreciated if people refrained from doing so in future. It doesn't matter if the WWE spoilers things or not, a lot of people go to great lengths to avoid spoilers of shows before they get the chance to see them and generally work around seeing spoilers by working out schedules so that they can avoid them. Personally, if something hasn't aired then it hasn't happened yet... and I prefer to be disappointed by the WWE in the order they intended on TV. Yes, this is a thread where people talk about future events and all sorts, but when it comes to spoilers it is just good manners to avoid talking about spoilers before an event is aired, whether other sources are reporting results or even advance hyping such things. That's why we use white text to hide things, something that a lot of users are good at doing and that is great appreciated by users (like myself) who try to watch shows before reading the results. Once a show is aired, it's fair game to talk about... but before then, white text is everyone's friend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigtplaystew Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 You're not going through "great lengths" to avoid spoilers by going to the message board that in the title says, "May contain spoilers". Other than that, your logic is sound. You definitely would be more polite to warn people posting spoilers of shows that haven't aired. So... how 'bout that Ryback getting the title shot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek B Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 You're not going through "great lengths" to avoid spoilers by going to the message board that in the title says, "May contain spoilers". Other than that, your logic is sound. You definitely would be more polite to warn people posting spoilers of shows that haven't aired. So... how 'bout that Ryback getting the title shot? Believe me, I do! It sometimes takes me a couple of days to check in on this thread because I can't always watch RAW or PPVs right away, which is why I don't post in here very often. I watch RAW every week and until recently I've been watching Smackdown most weeks, but I've grown lazy on tha because I just have so many better things to be doing at the weekend and Smackdown is pretty formulaic and bland. Probably has better matches than RAW for the most part, but the storylines are weak so I'm generally less interested. The same applies to TNA... Impact airs over here on a Sunday so if I were to watch it as it aired here, I'd be several days behind everything. I try to watch it elsewhere so that I can read the thread at about the same time as things happen, but I'm usually a day or two behind. It's one of the reasons I don't spend much time in the Dog Pound, because I don't want to get spoilered on things that I'm interested in and I avoid dirtsheets completely if there's a show I haven't watched yet. For everything else I watch I religiously avoid spoilers, to the point of even making sure to avoid episode names or everything. In terms of spoilers as a general principle, I think it's a sad reflection on modern TV audiences that TV shows need to give away future bits of plot by advertising what is going to happen. For me, if I enjoy a show I'm going to stay tuned regardless so I don't need to have any idea of what is going to happen next... but I know I'm in the minority in that viewpoint as many people have told me in that past. Either way... it's courtesy to avoid posting spoilers of things that haven't aired yet, which is the main thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rone Rivendale Posted October 21, 2012 Share Posted October 21, 2012 So in other words, you think the offended people should sue soxfan93 for several million dollars? I'm with Hive on this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crownsy Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 So in other words, you think the offended people should sue soxfan93 for several million dollars? Side note: did you know that case is one of the first ones they make you read in Law School for torts? and you know what, she deserved every penny. the media reported it like "derp, she spilled coffee on herself, derp she's suing for millions!!!" What actually happened was that Mcdonalds was heating coffee to (it's assumed because it liquified the stryfoam cup) to over 250 degrees. Her cup liquified while she was holding it over her lap. They had received multiple complaints, it came out in discovery, that customers styrfoam cups were outright melting from the heat. She also had third degree burns to her...area, that required over a million dollars in plastic surgery and skin grafts. Was actually an intersting case to read, when it was assigned to us I remeber thinking "this is what i'm going to school for? to read the idiot who spilled a coffe on herself case?" but it turned out to be a great read. /back to topic to what i actually wanted to talk about so...these are house show results about Ryback-punk, in light of the previous two pages, ill go white tags just in case SO this weekend they did long form matches where ryback had to sell punks offense. Reports on PW torch are positive, and say that the matches flowed reasonably well and ryback has some decent selling ability. I think one reader put it something like "he's no dolph, but he aint kevin nash either. I'm now offically expecting a reasonably decent macth at HIAC." Will be intersting to see what goes down, I'm pulling for Ryback to have a good showing, he's been growing on me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teh_Showtime Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Of course the match will be decent Punk made Vince look like a million bucks the other night. I think it's pretty clear that most of the match will be Ryback beating down Punk until the inevitable cheap finish so as to not kill his credibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crownsy Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Of course the match will be decent Punk made Vince look like a million bucks the other night. I think it's pretty clear that most of the match will be Ryback beating down Punk until the inevitable cheap finish so as to not kill his credibility. I have no doubt that punk will hold up his end, he's a great talent. But thats not what inpressed the people this weekend, nor is the scenario described what happened. according to the reports. What the reports were was that on the weekend house shows: (white again) Punk got 75-80% of the offense. from all three reports, ryback sold for punk very well during the match, and even engaged in a bit of chain wrestling with him. This is kinda going against the inital smark reports that ryback can't sell someone offense and can't engage in a long form match because he doesn't know how to do anythign but squash. What is being reported from this weekend is a long form 15-20 minute match where ryback was able to sell the champs offense and look like he belonged in a match longer than 2 minutes. Is some of that punk? of course, he's an amazing ring general. but that only goes so far, and people are apparently impressed with rybacks ability to add to a match at the end of the day, it's three house shows, he may look awful at HIAC. but considering house shows are sometimes pre season games, it gives me hope the match will be more than "punk gets murdered for 8 minutes, freak ending saves him" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hive Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Side note: did you know that case is one of the first ones they make you read in Law School for torts? and you know what, she deserved every penny. the media reported it like "derp, she spilled coffee on herself, derp she's suing for millions!!!" What actually happened was that Mcdonalds was heating coffee to (it's assumed because it liquified the stryfoam cup) to over 250 degrees. Her cup liquified while she was holding it over her lap. They had received multiple complaints, it came out in discovery, that customers styrfoam cups were outright melting from the heat. She also had third degree burns to her...area, that required over a million dollars in plastic surgery and skin grafts. Was actually an intersting case to read, when it was assigned to us I remeber thinking "this is what i'm going to school for? to read the idiot who spilled a coffe on herself case?" but it turned out to be a great read. Yeah, they even made a documentary about this. McDonalds just had great lawyers and PR people that made her seem like the outrageous part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackman Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 Agree on NO SPOILERS. Nowadays, WWE programming is rubbish if you know what's going to happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.