wrestling / Columns

Ask 411 Wrestling 02.13.13: Rude DVD, Chainsaw Charlie, Vince’s Net Worth, More!

February 13, 2013 | Posted by Mathew Sforcina

Hello, and welcome to the Valentine’s Eve edition of Ask 411 Wrestling! I am your answer guy, Mathew Sforcina. Hope your Valentine Day is filled with love and the like, although as I always say, if you need a special, certain, designated day to tell someone you love them, you aren’t doing it right.

Well, actually my Grandmother always said that.

And she was talking about Mother’s Day.

Still counts though!

… Moving on. This will be the last Total Opinion Week for a while as by this time next week I should be fully back to normal. Or at least back to where I was before my break. You got a question for me?
Email it to me and I’ll do my best to answer it!
You can also hear my opinion on
Just Another God Damned Rasslin’ Show. And I always endorse Wrestling PodClash. And I also endorse @IndiesWrestler on Twitter. Very funny, even if none of those tweets apply to me.

Banner time!

411 on Twitter!

Me On Twitter~!


Tony Schiavone: I’m kinda in both camps on Tony, in that I agree that he did suck, but also agree that he was a very good announcer in his day. The problem is that all of his work with Bischoff in his ear was pretty bad, and that’s what most people remember. He did have a period when he was good. But so did Michael Cole, so yeah…

My ‘ultimate’ choices: The main reason I chose from the last 25 years is because I know that they can work in a modern setting. Gorgeous George pioneered the modern heel, he was the original flamboyant heel, but could he work in the modern era? Probably, but MR. Backlund I know could work today. I don’t want too much of a style clash with my guys, and with the obvious exception, all my guys can give me superb matches at the drop of a hat.

Your Turn, Smart Guy…

I’m considered by many as a legend and have been a champion many times in my career in different countries, including Canada. One of the most infamous angles I was involved in was when I was blinded, very much like another angle done before in which the two wrestlers involved in it are now deceased. My most famous match was an “unification match” against another champion, and both him and me were known for using the same finishing manoeuvre, although we set it up it differently. One time, a member of my family was brutally attacked by a former US Champion and was avenged by someone who also won US gold many years later. I’ve won tag team gold with a former Triple Crown winner and also won tag team championships in wrestling companies owned by two Hall of Famers. Who am I?

lorddarias has the answer.

A Legend and champion in different countries (Canada, U.S. Puerto Rico)

Stampede Wrestling NWA International tag team champion (Calgary Version)
NWA World Heavyweight Champion (not recognized by NWA)
various WWC Titles

Blinded by Abdullah the Butcher with Ammonia

Probably similar to Chris Adams being blinded By Gino Hernandez with Shaving cream (both deceased)

Beat Ric Flair in a Unification Match. Both used the Figure Four Leglock finisher

Daughter Stacy was hit over the head with a Mexican guitar by Konnan (former US Champion)

Was avenged by son Carly (another former US champion)

Won Tag Team Gold with Pedro Morales (WWWF Champion, WWF IC Champion, WWF Tag Team Champion)

Won Tag Team Gold In 2 companies owned by Hall of Famers (Stu Hart and Dory Funk Jr)

You Are Carlos Colon

Jeremy has the question this week.

I am a tournament that involved an odd number of participants. The participants in this tournament did not compete in traditional singles matches. I was a concept created by a former world champion, and one of the participants would become a future world champion, albeit under a different name. The finals also saw an appearance from a former world champion, and the winner receiving a material possession that was not a championship belt. This ended up being a case where this tournament helped to launch the career of a man who did not even compete in the finals. What am I?

Questions, Questions, Who’s Got The Questions?/My Damn Opinion

Benjamin asks if the world is ready for a THE Guy who isn’t American…

Hi Mathew

Thanks for a great article each and every week (required reading every time). I have a question:

Do you think a North American promotion could ever accept a wrestler who is not from the Americas (I’m including Canada and South America) as THE guy in their promotion, on a level with Hogan, Cena, Austin, The Rock, Shawn Michaels or Bret Hart in their primes? If the promoters decided to get behind Antonio Cesaro, Wade Barrett or Sheamus (who was World Heavyweight Champion, but is several steps below Cena in the pecking order), and they were able to provoke strong reaction from the fans, would we see perhaps a European as the centrepiece of the promotion for a number of years? Or would it never happen, or the fans not accept it?


I think if someone can provoke strong reactions in that role, then it doesn’t matter where they come from, they should get that push. If someone gets the appropriate reaction from the crowd, then they get the push, full stop. So under that rule, sure, European, Asian, Australian, African, born on a raft in the middle of the Indian ocean, whatever, you’ll get the place.

However, if you don’t have that, if you’re on the cusp and you need a push, could that happen, would a North American promotion have a non-American as their centrepiece?

I think if the company has international aspirations, absolutely. If the company wants to run internationally, then anyone from outside the Americas would be welcomed in open arms.

But a strictly national one? One that focuses on only the US market? That’s… difficult. A regional one could, an international one, a national one… It really comes down to the talent in question. A certain amount of ability and/or charisma can and will make up for anything, but, while I don’t want to insult the majority of those reading this… The worry that Jack Swagger’s new gimmick/manager will get cheered in certain areas of the country does have some merit. So certain regions could, you can argue, lead to problems. Maybe.

However, I think we are at the point where if the next Hogan/Cena did arise, regardless of where they came from, they’d get there. At least, I hope we are.

Jon has a booking idea.

Mathew, here is My dream WM outcome, assuming it’s the main event everyone assumes we’re getting:

Rock beats Cena again. Like last year, Cena sits on the floor outside the ring with a stunned look. And it really would be a shocking moment, too since how the hell does Rock keep the title when everyone knows he’s leaving?

This time though, while Rock celebrates, Cena gets back up, reaches under the ring and grabs whatever he can find- a fire extinguisher maybe- and slides back into the ring while Rock is facing the other direction. He waits, Rock turns around, and Cena knocks him the fuck out. Then, kicks him a few times just to make sure you know he’s turned. JBL and Cole, in shock, start to sign off…but wait! Who’s that slowly coming to the ring??? Dolph Ziggler! In street clothes. Very skeptically, he slides into the ring and Cena backs off of Rock and motions for Dolph to pin him. Dolph covers, a ref runs in and counts to 3, Ziggler is now WWE champ. Cena helps him up, starts to hand him the title and then knocks Ziggler the fuck out with the belt. The show ends with Ziggler and Rock out cold, and Cena throws the strap over Dolph and walks off with no music.

So, in a ten minute span, Cena turns heel, Ziggler wins the title and turns face, and Rock is written off but with a reason to come back.

I can guarantee you two things: none of this will happen and it’s better than what they’ll come up with. But what are your thoughts?


Look, I know WWE has a bad track record of keeping its word, that they have been known to change things on the fly. But even they know that if they have Dolph cash in on the WWE champion, they WILL get roasted alive. Dolph’s contract is for the World Title. Not the WWE.

And even without that, even if they found a loophole, a double turn in the main event of a Wrestlemania is a very iffy proposition. X-7 was in the wrong place and that was just one turn. 2000 misfired as well. 13 had the benefit of it not being the main.

I mean, I get what you’re saying, but no, I don’t think it would work, and I wouldn’t do it. Cena’s heel turn has to be drawn out, long term, Cena ‘snapping’ just isn’t the way to go. You can’t turn Superman heel in one issue, you need a lot longer than that.

Cena beating Rock has always been the ‘right’ choice, it’s just that it should have been the culmination of a year long storyline where Cena dropped down, lost matches, lost feuds, had a truly bad year, not a bad year where he main evented every PPV and got title match after title match after title match. Cena losing to Rock then Brock then having to rise back up, winning the Rumble then winning the title off Rock could have been an epic storyline, and might well have finally gotten Cena over with everyone. Instead with have Twice in One Lifetime: Pay us again! And it’ll work.

Ah well. Mike has yet another follow on from the picking of people to start a promotion.


Great column love the debate your column cause in the comments section.

Continuing on from the top ten to start a promotion theme, lets reverse it.

If you were going to start a promotion who would be the top ten worst wrestlers/
The caveat is that for the Wrestlers they have to have held a world championship(the top belt men or women, tag does not count) in either WWE, WCW,ECW or TNA for multiple matches(no hotshot champs) or have had a lengthily main event push again multiple matches no 1 shot deals.

I’d have to go with

Scott Steiner
Ron Simmons
The Giant – Big show was so green at the time, he had no business being in the main event let alone being the champion.
Justin Credible
Ed Leslie(Various Gimmicks)
Candice Michelle

who would you pick?


Worst ten to build a full promotion around?

Alicia Fox
Bertha Faye
Brie Bella
Candice Michelle
Miss Tessmacher
Stephanie McMahon-Helmsley
The Fabulous Moolah
Velvet Sky

Or are you asking for the list of ten worst people I WOULD take? Or just the worst 10 wrestlers overall? Clarification, please.

Joe wants to talk Savage and the Hall of Fame.

Hey Matthew,

Love the column. I look forward to it every Tuesday. I have a question/ opinion about Randy Savage. I’ve been reading reports from Lanny stating that the only way that Macho Man will go into the HOF is if they induct all of the Poffo family at the same time. This to me sounds really fishy. It’s hard for me to believe that Savage would say that, and actually mean it. I can see that if the Poffo family were together, and Randy said that it would be cool if it happened. A part of me feels that this is just Lanny using Macho Mans death as a way to be in the spotlight again. I see no reason why any other member of the Poffo family should go in. It’s not like they were the Von Erich family. Savage was a stand alone star, and a massive one at that. What are your thoughts on this situation? Keep up the good work!

My thoughts are that I actually believe this. Mainly because of the track record with Hall of Fames and Savage, mainly the WCW Hall of Fame incident.

For those who weren’t around in 1995, WCW had a Hall of Fame that they began right after WWF began theirs, a.k.a just after Andre the Giant’s death. They held a ceremony each year at Slamboree, with Gordon Solie as inductor and a key figure in the selection process. But in 1995, among Dusty Rhodes and Antonio Inoki and the like, was an odd name, Angelo Poffo.

Poffo got in because Savage asked/requested/pushed/demanded/whatever for him to be inducted. Sure, they worked it into an angle that actually did some good business for WCW with Savage and Flair, but the fact remains that Poffo got in solely because Savage, one of WCW’s main stars, wanted him in. Solie quit WCW because of it.

So, zoom ahead to present day, and the question of Savage in the WWE Hall of Fame. Before 2009, it was for other reasons I’m sure, but after the Von Erichs got in as a group, they he felt justified in thinking his family should all get in. He wanted to be inducted with his family. I mean, if Lanny wanted to remain in the spotlight he’d be pushing for the induction and a DVD deal and the like. He’d be milking his brother.

I never met Randy, obviously, but this just sounds believable to me. Certainly moreso than him and Steph snapping some underage Slim Jims…

Kevin doesn’t want to Kayfab us, but he wants to talk about the Big W and the Bigger L…

What is your opinion on wins and losses in wrestling as it pertains to helping build a guy or killing a push? I always hear that Vince thinks they don’t matter but I feel differently. It seems that heels in the WWE more often than not lose and are booked really poorly, so they are not taken really seriously. You have guys like the US champ constantly jobbing or Wade Barrett winning one week and then going on a losing streak. Also, Ziggler. He “beat” Cena and could have moved on but instead they had Cena halt any momentum the next two weeks. One would think that the WWE would want stronger heels….

Wins and losses are part of the overall package of a push, and a story. You can tell a great story by having someone win match after match and rise to the top of the mountain.

And losses can also be used to tell a story as well, of someone having to rebuild themselves, or changing themselves, or whatever.

Wins tend to be easier to use than losses, but still. However, if the booking is strong enough, and the talent good enough, you can get away without focusing on wins and losses. It is possible to rise to the main event/get over without winning. Royal Rumble 2003 is an example of that, albeit one we don’t like talking about now.

But that state, of talent and booking getting someone over without winning, is very hard to achieve. It’s far, far easier to get yourself into a situation where wins and losses don’t matter because no-one gets over anyway. This is the problem with the WWE midcard, everyone just trades wins and losses. With the right booking, that leads to a highly charged, competitive environment where everyone is a contender and you’re never sure who’s going to win, which I suspect WWE wants. But instead of that, you lead to a point where no-one gets over and rather than everyone being seen as challengers everyone just comes across as losers.

And also you then have the Cena/Orton/Sheamus thing, where everyone is midcard expect a few select people, who beat everyone else 99% of the time. Again, that can be used well, as anyone who gets a win theoretically gets elevated immediately, but I don’t see anyone thinking Dolph’s a world beater after how he beat Cena that one time. Again, it’s the how, not the W or L.

Especially in a situation where you have an abundance of talent, your US/IC Champions should not be jobbing to ‘main eventers’ every week. You have plenty of guys to do that, don’t do it with guys you want to get over.

But you know what the weirdest thing is? WWE does know how to do this. You can toss out old historical precedent, but there’s one guy, right now, that proves WWE can push a guy and get him over.

Mark Henry is everything about how to push a monster. He beats people up, he wins matches, he loses occasionally, and thus he is over. It’s not rocket science. You push a guy, if he has the talent, then he’ll get over.

So, yeah, wins and losses, in an ideal world, aren’t essential. But they pretty much are, you have to give a guy wins if you want to get him over as a champion. Or losses if that’s the story you want to tell. It’s part of booking, it’s a tool. You might be able to avoid using it for a while, but eventually, you do need to pull it out of the box.

Luke asks a fact question. Well, I gotta let one or two in…

Hey Mat, love the column. With this years just in the books a few mates and I went back and watched some past Rumble matches and we were wondering about the 2005 Royal Rumble match. Scotty 2 Hotty never made it to the ring, and was therefore never eliminated. Cena and Batista eleminated each other before the match was restarted and Batista would eventually win the Rumble and the title at Wrestlemania. My question is was it ever discussed or brought up on Raw or Smackdown by Scotty or the commentators that he was never thrown over the top rope and could therefore stake a claim as the ’05 Rumble winner?
Thanks for answering for a fellow Australian, cheers,

This is actually something that has come up a couple times, as Mabel/Viscera was dragged out of the 1999 Rumble under the top rope and thus was never eliminated. Likewise in 2004 Spike Dudley got attacked on the outside by Kane and was never able to enter the ring. And in 2005 Scotty 2 Hotty arguable won the Rumble the minute both Cena and Batista’s feet hit the ground.

But unlike Maven in 2002, none of these guys got much sympathy.

Maven got a title shot due to how he got eliminated. Scotty’s elimination was never brought up. Same as Viscera, same as Spike. WWE seems to treat ‘getting beat up badly enough before entry’ as a forfeit and thus doesn’t count.

I got nothing here.

When in doubt, NewLegacyInc!

Joe has a few questions.

Hi Matt, thanks a lot for answering my questions a few weeks back.

1) I was watching this match and at about 4:12 Superstar Graham said has a 20 count to return to the ring. Did WWE(WWF/WWWF) ever have this rule? or did Superstar mean to say 10 count and it just came out wrong or did he really think that was the WWF’s rule at the time? Because I’ve watched several thousands hrs of WWE’s (and every other fed’s) entire history and I’ve never heard of WWE having that rule.

Sadly the video is unavailable.

However, even with the video, I can’t say for sure, because while modern WWE uses the 10 count, 20 was the old school standard. 20 was the number in the old days, in the time Graham was breaking in. So he might have slipped up, or it could be legit. Or it could be that the ref was counting fast and so it was a 20 count… Too many variables. I don’t recall WWE ever using 20 counts, but it’s not impossible. Any old school readers remember a 20 count?

2) When Rick Rude unveiled his tights with Jake Roberts wife’s face on the crotch and Jake ripped them off did Rude really run around naked or was it just censored as a TV “trick”? kinda like Ric Flair carrying a tag title. The live audience can tell obviously but not the TV viewer. I just cant imagine WWE letting people run around naked but then again The Kat’s boobs were on a few PPVs. same question for when Brian Kendrick streaked on Smackdown in 2003? thanks a million!

I happen to know that on that occasion, he was wearing a thong. So the censoring wasn’t needed as such, it just made it look wilder than it actually was.

As for Kendrick streaking, a.k.a WWE having zero follow up to Sean O’Haire’s awesome videos (which wasn’t totally their fault)…

It’s safe to say that he wasn’t naked. Dawn Marie when she flashed the audience was wearing pasties, so it’s fairly likely that Kendrick was wearing a thong. After all, people would be more likely to complain about a naked man than a topless girl…

Nightwolf has a few questions.

Hey Matthew, long time reader first time question asker. I have a couple of question for you.

1. With Ric Flair being inducted in the WWE Hall of Fame twice now ( one as singles career, and once with the Horsemen), do you see any other wrestlers being double inducted. Triple H and HBK come to mind( One as singles career and Once as Dx)?

HHH/HBK are both good bets.

Edge might have a good shot with Edge & Christian. In a perfect world Arn, Tully and Windham would get their own individual inductions. I can see Hogan, Hall and Nash maybe getting in as the nWo. Maybe Andre and Heenan as the Heenan Family if they get desperate?

And there’s always the idea that was floated a while back of inducting matches, with Andre/Hogan being the first one. So there could be a lot more doubling up that way. But I suspect they’ll try and avoid it in future, Flair’s probably the only guy who’ll ever get doubled up. Maybe.

2. The WWE has been run by 3 generations of McMahons ( James, Vince Sr, Vince Jr) and passed down from father to son). Can the WWE continue be successful with Triple H running WWE instead of Shane Mcmahon?

Sure it can. WWE is a international business. You don’t have to have McMahon blood to run the damn thing. Provided you gave them a wrestling mind to run the shows, any business person with the right level of experience running a major international media company could run the place. The McMahons have run it since they know both, but Hunter appears to be picking up the business side well enough. But yeah, provided the suit didn’t get involved in booking, anyone could run the company.

3. This question has really been bothering me for years now. Why does TNA copy WWE? Remember when they had Abyss feuding with his brother Judas Mesias? Obviously it’s a cheap rip off of Undertaker?Kane/Paul Bearer saga? Is it because hey know that no organization can touch the WWE?

Now there’s a question with no bottom.

I think that there’s a lot of factors at play here. Russo was a factor, in the sense that while he was booking, he booked how he saw wrestling working, which meant that his angles were similar to ones he did he WWE. Hell, Russo’s did the ‘Millionaire’s Club V New Blood’ war like 3 times.

Part of the reason is that what TNA is ‘ripping off’ WWE is stuff WWE ripped off from itself, some things are just wrestling booking 102, and use them whem appropriate. People just are more likely to claim it’s clearly ripped off now.

And part of it was a desire to beat WWE by copying them, an idea that’s never sat well with me, nor with a lot of people. TNA would never beat WWE by trying to outdo them in what WWE does. TNA should focus on providing an alternative, which they have, at times. And other times they just copy WWE.

And sometimes it’s an attempt at parody that fails.

Overall, it’s all tied into the idea of trying to win a war by doing what WWE does but better, which is never going to work. And TNA, to their credit, have tried to avoid that recently. Sometimes it works.

And sometimes it doesn’t.

But they seem to be at least trying. Good for them.

Stromi asks about sons.

Hello again Mathew,

First of all, in my opinion, you can mix up fact and opinion questions together. I read your entire article every week anyways!

Now, to my question:

During the WWF PPV’s of the late 80’s, Jesse Ventura always has something negative to say about referee Joey Marella, who almost always reffed Hogan’s matches. I mean, he really blasts “that idiot Marella” every time he would be in the ring. Imagine my surprise years later, when I found out that Joey Marella is Gorilla Monsoon’s son! Jesse must of known this, so was there ever any uncomfortableness between them in the booth? I feel weird listening to it now, never mind at the time. Did Jesse somehow not know they were related? Gorilla never personally defended him other than as a referee capacity (as opposed to say, Lawler did with Brian Christopher). Always makes me wonder….

It was a long running in-joke, no more, no less. They both knew that Joey was Gorilla’s son, and so Jesse’s ripping on him was a gentle rib on Gorilla, the sort that friends and co-workers would do. Gorilla knew exactly what Jesse was doing, but since he was such a stickler for kayfabe, he would never break character. And he knew Jesse was just being a heel. So no, it was never mean-spirited or anything.

Silly Diaper Rag Fontana Fountain asks about costs.

Just curious as to what the WWE actually brings home in terms of a
gate from live events. Not so much their grand total, but what kind of
a percentage to the people that own sat MSG take per ticket sold. Does
it vary from arena to arena or is there a standard?

It varies from arena to arena. Some places charge a flat fee, others charge a fee + a certain percentage of the tickets, others just straight a percentage. It’s up the arenas, they set the prices, then WWE decides if they are willing to risk a flat fee or if they decide to do a percentage gate and hope for the best. Venues charge what they think they can get away with, WWE pays what it thinks gives it the best deal.

Jez doesn’t actually have a question, as I clearly didn’t read the email properly. But then it’s fairly recent so then, dear readers, if you remember this questions, awesome, if not, feel free to skip to the image.

Ullo ullo Mr Q,

Hope your eye/face heals up well and leaves an awesome scar good sir 🙂

I don’t normally write in, as you and everyone who contributes generally does a fantastic job, but with the mania xx question being from my period of super-fandom (not a TV or PPV missed from Unforgiven 2000-Summerslam 2004) and being also from roughly the same period as I discovered 411, I thought I’d have a bash at answering a query.

Re: Mania xx booking, Foley/Orton was clearly on the cards for a long while leading up to the event according to Foley’s hardcore diaries (if I remember rightly not currently having them to hand) and Lesnar/Goldberg was certainly on the cards from at least Survivor series onwards (again,if recall serves, this match was also a lock from the moment El Bergos was signed. As for the Benoit thing, the Raw title picture was pretty much building to HHH vs HBK who obviously went on to feud for the first half of 2004 with Mania looking to be a stop along the way. The addition of Benoit was very last minute, as he really started catching fire in late 2003, (I remember a report from 411 at the time saying that backstage as one of the Bashams was coming out to the ring for a taping, Chris apparently shouted “You’ve gotta feel it!” or somesuch) from a push that seemed to be generated by the goodwill that he had garnered backstage due to showing a positive attitude. Chris went from feuding over the US title that summer, to a random feud with A-Train for No Mercy 2003. from here, he was in massive danger of slipping down the card as his next PPV outing was being lumped into the smackdown elimination match where he scored a decisive submission (I think) over Brock Lesnar. It was in the build-up to this match where they started testing the waters with Chris v brock, who hooked it up a bunch of times on TV over this period (including the aforementioned match w/Benoit passing out from the shittily-named Brock Lock.) This was a pretty prolonged period, as after survivor series in the days of brand extension, next smackdown outing wasn’t until the rumble. This rumble was incredibly even, as there were a number of mid carders building momentum who could have won – Cena was on the rise, Benoit and Orton were in the mix, then there was Angle, (The Cat) Big Show, Van Dam and probably more besides. With the momentum that he had gained by the booking of being a part of team Angle in the latter part of 2003, and by virtue of his ability to win the people over with his in-ring work, Benoit became the most logical choice for a title shot. However, with Eddie on the road to the smackdown title, and management assumptionally wanting the feel-good memory of both friends with the titles, I would guess this dictated that Benoit would need to go over for the other world title. Hence the call would have been made to make a big deal out of the rule about which world title he could challenge for, only way to do this without jeapordising the feel good moment of 2004 was to insert him into HHH and HBK.

So in a nutshell, these HHH/Orton rumours – although they did have quite the hard-on for young Randall at this time, it’s all way too early, I don’t remember hearing anything about this from this time frame, and it wouldn’t have made sense – Orton was gearing up for the money feud with Foley which he needed to start getting seen in the main event light. (which was looking to be Mania-bound)

Benoit vs HBK vs HHH – was kind of random isasmuch as he was literally inserted to a feud that was already progressing without him, but with the steam that I think he unexpectedly caught on with in late 2003, I think it was a case where he came out of left field at a stage where there was enough time to book it convincingly for mania.

In terms of original plans? I remember at the time expecting for Brock/Lesnar to possibly be a champion vs champion deal for a long while, otherwise I can imagine the way they were going with HHH/HBK that would have been a fairly solid bet at that time also.

By no means is this authorative (apparently I literally can’t even spell authorative) but from one fan’s perspective, this is how I remember things looking.

In regard to the camera work question, I’ve started watching on a regular basis again for the first time since 2004 this April, (mainly because of CM Punk who is fantastic) and I too have noticed this bizzare audience-watching-the-TV shot which has been on smackdown from at least around then. With a vague background in these sorts of things, I would concur that this is more than likely so that they can show off how big their audiences are and what an amazing show this is – but it really does look quite fucking odd – perhaps someone in the truck is just messing with us to check that we’re paying attention??

Keep up the good work sir, and next time, tell them to stay away from the face.

All the best.

Goddess’ birthday was the 10th, by the way. I hope you spent it in worship like I did.

Joshua asks about two title wins.

Typically after a wrestlers (Especially a face) wins the world title at a Wrestlemania or Summer Slam they typically hold on to the belt for a while. And you can bet that their first challengers, while might have good matches, probably won’t beat them for the title.

However, there have been a few big title wins that were followed up by losses. The two in particular I am thinking of is when Austin won the Title at WM14 then quickly lost it to Kane. What was the reasoning behind that? Austin got the belt right back the next night, so what was the point? Did they paint themselves in a corner with Kane having to set himself on fire? Did they do it because, like me, most people didn’t think Kane stood a chance?

The point was that Austin got to win the title back the next night and so they’d get a monster rating. That, and they’d written themselves into a corner with the stipulations and so Kane winning was the only option that was doable. Kane was over enough that he was believable to beat Austin given the situation (First blood match. He wears a mask. What did you think was gonna happen?) but wouldn’t be hurt losing it back to Austin the following night.

It was a way to get a good rating, put over Kane as a guy who could beat Austin and then get the belt back onto Austin, who was also now slightly more underdoggy, since he’d lost the belt once…

The other is Triple H’s title win at WM 18. The big, emotional win after his career threatening injury, only to lose it the next month to Hulk Hogan. Why? I get Hogan was popular again, but why not feud him with Hall and Nash? They did just break up the WWE nWo. He could have feuded with them THEN took the belt of Triple H at Summer Slam. Thoughts? Ideas?

Nostalgia only lasts so long. Hogan was HOT after Wrestlemania, hell leading up to it, he was over like a motherfucker, excuse my language, so the thought was to get him the belt ASAP and cash in. If they waited, they might miss out on all that sweet sweet nostalgia cash. Now, of course in retrospect it is very easy to say they should have waited so that they’d see that the nostalgia wouldn’t last, but at the time, it was a defendable idea, that you strike while the iron is white hot. And they did. But it then cooled down almost immediately.

Rex is all over the place.

dear 411 wrestling i have a couple of questions i was hoping you could answer

1. when cactus jack and chainsaw charlie were feuding the new age outlaws what was the name of their tag team called? i thought it was hardcore legends or something also how did terry funk and wwe come up with the idea of chainsaw charlie?

They had no official name. They were just “Cactus Jack and Chainsaw Charlie”. Any tag team name you see for them is fan made. As for the idea of Chainsaw Charlie, Terry was the guy who came up with it, taking inspiration from FMW’s Leatherface, according to most sources, with the idea of it being an alter-ego, like Foley had Mankind/Dude Love/Cactus Jack. Terry Funk had Chainsaw Charlie. And given that it was obvious who it was, the rub was still given as anyone who knew who Terry Funk was saw through it and those who didn’t know him wouldn’t care, according to Kevin Dunn and the like.

Funk’s quotes on this from his book say that, when Bruce Prichard asked if Terry wanted anything for his debut, where he’d come out from a box, is…

“Before my brain could fully process the question, my lips blurted out, “Chainsaw Charlie! Get me a chainsaw, so I can go out there!” I can’t explain it. It just popped into my mind.”

So yeah, Terry just came up with it on the fly and it didn’t work, clearly.

2.when did the ultimate warrior start wearing the jackets he wore at wrestlemania 7 against macho man randy savage? i seem to remember that being the first time he wore one in his entrance.

Wrestlemania 7 was when he first wore the coat, yes. When he was champ, he just had the belt.

3.where does vince mcmahon rank among the richest men in the world?

Pretty low, comparatively. Vince McMahon as a billionaire lasted only as long as the WWE was riding high, because most of his ‘money’ was derived from him owning so much of the WWE, and so when the WWE was worth $18.64 a share, it was worth over a Billion. Now that it’s down to $8.53, they’ve lost $500 Million worth. Vince himself is now rated at just a few million under $500 Million. So given that there are 1,226 or so billionaires in the world, and a number I’ve read is that there’s maybe 4,650 people worth $500 Million, Vince is certainly in the top 6,000 richest in the world, maybe even 5,000 given the stock price, but he’s nowhere near the top of the list.

4. and do you think that wwe will ever release a ravishing rick rude dvd? there certainly is enough matches for them to make one of him and also was wondering the same about demolition.

I would have said no to both Rude and Demolition a few years ago given their status as guys who pissed Vince off, but while they both are now more accepted into the WWE world, I say no simply because WWE seem to have moved away from the midcarder compilation DVD. Many of the early ones they did for guys like Graham, Pillman and the like didn’t sell. Hell, look at the 2013 list:

WWE TLC: Tables, Ladders & Chairs 2012 1/15/13
The Best of Raw & SmackDown 2012 01/29/13
The Best of WCW Monday Nitro Volume 2 02/12/13
Royal Rumble 2013 02/26/13
Bret “Hit Man” Hart: The Dungeon Collection 03/05/13
Elimination Chamber 2013 03/19/13
For All Mankind: The Life & Career of Mick Foley 04/16/13
The Best of In Your House 04/30/13
WrestleMania 29 05/14/13
Top 25 Rivalries 05/28/13
Extreme Rules 2013 06/18/13
Best of War Games 06/25/13
TBD PPV 07/16/13
ECW Unreleased Vol. 2 07/30/13
Money In The Bank 2013 08/13/13
Best of MSG 08/27/13
Midsouth 09/10/13
SummerSlam 2013 09/17/13
Triple H (Biography) 09/24/13
Goldberg (Match Comp) 10/08/13
Night of Champions 2013 10/15/13
Money In The Bank Anthology (Match Comp) 10/29/13
Over the Limit 2013 11/05/13
History of WWE 11/19/13
Hell in a Cell 2013 11/26/13
Raw 20th Anniversary Box Set 12/03/13
Survivor Series 2013 12/24/13
Best WWE PPV’s 12/31/13

It’s either match types, gimmick lists, main eventers or promotions. Foley and Goldberg are the lowest single star sets there. Add in the Sammartino DVD… So no, I don’t think Rude and Demolition are gonna get one any time soon.

And on that downer, I bid you all goodbye for now, and I hope, as tomorrow is all about love, that you remember the loving relationship that you should always strive to emulate.


article topics

Mathew Sforcina

Comments are closed.