|
|
Post by Bluenose on Feb 2, 2007 20:03:38 GMT
I have been having some discussion and of course I rate Billington way ahead of Hart. I was analysing their body of worker as someone was telling me they reckoned Harts was far better but don't you think it is so hard to judge that due to Hart getting to work with better wrestlers and also his matches are more widely available.
What are your thoughts on Dynamite/Hart and why is the Kid so much better? Just brief points.
|
|
|
|
Post by tequillin on Feb 2, 2007 21:11:25 GMT
Is Dynamite so much better?
Its not hard to judge their body's of work. Just buy Dynamite Kid compilations from any tape site in existence. He arguably is better, but he's not so much better. Billington never got the chance to fully develop due to his injuries at such an early age.
Hart obviously has the greater career and I'd say he has the greater body of work, certainly more range and variety in it, especially in singles competition.
I believe Hart to be better in certain departments. Storytelling for example and building up to the climax of a match.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bluenose on Feb 2, 2007 21:17:28 GMT
I should have rephrased that, I rate him better however not by so much. Just by a bit however. Misawa and Dynamite are the two greatest to have ever stepped in a ring in my eyes but Bret would def be a top three in terms of North America.
|
|
|
|
Post by OfLegend on Feb 3, 2007 17:21:15 GMT
I rate Dynamite as being simply better. I also enjoy his body of work more, while it's arguably not as extensive.
The only thing I will say in Hart's favour in a direct comparison is, while Dynamite always entered into a quality solo performance (until it became more about self-preservation and doing the best he did with what he personally had in his later career), Hart seemed more concerned with raising the quality of the entire match itself.
I don't think Bret was better than Dynamite in even one department in terms of on the day, in between the ropes performance. Hart never had a match as good as vs Sayama in '83 with a worker on such a limited level.
|
|
|
|
Post by janedoe95 on Feb 4, 2007 16:18:53 GMT
Bret even rates Billington higher than himself.
|
|
|
|
Post by JimmyJackJericho on Feb 5, 2007 0:44:42 GMT
Bret even rates Billington higher than himself. That would make Billington the Ultrazord to Hart's Megazord, surely. I mean, Bret is God, is he not? Snideness aside, I actually believe them to be very different wrestlers. Bret worked the main event style of the least daring company in the world, whereas Dynamite pretty much fucked himself up working so hard. |
|
|
|
Post by tequillin on Feb 5, 2007 1:19:48 GMT
Bret worked the main event style of the least daring company in the world, whereas Dynamite pretty much fucked himself up working so hard. Bret's matches are not stuck to one template and contain variation of a great standard, plus he did also work his arse off for 14 years did he not, adding in the 'dare' to the company with many things that the company hadn't done before. The snideness didn't seem to be cast aside to be honest. |
|
|
|
Post by JimmyJackJericho on Feb 5, 2007 2:08:34 GMT
You're reading me wrong.
What I meant, is that Bret didn't have the freedom Dynamite did, working such a brutal schedule against limited workers. Dynamite worked good wrestlers for the majority of his career, which means he has a selection of matches that are sublime. Bret was working for a Sports Entertainment company, with little focus on true, quality wrestling. If you look at his ME run, 92-97, quality opponents were the exception rather than the rule.
It would be interesting to see the body of work if they were to somehow swap roles, with Billington working the WWF Main Event style, with Bret working exclusively toward a wrestling crowd.
|
|
|
|
Post by tequillin on Feb 5, 2007 13:36:31 GMT
What I meant, is that Bret didn't have the freedom Dynamite did, working such a brutal schedule against limited workers. Dynamite worked good wrestlers for the majority of his career, which means he has a selection of matches that are sublime. Bret was working for a Sports Entertainment company, with little focus on true, quality wrestling. If you look at his ME run, 92-97, quality opponents were the exception rather than the rule. It would be interesting to see the body of work if they were to somehow swap roles, with Billington working the WWF Main Event style, with Bret working exclusively toward a wrestling crowd. I didn't think you actually meant this. I've often thought of that and whilst his height would more than likely have played a factor in how high he got in the company, I'm sure with his talents he would have done exceptionally well. I know what you mean about Brets limited opponents and Dynamites freedom. This will always play into the argument for who's better. |
|
|
|
Post by OfLegend on Feb 6, 2007 9:54:11 GMT
Nonsense. While I agree that limitations were strapped on Bret, saying Dynamite got to work with better wrestlers is ridiculous. Dynamite worked Satoru Sayama, Keith Hart, Bruce Hart, Rollerball Rocco, Davey Boy Smith, a very green Mitsuharu Misawa and few better in his prime. When Bret was on top form, he got to wrestle Steve Austin, Chris Benoit, Owen Hart, Shawn Michaels, Curt Hennig, Bam Bam Bigelow and even Ric Flair. There's no comparison.
|
|
|
|
Post by euanzooom on Feb 6, 2007 21:39:20 GMT
I don't really think this comparison has much bearing in the discussion, however, add Hansen, Fujinami and Cobra to Billington's list.
|
|
|
|
Post by OfLegend on Feb 6, 2007 21:47:36 GMT
He never worked Hansen in his prime. And Cobra wasn't that much better fundamentally than Sayama.
|
|
