|
|
Post by wildknight on Apr 27, 2014 22:36:19 GMT -5
So it sounds like Triple H's record at Wrestlemania could be described as "average". Average for a Main Eventer with multiple world titles? Not even close... he's lost far more matches than he's won. Almost 50% more losses than victories... Can you name ANY other guy who has been at the top and can say the same thing? |
|
|
|
Post by setokaiba on Apr 27, 2014 22:43:59 GMT -5
So it sounds like Triple H's record at Wrestlemania could be described as "average". Average for a Main Eventer with multiple world titles? Not even close... he's lost far more matches than he's won. Almost 50% more losses than victories... Can you name ANY other guy who has been at the top and can say the same thing? Randy Orton is 4-7 Big Show only has two wins I think Chris Jericho is 4-8 Mick Foley is 2-3-1 HBK is 6-11 The only people who appear to be above or at .500 are the people who are consider the faces of WWE Hogan, Austin, Rock(at .500) and Bret Hart and Undertaker(obviously). Edit: Shocking Edge is 6-4 and Kane is at .500 |
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Apr 27, 2014 22:50:03 GMT -5
Average for a Main Eventer with multiple world titles? Not even close... he's lost far more matches than he's won. Almost 50% more losses than victories... Can you name ANY other guy who has been at the top and can say the same thing? Randy Orton is 4-7 Big Show only has two wins I thinl Chris Jericho is 4-8 Randy Orton is the only one of those three that counts. Show and Jericho have never been legit Main Event level talent. They've been "plug-in" talent when the Main Event needed extra workers. I do have to admit though... 4 and 7 is shockingly bad for Orton, but it just goes to show... if the internet hates you, no matter how talented you are, no matter how much you bust your ass for the company, the headline will always read "I hate that guy because he always wins." |
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Apr 27, 2014 22:52:44 GMT -5
The only people who appear to be above or at .500 are the people who are consider the faces of WWE Hogan, Austin, Rock(at .500) and Bret Hart and Undertaker(obviously). I'm sorry but this statement is not even remotely true. There are a fairly large number of people who outright suck who are like 66% at Wrestlemania (2 and 1), and a fairly huge number of people are 1 and 0 or 1 and 1. Now, if you're talking guys with multiple major matches at Mania... yeah you're still wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by setokaiba on Apr 27, 2014 22:53:24 GMT -5
Holy shit Randy Savage is 7-4. I thought he would have a losing record.
|
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Apr 27, 2014 22:54:55 GMT -5
Holy shit Randy Savage is 7-4. I thought he would have a losing record. Yeah, keep going, you'll see that you're REALLY wrong about your claim. I scoured HHH's record (with help from Cole) a couple of years back. His record SUCKS for a Main Event level guy. HHH has lost virtually every major match of his career. |
|
|
|
Post by setokaiba on Apr 27, 2014 22:56:34 GMT -5
The only people who appear to be above or at .500 are the people who are consider the faces of WWE Hogan, Austin, Rock(at .500) and Bret Hart and Undertaker(obviously). I'm sorry but this statement is not even remotely true. There are a fairly large number of people who outright suck who are like 66% at Wrestlemania (2 and 1), and a fairly huge number of people are 1 and 0 or 1 and 1. Now, if you're talking guys with multiple major matches at Mania... yeah you're still wrong. I thought we was talking about the top guys not the David Otungas(and no disrespect to Otunga he is 1-1) of the wrestling world |
|
|
|
Post by setokaiba on Apr 27, 2014 23:00:01 GMT -5
Lmao Jeff Hardy is 0-5 and Goldust is 0-6. I thought They would have won a tag team match or something.
It's fun looking up this records.
|
|
|
|
Post by setokaiba on Apr 27, 2014 23:01:59 GMT -5
Holy shit Randy Savage is 7-4. I thought he would have a losing record. Yeah, keep going, you'll see that you're REALLY wrong about your claim. I scoured HHH's record (with help from Cole) a couple of years back. His record SUCKS for a Main Event level guy. HHH has lost virtually every major match of his career. RVD is undefeated at WM. I'm going to let you sit on that one |
|
|
|
Post by pinksparklepuff on Apr 27, 2014 23:08:10 GMT -5
Diamond Dallas Page is undefeated at Wrestlemania.
Goldberg is undefeated at Wrestlemania.
Michael Cole is undefeated at Wrestlemania.
Shelton Benjamin I believe has been in every MitB match at Wrestlemania, I'll have to double check that.
|
|
|
|
Post by setokaiba on Apr 27, 2014 23:13:01 GMT -5
Shelton Benjamin I believe has been in every MitB match at Wrestlemania, I'll have to double check that. Not WM 23 |
|
|
|
Post by sychosid1 on Apr 28, 2014 4:16:51 GMT -5
Funny WK, because even if Triple H has lost more matches than he has won, how do you know 100% t hat it wasn't Triple H's call to lose those matches? He wanted to lose to Batista and Benoit...so he still main evented WRestlemania's...argument or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Apr 28, 2014 6:08:43 GMT -5
Funny WK, because even if Triple H has lost more matches than he has won, how do you know 100% t hat it wasn't Triple H's call to lose those matches? Because most of the time, he wasn't in the position to make that call. He didn't have any kind of creative influence in the company until very recently. 1) What is your RELIABLE source for this information. 2) Him wanting to lose does not mean he chose to lose. He didn't have creative control for EITHER of those matches 3) I didn't say he hasn't Main Evented. I said that if you compare him to other big name talents, he hasn't Main Evented nearly as high a percentage of his appearances Either have your facts AND an understanding of what I'm saying straight, or do not participate in the conversation. |
|
|
|
Post by sychosid1 on Apr 28, 2014 6:49:23 GMT -5
Uh...since Triple H actually got married to Steph McMahon, he got anything he wanted most of the time. Your facts is: 1) Triple H was considered by you a transitional champion...yet he held the WWE Championship 8 times I believe and the World Title about 5 times. Add it all together, HHH held the WWE Title for 539 days. And HHH held the World Title for 616 days altogether. Now you are right on one instance, that he was a transitional champion TOWARDS his first 5 title reigns when he held the WWE Title for 4 reigns out of 5 under 50 days. The other lasted 118. After that, you calling him a transitional champion is stupid (Except when he won the WWE Title and lost it back to Orton back at No Mercy). 2) Triple H got to the top can be put mainly on him marrying Steph. Even without Steph, HHH would of reached main event level status, but I feel he wouldn't of been as big as being with Steph. EDIT: Even what Mike said is 100% true. Let me get that quote again: "As for them not caring how hard he's worked for them I'm thinking that calling him "King of Kings", letting him main event several Wrestlemanias, giving him the major titles something like a dozen times, making him the inaugural World Heavyweight champion by literally handing him the belt, putting him on a thousand T-Shirts and making him an executive officer of the company suggests that they're at least somewhat aware of his efforts.  " Exactly. Triple H vs Chris Jericho was considered a main event match even if it wasn't the actual main event. How can you explain it going on last exactly? Same with Triple H vs Randy Orton. They weren't considered the main event of Wrestlemania according to you even though they were hyped as a main event and actually headlined the show. |
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Apr 28, 2014 7:03:04 GMT -5
Uh...since Triple H actually got married to Steph McMahon, he got anything he wanted most of the time. Thank you for making the rest of your post not even worth reading by revealing where you're really coming from right off the bat. I appreciate your honesty, even if it was unintentional. Have a good day. |
|
muta75
Jobber
RONDA ROUSEY IS THE BEST FIGHTER ON THE PLANET
Posts: 3,606 
|
Post by muta75 on Apr 28, 2014 7:05:41 GMT -5
Uh...since Triple H actually got married to Steph McMahon, he got anything he wanted most of the time. Thank you for making the rest of your post not even worth reading by revealing where you're really coming from right off the bat. I appreciate your honesty, even if it was unintentional. Have a good day. i didn't stop reading at that line, though i wish i had.. |
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Apr 28, 2014 7:07:33 GMT -5
Thank you for making the rest of your post not even worth reading by revealing where you're really coming from right off the bat. I appreciate your honesty, even if it was unintentional. Have a good day. i didn't stop reading at that line, though i wish i had.. I actually read the rest of his post as well, but my essential position is that I respond to the relevant elements of a given post. Just because someone has 32 things that they think are "points" in their argument does not obligate me to address all 32. If 27 of them are strawmen or other irrelevant babble, I ignore them. |
|
|
|
Post by sychosid1 on Apr 28, 2014 7:11:15 GMT -5
Babble? No you just can't admit what you're saying is subjective. Like I said a long time ago Wild, YOU THINK when you say something, its 100% correct, no everything is subjective and debatable. What you said is stupid because my reasons above.
|
|
muta75
Jobber
RONDA ROUSEY IS THE BEST FIGHTER ON THE PLANET
Posts: 3,606
|
Post by muta75 on Apr 28, 2014 7:13:48 GMT -5
HHH has propped up more guys than he has buried (still waiting for one name that he has actually buried that would have been worth their weight in rat shit). more guys got to the top because HHH saw worth in them than the contrary. hardly a golden shovel..
|
|
muta75
Jobber
RONDA ROUSEY IS THE BEST FIGHTER ON THE PLANET
Posts: 3,606
|
Post by muta75 on Apr 28, 2014 7:15:08 GMT -5
Babble? No you just can't admit what you're saying is subjective. Like I said a long time ago Wild, YOU THINK when you say something, its 100% correct, no everything is subjective and debatable. What you said is stupid because my reasons above. yes... |
|
"
