View Poll Results: ?

Voters
24. You may not vote on this poll
  • Undertaker

    16 66.67%
  • HHH

    8 33.33%
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 30

Thread: Who do you prefer? Week 7

  1. #1
    Making Odd Since 1980
    Oddbob's Avatar

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Ontarioville
    Posts
    2,027
    Rep Power
    178
      Country                    Canada

    Who do you prefer? Week 7

    This week we will get everyones opinion on two future Hall of Famers and Legends in this business.



    vs

    SWEEEEEEEEEEEET!!!!!


  2. #2
    Curtain Jerker

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    5
    Rep Power
    0
      Country                    ca=Canada

    Re: Who do you prefer? Week 7

    Two of the oldest wrestlers in the wrestling business. Got to go with the oldest one, the deadman.

  3. #3
    Intercontinental Champion

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,666
    Rep Power
    22

    Re: Who do you prefer? Week 7

    I wonder how many HHH will get lol. Not even a big fan of Taker, biker Taker maybe but I still prefer him over HHH.

  4. #4
    Firefly Fun House
    JakeYourBooty's Avatar

    Status
    Online
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    The Neighborhood
    Posts
    14,685
    Rep Power
    507297

    Re: Who do you prefer? Week 7

    the internet hates HHH

    i love him....but they are both pretty fucking epic

  5. #5
    Sweet Meat
    Hollywood Dook's Avatar

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    56,685
    Rep Power
    701366

    Re: Who do you prefer? Week 7

    God damn let people see who voted for who.

    I'd love to call out whomever would possibly vote for HHH. And I'm currently a HHH fan again.

    Spoiler:

    I solemnly swear I am up to no good


    Quote Originally Posted by Steve
    I stopped reading when it became clear it was the same butthurt smarkf*g "real wrasslin'" crybaby rant on every youtube vid featuring Cena.



    Quote Originally Posted by Buff Bagwell on John Cena
    But I think he's bigger than Buff Bagwell. I really do.
    [02:00 AM] Dakstang : girls ain't dudes


  6. #6
    Firefly Fun House
    JakeYourBooty's Avatar

    Status
    Online
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    The Neighborhood
    Posts
    14,685
    Rep Power
    507297

    Re: Who do you prefer? Week 7

    I voted for HHH, call me out. I am pretty sure the title is who do YOU prefer... I prefer the Game the Deadman schtick got old for me for many years, then the American Badass was just terrible... now they are both at the point where they do what they want....it's all about personal preferences my friend.

  7. #7
    Sweet Meat
    Hollywood Dook's Avatar

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    56,685
    Rep Power
    701366

    Re: Who do you prefer? Week 7

    Well CLEARLY it's about who you prefer and taste..


    I just can't see why someone would prefer HHH to Taker, at all. I can't think of one thing HHH does better than Taker, except MAYBE hype a feud but how many good feuds have HHH hyped on the mic? Aside from his feud with Sheamus.. uh.. his feud with Cena in 06?

    Spoiler:

    I solemnly swear I am up to no good


    Quote Originally Posted by Steve
    I stopped reading when it became clear it was the same butthurt smarkf*g "real wrasslin'" crybaby rant on every youtube vid featuring Cena.



    Quote Originally Posted by Buff Bagwell on John Cena
    But I think he's bigger than Buff Bagwell. I really do.
    [02:00 AM] Dakstang : girls ain't dudes


  8. #8
    Firefly Fun House
    JakeYourBooty's Avatar

    Status
    Online
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    The Neighborhood
    Posts
    14,685
    Rep Power
    507297

    Re: Who do you prefer? Week 7

    i just like him better man....don't crucify men...ha...see what I did there

  9. #9
    Sweet Meat
    Hollywood Dook's Avatar

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    56,685
    Rep Power
    701366

    Re: Who do you prefer? Week 7

    No.

    edit: But fine, if you prefer him whatever. Clearly we all have our preferences. Would just have liked some reasoning.

    Spoiler:

    I solemnly swear I am up to no good


    Quote Originally Posted by Steve
    I stopped reading when it became clear it was the same butthurt smarkf*g "real wrasslin'" crybaby rant on every youtube vid featuring Cena.



    Quote Originally Posted by Buff Bagwell on John Cena
    But I think he's bigger than Buff Bagwell. I really do.
    [02:00 AM] Dakstang : girls ain't dudes


  10. #10
    Firefly Fun House
    JakeYourBooty's Avatar

    Status
    Online
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    The Neighborhood
    Posts
    14,685
    Rep Power
    507297

    Re: Who do you prefer? Week 7

    over the year HHH has been one of my favorite wrestlers because I like his style more, his promos to me have consistently been some of the most entertaining and the old DX stuff alone was to me the best thing going at the time...he has also done more different things from the jokester, to the serious face, to the biggest heel in the game....he kept things fresh in my eyes, where the Taker has just done the same routine over the last billion years....he is the phenom..yadda yadda yadda....not really sure what else to give ya on this subject

  11. #11
    grandma RKO'er.

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    --> NYC <--
    Posts
    641
    Rep Power
    11

    Re: Who do you prefer? Week 7

    Ahhh this is a tough one. I mean HHH is a great superstar and a future hall of famer for sure, but nobody right now in the business can compare to Taker's status.

  12. #12
    Rhythm Rock Shocker
    NovaRoad's Avatar

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    1,445
    Rep Power
    59322
      Country                    United States

    Re: Who do you prefer? Week 7

    I voted Triple H because right now I do prefer him. He's been working with Sheamus really well on this rivalry they've got going, and it's the first time in a year or so that I can say that about him. As much I love Undertaker, he's been absent (rightfully so) since WM. The exception being, of course, his appearance to fight Swagger on RAW, but he probably won't be seen again until after Extreme Rules.

    Ask me this a month ago, I easily say Undertaker.





  13. #13
    On Vacation
    VOWrestling's Avatar

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    639
    Rep Power
    0
      Country                    us=United States

    Re: Who do you prefer? Week 7

    Where IS the Undertaker. I mean, he was on Raw but he was nowhere after WM26. What's he gonna do now that Shawn is gone? HHH, definitely.

  14. #14
    Tommy Got Hacked
    Guest

    Re: Who do you prefer? Week 7

    Watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect Film.

  15. #15
    The Only 2x WC HOF
    Shock's Avatar

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    21,392
    Rep Power
    1438597

    Re: Who do you prefer? Week 7

    Triple H, and it's not even close for me.

    Undertaker became a great wrestler in 2007. Before that, he had truly great matches with these wrestlers: Shawn Michaels; Kurt Angle; Bret Hart - hardly the worst guys in the ring [you could include Mankind for Pittsburgh, but that wasn't Undertaker being great, that was all Foley].

    People say Undertaker ONLY because he has gotten better in modern history, and Triple H has gotten poorer (not his fault, but I'll get to that). Pre-quad injury Triple H was better than Undertaker ever was, or could ever dream of. Think about the matches he was having: a classic with Stone Cold at No Way Out; the matches against The Rock; Cactus Jack; with Stone Cold against Benoit and Jericho. The guy was a fucking machine.

    Even after the quad injury, he still pulled out some amazing matches (Wrestlemania XX; SummerSlam 2002 immediately come to mind).

    As a wrestler, Triple H wins easily. Because of Undertaker's resurgence people have forgotten about how shit he was at times (and he was fucking god awful at times).

  16. #16
    WAKE UP

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    32,126
    Rep Power
    207741

    Re: Who do you prefer? Week 7

    HHH had a good 2 year run where he was reigned in (carried) by Mick Foley before working with guys like Rock, Benoit, Austin and Jericho all during periods of time where they were all legit great. Since the quad-tear in 2001 he's been actively mediocre to awful with the occasional good match here and there when either working with a superior talent or put into a good storyline, and he was mediocre before 2000. That's a good 2 year run in a decade plus career.

    Undertaker was mediocre for most of the 90s but got very good by 1997. I would say he easily contributed far more to his matches with Bret and Michaels than they did (and I like Bret). He was awful 1999-mid 2002 but since then has been very good-to-miracle worker status. Undertaker vs Shawn Michaels from Wrestlemania was much more of an Undertaker match than a Shawn Michaels match. Undertaker vs Kurt Angle was Undertaker making Angle's tired, nonsensical match formula and turning it into a great match. Undertaker vs Batista is Undertaker taking a limited opponent and carrying him to a great match. Something like Undertaker vs Festus from 2008 was a great, short TV match where Taker could have put on a nothing match but instead decided to be a workhorse. When was the last time HHH had a match that was even close to being match of the week? Or match of the night, even?

    Old Man Undertaker (say, 2007-2009) is a much better run than HHH's prime.

    As far as crap in their careers, they are probably equal though I think I'd rather watch Taker spending 10 minute choking his opponent than HHH working some awful 30 minutes attempted epic propfest. As far as the good in their careers go, it's Taker in an absolute walk.

    Undertaker is a better promo. Undertaker is a better draw. I don't think theres any aspect in which I would take HHH over Taker.
    Last edited by King Steventon; 04-21-2010 at 08:42 PM.

  17. #17
    The Only 2x WC HOF
    Shock's Avatar

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    21,392
    Rep Power
    1438597

    Re: Who do you prefer? Week 7

    Hang on, Undertaker vs. Shawn Michaels from 1997 - Undertaker contributed more? Rewatch that Hell in a Cell. If people say that Shawn Michaels could have had the Razor Ramon ladder match with anyone (which I don't believe, but I do believe Michaels made it the classic it is), then the same applies to Undertaker vs. Michaels.

    Triple H carried by Cactus? Oh my lord, Triple H was becoming a proper in-ring general. Cactus helped put him over through the bumps, but Triple H carried his weight and more in that match.

    Like I said, Triple H has declined over the years, but that shouldn't negate the fact that he was absolutely brilliant. In 1999/2000, he was amazing on the mic, he was a huge draw as a heel and was putting on great matches with everyone. If it was that easy to have good matches with The Rock, Benoit, Jericho, then why didn't Undertaker? Because, like you said, he was a clown. I suggest you go back and watch some 2000 WWF, and tell me that Triple H wasn't better than Undertaker now.

    It doesn't matter if the recent adaptations of Undertaker/Shawn Michaels were mostly Undertaker (in your eyes), because it was Shawn Michaels that made Undertaker's offence look great. That was a match (or two) where both men did excellently, as good as each other.

    Undertaker and Batista was just two limited wrestlers putting on a great match. It happens when two styles complement each other so well (think, Hogan/Warrior). Even Triple H can have very good matches these days: John Cena at NoC; the Jeff Hardy matches; the Orton last man standing; and Triple H had a great TV match with John Cena in 2009 to answer your question.

    While Undertaker has had some truly classic matches (the two Shawn Michaels matches) in recent years, Triple H since his first quad has had 2 truly great matches (against HBK on Raw and against HBK/Benoit at XX) and several very good matches (like the ones listed above), which are of similar standard to Undertaker's very good matches against Batista, Angle, etc. Triple H's best matches were in late 1999-2001, and had more great matches in that time than Undertaker had in his entire career.

    Although if you want to watch 10 minutes of Undertaker choking someone and being vintage then I can see why you would think he's so great.

  18. #18
    Tommy Got Hacked
    Guest

    Re: Who do you prefer? Week 7

    Watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect Film.

  19. #19
    WAKE UP

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    32,126
    Rep Power
    207741

    Re: Who do you prefer? Week 7

    Quote Originally Posted by TheShockmaster View Post
    Hang on, Undertaker vs. Shawn Michaels from 1997 - Undertaker contributed more? Rewatch that Hell in a Cell. If people say that Shawn Michaels could have had the Razor Ramon ladder match with anyone (which I don't believe, but I do believe Michaels made it the classic it is), then the same applies to Undertaker vs. Michaels.
    Michaels's ridiculously flailing about for most of the match was pretty embarrassing. Im not a big fan of the match but nothing Undertaker did in it annoyed me like Michaels. The match is famous because of the booking, not because of anything either man did in it.

    Triple H carried by Cactus? Oh my lord, Triple H was becoming a proper in-ring general. Cactus helped put him over through the bumps, but Triple H carried his weight and more in that match.
    There are people who think HHH wasn't carried by Foley? HHH could have been replaced by almost any other heel in those matches and they wouldn't have changed much. It was Foley laying out the story, Foley taking all of the big bumps, Foley bringing the emotional aspect to them.

    Like I said, Triple H has declined over the years, but that shouldn't negate the fact that he was absolutely brilliant. In 1999/2000, he was amazing on the mic, he was a huge draw as a heel and was putting on great matches with everyone. If it was that easy to have good matches with The Rock, Benoit, Jericho, then why didn't Undertaker? Because, like you said, he was a clown. I suggest you go back and watch some 2000 WWF, and tell me that Triple H wasn't better than Undertaker now.
    This is hyperbolic. Ric Flair in 1989 was absolutely brilliant. Toshiaki Kawada in 1993 was absolutely brilliant. Samoa Joe in 2005 was absolutely brilliant. HHH in 2000 was very good. I'm not seeing how he was a huge draw, most of the heat was directed Steph and the McMahon-Helmsley faction rather than just him.

    It doesn't matter if the recent adaptations of Undertaker/Shawn Michaels were mostly Undertaker (in your eyes), because it was Shawn Michaels that made Undertaker's offence look great. That was a match (or two) where both men did excellently, as good as each other.
    This part has to be a joke right? Michaels made Undertaker's offence look great? Undertaker's offence always looks great. He has some of the best offence in wrestling. I can't remember the last time he did something that looked like it was whiffed or wouldn't hurt. Michaels was damn good in that match, but if you look at the way Undertaker builds his matches with bigger nearfalls as opposed to Michaels who ends up doing a middle part then nipping up for a comeback and a finishing run, it was much more of a Taker match.

    Undertaker and Batista was just two limited wrestlers putting on a great match. It happens when two styles complement each other so well (think, Hogan/Warrior). Even Triple H can have very good matches these days: John Cena at NoC; the Jeff Hardy matches; the Orton last man standing; and Triple H had a great TV match with John Cena in 2009 to answer your question.
    That Cena TV match was pretty bad and full of lots of goofy shit. vs Cena @ NoC was hardly a carryjob from HHH. The Hardy matches were good 100% because of Hardy, not sure what HHH really brought to them other than restholds and shitty finishes. The Orton LMS match was not a carryjob either considering Orton was way better than HHH at the time and the match was good mostly because of the booking.

    While Undertaker has had some truly classic matches (the two Shawn Michaels matches) in recent years, Triple H since his first quad has had 2 truly great matches (against HBK on Raw and against HBK/Benoit at XX) and several very good matches (like the ones listed above), which are of similar standard to Undertaker's very good matches against Batista, Angle, etc. Triple H's best matches were in late 1999-2001, and had more great matches in that time than Undertaker had in his entire career.
    The RAW HBK match is like half an hour of guys who throw crappy looking punches and chops doing just that, with an obligatory figure four spot because HHH was in full-on Ric Flair markdom at the time. The Wrestlemania triple threat was all about Benoit and I don't see how anyone could chalk that up as being good thanks to HHH. What are the good HHH matches from 1999?

    Although if you want to watch 10 minutes of Undertaker choking someone and being vintage then I can see why you would think he's so great.
    I said I'd rather watch it than some garbage match like HHH vs Michaels HIAC, HHH vs HBK 3 stages of hell, HHH vs HBK LMS, any HHH match from 2003, any HHH match from 2004 that didnt involve Benoit, HHH vs Jericho from Wrestlemania, any HHH vs Orton match from 2009, etc.
    Last edited by King Steventon; 04-22-2010 at 09:11 AM.

  20. #20
    The Only 2x WC HOF
    Shock's Avatar

    Status
    Offline
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    21,392
    Rep Power
    1438597

    Re: Who do you prefer? Week 7

    Quote Originally Posted by Tommy Red View Post
    I wouldn't say HHH was ever carried in 2000-2001, but he was working with some of the best ever in their kinds of matches (eg hardcore with Foley, brawls with Austin, technical with Angle/Benoit etc). Sure this shows HHHs versatility at the time, and I'm not trying to downplay the greatness of his run then because he was that damn good, but it's not like he was getting great matches out of average wrestlers or anything like that.

    Personally I think that while it's true that Taker was bad for much of the 90s as well as the early 2000s, he's had a lot more good stuff than HHH and a much longer run of greatness. Great HHH matches post 2001 are the exception rather than the rule, while Taker has produced a great deal of quality matches in the past few years, and a lot before then at various points. I think HHH at his worst is a lot worse than Undertaker at his worst, and Taker at his best easily beats HHH at his best.

    HHH was still great 10 years ago though.
    I disagree that Undertaker at his worst was better than Triple H at his worst. When Triple H was at his worst (2003-ish), he could still pull off a classic like the HBK match. Undertaker at his worst was about 2000-2001-ish, where he legitimately had no good matches that I can remember. Even Undertaker at his best (recently) can pull out a few stinkers as well.

    Put it like this, in 2000 when Triple H was at his best, every single PPV Triple H was on he had the best match (or at least equal best) except for: Wrestlemania, SummerSlam, Survivor Series. There are others where it's debatable such as Fully Loaded, Backlash, etc, but those are some of the best PPV's ever and Triple H was in a great match anyway. People are forgetting the abundance of great matches Triple H had in 2000, I still maintain that he had as many great matches in that time that Undertaker had in his career, and when you consider the other spaced out classics Triple H has had outside that over the years I think he pushes Undertaker away.

    I never even mentioned Triple H's versatility but thanks for bringing it up. Triple H can have a great match with a variety of styles, like Chris Jericho/HBK; Angle/Benoit; Austin/Rock; Cactus. Undertaker, to his credit has been very versatile towards the end of his career (he always had great matches against HBK; and had great matches with Angle/Batista in the latter so he's obviously quite versatile).

    My three favourite WWE matches ever (with the exception of HBK vs Mankind) all have Triple H in them: The Mania Triple Threat; the No Way Out match against Stone Cold; the 60 minute ironman against The Rock. That's why I think he's better than Undertaker at his best - Undertaker has never had a match of those quality with anyone not named HBK, and I think it's much more admirable to have three brilliant brilliant matches with three (well four since the Triple Threat) than three brilliant brilliant matches with the the same guy.

    Also, Stevenson, it seems to be that:
    When Undertaker has a great match its clearly because of Undertaker.
    When Triple H has a great match its clearly because of the other guy.

    I get you now.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •