Let's Talk About Match Structure

[Greggulator]

There is also something to be said that actual boxing matches and basketball games aren't told in narratives. And things like slugfests happen regularly.

Not every match should look the same or have a theatrical structure.

[stro]

There is also something to be said that actual boxing matches and basketball games aren't told in narratives. And things like slugfests happen regularly.

Not every match should look the same or have a theatrical structure.

Wrestling turned into a work so you could script and tell stories in matches. That's the whole point. If you aren't telling a story, why even bother? It's not a real sport and shouldn't be held to the standards of a real sport, which also have storylines, they're just more subtle and usually need a good broadcaster to move them along.

[SirSmUgly]

But that's not what Gregg was saying. Gregg was saying that not every match needs to have some theatrical narrative, not that there should be no narrative at all.

 

And truth be told, every sporting event has a narrative, too, even if the promoters for the event haven't manufactured one. 

 

Re: tag structure. Southern-style tags are just shine, heat, hot tag, finish, right? That's basically the structure for tag matches in the U.S., but are there other structures besides this? I have seen numerous variations on this structure where the heat segment is elongated with missed tags, etc., or even matches where there's shine, heat, more shine, and then a longer heat segment leading to the hot tag, but otherwise, are there any other structures and are they viable? Someone who I really respect on this stuff, can't remember who, made an argument that this is the only real working structure for tags and it shouldn't be messed with. 

[Skeeball Wizard]

A while back I had what was known as "Pro Wrestling Theory Sheet", a step by step guide to exactly how to work a match, down to how many bumps etc. Certain guys I knew wouldn't deviate from it a single step, when asked "What happens if the audience figures out that every match is exactly the same?" They would reply "They won't." Seemed ridiculous to me then and even more now. I'll put it up here if I can find it.

[Go2Sleep]

There were plenty of AJ/NOAH tags that were great without a "true" hot tag, but then again, their face/heel dynamic tended to be more subtle. Of course, they did also have an even more annoying cliche: The Cold Tag... You know, where the vet on one team is rolling, then tags in the rookie while the other team still has a vet in the ring and you can hear the crowd deflate instantly because they know it's over and who's winning.

 

In the US, I guess there will always be some degree of a hot tag because it's the most logical way for the face team switch momentum if the heels are going to have sustained offense, I just wish there was more variety in the length of the heat segments and some occasional role reversals with a heel just sneaking out of a danger and a fresh partner changing momentum. It's tough for me to get into regular 2 on 2 tags in WWE because there's just this 6th sense for how long the heat segment's gonna go, and there's no credible nearfalls before the hot tag.

 

Also unrelated to tag teams, I did want to comment on 90s AJ earlier as it pertains to character work. What sticks out about those main event matches to me was how everyone had a clear character that was basically only established in their matches. They had few promos or backstage segments, and I'd guess that less than 1% of the posters here speak enough Japanese to gain any insight from the speaking time they did get. Still, everyone can tell you that Jumbo was the bitter legend struggling to hold onto his spot, Misawa was the class-act generational phenom, Kawada thought he should've been Misawa and had a chip on his shoulder, Kobashi was the ultimate competitor who fought with courage and honor, Taue was the guy who developed a little slower and needed to put all the pieces together, and Akiyama was the stud rookie who only fell short of the others due to lack of experience. All this just came across naturally in their matches with each other, and the occasional midcarder or big bad foreigner thrown in. They were truly telling stories with their characters in the form of matches. The use of body language in addition to the pace, selling, lack of selling, huge moves, etc made it easy to follow. The characters were simple ones that appear in all types of fiction, but being able to tell those stories so clearly through the lens of a professional wrestling match is why those guys should be and are regarded as all-time greats.

[Jingus]

I'll put it up here if I can find it.

Oh PLEASE do, that sounds AMAZING.

[Cobra Commander]

if TV squashes are a problem, then put a mask on some NXT guy and call him a Galaxian.

 

as for a reasonable percentage of squashes to competitive matches (with barely competitive matches in-between), there's probably some other sports where occasionally a top tennis player is upset for a set but still wins. And matches involving a 6-1 set.

 

Was 1990s WCW the last big fed that really didn't care about multiple guys using the same finishing move?

 

Also, I could have said this before on here: but the Mid South concept of Stand-by matches was a pretty interesting concept. Considering that there's no more Monday Night Wars, should the main event continue to revolve around an 11pm Eastern finish?

[Jiji]

If NXT has taught us nothing else about Triple H's booking beliefs, he's a firm proponent of the squash match. Hit me with dat motorcycle engine rev! One day, guys. One day.

[Greggulator]

Sometimes, a fight should just go back and forth for a while. I didn't see all their matches but I always look at matches like Owens/Cena as something like Gatti/Ward in boxing. It's two dudes beating the hell out of each other, with neither one really having a clear-cut "lead" as it were. Of course, wrestling has the elements of characters pretending to hating each other and no scorecards, so there has to be a "decisive" winner in some manner. But either way, two dudes evenly matched who can't really put each other down for too long is a story. It's not something overtly complex (until you get to later matches when they start using different variations of there finishers) but there's nothing wrong with something being incredibly easy to see unfold. In fact, that's actually a good thing in a lot of cases.
 

I should go back and rewatch Bray/Roman. But I loved that match. They tagged the hell out of each other at the end and did all sorts of nifty things. But I'm okay with someone putting on a headlock or chinlock in a heated match. Have you ever seen an actual fight? So many street fights end up with guys just entangled with each other. Would YOU want a 300-pound dude headlocking/chinlocking you in an actual fight? Bray was trying to choke Roman out to make physically decimating him later on easier. But Roman has that ability to power out of that (babyfaces seem to have that), but it causes him to expend energy.

Harper/Roman was a great match, too. I liked Harper doing that to Roman's arm in the ground spot. But, seriously, why does a swamp monster know how to cravate someone's arm like that? Just playing Devil's Advocate here -- sure, Roman's arm hurting was the story of the match. But how does a dude like Luke Harper know how to target something in a technical manner like that? It's not in character.

[SirSmUgly]

I'd be less annoyed with those chinlock spots if 1) they were used less often instead of being the go-to heel rest spot in the middle of each match, and 2) if guys looked like they were actually trying to fight out of them so that I could get lost in the illusion that we all weren't just biding our time before the transition to the face on offense. 

[JCM]

Two dudes beating the hell out of each other is fine, but when they have 3 matches in a short period of time I would expect more than for the most part a rehash of the first match X's 2. It also doesn't help when one of the guys in the trilogy goes on tv and has two matches with a better worker than the guy he's feuding with that are pretty much the same as the matches he's been having against his hated rival.

 

Sami Zayn is in a class by himself when it comes to in ring storytelling in WWE. Nobody else in the company draws me in with just his ring work like Zayn. Maybe they should have him agent some matches on the main roster while he's out.

[JCM]

I'd be less annoyed with those chinlock spots if 1) they were used less often instead of being the go-to heel rest spot in the middle of each match, and 2) if guys looked like they were actually trying to fight out of them so that I could get lost in the illusion that we all weren't just biding our time before the transition to the face on offense. 

The thing I noticed right away in the Owens/Rusev match was how Rusev worked when Owens put on a chin lock. Just 100 times better than most everyone else in WWE, and something that really shows how good Rusev is. 

[RandomAct]

Two dudes beating the hell out of each other is fine, but when they have 3 matches in a short period of time I would expect more than for the most part a rehash of the first match X's 2. It also doesn't help when one of the guys in the trilogy goes on tv and has two matches with a better worker than the guy he's feuding with that are pretty much the same as the matches he's been having against his hated rival.

 

Sami Zayn is in a class by himself when it comes to in ring storytelling in WWE. Nobody else in the company draws me in with just his ring work like Zayn. Maybe they should have him agent some matches on the main roster while he's out.

 

And going back to the Ward-Gatti comparison, by fights 2 and 3 of that series, it became clear-cut that there was a better man in Gatti.  He changed his strategy and fought smarter, and completely outfought Ward in the final 2 fights.  We didn't get anything like that in Cena/Owens.  There was no attempt to have either go in and say "I should try something different to keep this dude down".

[JCM]

Realistically Owens should've focused on Cena's back after the apron power bomb took him out, but Vince probably thought that would make Cena look weak and cost him a dozen or so t-shirt sales. After the apron bomb it should have been put over that another pop up power bomb would cripple Cena, and he'd need to avoid it at all costs. Instead we got "eh fuck it just kick out of it and no sell the back the whole time".

[Greggulator]

I think it's more "John Cena is the most resilient wrestler in the history of professional wrestling" than any sort of cost-benefit analysis the marketing department ran past Vince.

Here's how I view the Cena Indie Classics. (Keep in mind, I've seen absolutely zero of those guys before they went to NXT or the WWE.)

John Cena is the most resilient wrestler of all-time, in a kayfabe setting. He has been presented as that for a decade now. His whole motto is "Never Give Up." He's the ultimate big match competitor. It takes an absolutely monstrous effort to beat him in a big spot. These new guys have seen Cena's matches. The only way to beat Cena (non-Brock division) is to throw everything at him and hope something sticks leading to a pinfall. This can be a Pop Up or a low blow or demon child. But that's the only real way to play it.

The newer guys have also seen hundreds of Cena matches. They know what to prepare for. If you know the AA is coming and you get hit with it, try and get near the ropes for an apron break and/or brace yourself to hopefully get a shoulder up before three. If the STF is coming, try and get near the ropes. Cena's not unbeatable and he doesn't have the most devastating moves ever. Kicking out of his moves is a possible thing to do. But kicking out twice? Not so much.

[J.T.]

I am pleased by how well received flash finishes are these days but that is because we're so into the time where nothing short of an atomic bomb will keep even the smallest guy down for the count.  Flash pins are the thing that protects both winner and loser but it does not protect finishers.

 

I keep up with the 70's Wrestling thread and it is astounding how well even the most simple finishers were protected.  I love ROH, but half of the moves those guys use in the second act of the match should kill you dead.  You're kicking out of legit finishers for the last five to ten minutes of the match.  And people complain that Cena is a superman.

[Goodear]

One thing WWE does well typically is present an underlying tier system for their wrestlers where guys have strengths and weaknesses where you know who in a particular match is going to win a test of strength or will or speed.  As Gregg pointed out, Cena sets the standard for being made of super ball and duct tape.  It works in that context because they have made that the context.  It does not have the same effect when someone like the Young Bucks kick out of ROH standardized offense.  

[Greggulator]

One thing WWE does well typically is present an underlying tier system for their wrestlers where guys have strengths and weaknesses where you know who in a particular match is going to win a test of strength or will or speed.  As Gregg pointed out, Cena sets the standard for being made of super ball and duct tape.  It works in that context because they have made that the context.  It does not have the same effect when someone like the Young Bucks kick out of ROH standardized offense.  

 

Exactly.

You can sort of rank the WWE's ladder by how little effect someone's finisher has on a person. That should actually be a sabermetrics/analytics thing.

1) BROCK -- He barely even falls down from a lot of finishers, let alone get pinned from them.

2) CENA -- Can kick out of anything and everything.

3) CESARO -- Currently on a hot streak, where he is incredibly hard to put away with a finisher.

4) OWENS -- Fueled by family commitments, he has his own ability to get a shoulder up after a finisher.

 

But then guys like Bo Dallas or Heath Slater aren't kicking out of crap. And nor should they. In the WWE, you only can kick out if you're a top dog. A sign that someone is becoming a top dog is the amount of finishers they can survive.

[Jingus]

One thing WWE does well typically is present an underlying tier system for their wrestlers where guys have strengths and weaknesses where you know who in a particular match is going to win a test of strength or will or speed.  As Gregg pointed out, Cena sets the standard for being made of super ball and duct tape.  It works in that context because they have made that the context.  It does not have the same effect when someone like the Young Bucks kick out of ROH standardized offense.

It's kind of interesting that the current idea of "selling" really is a modern invention, something that pretty much didn't exist in earlier wrestling eras. If you spend much time watching matches from the 1950s, you see that almost nobody ever does any kind of long-term selling. They're all like ye olde RVDs, bouncing right back up after every bump like nothing happened. Which is actually more realistic; the whole thing you're supposed to do in boxing or MMA is act like you're not hurt when you're hurt. You're supposed to be a no-pain-feeling Terminator out there, shrugging off knockout blows like minor annoyances. (A lot of even the very best kung-fu movies still act the same way.) Somewhere along the line, wrestling changed tracks to this weird, totally unique mindset that the way to success was to have everyone lying on the mat and moaning about how much everything hurt.

[JCM]

 

One thing WWE does well typically is present an underlying tier system for their wrestlers where guys have strengths and weaknesses where you know who in a particular match is going to win a test of strength or will or speed.  As Gregg pointed out, Cena sets the standard for being made of super ball and duct tape.  It works in that context because they have made that the context.  It does not have the same effect when someone like the Young Bucks kick out of ROH standardized offense.  

 In the WWE, you only can kick out if you're a top dog. A sign that someone is becoming a top dog is the amount of finishers they can survive.

 

You might want to tell that to the 25 mid carders that kicked out of Cena's finish this year. Owens being the first person to kick out of the super AA must mean he's above Brock and Taker lol.

[S.K.o.S.]

Re: tag structure. Southern-style tags are just shine, heat, hot tag, finish, right? That's basically the structure for tag matches in the U.S., but are there other structures besides this? I have seen numerous variations on this structure where the heat segment is elongated with missed tags, etc., or even matches where there's shine, heat, more shine, and then a longer heat segment leading to the hot tag, but otherwise, are there any other structures and are they viable? Someone who I really respect on this stuff, can't remember who, made an argument that this is the only real working structure for tags and it shouldn't be messed with. 

 

I remember someone going as far as to say that there could never be a WWE tag MOTY because they were so locked into that one match structure.  So that's the extreme opposite viewpoint.

 

I know that after growing up on American wrestling, it made Japanese tag matches, NOAH junior stuff like KENTA/Marufuji vs. Juvi/Ricky Marvin seem very aimless and meandering because there was no hot tag.

 

Just going back and watching the Jericho v Mysterio and Jericho v Michaels stuff from a few years back - great story telling from match to match.

 

Actually, now that you mention it, yes, those were great.  I know it wasn't the best match in the feud  but the most memorable Jericho-Mysterio match was the ppv match where Jericho does a pre-match interview saying "You won't be seeing the 619 tonight" and the entire match was built on Jericho repeatedly countering the 619, it must have been like 7 or 8 times, with a different counter each time.

 

And the Jericho-Michaels-Batista storyline... there is a fantastic forgotten Raw match between Jericho and Batista in May 2008.  Michaels had beaten Batista earlier that year on ppv by faking a knee injury and luring him in for a superkick, and then did basically the same thing to Jericho during an interview segment (Jericho says he knows Shawn's really hurt, Shawn superkicks him and goes "Trust me when I tell ya... my knee's fine.")  During the Batista-Jericho match, there were moments when both of them appeared to have sustained knee injuries, and in each case the other guy got this look on his face like "Oh no, Michaels got away with this ploy but you're not going to," but as a viewer you weren't entirely sure whether each guy was (kayfabe) injured or faking.  Much deeper in-ring storytelling than you usually get from WWE, especially on free tv.

 

And THAT led to the Batista-Michaels stretcher match which had the moment where Michaels appears to be beaten down, is pulling himself up, leaning on Batista just to stand, and I (and probably most others watching) were 100% expecting Michaels to suddenly reveal that he was playing possum, push off and hit a superkick... and Michaels did push off and hit a superkick, but he really WAS beaten down and couldn't put any force behind it, and Batista just stood there and no-sold it.  Great moment that for once completely subverted my expectations.

 

Sorry, I spent like 500 words going through what you already said in one line, but yeah, there were some great matches in there.

[Technico Support]

Great thread, guys.  Even though I've been a fan since a little before the first Wrestlemania, I never paid much attention to match structure until fairly recently.  I normally just zone out and watch the match, but a few months ago I watched Luger vs Michael Hayes from maybe Chi Town Rumble or something, watching it critically, and it definitely followed the simple structure of shine, cutoff, heat, comeback, finish perfectly.  Now I see the formula whenever I watch any old wrestling. 

 

As for "won't the fans catch on?"  The answer is definitely not, as the formula allows for a lot of variations.  Sometimes one segment is longer or almost non-existent.  Sometimes the face gets multiple hope spots and the heat isn't as strictly defined.  Sometimes the heel is going to go over so there's barely any heat.  Shit, I watched Barry Windham vs Brad Armstrong where the Armstrong took like 70% of the match, the short heat segment was just Windham slapping on the claw forever, then a quick comeback by Armstrong, and then Windham winning with......the claw.  There is so much room for improvisation in this formula.    

 

But anyway, can someone elaborate on what exactly the current WWE style is?  It definitely doesn't follow this pattern, so exactly is it?  Oyogi explained it a little bit earlier but can someone please go more in depth?  Thanks in advance.

[JCM]

Current WWE style is waste the first 10 minutes doing pointless half ass stuff then the heel throws on a chin lock then the baby face does his comeback spot complete with the heel having the same reaction every match after the 2nd closeline or shoulder block then they trade moves until a this awesome chant happens then someone's entrance music plays leading to a distraction finish. If it's a John Cena match add at least two finisher kickouts at the end so everyone knows it's extra awesome.

[Jingus]

Don't forget, if it goes longer than five minutes, the commercial break inevitably happens right after someone takes a bump to the floor. And SO MUCH ROPE RUNNING, they never fucking STOP irish-whipping each other.

As for "won't the fans catch on?"  The answer is definitely not, as the formula allows for a lot of variations.  Sometimes one segment is longer or almost non-existent.

I've known at least a couple of indy guys who would test the crowd in some towns, doing the exact same match two shows in a row. The verdict was, you'd be surprised how often nobody caught on and the marks reacted identically both times.

House show tours were/are infamous for having the same damn match every night in every town. But for that, I understand; if you're doing basically the same stuff each night, you can see how different crowds react to the same shit. And it's easier on the guys, repeating the same match lowers the possibility of blown spots. You can sharpen your execution on particular moves and sequences, basically rehearsing stuff until you've perfected it (or just stop caring). Of course, that all presumes that nobody in the crowd was a big enough fan to either drive to multiple shows or talk to someone who was at last night's event...