Poll: MMA vs Pro Wrestling

Jenkins83 · 10-12-2006, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bomber

For those who asked why I started this thread, it's because I've heard people in this forum say that most MMA fans are Wrestling fans, and I didn't believe it. I just want to see what the percentage is.

Unless a LOT more people start voting this poll won't really be that accurate as far as overall percentages go. When you are talking about an audience of millions of fans, I would say you need at least a thousand or so votes to be able to come to a fairly accurate conclusion.

As for my take, I enjoy pro-wrestling. Mostly for the athleticism. Staged or not, the wrestlers who do some of these moves are true athletes, not simply glorified stunt men as the non-fans who don't even watch it like to say. I watch pro-wrestling for entertainment and MMA for the competitiveness and excitement. As for which I like better, I can't really say since I like both of them for different reasons.

Bomber · 10-12-2006, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jenkins83

Staged or not, the wrestlers who do some of these moves are true athletes, not simply glorified stunt men as the non-fans who don't even watch it like to say.

I have to disagree with that. An athlete competes in a sport. Wrestling is rough, dangerous and very physically demanding, but not a sport. A sport involves some measure of competition. Since the winner in wrestling is predetermined, it does not involve competition (except competition for attention). WWE style wrestling's closest comparator is movie stunt work, not fighting. Actually the closest comparator would be an actor who does his own stunts, because part of pro wrestling is getting your character across.

angryjonny · 10-12-2006, 11:55 AM

An athlete is someone who possesses the skills or traits to compete in sports. You don't have to compete in sports to be athletic though.

Jenkins83 · 10-12-2006, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bomber

I have to disagree with that. An athlete competes in a sport.

Incorrect. Angryjonny is correct. An athlete can compete in a sport, but you don't have to compete in a sport to be considered an athlete. An athlete is defined as a person trained or gifted in an area requiring physical agility, stamina and strength. Pro-wrestling is an area that requires all of that and then some.

Bomber · 10-12-2006, 01:20 PM

My son's athletic, but doesn't play any sports, so I would not call him an athlete.

Dirty Fighter · 10-12-2006, 01:23 PM

Lots of pro wrestlers do have a background in sports, like Kurt Angle. And most train just as hard now as they ever did. It is just a different skill set they are working.

subgenius · 10-12-2006, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bomber

I have to disagree with that. An athlete competes in a sport. Wrestling is rough, dangerous and very physically demanding, but not a sport. A sport involves some measure of competition. Since the winner in wrestling is predetermined, it does not involve competition (except competition for attention). WWE style wrestling's closest comparator is movie stunt work, not fighting. Actually the closest comparator would be an actor who does his own stunts, because part of pro wrestling is getting your character across.

Pro-wrestling is, in fact, a psuedo-sport. It is exhibition of skill, not competition. Jonny is right. And, I will only add that a tiny percentage of people worldwide can perform in pro-wrestling. Even many MMA fighters cannot perfrom in pro-wrestling, at least NOT at the top level. The reason for that is not athletic for MMA fighters. It is just that most MMA fighters are not marketable in pro-wrestling as character players. So, yeah, getting the character across is important. But, it hardly negates the athletic ability that we see in the pro-wrestling ring.

Movie stunt work is easier than pro-wrestling. One example: The Dukes of Hazzard had dozens of General Lee cars. They filmed a single jump like five or ten times to get it right. And, they had tons of gear and equipment to assure safety for the stuntmen. THAT is just one show on TV. Movies can afford to film so many multiple takes and splice them all together that most people think that it was a single take. NEVER! Even if the first take was spot on perfect, they WILL film many more. That is how the film industry works.

You ought to take the other aspect of movies that actually does apply to pro-wrestling: suspension of disbelief. This is also applicable to a magicians act. We all know that movies and magic acts are fake. Please, do not try to convince me that magic is real -- please. But, magicians have a single take to get the act right and to engage suspension of dibelief. THAT is what pro-wrestling does. And, the athletes in pro-wrestling must be top-notch to get that right.

And, do not be fooled by the presence the Big Two in pro-wrestling: TNA and the WWE. There are far too many lower promotions of pro-wrestling for me to list here, and those are just here in the USA. Down in Mexico they have more, as does Canada and Japan and many, many more over in Europe. Pro-wrestlers will spend many years on the lower circuits before they are good enough to be on the stage of the Big Two.

subgenius · 10-12-2006, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jenkins83

Incorrect. Angryjonny is correct. An athlete can compete in a sport, but you don't have to compete in a sport to be considered an athlete. An athlete is defined as a person trained or gifted in an area requiring physical agility, stamina and strength. Pro-wrestling is an area that requires all of that and then some.

And, that is why most people consider NASCAR a sport, despite the fact that it requires a vehichle that is not the human body to perform in that sport.

Jenkins83 · 10-12-2006, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bomber

My son's athletic, but doesn't play any sports, so I would not call him an athlete.

You don't have to call him an athlete if you don't want to, but if he possesses the attributes of what an athlete is, then he is one. A lot of people mistakenly consider the word "athlete" to mean only someone who plays sports, but the fact is the word "athlete" is defined as I said above.

AllAboutTheGame · 10-13-2006, 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by subgenius

And, do not be fooled by the presence the Big Two in pro-wrestling: TNA and the WWE. There are far too many lower promotions of pro-wrestling for me to list here, and those are just here in the USA. Down in Mexico they have more, as does Canada and Japan and many, many more over in Europe. Pro-wrestlers will spend many years on the lower circuits before they are good enough to be on the stage of the Big Two.[/font]

TNA is one of the big two? Are you sure?
there's only one big one... and it is the WWE...
TNA is the minor league... if you can even call it that...

and damn... i thought magics are real
lmfaooo

subgenius · 10-13-2006, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AllAboutTheGame

TNA is one of the big two? Are you sure?
there's only one big one... and it is the WWE...
TNA is the minor league... if you can even call it that...

and damn... i thought magics are real
lmfaooo

That is just opinion. TNA and WWE are the two that are on TV. National TV. TNA is expanding. TNA has access to ALL of the original NWA territories. They have already aquired many important WWE talent (Christian, Rhino, and now the number two pro-wrestler in the world according to PWI -- Kurt Angle). TNA has the NWA world HW title. That title was created around 1905. So, maybe you should look into what TNA is all about.

MuStAnG12687 · 10-21-2006, 04:26 PM

It should not be called "Pro Wrestling" if its fake...that’s just ridiculous...I liked it as a kid when they would actually "fight" and not talk on a microphone the whole time...soap opera that’s suitable for men is what "Pro Wrestling" is today.

subgenius · 10-21-2006, 06:46 PM

There are a lot of people in this thread that do not watch pro-wrestling that certainly have big opinions (and no idea) about what pro-wrestling is all about. But, check out RPW. It is an acronym for "Real Pro-Wrestling." No, it is not the WWE or TNA or ECW or anything like that at all. But, it is professional wrestling.

Real Pro Wrestling (also known as RPW) is a concept announced in March 2005 for a new professional league of sport wrestling, similar to the amateur wrestling found in the Olympic Games and at the college and high school level. The term "Real" is meant to emphasize that it is professional (meaning the wrestlers are paid money) and it is wrestling, but that it is not pro-wrestling in the traditional sense, which features predetermined outcomes and operates under a very different set of rules from amateur wrestling.

Numerous similar projects have been announced in the past, but have either failed to begin operation or operated only for a brief time as a "legit" promotion, before lapsing into the professional wrestling tradition of kayfabe and worked matches. However, the promoters of Real Pro Wrestling have announced that they have contracts for prime time broadcasts with both PAX TV and Fox Sports Net, which could make the operation viable.

After watching RPW, it is easy to see why the WWE is so highly successful. Wrestling as a sport is a fairly boring thing to watch on TV. It cannot muster enough attention to sell a PPV. And, it is essentially a weak marketing product. People do not want to see it. You guys here seem oblivious to it, so that is a good indicator that even you guys are not interested in anything real related to really real pro-wrestling.

angryjonny · 10-21-2006, 06:53 PM

I've heard about that before. Is that the program that Rulon Gardner is involved with?

subgenius · 10-21-2006, 07:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by angryjonny

I've heard about that before. Is that the program that Rulon Gardner is involved with?

I am not sure about Rulon Gardner starting a pro-wrestling promotion. Below is from the RPW website's "about" section.

Real Pro Wrestling, Inc was founded in 2002 by former Northwestern University wrestling teammates, Toby Willis and Matt Case. The company is based in Nashville, TN with brand offices in New York and Virginia. RPW is a television production company and a producer of live events.

Gardner has been the host for Real Pro Wrestling.

angryjonny · 10-21-2006, 07:30 PM

Hmm...I swear I remember Gardner doing something like this. And the name Real Pro Wrestling sounds so familiar. Either way I know it's something I'd be interested in.

subgenius · 10-21-2006, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by angryjonny

Hmm...I swear I remember Gardner doing something like this. And the name Real Pro Wrestling sounds so familiar. Either way I know it's something I'd be interested in.

It was on today on WSKY TV here in Hampton Roads. WSKY is a TV station from the Outer Banks in North Carolina, which is close enough to Hamton Roads that we can get that station on our local digital cable package. I watch it because I like all forms of combat (and pseudo-combat) sports. But, I can easily see why many people would not watch it or even be interested in watching. Look at the average MMA fans (or average UFC fans, if you will) and they want KO wins almost predominantly. We have seen many times here on these forums where ground fighting and wrestling in MMA is frowned upon as LnP and/or boring to watch.

MuStAnG12687 · 10-24-2006, 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jenkins83

Unless a LOT more people start voting this poll won't really be that accurate as far as overall percentages go. When you are talking about an audience of millions of fans, I would say you need at least a thousand or so votes to be able to come to a fairly accurate conclusion.

As for my take, I enjoy pro-wrestling. Mostly for the athleticism. Staged or not, the wrestlers who do some of these moves are true athletes, not simply glorified stunt men as the non-fans who don't even watch it like to say. I watch pro-wrestling for entertainment and MMA for the competitiveness and excitement. As for which I like better, I can't really say since I like both of them for different reasons.

The poll's here are not scientific at all...even with thousands there is still a high margin of error, there are a lot more factors than numbers that affect the validity of statistics...but you of the number of people voting is a big factor..."pro" wrestlers are very athletic...but I feel that WWE has become mostly drama...maybe its not like than now, but it was a few years ago...I don't watch the soap operas after the Price is Right...so I’m sure as hell am not going to watch the disguised soap opera suitable for men: "pro-wrestling"

w0264007 · 10-24-2006, 10:28 PM

I loved wrestling in high school, but I don't care to watch it on TV. I don't think olympic wrestling is a very entertaining sport for the uninformed, and all the action happens where cameras can't go: making it hard to appreciate until you truly know the wrestlers and their different approaches.

subgenius · 10-25-2006, 12:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MuStAnG12687

The poll's here are not scientific at all...even with thousands there is still a high margin of error, there are a lot more factors than numbers that affect the validity of statistics...but you of the number of people voting is a big factor..."pro" wrestlers are very athletic...but I feel that WWE has become mostly drama...maybe its not like than now, but it was a few years ago...I don't watch the soap operas after the Price is Right...so I’m sure as hell am not going to watch the disguised soap opera suitable for men: "pro-wrestling"

This poll is especially screwed up. It has three choices, and two of the choices are essentially the same choice. The results are therefore skewed. It makes the option of hating pro-wrestling seem to be dominant. The actual result is 23 do not like it and 15 like it. Any poll anywhere in the world, even the USA, can easily be skewed and distorted by simply tweaking the questions and the available options to answer that question.