Tossing Salt Presents:
Wrestling Fact or Fiction
Match Reviews
DougMaynard.com
Doug Maynard

I’m Doug, and welcome to Wrestling Fact or Fiction. As usual, the meat of this comes from the esteemed Jake Chambers over at 411Mania.com. He provides the inspiration and the statements. I just agree or disagree and explain why.

This one is slightly different than the usual in that it’s only three statements instead of the usual six, plus it’s about reviewing matches, something I haven’t done in a long time. I nearly passed on this, but then I remembered, I used to recap Sunday Night Heat and Monday Night RAW way back back so many years ago.

That’s how I got started in this crazy world of internet wrestling journalism, whatever the hell that is. If I could contribute to The Wrestling Informer, Wrestle-Zone.co.UK, Lords of Pain, PWInsider, and PWBTS, all as a recapper and a columnist, which I have, I still might have some opinions on this.

So enough with the small talk. Let’s see what I can come up with to hopefully entertain the hundreds of people who may read this. Again, thank you, Jake Chambers. It’s Wrestling Fact or Fiction. Let’s roll.

Statement #1: You believe you could declare a new match that you are watching live for the very first time – while reviewing a show for 411 – as the best match of all time.

FICTION: I’m good, but I’m not that good. I can express my opinion on the match and talk about what I liked or didn’t like about the match, but I’m not Meltzer. I’m not vain enough to watch a match and make a declaration of that nature. If it’s good enough that I go back and watch it repeatedly, I might say that I think it’s a good match and I may even give a rating of my opinion of the match and how it plays out in my view, but to declare a match as the GOAT after only watching one time, that’s just poppycock. Nothing more.

Statement #2: High-concept gimmick matches, like the Royal Rumble, cannot truly be reviewed on the same 5-star scale that you use for traditional pro-wrestling matches.

FACT: In gimmick matches and the like, one has to consider all the different factors involved in the match when reviewing. It’s all about context. They’re not traditional wrestling matches and can’t be treated or reviewed in the same way. Different matches have different factors to be considered and evaluated in the determination of being good, bad, what works, what didn’t work, etc. They’re a whole different animal and must be treated as such.

Statement #3: By the standards you use to review matches today, this is a 5-star match:

FACT: Though Steamboat and Savage were never my favorite wrestlers, they went at it 1000% in this match, busted their asses, and scored in every way, delivering a match that still entertains after thirty-seven years. What more needs to be said? Is it a bit overhyped at times? Maybe, but it delivered and can live up to the hype quite well. I liked it then and I like it now. Those 5-stars are well deserved.

And there you go. Thanks to Jake Chambers at 411Mania.com for the statements and to you, my faithful readers, for allowing me to entertain you with my wrestling knowledge and opinions. Comments, thoughts, and any questions are welcome and appreciated. Hit me up at Doug28352@yahoo.com or @Doug28352 on X. Don’t forget to like, share, and subscribe. And I guess that’s all for now. I’ll see you at the matches.

Ubuntu!