Cena Region, Philadelphia Subregion, First Round: (8) Scott Hall vs. (25)Gene Kiniski

[HBK-aholic]

This is a first round match in the Cena Region, Philadelphia Subregion. It is a standard one on one match. It will be held at the Wells Fargo Center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

#8. Scott Hall


Vs.

#25. Gene Kiniski


​

Polls will be open for three days following a one day period for discussion. Voting will be based on who you feel is the greater of the two competitors. Post your reasons for why your pick should win below. Remember that this is non-spam and the most votes in the poll win. Any ties will be broken by the amount of posts of support for each candidate, with one vote per poster.


Also remember that this is a non-spam forum. If you post a response without giving a reason for your selection, it will be penalized for spam and deleted.

 

[NSL]

I'm going to wait a while to vote in this one...I know Kiniski is a legend and everything he's accomplished, but Hall needs to be remembered for just how incredible he was in the AWA, and then as Razor Ramon, and eventually the nWo, where, when he was sober, he was arguably the best of the trio. He's held all sorts of titles, and was a sight to behold when watching him live.

I'm leaning heavily towards Hall, but there's a chance I'll come around to the Canadian.

 

[Richard Blonoff]

Some people will tell you how much money Kiniski drew, but the fact is Hall had a bigger impact on the business. He was a great IC champ in WWE, and a great tag team champion in WCW. Hell he even played a great drunk in TNA.

Kiniski deserve merit as self billed Canada's Greatest Athlete, but the business will remember Hall better than Kiniski.

Fite me Ech.

 

[Bernkastel]

Some people will tell you how much money Kiniski drew, but the fact is Hall had a bigger impact on the business.

The NWA had a big impact on the industry. Hall didn't do shit and you know it.

He was a great IC champ in WWE, and a great tag team champion in WCW. Hell he even played a great drunk in TNA.

And Gene Kiniski defeated Verne Gagne and Lou Thesz for world titles and damn near defeated Bruno Sammartino. And I'd argue that Kiniski was every bit the athlete and performer that Hall was.

Kiniski deserve merit as self billed Canada's Greatest Athlete, but the business will remember Hall better than Kiniski

O rly? Ask me again in 50 years if fans still remember Scott Hall. Because it has already been 50 years and we are still talking about Gene Kiniski.

Fite me Ech.

Blow me.

 

[Richard Blonoff]

The NWA had a big impact on the industry. Hall didn't do shit and you know it.

So the nWo was nothing? His classic ladder matches with Shawn were nothing?

And Gene Kiniski defeated Verne Gagne and Lou Thesz for world titles and damn near defeated Bruno Sammartino. And I'd argue that Kiniski was every bit the athlete and performer that Hall was.

I'm not going to take away Kiniski's athletic prowess. He was a pro football player before he turned to wrestling. He was a great athlete. You would be asinine to argue that the athletes of the last twenty years are inferior to athletes from sixty plus years ago though.

O rly? Ask me again if fans still remember Scott Hall. Because it has already been 50 years and we are still talking about Gene Kiniski.

People still remember Hall. He was just inducted into the WWE HoF to a big ovation. He played a part in one of last year's Wresltemania's marque matches, he even took a bump. Who still talks about Kiniski other than people trying to dick wag?

Blow me.

Only if you buy me a drink first. ♥

 

[NSL]

The NWA had a big impact on the industry. Hall didn't do shit and you know it.

So the nWo was nothing? His classic ladder matches with Shawn were nothing?

I'm with Yaz here. You say Hall did "nothing", yet the nWo is one of the biggest things to happen in the history of wrestling. His ladder match with Shawn at Wrestlemania X was a trendsetter, and ahead of its time.

O rly? Ask me again in 50 years if fans still remember Scott Hall. Because it has already been 50 years and we are still talking about Gene Kiniski.

Who still talks about Kiniski other than people trying to dick wag?

Again, going with Yaz here. The only reason Kiniski is talked about on this forum, aside from being placed in the tournament, is because a small handful of people bring up guys from before any of us were born. I'm not trying to diminish how great he was, but you're really grasping at straws to say he's talked about widely, 50 years after retiring, when he's really not. And, aside from Thesz, is anyone?

 

[Bernkastel]

So the nWo was nothing? His classic ladder matches with Shawn were nothing?

You seem to be forgetting the existences of Hogan and Nash. Are you going to argue that Hall contributed more to the group than they did. I'll give you the ladder match. Cool stuff.

I'm not going to take away Kiniski's athletic prowess. He was a pro football player before he turned to wrestling. He was a great athlete. You would be asinine to argue that the athletes of the last twenty years are inferior to athletes from sixty plus years ago though.

If we are normalizing eras here we can't just assume that one man has an athletic advantage over the other due to decades of medical science between them. How beastly would the already 6'6 270 pound Kiniksi have been in the 90's? Would the 290 pound Hall have been leaner in the 60's? It's subjective to say.

People still remember Hall. He was just inducted into the WWE HoF to a big ovation.

Because he's recent. Ask me again when we are 80 sitting on our porches if people still remember that Scott hall guy from long ago.

He played a part in one of last year's Wresltemania's marque matches, he even took a bump. Who still talks about Kiniski other than people trying to dick wag?

Lots of older fans still remember the guy. He was a kinda of a big deal and all. It's not like he's Frank Gotch who died before my 93 year old grandfather was even born.

Only if you buy me a drink first. ♥

I'll buy you two drinks.

 

[NSL]

You seem to be forgetting the existences of Hogan and Nash. Are you going to argue that Hall contributed more to the group than they did. I'll give you the ladder match. Cool stuff.

The Outsiders were the precursor to the nWo, and of the two, Hall was definitely the more important. He was better in the ring than Nash, and cut far better promos. Adding Hogan made it the nWo, but even then, Hall was the better man on the mic, and his matches were the most entertaining of the three.

 

[Khalifa]

Didn't Thesz once drop the title to Kiniski because he wanted a reduced schedule for a while and thought Kiniski was the only one worthy at that time to take it? Maybe I am wrong but if it's true then that says a hell of a lot. I love Scott Hall but no way does anything in his career come as close to that statement. One of the greatest dropping the belt to you is a huge honour. I just can't go past that. Even though my knowledge of Kiniski isn't the greatest compared to Halls I'm still siding with Kiniski (unless someone tells me I'm wrong before I vote).

 

[MrMojoRisin]

Gotta go with Kiniski here. He was a better wrestler. He was a more accomplished wrestler. He was a more important wrestler.

Keep one thing in mind here.

Hall was NEVER a World Champ, and he competed in an era where World titles were handed out like candy.

Kiniski was a World Champion, and he competed in an era where only an elite, select few were ever considered worthy of being champ.

Here's an exercise for you just to illustrate the differences here.

In the 60's there were 5 men who were NWA World Champion. Pat O'Connor, Lou Thesz, Buddy Rogers, Gene Kiniski and Dory Funk (tail end of the decade). There were 2 men who were WWE Champions. Buddy Rogers and Bruno Sammartino.

Six separate men from what would be the two major companies of Scott Hall's era (the 90's and NWA essentially becoming WCW) who were considered worthy of being champ, with only one being honored to be champion in both.

Assume that the exact same rules applied in the 90's as did in the 60's, and you can only select 6 guys in total from both WWE and WCW who could be champion. No transitional reigns. Just 6 guys who are big enough stars, good enough wrestlers, and strong enough attractions to carry both major companies through the entire decade.

Is Scott Hall on anyone's list?

Because if he's not, then you have to concede that Gene Kiniski, who was one of that elite 6 in the 60's, was the bigger deal.

Vote Kiniski.

 

[nightmare]

Hall is probably one of three guys I always expected to be world champion, but never were. The guy had size and charisma to go with his vastly underrated talent in the ring and his great mind for the business.


You can thank him for being the guy who kicked off the NWO, one of the best IC title runs ever & oh yeah- Sting's legendary gimmick change. Without Hall, things would have gone very different in wrestling during his time.

He gets my vote.

 

[Bernkastel]

People like to throw around terms like "great talent" and "charismatic" and "innovative." If Scott were truly any of these things then why was he never a world champion? If Jeff Jarrett could get 4 of them in the span of two weeks then why couldn't Hall get one? His less talented stablemate Kevin Nash managed to be world champion in 2 separate companies. It's ludicrous to put him over a guy like Gene Kiniski who was far more charismatic, far more entertaining, far more consistent, and far more influential. The guy carried the NWA for years. You didn't get to have that opportunity unless you were a proven draw everywhere and highly entertaining to all the many different wrestling audiences that existed at the time.

Gene Kiniski should win and the vote shouldn't be close.

 

[NSL]

People like to throw around terms like "great talent" and "charismatic" and "innovative." If Scott were truly any of these things then why was he never a world champion? If Jeff Jarrett could get 4 of them in the span of two weeks then why couldn't Hall get one? His less talented stablemate Kevin Nash managed to be world champion in 2 separate companies. It's ludicrous to put him over a guy like Gene Kiniski who was far more charismatic, far more entertaining, far more consistent, and far more influential.

More charismatic than the man that oozed machismo? I doubt it. Scott Hall, Razor Ramon...whatever gimmick you want to assign to him, the man commanded the crowd. your argument about Jarrett winning multiple titles is irrelevant because that was Russo booking and involved David freaking Arquette. Nash won his two titles because he was holding the book. Of course he's going to get some title reigns out of it. And, you know what? Hall helped him win one of those, didn't he? Over Goldberg? Hall never needed to be champion in WWE or WCW. He was enough of a draw without it. He was must-see TV, anywhere he worked.

 

[Bernkastel]

More charismatic than the man that oozed machismo? I doubt it.

Gene Kiniski was machismo before Scott was even born.

Scott Hall, Razor Ramon...whatever gimmick you want to assign to him, the man commanded the crowd.

And Kiniski didn't? A laughable statement. Gene wrestled everywhere and had universal appeal. Just like nearly every other NWA world champion. You are either drastically downplaying that achievement or you just don't understand the gravity of what that actually meant. The NWA wasn't a promotion. It was an organization. And at its peak there were over 30 promoters affiliated with it. So that meant that Gene as champion had to meet the demands of 30 different promotions and and many different fan bases.

He was enough of a draw without it. He was must-see TV, anywhere he worked.

And Kiniski wasn't? Sorry. An upper mid carder like Scott Hall cannot hold a candle to the achievements and career of a true all time great like Gene Kiniski.

 

[MrMojoRisin]

I'll repeat myself.

In the 60's, there were only SIX men in both the WWF and NWA who were considered worthy and capable of being Worlds Champion. Pat O'Connor, Buddy Rogers, Lou Thesz, Bruno Sammartino, Dory Funk and GENE KINISKI!

Do an exercise and select ONLY six wrestlers from the 90's who can be champions of the WWE and WCW (not per company, but in total).

Does Scott Hall make ANYONE's list?

Because if he doesn't, then he was not on the same level that Gene Kiniski was.

Here's mine.

WWF - Hogan till about '92 where he drops to Hart. Hart and Michaels trade the title till '98 when Austin takes it and carries it into the new century.

WCW - Flair until say '93 when he drops to Hogan. Hogan runs with it until the NWO turn, when in '97 Sting takes it from him. Sting carries for a while until '99 when Goldberg beats him to carry it into the new century.

That's even me using more than 6 guys and trying to break it up into multiple reigns. That's how hard it is to come up with something like what happened in the 60's. That's how big a deal it was that Gene Kiniski, in a decade that saw a miniscule percentage of guys working in the NWA or WWWF actually get to be the champion, Kiniski not only was one of that select few, but was actually the guy that held the NWA title the longest.

And the whole Scott Hall was never champ because he didn't need to be champ argument? That's an argument that only works in the days BEFORE the titles turned into hot potato's. After that, anyone worth anything needed to have his resume padded with at least a couple title reigns just to retain credibility. An if David Arquette could be a 1x Champion, then you'd better be able to at least win the damn thing twice type of deal.

Besides, look at the IWC and just this tournament as a perfect example. All the older guys out there who never were World Champs because they worked in a different time under different rules? They all struggle getting any respect over guys who've been hot shotted a few different reigns for the sake of spiking the ratings in any given week.

This one should belong to Kiniski all the way, and the only reason anyone wouldn't vote for him, is because they don't know anything about Kiniski, and don't care to learn.

 

[Pay Per Ghost]

I'll repeat myself.

In the 60's, there were only SIX men in both the WWF and NWA who were considered worthy and capable of being Worlds Champion. Pat O'Connor, Buddy Rogers, Lou Thesz, Bruno Sammartino, Dory Funk and GENE KINISKI!

Do an exercise and select ONLY six wrestlers from the 90's who can be champions of the WWE and WCW (not per company, but in total).

Does Scott Hall make ANYONE's list?

See here is the first plot hole whence discussing wrestling over the years; there are so many variables and such a huge change in pop culture, that this whole tourney seems pointless.

Again, that's where wrestling fans come in wearing their smarky tees sitting behind their screens getting worked up over a scripted form of carnival legacy that makes them feel special and a part of group of some kind.

The territories didn't have the sort of exposure that Razor's TV had. More people know about Razor than Sammar-what the fuck. People who broke the ceiling the Hogans and Rocks were global wrestling stars. Razor is a bigger world wide star than any territorial star.

The tourney taught me about Kiniski, the man's accomplishments rank high but THIS TOP 6 ARGUMENT, IS BULLCRAP!

 

[MrMojoRisin]

See here is the first plot hole whence discussing wrestling over the years; there are so many variables and such a huge change in pop culture, that this whole tourney seems pointless.

Again, that's where wrestling fans come in wearing their smarky tees sitting behind their screens getting worked up over a scripted form of carnival legacy that makes them feel special and a part of group of some kind.

The territories didn't have the sort of exposure that Razor's TV had. More people know about Razor than Sammar-what the fuck. People who broke the ceiling the Hogans and Rocks were global wrestling stars. Razor is a bigger world wide star than any territorial star.

The tourney taught me about Kiniski, the man's accomplishments rank high but THIS TOP 6 ARGUMENT, IS BULLCRAP!

Which would be the whole point of normalizing the era's that Ech's pointed out multiple times already. To take away all of the variables and changes in pop culture. To put EVERYONE on an equal footing, and to take each competitor at face value with how they were regarded in their own time.

Otherwise, what's the point of even including guys from different eras?

If your using the fact that modern guys had the level of TV exposure that simply did not exist in earlier eras as part of your criteria here, because that exposure allowed them to be bigger stars... then are you saying that you'd put Koko B. Ware over Buddy Rogers? Zach Ryder over Verne Gagne? Because both Ware and Ryder got far more exposure than either of those guys did at their peaks. Going by the criteria you just listed, then obviously they must have been better.

That bullcrap top six argument is meant simply to illustrate the level that Gene Kiniski was on in his era. The exercise of trying to come up with your own list for the 90's... is simply meant to drive that point home once you realize how many guys you're forced to exclude to hit that number. Nothing more than that.

Sorry if you didn't understand it.

 

[Bernkastel]

See here is the first plot hole whence discussing wrestling over the years; there are so many variables and such a huge change in pop culture, that this whole tourney seems pointless.

Again, that's where wrestling fans come in wearing their smarky tees sitting behind their screens getting worked up over a scripted form of carnival legacy that makes them feel special and a part of group of some kind.

The territories didn't have the sort of exposure that Razor's TV had. More people know about Razor than Sammar-what the fuck. People who broke the ceiling the Hogans and Rocks were global wrestling stars. Razor is a bigger world wide star than any territorial star.

The tourney taught me about Kiniski, the man's accomplishments rank high but THIS TOP 6 ARGUMENT, IS BULLCRAP!

Okay A.) Modern era wrestlers don't have to worry about protecting the kayfabe side of pro wrestling anymore. They just have to worry about entertaining fans. And are afforded way more freedom of expression then Kiniski would have. But that didn't stop fans from all over the country from going wild for wrestlers in the 60's. Or in his case, booing the crap out of the guy. B.) Less people out of the total population of the country followed wrestling in the 90's than the 60's. The total population pool may have been larger in the 90's, but a far less percentage of them were wrestling fans. So as a household name that people would actually know a much less percent would recognize Scott Hall in the 90's than NWA champion for 3 years Gene Kiniski in the 60's. Wrestling back then resonates like boxing does today. The average person knows Mike Tyson, and Evander Holyfield, and Floyd Mayweather. The average person in the 60's would have known Gene Kiniski. So, no. The "top 6" argument that MojoRisin is using is not bullcrap.

 

[The Brain]

Love me some Razor Ramon but I'm voting for Kiniski. Scott Hall was considered to be an underachiever until he broke out as Razor in the WWF. He was a cornerstone of the New Generation and used the momentum he built to become a wealthy man with a guaranteed contract in WCW. And since his money was now guaranteed he didn't have to care anymore.

The late 90s WCW is kind of a blur to me (although not nearly as much of a blur as to Hall I'm sure) so someone is going to have to remind me. What did Hall accomplish? Of course I know the impact he had when he first came over from the WWF and formed the nwo but what did he accomplish in the ring? I mostly remember him just thugging around with the nwo. Did he ever main event on his own? Kiniski was a strong NWA champion for three years. I admit I only know what I've read about Kiniski. I've never seen him in action, but it's hard for me to put someone that didn't come close to living up to his contract over him.

 

[tdmoon]

It's absolutely stunning that this is this close. Scott Hall is a career upper mid-carder. Kiniski was at the top of the card in every promotion he was in. Scott Hall never won a World title in a period when the belt was passed around like a hot potato. Kiniski was a champion everywhere he went. Scott Hall was never even thought highly enough to be given the top spot in his promotion; Kiniski was the number one wrestler in the world.

Hall's most memorable in-ring moment was a ladder match in which he won the Intercontinental title. Kiniski's was beating Lou Thesz for the Heavyweight Championship of the World.

Kiniski doesn't give up much size to Hall and was a far superior wrestler. Scott Hall's legacy in wrestling is the NWO angle and being the funny drunk guy. Kiniski's legacy is being the best and being known as "Canada's Greatest Athlete". Being a wrestling tournament, this should be about who was the better wrestler in the ring, not who had a more shocking promotion debut.

Kiniski dominates Hall and beats him with repeated backbreakers in under twelve minutes.

 

[NegativeFeedback]

I cannot for the life of me understand how it can be *this* close. I get that Scott Hall is a legend, but he's not even close to the megastar that Gene Kiniski was back in the day. Others have already went more in-depth about it, but Gene definitely deserves to win here.

 

[Tastycles]

Look, I know the resident old school crew love Kiniski and the usual wikipedia army are following their lead, but I guess much of it depends on how you look at it. Hall is certainly spoken of more often these days, but he has the obvious advantage of being much more recent. What I will say is comparing eras is risky at the best of times, but one thing is certainly true - Scott Hall competed at a time when some of the greatest names in the history of wrestling were competing.

This is true of Kiniski too, however he didn't get a sniff of the title until the vast majority of the big names of the 60s were all well into their 40s. At a time when being NWA Champion meant touring almost non-stop few were willing to do it - Thesz was nearly 50 when Kiniski beat him. The Funks weren't old enough and most other stars were unlikely to translate region as well. I'm not belittling his achievements, but what I would say is Kiniski was the NWA's best option at the time rather than a stand out champion.

Scott Hall is never going to be anyone's best option as a champion because his life outside of the ring is so tumultuous. However, on his day he was capable of being one of the best workers, one of the best mic workers, and arguably the best mind for character development of the 90s. If we are to take this tournament as a reflection of a wrestler at their very best, then I think Hall would win this.

 

[NSL]

THIS TOP 6 ARGUMENT, IS BULLCRAP!

It really is. Kiniski and the whole "Top 6" thing lived in a day where they wrestled far less than they did during Hall's heyday. By the time Hall was on the level of being a main eventer, they were wrestling at a minimum of 100 matches a year, some way more than that. There were also larger rosters, and national and international TV deals.

Hall wins this, and I'm glad he's leading in the vote.

 

[Bernkastel]

It really is. Kiniski and the whole "Top 6" thing lived in a day where they wrestled far less than they did during Hall's heyday. By the time Hall was on the level of being a main eventer, they were wrestling at a minimum of 100 matches a year, some way more than that. There were also larger rosters, and national and international TV deals.

Hall wins this, and I'm glad he's leading in the vote.

Kiniski wrestled upwards of 350 matches a year. Especially while touring as NWA world champion. It seems that people are only voting for Hall because he's a recent modern superstar. None of his achievements match up to Kiniski's and his overall significance to the industry was no where near as important. As far as larger rosters go... as far as contracted talent to certain promotion, yes. But as far as the number of full time wrestlers in Kiniksi's time versus the number of full time wrestlers in Hall's time, no. The 60's would have had more. Also it was possible to follow the results of certain wrestlers, cities, and territories through newspapers, radio, and magazines. Kiniski toured everywhere anyway, so he didn't need those things to remain popular.

Hall shouldn't win this. It's blatant ignorance if he does.

 

[MrMojoRisin]

It really is. Kiniski and the whole "Top 6" thing lived in a day where they wrestled far less than they did during Hall's heyday. By the time Hall was on the level of being a main eventer, they were wrestling at a minimum of 100 matches a year, some way more than that. There were also larger rosters, and national and international TV deals.

Hall wins this, and I'm glad he's leading in the vote.

That is not true.

Ech's already said how much Kiniski wrestled, but just to give you an idea on the type of schedule he would have worked.

- he'd spend a week working in Texas, traveling from a couple hundred miles per day by car to get to the next show.
- once he was done there, he'd move on to Los Angeles for a few days, again working every night
- after that, he'd stop off in Missouri to work a few shows
- then it would be on to Portland, where he'd spend another week doing the town to town tours
- once done in Portland, he'd be off to Western Canada, where he'd spend another week or so putting major miles on the road between each match
- then he'd be off to Toronto, where he'd spend another week going up and down the 401 each day to the next show

and on and on and on.

The NWA champ's life never ended. Bruno once mentioned that they wanted him to be NWA champ while he was also WWWF champ, but he turned it down because he'd be working 400 days a year if he took the belt. He was exaggerating of course, but his point was he'd never have a day off, or have any type of a life if he took the belt.

That's what Kiniski dealt with, and he did it for just over 3 years straight.

Now we don't have complete records from that time unfortunately, but it's completely conceivable that Kiniski worked roughly 1,000 matches during his time as NWA champion.

As for Hall, during his busiest 3 year period, which would have been his run as Razor Ramon, we do have complete (or near complete at least) records. Hall's busiest 3 year run saw him work roughly 600 matches. After that, he left for WCW, which guys from his time were doing for two reasons:

- they paid better than the WWF
- they didn't have the travel schedule and had to work FAR less

In WCW, Hall's busiest year (1998), saw him work 98 total matches. Less than 2 times a week.

The truth is, wrestling for WCW was probably the greatest part time job ever created.

So no, Scott Hall did not work more than Gene Kiniski. Not even close.