Bret Hart - The Best There Is?

[Eelementary]

No disrespect to him, but I very much doubt he'll be the best there ever will be...

 

[RABK]

Yes he damn will be. No one, including Angle is even close to what Bret Hart was in his prime.

Bret is the most complete wrestler of all time, to be honest, anyone who says he has no mike skills is a fool. Watch his dvd that is coming out and try telling me he has no mike skills. He sold and promoted his opponents and matches perfectly and was especially good on the mic has a heel.

He was Canada's most popular sportsmen for a few years running and still is a national hero rated right up there with Wayne Gretzky (sp)

Personally, although Austin will always be my favourite wrestler because you watch wrestling to be entertained and by god did he entertain, Bret Hart truly is the best there is, the best there was and the best there ever will be.

I jus think he oozed Charisma, Flair, confidence and Passion in what he spent 21 years of his life doing.

I'd pay $500 to see Angle Vs The Hitman.

 

[Baron Vo Mandor]

HHH is also f**king awesome at cutting promos, Batista ill give you but you've got no idea on HHH and the Hitman

I get very sick of HHH promo's if u've seen one u've seen them all tone as well as content.

 

[Baron Vo Mandor]

Stone Cold/Hitman matches were some of the best Ive ever seen, and even show Austin possessing some technical ability. Bret could bring anyone up to his level.

Mania 13, catapalted Austins career almost as much as King of the Ring did..

 

[Baron Vo Mandor]

brets mic skills were no where near the best of all time whcih is osmthing which makes a good wrestler

the only time i thought bret was good was when the usa\canada war went on

You've clearly proven that you have as little idea about wrestling as you do about Rugby League.

 

[Manurewa_Marlins]

^^^heh, anyone who watches wrestling purely for promos, might aswell watch it just for the signs in the crowd, because they arent true fans.

Find me a Bret Hart match that sucked. It isnt possible. Yet I can find you a Rock match that sucked, an Austin match that sucked, a Michaels match that sucked and a Hogan match that sucked.

Bret Hart is the best there is, the best there was, and the best there ever will be, admit it. If you can'y, you obviously need to get your ass down to the video shop, or jump on Bear Share, or Ebay, and get your fix, because you quite clearly dont know jack.

 

[Moffo]

A Hogan match that sucked?

Get off the grass

I used to hate the Rock v Austin matches on Raw when they would do five stunners and five rockbottoms on each other and still get up. FFS, its not a video game!

 

[Martli]

I think some people get "wrestler" confused with "entertainer".

Steve Austin and the Rock could undoubtedly work the mic a lot better than Hart, and i'm sure he would admit that too, but neither come close to being as good a wrestler (As in pure wrestling ability) as Bret Hart.

A good "entertainer" is someone who can talk on the mic and wrestle. I belive Hart's wrestling was good enough to make up for his lack of mic skills, which weren't horribly bad to be fair, but weren't up to Rock/Austin standards for sure. And thus Hart was a good entertainer as he put most of his entertainment into ring work.

The Rock and SCSA are also good entertainers, neither aren't crap in the ring, but they're no bret hart in the ring. Their mic skills make up for this and so they are good entertainers, average wrestlers.

Kurt Angle is an excellent example of someone who has awesome mic skills AND awesome wrestling ability. For me, Kurt will always be above Rock and Steve Austin, no matter how popular those two were.

But no-one will ever beat bret.

 

[Big_Bad_Shark_Fan]

pretty much what the above said
bret was a great wrestler but to compare him as an entertainer with the mic like the rock, hbk , austin , hulk hogan - all though one dimensional etc is stupid

 

[Big_Bad_Shark_Fan]

You've clearly proven that you have as little idea about wrestling as you do about Rugby League.

And how is that?
You dont even back up your comments.
I said Bret wasnt as good on the microphone as some of the others, and I really only thought his interviews were great during the Canada\USA War.
Show me another one which was great. Im not saying he was bad but far from the best with the microphone.

I mean just some of his calls such as calling Jerry The King Lawler "A Burger King" didnt really get me going.

Im not doubting him as a wrestler, hes my favourite of all time with his nemesis Michaels.

 

[Martli]

pretty much what the above said
bret was a great wrestler but to compare him as an entertainer with the mic like the rock, hbk , austin , hulk hogan - all though one dimensional etc is stupid

Yeah but I also said that as an all round entertainer, Bret was still way better. Where as it seems you were implying that they were all better than Bret, purely based on their mic skills.

 

[Baron Vo Mandor]

And how is that?
You dont even back up your comments.
I said Bret wasnt as good on the microphone as some of the others, and I really only thought his interviews were great during the Canada\USA War.
Show me another one which was great. Im not saying he was bad but far from the best with the microphone.

I mean just some of his calls such as calling Jerry The King Lawler "A Burger King" didnt really get me going.

Im not doubting him as a wrestler, hes my favourite of all time with his nemesis Michaels.

Misread by me I thought u meant something else.

 

[Big_Bad_Shark_Fan]

Martli..

no i was implying they were better entertainers with the mic and id much rather watch alot of other wrestlers cut a promo than him. I watched a few of Harts old promos last week , one where he quit WWF and it really wasnt that exciting.

 

[Martli]

Martli..

no i was implying they were better entertainers with the mic and id much rather watch alot of other wrestlers cut a promo than him. I watched a few of Harts old promos last week , one where he quit WWF and it really wasnt that exciting.

Sorry, it was that dude with the same signature as you that was implying it.

 

[Eelementary]

Yes he damn will be. No one, including Angle is even close to what Bret Hart was in his prime.

Bret is the most complete wrestler of all time, to be honest, anyone who says he has no mike skills is a fool. Watch his dvd that is coming out and try telling me he has no mike skills. He sold and promoted his opponents and matches perfectly and was especially good on the mic has a heel.

He was Canada's most popular sportsmen for a few years running and still is a national hero rated right up there with Wayne Gretzky (sp)

Personally, although Austin will always be my favourite wrestler because you watch wrestling to be entertained and by god did he entertain, Bret Hart truly is the best there is, the best there was and the best there ever will be.

I jus think he oozed Charisma, Flair, confidence and Passion in what he spent 21 years of his life doing.

I'd pay $500 to see Angle Vs The Hitman.

But surely, some time down the track, a better wrestler than him will pop up from the wilderness?

 

[Special K]

Yes he damn will be. No one, including Angle is even close to what Bret Hart was in his prime.

What are we basing this on? In ring? Promos? Money drawn? Total package? etc.

I like Hart a lot but his matches like Flair's followed the same paths in that they had a outline for every match. Still he will go down as one of the best but I find it hard to call him the best(or anyone really for that matter)

Just interested to know what you think Brets prime was also...

 

[CanadianSteve]

He was Canada's most popular sportsmen for a few years running and still is a national hero rated right up there with Wayne Gretzky (sp)

That's going a bit far. Wrestling has nowhere near the public awareness of hockey. Those Canadians who follow wrestling loved Brett, but many more wouldn't know who he was, or any other wrestler. Whereas every single Canadian knows who Gretzky is.

I started following wrestling in the late 90s, when my sons started watching it, so I missed the better part of Brett's career. I saw him mainly when he came to WCW, and thought he was a great wrestler and very good on the mic. But I had never heard of him before then.

 

[Misanthrope]

My God, I've been reading this thread and laughing. Bret Hart was tremendous, but a better in ring worker than Angle? A better promo cutter than The Rock? More money drawn than Austin or Hogan? Sweet Jesus, you make him out to be as good as he claimed he was - which was not the case.

He might have been a better combination worker than a great many, but there's no debating that the likes of Benoit are easily the best in ring workers ever.

Bret Hart was tremendously talented but he was far from the greatest of all time.

If we're looking for a total package, I'd put Angle above him. He's a tremendous in ring worker, knows how to work the psychology of a match, cuts freakish promos, can build a feud with virtually anyone, and has still got more to offer.

The only real difference between Hart and Angle is the era they were in. Bret Hart had the fortune to be around during a time when wrestling was king. Nowadays wrestling is a passing fancy for a lot of people, and most look back at the Attitude Era with fondness as if it could do no wrong. Then you add the hype following the Montral Screwjob, and Bret's been turned into something bigger than he ever was.

If the roles were reversed, I daresay there'd be a thread about Angle being supreme and modernists arguing that Hart is better. It's like old men at a pub telling you how much better the old days were. *Everything* was better when you were younger and less cynical - wrestling especially.

 

[Iafeta]

CWB, I'll add a few things in regards to Bret Hart:-

He was astetically and technically brilliant coming from an era where brawlers were very much pronounced. Kurt Angle has come through an era where better workers get more of an opportunity. Workers back when Bret Hart came through the system were generally generic wrestlers, differentiated by the strength of their cartoon character image.

Bret Hart also plied his trade at the top, or near the top for near on two decades. Kurt Angle hasn't been anywhere near as long.

Technically, I still rate Hart the best, slightly ahead of Angle/Benoit. Psychologically, I rate Jake Roberts the best (IE the ability to tell a story in ring), but Bret Hart still had an aura about him in ring to tell a story without needing to use the microphone. On microphone, no, he's not in the Rock stratosphere, but he's certainly not mediocre. He was reasonably good, without ever excelling.

Regardless of the Montreal Screwjob, Bret Hart was my favourite wrestler to watch well before that. And it carried on after that. While doubtlessly it adds somewhat to his folklore, IMO I would have judged him no less if it didn't occur.

 

[Mr Saab]

My God, I've been reading this thread and laughing. Bret Hart was tremendous, but a better in ring worker than Angle? A better promo cutter than The Rock? More money drawn than Austin or Hogan? Sweet Jesus, you make him out to be as good as he claimed he was - which was not the case.

He might have been a better combination worker than a great many, but there's no debating that the likes of Benoit are easily the best in ring workers ever.

Bret Hart was tremendously talented but he was far from the greatest of all time.

If we're looking for a total package, I'd put Angle above him. He's a tremendous in ring worker, knows how to work the psychology of a match, cuts freakish promos, can build a feud with virtually anyone, and has still got more to offer.

The only real difference between Hart and Angle is the era they were in. Bret Hart had the fortune to be around during a time when wrestling was king. Nowadays wrestling is a passing fancy for a lot of people, and most look back at the Attitude Era with fondness as if it could do no wrong. Then you add the hype following the Montral Screwjob, and Bret's been turned into something bigger than he ever was.

If the roles were reversed, I daresay there'd be a thread about Angle being supreme and modernists arguing that Hart is better. It's like old men at a pub telling you how much better the old days were. *Everything* was better when you were younger and less cynical - wrestling especially.

well said, i agree with all of that