When discussing Pro Wrestling, why is it more based on opinions or opinions being presented as facts?

I'll try to give you my opinions on it.

The Dragon mentioned about wrestling being scripted in his answer. I think that's the reason why there's no fact. Wrestling isn't determined by skill, so there is no clear cut answer on who is clearly the superior wrestler, except for stating an opinion. Professional wrestling is a sport centered around opinions because its scripted. Football, Basketball, Soccer, and other sports rely heavily on skills, and that's how you can see which team is superior in skill and ability. Wrestling isn't quite like that. With storylines, characters, matches, and other things being scripted, you can't exactly present your answer with actual facts. You can only give your opinions regarding that particular topic. There isn't realism in professional wrestling from our perspective.

There's also the part where a fan might not have witnessed the same events as an older fan. For instance, I haven't watched much of wrestling in the 70s and early 80s, aside from matches I found through DVD's and video sites. I didn't get to witness it first hand like an older fan. That's another reason why I can only give my opinion based on what I know. The same can be said for current generation of fans. Many probably have not witnessed the Golden Era, 80s wrestling, NWA, etc. They can only give their thoughts from what they heard or seen from clips. That's why they can't quite give facts. That can be one reason from my point of view.

My final reason is that everyone has their own thoughts. Everyone has their own preferences. When a fan only watches from his/her perspective, they develop an opinion of their own. That's why there's many debates in who the greatest wrestler is, which promotion is the best promotion, etc. It's whatever that satisfies the fans. They can only give their opinion on several matters. If you asked in Y!A who the best wrestler in history is, most would give you a completely different answer from each other.

I think the best way to have debates or discussions is not by only stating opinion. Opinions are the predominant source of debates, but I believe that you can back it up with facts that you know or examples that you can share. That's how you would debate with a person in anything.

I. This is rarely mentioned and I've never said this in any of my answers. Frank Gotch and Georg Hackenschmidt held some of the first World titles that we know today. It goes all the way back to 1904-1905.

II. There could be a variety of reasons why we see transitional World champions. Besides being a transitional champion and just holding the title for another wrestler, there's shock and there's just testing the wrestler. Majority of wrestling promotions use shock to draw viewers. They want fans to be excited and want them to tune in next week. Shock usually makes fans want more, which is a good way to draw fans into your company, which would boost ratings and popularity. Transitional champions are usually champions who are rarely champions, so that only includes more suspense and excitement.

Another reason could be that the company wants to test the wrestler as their World champion. Being the World champion is a huge responsibility, and promotions would want to try testing the ability of a wrestler to carry the company and continuously become the main attraction of their programming. I believe Edge was used that way when he won the WWE championship from John Cena back in 2006 after cashing in Money In The Bank. A promotion could be trying to test the wrestler and just testing the waters. It's a great opportunity, and if you do well, you'll become a real World champion.

III. The pants and the armband kind of gave it away from me. I just watched Bret Hart vs Davey Boy Smith from Summerslam 1992 a couple days earlier, so it was still fresh in my memory. This took place in London England from Summerslam 1992. What made this event was Bret Hart vs Davey Boy Smith and the tremendous display of their wrestling ability. It was an amazing match and one of Bret Hart's more memorable matches of all time. What made this match special was that it was a superb wrestling match between arguably 2 of the best at the time, and the Intercontinental championship was on the line. The IC title was extremely prestigious back then, and the caliber of both wrestlers made their match the main event at Summerslam. It was special for wrestlers because they both became bigger names in the WWF, and Bret Hart eventually became WWF champion. A great match with a lot of chemistry.

When discussing Professional Wrestling, most thoughts are indeed opinions.

One reason is because Professional Wrestling is not 100% legitimate. Because of that, the ideas of "who is the best" is gray, as people have also noticed that those that are pushed as the best aren't exactly the best on the roster and have obvious weaknesses that are covered up. When having a debate in a place like Yahoo Answers, there are events people can point out to make themselves look more right than another, but for the most part, Professional Wrestling is mostly opinion.

I -- One type of fact that is avoided is usually that many Professional Wrestlers were never 100% into Wrestling all of their lives and have played different sports. While you may here about sports that are considered "manly" like Football with guys like "Dr. Death" Steve Williams and Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson, Sid Eudy (aka Sycho Sid) used to be a badminton player, which is odd in itself to hear, considering how large he is physically.

II -- Most of it is done for the sake of advancing a storyline or for unpredictability. There is no other reason for it, as most of the time, it doesn't help much in terms of keeping the specific title prestigious. One Day World Champions (or even one hour) tend to be embarrassing for not just the prestige, but also to the Professional Wrestler as well, just showing that the Professional Wrestler can't hold a title past their first title defense.

III -- Well, no point in trying this now.

Well the main reason is most of the topics brought up on here are more opinion based than factual and every fan has different preferences. It's just like in everyday life just with different topics. Say somebody you know likes McDonalds and another person likes Burger King. You think the "Big Mac" is superior while the other person thinks the "Whooper" is better for your own reasons. It could be that you like beef and the "Big Mac" has more beef than the other and the other prefers the "Whooper" because it has a more diverse selection of toppings on it. That same logic appiles to professional wrestling. Example: "What did you think of the main event of RAW last night" One fan goes "Ehh it was boring all they did was mat wrestle etc" Another fan goes "I loved it was an amazing display skill and athletism that's what wrestling should be" And this varies from topic to topic when people discuss pro wrestling.

I- That one of Canada's biggest wrestling stars (Bret Hart) actually had a match against one of Japan's biggest wrestling stars (Mitsuharu Misawa) at the WWF/AJPW Supershow that i believe took place in 1988.

ll- The only thing that comes to mind after looking at this is to simply shock the viewers. Other then that there is no logical point in having one day World Title reigns and i don't think i need to type a long explanation on this topic.

lll- That's Bret Hart excuting a German Suplex on the British Bulldog at Summerslam 92 at Wembley Stadium in London, England. What made it significant because for one the Intercontinental Championship was being defended in the main event of a major PPV so the prestige of the title was at an all time high and it was the stepping stone to Bret Hart's first WWE/F Championship reign.

I have discussed similar question in the past about how people seem to only state their opinions then choose BA for whoever agrees with them. it is rare to see a real question but seeing as most of the users here are kids you don't expect many real question either

You get maybe one actual question a day here but this is still an ok place to discuss wrestling nonetheless

1- FACT- ANdre the Giant was not Actually 7 Ft, he was 6-10. many won't beleive me but someone ex WWE guy released a book of facts which also had some stuff like all blood in wrestling matches are real and are blade jobs which everyone knows as fact

2- One day champions are pointless and ruing the character that has to do it. now if they dropped the title after one day due to injury during the match they won it in then i understand but it is pointless to pass the title every few weeks(Most notably last year with Cena v Orton and year before that batista v Jericho)

3 no clue, i will have a guess that one of them might be taker

Sure Thing Rated R John Gimmick Phyco Gimmick Willing To Do Anything to Win Finishers Spinning Killswitch&Shooting Star Leg Drop Signature GoldBerg Spear And Superkick (Rated R Kick) SPW Pure Title

Because they're aren't too many truly knowledgeable wrestling fans on Y!A. It's mostly kids who started watching WWE in 2000-something who don't realize that there are other wrestling promotions besides WWE & TNA.

For intelligent wrestling discussions, this honestly isn't the place (I know the question isn't directly about Y!A, but I wanted to get that off my chest).

Several reasons, I believe.

There is no official record book logging any stats as there is in other forms of entertainment. Sure, somebody somewhere is keeping track of particular stats that interest that person but for the most part, to find any sort of facts about pro wrestling, you have to search for them. And most people just rely on wiki for that. Wiki is not a reliable source of information, though (due to it's "open" editing where anybody can write whatever they want without having to submit their article to a "panel of experts" who check the veracity of the article).

Some of the long-time users here have proven themselves to this section to the point that their facts are accepted as facts without other users questioning their credibility.

Wrestling history is rarely discussed. The vast majority of the questions asked pertain to the most recently aired wrestling show.

Most people just accept Vince McMahon's word as the final authority in pro wrestling. Few people rebut, or even question, anything he says, even when it's blatant that he has re-written history to fit a current storyline or angle.

Most users aren't here to discuss wrestling; most of them just give short opinions on whatever the question asked, and most of THAT is just a few words either saying "yes" or "no". And that goes for the internet in general.

Far too many people write in "text-speak" as if they are sending text messages via a cell phone. They have been conditioned by that medium to make their messages as brief as possible, using as few characters as they can get away with. And citing references to back up their "arguments" takes too long and takes up too much space. So they just don't bother.

And the vast majority of the discussions about pro wrestling concern storylines and the "entertainment" aspect (entrance themes, who's better at promos, which skit is funnier, and even "who's hotter?"), all very subjective topics that have little to do with "facts". Very few fans discuss pro wrestling as they would, say, Babe Ruth's career. There are many facts and records carefully logged that prove Ruth was the greatest home run hitter of all-time, but people can argue that because of "modern technology", better physical conditioning, and even "enhancements" (such as legal dietary supplements like creatine) that today's sluggers are better than Ruth, and they have records stored on the internet to back up their claims. We don't have that in pro wrestling. Because wrestling is "fake", win-loss records, undefeated streaks, "creative" writing of storylines, etc. the "record books" are very subject to interpretation by anybody who reads them.

1 -- After 11,000 answers you want me to list a wrestling fact I HAVEN'T mentioned before? Hmm, let's see. Occasionally on WWE TV somebody will do a knee lift move on his opponent and JR sometimes calls it the "Million Dollar Knee Lift". The man who used that move as a knock-out finisher and the man who made that move famous was Mr Wrestling 2 back in the 1970's and 1980's in the Southern promotions. When JR calls that move the "Million Dollar Knee Lift" he's giving a little salute to the Southern wrestling legend, Mr Wrestling 2.

II -- I can't always explain or even understand what Vince's crayon-wielders are thinking when they do what they do. But there have been quite a few instances in wrestling history where a Champion was booked to lose his title but the Champ refused to drop it to the wrestler the promoter wants to be the new Champion so the promoter brings in the "transitional Champ" to pass the title to the new Champ. Probably the most famous of those was Vince Jr wanting Bob Backlund to drop the WWF World Title to Hulk Hogan. Backlund refused because in his eyes Hogan wasn't a wrestler and Backlund was not going to lose a match to a non-wrestler. So Vince Jr brought in the Iron Sheik (former Olympic wrestler) to beat Backlund then lose to Hogan a few days later. Backlund had no problem losing to a real wrestler like the Iron Sheik. And the Sheik had no problem losing to Hogan. If Backlund had been willing to lose to Hogan, the Iron Sheik would never have been WWF World Champion. This is a strange change of mind for Backlund being that he was willing to be squashed by the worst big-name "wrestler" in history, Kevin Nash (as Diesel), for that very same title 10 years later.

III -- As best as I can tell, I agree with the others in that it is Bret Hart vs Davey Boy Smith for the IC Title at Summerslam in England.

Because its a scripted drama not an actual sporting event. Hence opinions over facts.