FORUM HOME > Wrestling > US Independents
Petey Williams

AnubisPosted on 06/09/06 at 23:05:56

I was wondering something . . . Does anyone know why Pete Williams has been getting so little exposure lately and why he's been basically used as a jobber for the last several months?  He's the most talented member of Team Canada, yet he's being used like a jobber, and it makes no sense to me.
Snabbit888Posted on 06/09/06 at 23:07:34

It's because personality wise, he's subpar.
TheImpalerTMXPosted on 06/10/06 at 20:25:50

It probably also has to do with the fact that he really has no new tricks and hence his old tricks have become stale. I'd even debate that he is the best one of the bunch - overall, I'd probably rather watch 10 Bobby Roode matches over 10 Petey Williams ones.
AnubisPosted on 06/10/06 at 21:14:04

I can't figure out what people like so much about Bobby Roode.  He strikes me as just a boring brawler.
TheImpalerTMXPosted on 06/10/06 at 21:18:04

Well I guess I have the same curiousity as to why people like Petey Williams. I mean, I know why they do - but there really isn't anything special. Roode may not reinvent the wheel, but what he does do he does pretty well. I'm much more partial to guys who know their boundaries and work within them then guys who just try to do too much.
AnubisPosted on 06/11/06 at 00:22:19

I like him because he's a good worker.  That and because the Canadian Destroyer is the most badass finisher I've seen thus far.  One of, at least.
HugeRockStar760Posted on 06/11/06 at 00:27:23

The Canadian Destroyer is a silly finisher. It looks good, but it is not believable at all.
The Bizz 2.0Posted on 06/11/06 at 01:17:57

u better believe it... cuz its real... lol
TheImpalerTMXPosted on 06/11/06 at 01:41:26

My hatred for the Canadian Destroyer burns like seven suns, but I'm not even using that as my basis for Petey Williams dislike. My problem is more that he is the king of vanilla indy spot machines, bringing the whole style of "Let's use moves that should be sold like death as transition moves" to a more public eye. I mean, that's my whole problem with a lot of the X-Division guys anyway, but he is the one who gets the most hype (outside of Daniels & Styles of course), so I more dislike him for him being a figurehead to a style of wrestling I just can't stand and further than that, he's complacent in that spot.
The Bizz 2.0Posted on 06/11/06 at 10:18:16

now a days... if it looks impessive... its the "it" move. thas why styles is the "it" TNA wrestler, he is giving us a style we've never seen before (as well as joe)
rey619Posted on 06/11/06 at 17:32:56

They tried pushing Petey, it didn't work so well. With limited time, maybe they're just preferring to push other guys for the time being. I personally find Eric Young to be the most entertaining Team Canada guy. Besides, I haven't watched TNA in 2006, so I really don't care.
Rick GarrardPosted on 06/12/06 at 04:55:31

I will ask the question that MOST WWE would ponder...

WHO is Petey Williams?

;)
PulsarPosted on 06/12/06 at 06:30:12

I agree with Eric Young being my favorite Team Canada wrestler. He does the bad-guy who's-afraid-of-the-face gimmick SOOO very well. Go watch his Sting promos, and you'll see.
Rick GarrardPosted on 06/12/06 at 06:35:07

doing the bad guy afraid of the face gimmick used to be mainly reserved for managers during matches, because prior to a match a heel should NEVER shy away from the face, but instead be loud and boisterous until confronted and then scamper away like the cowardly lion.
AnubisPosted on 06/13/06 at 01:11:58

@rey619: Oh, I agree that Eric Young is the most entertaining.  Petey Williams is better in the ring, though, which is what I mean when I say Williams is the "most talented member".  Honestly, I think Williams and Young are the only cool members of Team Canada, with Williams just a bit better (even if Young is more entertaining).  Bobby Roode, Johnny Devine, and A-1 are just plain boring.

On 06/11/06 at 00:27:23, HugeRockStar760 wrote:The Canadian Destroyer is a silly finisher. It looks good, but it is not believable at all.
o rly?

Shall I list some mainstream finishers that are less believable and far sillier as finishers?

Atomic Legdrop (Hulk Hogan)
The People's Elbow (The Rock)
The Worm (Scotty Too Hotty)
Pounce (Monty Brown)
Unprettier (Christian Cage)

How about other "big" moves (non-finisher) that are less believable and far sillier?

Old School (The Undertaker)
The Five Knuckle Shuffle (John Cena)
Tarantula (Yoshihiro Tajiri)
"Pulling The Tights" (Any Heel)
European Uppercut
Baba Chop (I think that's what it's called; it's the move where the wrestler swings his arms around in big circles at his opponent)
Vertical Suplex

Good grief I could probably go on for hours if I sifted through the BBBOWM.

Yeah, the Canadian Destroyer defies reality and physics, but at least it fucking looks like it would hurt, and on top of that, it looks cool as all fucking Hell.  It ranks up there with the Vertebreaker, the Air Raid Crash, and the Mariko Sleeper in coolness.
TheImpalerTMXPosted on 06/13/06 at 18:16:40

On 06/13/06 at 01:11:58, Anubis wrote:Baba Chop (I think that's what it's called; it's the move where the wrestler swings his arms around in big circles at his opponent)
That's a Mongolian chop and actually its a legit move. Occassionally you'll see one thrown in MMA, though without the theatrics of the pro wrestling wind-up; it just comes in more like a slice. The Baba Chop was simply a chop to the top of the head.
AnubisPosted on 06/13/06 at 22:52:03

On 06/13/06 at 18:16:40, TheImpalerTMX wrote:That's a Mongolian chop and actually its a legit move. Occassionally you'll see one thrown in MMA, though without the theatrics of the pro wrestling wind-up; it just comes in more like a slice. The Baba Chop was simply a chop to the top of the head.
Hahaha legit? Are you just fucking with me here? I've seen that move many times, and can't figure out any way for it to, you know, actually hurt. Especially in an MMA fight, throwing that instead of a punch or something just seems . . . silly.
TheImpalerTMXPosted on 06/14/06 at 05:53:12

On 06/13/06 at 22:52:03, Anubis wrote:

Hahaha legit? Are you just fucking with me here? I've seen that move many times, and can't figure out any way for it to, you know, actually hurt. Especially in an MMA fight, throwing that instead of a punch or something just seems . . . silly.
No, I kid you not. Granted, you are picturing it with the super contrived wind up. Its actually not uncommon when done from a mount. And if you think about it, if a guy is guarding his face from getting punched, chopping at the point between the neck and the shoulder will weaken that. Or better yet, a swift Mongolian chop to the ears. Then you can start raining down punches to the face.
AnubisPosted on 06/14/06 at 06:21:37

Ah, well, from a mounted position I suppose it could work, but the specific move I'm referring to is the standing version.  Standing, that move would never work.  Would it even be the same move from a mount?  Sounds more like the earringer to me, or shoulder chops.
rey619Posted on 06/14/06 at 06:49:23

How in the nine hells is a vertical suplex an unrealistic and silly move?
AnubisPosted on 06/14/06 at 08:45:35

On 06/14/06 at 06:49:23, rey619 wrote:How in the nine hells is a vertical suplex an unrealistic and silly move?
Why is the Canadian Destroyer?  They're both mega-assisted and defy physics and realism.

I'm not saying I have a problem with it myself, but if people wanna bash the Canadian Destroyer, they better be ready to realize how many moves in wrestling are just as "inane".
rey619Posted on 06/14/06 at 09:39:36

A vertical suplex can easily be done without assistance. Defies physics? Why?
AnubisPosted on 06/14/06 at 09:44:57

On 06/14/06 at 09:39:36, rey619 wrote:A vertical suplex can easily be done without assistance. Defies physics? Why?
How can it be done unassisted? I tried testing it out on someone half my weight just to see if the lift was possible unassisted as shown on television, and it's not. Pulling on the pants just doesn't get you what you need to get lift.

The only way I was able to get him lifted up was by hooking the leg with my arm and pulling it up, but that's actually a different move: the fisherman's suplex. Grabbing the pants, it's just not possible. It has nothing to do with strength, it's that you can't get the . . . leverage? I think that's the word I'm thinking of. Yeah, leverage.

I wasn't even trying to do the move, I was just seeing if the lifting portion was feasible (because I wasn't sure myself if it was possible or not, so I wanted to find out), and it's not. The snap suplex variation is doable by substituting momentum for leverage, but the traditional ol' vertical suplex just isn't feasible.

EDIT: Forgot one other thing.  The person taking the move also has to assist by not resisting whatsoever and balancing the top portion of the move.  In reality, if you tried to use the standard vertical suplex, the person could just drop down in dead weight and stop it easily.  If you tried a snap suplex in a real fight, you'd end up in a katahajime (sp?) because it'd be so easy to counter.  So yeah, the move isn't at all realistic.
rey619Posted on 06/14/06 at 10:01:22

Hmm.. I didn't think about the pants part.. I'm not saying that it is normally done without assistance, but that someone quite strong like Goldberg could do the vertical suplex on say, Rey Mysterio by simply putting a hand on the side or stomach of Rey and suplexing him over.
Rick GarrardPosted on 06/14/06 at 14:38:32

hence why a gutwrench suplex is the better move when going for realism as it is often used in amateur wrestling as a take down move.
rey619Posted on 06/14/06 at 15:40:19

I asked a couple of friends of mine (both wrestlers who've performed in England, Italy, Norway and Finland). One is small but intense (think Benoit), the other is rather big... think Big Vito. They told me that the big guy could manage a shoot vertical suplex on the small guy, but not the opposite way around. Nobody could pull off the Canadian Destroyer.

AnubisPosted on 06/14/06 at 22:04:29

Point is that neither of them are viable moves in a real fight.

Heck, I listed about a dozen moves there that are just as unrealistic as the Canadian Destroyer, not just that one.

Besides, the fact that size seems to be such a big deal in wrestling and women are almost always squashed is more or less proof that professional wrestling doesn't adhere to realism.  There are plenty of unrealistic things in professional wrestling.

Heck, take one of the most famous finishers of all time: the Figure-Four.  Yes, it would hurt in reality if applied, but let's face facts here.  There is no way no how anyone could ever apply the move in reality.  You'd have to be totally stupid to actually get caught in it.

Basically, whether it's wrestling or sports entertainment, entertainment is still the top priority, just as with any sport out there.  The Canadian Destroyer is a cool move and it looks like it would be devastating, so it works.
Snabbit888Posted on 06/14/06 at 22:32:01

On 06/14/06 at 22:04:29, Anubis wrote:Point is that neither of them are viable moves in a real fight.

Heck, I listed about a dozen moves there that are just as unrealistic as the Canadian Destroyer, not just that one.

Besides, the fact that size seems to be such a big deal in wrestling and women are almost always squashed is more or less proof that professional wrestling doesn't adhere to realism. There are plenty of unrealistic things in professional wrestling.

Heck, take one of the most famous finishers of all time: the Figure-Four. Yes, it would hurt in reality if applied, but let's face facts here. There is no way no how anyone could ever apply the move in reality. You'd have to be totally stupid to actually get caught in it.

Basically, whether it's wrestling or sports entertainment, entertainment is still the top priority, just as with any sport out there. The Canadian Destroyer is a cool move and it looks like it would be devastating, so it works.
That is a good argument, Anubis.  Now let's try applying it to the Pounce and see where this goes. :)

LEGITMATELY, the Pounce would hurt a fuckload (as anyone who has ever played football will tell you) and barreling into a guy full blast is definitely feasible in a real fight.
pszPosted on 06/15/06 at 01:21:18

However, it really does look like... A dorky spear.

Back to the "Entertainment" side of things, and it just doesn't LOOK "cool" like a well placed spear does.

Having Edge slam into RVD, and watch RVD fold like one of the chairs he uses is just damn brutal.

Watching a guy bounce (hard) due to a Pounce just looks... Silly.

In reality, I don't want to be on the receiving end of EITHER :-P
rey619Posted on 06/15/06 at 06:58:56

Yup, a move can be legit and silly (Pounce), and non-legit and cool (Canadian Destroyer).

One of my wrestling friends works as a bouncer, the other as a security guard, and they've told me they've resorted to wrestling moves now and then. Ankle Locks, hammerlocks, headlocks.. even a camel clutch! But the figure four? Nah.. that's impossible to use. The security guard even DDT a guy that charged him.. knocked him out cold..
pszPosted on 06/15/06 at 14:07:41

I DDT'd a friend of mine once (some friend, eh? ;->)

He had a headache for a day, and a hurt neck for nearly a week.

At the time I felt sorry for him. Fast forward a few years, and I wished I'd done it single-arm :-P
AnubisPosted on 06/15/06 at 22:04:05

On 06/15/06 at 06:58:56, rey619 wrote:Yup, a move can be legit and silly (Pounce), and non-legit and cool (Canadian Destroyer).
I'm still not sure I'd call the Pounce legit, at least not the way Monty Brown hits it.  It's nothing more than a running shoulder tackle, really.  It's not even a real football tackle (which is more like the Spear).  While it might certainly hurt to an extent, I certainly don't believe it could keep someone down for a three-count.

So that's a weird move, much like the Atomic Legdrop.  The move would hurt, but in 2006, I don't buy it as a finisher.

On 06/15/06 at 06:58:56, rey619 wrote:One of my wrestling friends works as a bouncer, the other as a security guard, and they've told me they've resorted to wrestling moves now and then. Ankle Locks, hammerlocks, headlocks.. even a camel clutch! But the figure four? Nah.. that's impossible to use. The security guard even DDT a guy that charged him.. knocked him out cold..
Most of those were real fighting maneuvers before they were used in professional wrestling.

The DDT, however, is an actual wrestling move (created by Jake Roberts IIRC) that could hurt or even kill in reality.  Coincidentally, the move is illegal in MMA competition (as are all head drops).
pszPosted on 06/16/06 at 01:52:33

Considering it's a front face lock (or choke, depending on who's doing it), and a snapping DOWN motion while the neck is held, I can certainly see WHY it's not considered a good idea ;->

The way it's used in wrestling, though, is obviously a lot safer (though RVD sells it wonderfully)
PulsarPosted on 06/16/06 at 06:19:28

In real life fights, I have used BOTH The DDT....and the Pounce. Trust me, the Pounce will put someone down for much more then a 3 count.
Critic of the DawnPosted on 06/16/06 at 08:59:14

Of course, the ultimate move for use in a real fight is the good old fashioned back rake.  Nothing can convince me that any of the moves talked about here are even close to as devestating as this wicked and extremely heelish technique.

Eric "Critic of the Dawn"
Rick GarrardPosted on 06/16/06 at 14:55:17

what about the running of one's face down the top rope/cable of the ring, when said rope is either plastic or tape covered the whole way, thusly reducing the fiction that is supposed to be doing the damage?
Psymin1Posted on 06/16/06 at 22:27:07

After watching Jake "The Snake" Roberts: Pick Your Poison, I have a whole new found respect for the DDT. That move is brutal.  It's the move that knocked out Ricky "The Dragon" Steamboat in May of 1986 when Roberts DDT him on the concrete outside the ring.  Roberts told management that it could not be done outside the ring because it could kill Ricky, but, Ricky insisted that he could block it without injury, and, well, the rest is history.


~Branden
Rick GarrardPosted on 06/17/06 at 01:15:09

any move can be safely done, if the guy giving it isn't in a drug/booze induced haze, not to say that Jake was at the time, but most sources would say that he probably wasn't sober or clean.
HugeRockStar760Posted on 06/17/06 at 02:16:39

Jake Roberts should have a job with WWE creative or some kind of job in the company where he is teaching psychology to the developmental talents.
Psymin1Posted on 06/17/06 at 02:21:47

On 06/17/06 at 02:16:39, HugeRockStar760 wrote:Jake Roberts should have a job with WWE creative or some kind of job in the company where he is teaching psychology to the developmental talents.
Couldn't have said it better myself.


~Branden