|
Post by srossi on Jun 12, 2023 20:41:13 GMT
It's probably a dying hobby. In terms of 'ports & Wrestling' the move to proboards was not good.
Lost half the members. We have no clue where 'Ron' went to. There was a guy named 'The Brute' that posted 'something' everyday.
Databases are nice but you can't interact with a database. I doubt 'research' works on Facebook, Twitter (character limit) or Discord.
Those that 'research' are getting older
Is anyone 'researching' today's wrestling? How about the past 20 years?
Less shows and less jobs in wrestling then when there were 3 thriving groups and all kinds of sub-territories.
I haven't looked in quite awhile - how is the Kayfabe forum results forum?
Great question/topic bertew as it applies to not only here
Its like the age-old 'Pro Wrestling will be dead won't exist 20 years from now .....and while fewer jobs and fewer shows .....the people innit make more money than ever' (if you can get to a certain level at least)
Beej, I was there - you alerted everybody and gave ample notice multiple times that the board was moving. The Brute was a relative newcomer over the past couple of years and it was nice to have an active poster join so recently. I think most of us are posting to a similar amount based on the new board vs old board. A few other friendly faces haven't really been active, like our buddy WongLee, I can't remember seeing guys like Freebird Ted in over a year, there were guys like Tofu Chipmunk that posted for years that simply stopped posting but still visited. Some clowns got butthurt over stupid games of chance where your best possible prize is a free pizza and they left.
So I say this - who from the "results" forum has dropped out? I mean, can somebody reach out to them with an email or something? Fact is, I only know the guys that post in the forums, I've never frequented the results forum because I don't really look up results. What I did do once was look to see the how many matches Ric Flair won after losing to Shawn Michaels at Wrestlemania. I also looked to see how many jobs Hogan did after he dropped the belt to 'Taker in 2002. And I looked to see once when Superstar Billy Graham stopped competing in the WWF. That's pretty much it.
People move on with their lives and get too busy to interact with message boards anymore. Ron is a strange case because as a mod he was actively participating in the move and then literally disappeared one day. I assume if something bad had happened to him, someone would've heard, so I have no idea what that was about. As far as recent wrestling goes, I use Cagematch. It seems to have almost everything in an easy-to-search format since the mid-'80s. For older results, it's got tons of gaps that the researchers here filled nicely. But if you're looking for info on almost any modern star, Cagematch has almost everything other than the most obscure indy results from early in their careers. I used to keep a database of shows I had attended, TV results, etc. into the mid-'90s, and then the Internet completely killed any such need for me to waste my time with it. There was literally nothing I had that everyone else also didn't have. So the value of a forum like this is going to be relegated to smaller territories before 1980 and the distant past, like the '20s. And I'm not sure how much of that stuff is being unearthed anymore. There's only so much new information about old results out there. 90& of it has either already been found or it's not going to be, and the few researchers left are spending hours trying to uncover those handful of results that might still be out there but are undocumented.
|
|
|
Post by beejmi on Jun 13, 2023 7:56:35 GMT
I kinda agree. If nothing in the past 20 years is worth researching then isn't that the beginning of the end?
|
|
|
Post by Kriss on Jun 13, 2023 8:33:10 GMT
I kinda agree. If nothing in the past 20 years is worth researching then isn't that the beginning of the end? I'm not sure what you mean by "worth researching". You can read the Observer back issues for more wrestling information than you could ever want. You can find results of almost every wrestling card from the past 20 years with a simple search. In terms of what the results board does, there is no research to do. No one researches the NFL either. The earlier stuff gets my interest because no one was recording and conpiling all this stuff back in the day. Well, some people were, but the club was very small and a lot of the work has just disappeared.
|
|
andyo
New Member
Posts: 20
|
Post by andyo on Jun 14, 2023 12:12:26 GMT
I do check in here for results but Kriss' work on the WrestlingDatabase site is where I spend most of my time. I only collect results from 1964-1973 so that is where I am constantly finding new stuff, etc.
|
|
|
Post by portalesman on Aug 24, 2023 7:28:30 GMT
I'm not a researcher by any means NIce to finally see you tell the truth.
|
|
|
Post by vancenevada on Sept 28, 2023 14:43:11 GMT
Speaking for myself, I'm always chipping away at research projects - territory results or career records - and was actively sharing, but it is disheartening to see that original research used by others in their postings without a research credit or attribution. When someone has spent years digging into some of the most obscure archives -- and in the case of Canada, trudging through a translation of French newspapers to create the most thorough record of the Montreal territory, for example, it's difficult to see this 'stolen'.
For Canada, I'm closing in on line ups and results for 70,000 shows from 1867 to the present. It has been immensely helpful for a variety of writers and researchers for their book projects etc., but I find that I am sharing less on the forums than I did previously.
|
|
|
Post by Kriss on Sept 29, 2023 5:00:59 GMT
Speaking for myself, I'm always chipping away at research projects - territory results or career records - and was actively sharing, but it is disheartening to see that original research used by others in their postings without a research credit or attribution. When someone has spent years digging into some of the most obscure archives -- and in the case of Canada, trudging through a translation of French newspapers to create the most thorough record of the Montreal territory, for example, it's difficult to see this 'stolen'. For Canada, I'm closing in on line ups and results for 70,000 shows from 1867 to the present. It has been immensely helpful for a variety of writers and researchers for their book projects etc., but I find that I am sharing less on the forums than I did previously. I completely understand the credit issue, but I don't think it's worth getting upset that work gets distributed without credit. I've had plenty of credit in internet posts, or in a big list of "thanks to" on a website or in a book. It's nice to be recognised, but it's not my motivation. I just enjoy it as a hobby, and I just want to help get the information that's out there as accurate and complete as possible whilst having some fun. If you really believe that your work has value, you should create a website or put some books out. You don't even need a publisher these days. Look at the books that Al Getz is self-publishing via Amazon print-on-demand. And this isn't criticism. You do whatever feels right to you. The above is my "philosophy." I loved your Canadian results website when it was still active, and I still have the results CD-ROMs you sent me many years ago backed up on my computer, and I still go back to them from time to time.
|
|
|
Post by cman73 on Sept 29, 2023 15:00:44 GMT
Speaking for myself, I'm always chipping away at research projects - territory results or career records - and was actively sharing, but it is disheartening to see that original research used by others in their postings without a research credit or attribution. When someone has spent years digging into some of the most obscure archives -- and in the case of Canada, trudging through a translation of French newspapers to create the most thorough record of the Montreal territory, for example, it's difficult to see this 'stolen'. For Canada, I'm closing in on line ups and results for 70,000 shows from 1867 to the present. It has been immensely helpful for a variety of writers and researchers for their book projects etc., but I find that I am sharing less on the forums than I did previously. I completely understand the credit issue, but I don't think it's worth getting upset that work gets distributed without credit. I've had plenty of credit in internet posts, or in a big list of "thanks to" on a website or in a book. It's nice to be recognised, but it's not my motivation. I just enjoy it as a hobby, and I just want to help get the information that's out there as accurate and complete as possible whilst having some fun. If you really believe that your work has value, you should create a website or put some books out. You don't even need a publisher these days. Look at the books that Al Getz is self-publishing via Amazon print-on-demand. And this isn't criticism. You do whatever feels right to you. The above is my "philosophy." I loved your Canadian results website when it was still active, and I still have the results CD-ROMs you sent me many years ago backed up on my computer, and I still go back to them from time to time. ----- Vance, like Kriss, I also have your Canadian Results archives, and hope you do post more online. From the Montreal listings that I published on this site, if I missed giving you credit for anything, I apologize. I did add "Courtesy of Vance Nevada" for many of the listings I couldn't find researching the French newspapers over this past year to year and a half. I'm currently going through the year 1969 for the Montreal promotion, which will probably be the last one for me, then I'm going to start working more on the promotions in Verdun (Grand Prix, Celebrity, Superstars, etc..) This is just a hobby for me as well, a welcomed break from all the hectic stuff that goes on in life from day to day.
|
|
|
Post by WongLee on Oct 16, 2023 11:25:52 GMT
I think that maybe the next generation of wrestling research may be what Al Getz is doing on his chartingtheterritories.com website. He is taking a hard-core statistical approach to territories complete with pie charts. He is showing weekly breakdowns of where the territory would hold cards on any particular week. He also breaks guys down into main eventers, upper midcard, midcard, and preliminary. Again, he does this through statistics. He does ad some decent historical stories too so it's not just dry statistical data.
But then I ask to myself, are all those pie charts and breakdowns of position on the cards really needed? Sure, I might get to pwn Money Dragon at WCMB in an argument on whether The Viking had as much of an impact on 1966 Kansas City gates as he thinks he did. But other than that, why? I found myself bored after a while even when delving into his stuff on one of my favorite territories, Los Angeles.
Another thing is I know he's getting almost all of his Los Angeles stuff from research Yohe and I did, as well as to some extent Jim Zordani. That circles back to the do you get butthurt when your research is used and you're not given credit. But then I think, I did the bulk of my research more than 15 years ago. My results have been put up many times since then by someone else (though I never saw anyone try to take credit). My name is certainly out of the loop now.
|
|
|
Post by Kriss on Oct 16, 2023 11:55:53 GMT
I think that maybe the next generation of wrestling research may be what Al Getz is doing on his chartingtheterritories.com website. He is taking a hard-core statistical approach to territories complete with pie charts. He is showing weekly breakdowns of where the territory would hold cards on any particular week. He also breaks guys down into main eventers, upper midcard, midcard, and preliminary. Again, he does this through statistics. He does ad some decent historical stories too so it's not just dry statistical data. But then I ask to myself, are all those pie charts and breakdowns of position on the cards really needed? Sure, I might get to pwn Money Dragon at WCMB in an argument on whether The Viking had as much of an impact on 1966 Kansas City gates as he thinks he did. But other than that, why? I found myself bored after a while even when delving into his stuff on one of my favorite territories, Los Angeles. Another thing is I know he's getting almost all of his Los Angeles stuff from research Yohe and I did, as well as to some extent Jim Zordani. That circles back to the do you get butthurt when your research is used and you're not given credit. But then I think, I did the bulk of my research more than 15 years ago. My results have been put up many times since then by someone else (though I never saw anyone try to take credit). My name is certainly out of the loop now. I will have to defend Al's honor here. Al has actually researched almost everything he has from scratch. Of course, a lot of it isn't new research, but he has the newspaper clipping for 95% of the shows, including stuff that is new to results collecting circles. He's doing the old-school leg-work of visiting state archives to find newspapers that aren't online and look through any commission reports that might exist. He shares his clippings with me so that I can update WrestlingData, so I have seen that his work is legit.
|
|
|
Post by WongLee on Oct 16, 2023 15:04:58 GMT
I think that maybe the next generation of wrestling research may be what Al Getz is doing on his chartingtheterritories.com website. He is taking a hard-core statistical approach to territories complete with pie charts. He is showing weekly breakdowns of where the territory would hold cards on any particular week. He also breaks guys down into main eventers, upper midcard, midcard, and preliminary. Again, he does this through statistics. He does ad some decent historical stories too so it's not just dry statistical data. But then I ask to myself, are all those pie charts and breakdowns of position on the cards really needed? Sure, I might get to pwn Money Dragon at WCMB in an argument on whether The Viking had as much of an impact on 1966 Kansas City gates as he thinks he did. But other than that, why? I found myself bored after a while even when delving into his stuff on one of my favorite territories, Los Angeles. Another thing is I know he's getting almost all of his Los Angeles stuff from research Yohe and I did, as well as to some extent Jim Zordani. That circles back to the do you get butthurt when your research is used and you're not given credit. But then I think, I did the bulk of my research more than 15 years ago. My results have been put up many times since then by someone else (though I never saw anyone try to take credit). My name is certainly out of the loop now. I will have to defend Al's honor here. Al has actually researched almost everything he has from scratch. Of course, a lot of it isn't new research, but he has the newspaper clipping for 95% of the shows, including stuff that is new to results collecting circles. He's doing the old-school leg-work of visiting state archives to find newspapers that aren't online and look through any commission reports that might exist. He shares his clippings with me so that I can update WrestlingData, so I have seen that his work is legit. That's great as far as Al's honor is concerned, but why? It's 95% out there already. I think he may be reinventing the wheel. Don't get me wrong, I am in no way slagging this guy. I think his statistics are very original. I just think so much has been already done and the pie charts and graphs don't really add much. Just my opinion of course. I listened to his Los Angeles video and I love how he was all business.
|
|
|
Post by Kriss on Oct 16, 2023 15:51:43 GMT
I will have to defend Al's honor here. Al has actually researched almost everything he has from scratch. Of course, a lot of it isn't new research, but he has the newspaper clipping for 95% of the shows, including stuff that is new to results collecting circles. He's doing the old-school leg-work of visiting state archives to find newspapers that aren't online and look through any commission reports that might exist. He shares his clippings with me so that I can update WrestlingData, so I have seen that his work is legit. That's great as far as Al's honor is concerned, but why? It's 95% out there already. I think he may be reinventing the wheel. Don't get me wrong, I am in no way slagging this guy. I think his statistics are very original. I just think so much has been already done and the pie charts and graphs don't really add much. Just my opinion of course. I listened to his Los Angeles video and I love how he was all business. Some territories are better researched than others. Since we started our deep-dive into 1971, we've added close to 2,000 results to WD. Not that WD is a good barometer of all the results that were out there, but it is a barometer. And a big part of it is just enjoying the work. No one is getting rich off this.
|
|
|
Post by WongLee on Oct 25, 2023 22:05:48 GMT
Kriss, wrestlingdata.com is your baby correct? To me, it's the only place I'll go to when I get stuck. I don't like the "rival site" at all. Poor user interface and it seems to have virtually nothing. Wrestlingdata.com goes deeeeeep, whether you're looking for an arena result or a year in the life of a specific wrestler. Good stuff.
|
|
|
Post by Kriss on Oct 26, 2023 4:46:55 GMT
Kriss, wrestlingdata.com is your baby correct? To me, it's the only place I'll go to when I get stuck. I don't like the "rival site" at all. Poor user interface and it seems to have virtually nothing. Wrestlingdata.com goes deeeeeep, whether you're looking for an arena result or a year in the life of a specific wrestler. Good stuff. I was invited there by Kaspar, who used to post here at S&W. indikator, who does post here currently, was also at WD long before me. I think I've been editing WD for about 10 years now though. The three of us, along with DaClyde, who was also an S&W poster, between us do all the old-school stuff. We all have out different areas of focus, nothing agreed, it's just the way it's turned out. For 60s and 70s territory stuff, that's my "baby" if you weeeel. Right now, I'm focused on 1971-1973, which is a project I'm working on with Al Getz. In a few months, I believe we will have a very extensive history of North American territories for those three years documented and on WD. I believe the only thing missing will be some spot shows, and anything that was never advertised in newspapers. CageMatch get most of the love on the internet. I think their site looks nicer. I prefer the white background. They have way more if you are interested in today's wrestling, but if the historical stuff is your thing, then without tooting my horn, we at WD have the people putting in the time to document that (toot, toot). Thanks for the nice words. It's nice to know that people are using the site. If you ever spot a mistake, even a tiny one, tell me.
|
|
|
Post by WongLee on Oct 26, 2023 5:52:27 GMT
I think wrestlingdata is an oasis in the desert. You've probably heard this alot or it may have even happened to you personally. I've had dead hard drives over the years that would have knocked your socks off. Really rare WWWF and Lebell stuff I haven't seen before or since lost to the ravages of cheap hardware lol.
By the way, I absolutely lov1e the red. I have no problem reading it whatsoever and it makes the page unique. While the user interface you guys have isn't the very greatest, it's still light years ahead of cage match.
|
|