In the 19 years I have been commenting about my fewer years in the sixties and seventies as a wrestling fan, one ongoing theme amongst fellow fans has been about shooting and hooking and scurfing ....and all the rest.
Whilst we lap up those occasional moments where things went wrong and tempers really flared, we have to concede that 99+% of the time the wrestlers were doing their jobs in a way they could perform five or six times a week - and we hardly every saw anyone with a bruise or a genuine in-ring injury. Blading just earnt them a couple of extra quid and was voluntary.
This serves to underline that the true day-in-day-out of being a professional wrestler included wrestling light. Wrestling light was therefore the greatest skill to master. It's a skill I have seen relatively neglected on here over these 19 years alongside the focus on those rare "shooting" (or whatever) moments.
I have been mulling over starting this thread for a few weeks since Steve Best's family posted that Steve most of all liked wrestling Mick McManus because he was so careful and light - yet provoked such outrage amongst the fans.
Having seen McManus's routines so many many times live and on tv, I cannot deny affection for him and I am glad that for once we can place him at the top of a list. His routines included taking precisely three cross ring throws per bout. He was also noisy with what I called Tellytubby anger years ago; all this to camouflage the lack of force applied. And he had the delicateness of a cat in contacting just enough to make it look real - but never enough to hurt.
I enjoy watching back as the likes of Clive Myers, Mal Sanders and Best himself exaggeratedly sell their boss's offensives. Their reactions highlight, for me, the respect they had for McManus's in ring skills.
Getting that force/contact balance right is a real art. I know this because I can see others who were too light, Dick Conlon springs to mind.
At the same time I am probably overlooking others who were also skilled light wrestlers because their camouflage was so good.
So I am wondering who else can be listed as adept light workers?
And does this valuation also mean that the likes of Keith Martinelli and Hans Streiger and Billy Robinson were not so skilled as professional wrestlers since they knew only the heavy-handed approach?
Matey Dave has written:
Many claim expert knowledge of light wrestlers but how many would be prepared to go in a ring with a light worker wrestler? It is important to take note all wrestlers were professional and knew what they were doing. When did it become fashionable for a wrestler to stamp his foot on the ring floor to add to the effect of whacking the opponent? How many wrestlers went into the ring and was never worried about putting another wrestler in harm's way? Unless we have ever been in a ring we can only speculate. Personally I would have to trust somebody with my life if going into a ring
Light and snug are positives. Too loose or too stiff are not. All part of making the job a night off or a hard slog.
Mick's still confirmed as Number One. Eddie Rose excludes Jack Dempsey in today's Newsletter:
"...............Jack Dempsey of Wigan. He was truly a master wrestler of the Wigan School with an extensive range of moves and cruel submission holds. I wrestled him twice in championship bouts and each time I lost to his brutal single legged Boston crab. I can still feel the pain! He hurt me. "
What I am saying, Main Mask, is that working light is a great skill that we have under-estimated. It is central to professional wrestling. It is not to be frowned on just because it's not shooting. There are other skills too, but here I want to discuss light workers and light working.
It's such a great skill because you have to get away with it.
Despite what Nagasaki wrote in his book about isolated moments, he too was a light worker for much of his bouts.
Yes, James, Eddie Capelli very light, along with Steve Grey and Dick Conlon.
Easier to spot the clean light workers - which makes McManus all the more noteworthy.
James Morton has written:
Jack Taylor used to say Eddie Capelli was a very light worker. Apparently, if you had not been warned, between rounds he could scoot across the ring deliver a 'heavy' blow to your neck and scoot back before you could react.
And didn't Eddie Rose write that Dominic Pye (of all people) was a surprisingly light worker?
Sorry ANGLO!-I Have to Largely Agree with DAVID's Last Post!-Very Well Put Over!!
MM
> And does this valuation also mean that the likes of Keith Martinelli and Hans Streiger and Billy Robinson were not so skilled as professional wrestlers since they knew only the heavy-handed approach? I don't think any of them cared about that anyway. Robinson until he blended in with the AWA modus operandi considered himself a catch wrestler first and foremost who was doing show-wrestling as the only profitable outlet for his skills. Famously he asked his mate and regular training partner Peter Thornley not to make his mentor Count Bartelli (an inferior shooter to either Thornley or Robinson) look so good in the ring. When Thornley said he owed it to Bartelli as his trainer, Robinson replied "You don't owe anyone anything."
A lot of wrestlers found the whole "working light" thing irritating, like a limp handshake. See Thornley's comments about Mike Marino constantly stepping backwards.
At the end of the day there are many defnintions of how good a wrestler is - whether they are the best shooter or have the biggest repertoite of technical moves/escapes/reversals or sell/bump the best or are "light" in the ring. If you start saying that the only good wrestlers are the "light" ones or the "charismatic" ones, you end up like that fool Jaqk Halewood on 1stopwrestling two decades ago with that stupid signature of his "Hulk Hogan's A Better Wrestler Than Johnny Saint - Yes He Is!"
Thinking about it you have to think the trusted few like Black Jack Mulligan and Peter Kaye were probably quite light workers and I think I would also put Mick McMichael in that category too.
Now you're talking turkey - good calls.
I suppose the question I am asking:
SHOULD WE REGARD THE VERY BEST PROFESSIONAL WRESTLERS AS THOSE DEFT ENOUGH TO WORK LIGHT AND BELIEVABLE; RATHER THAN THOSE WHO CHOSE TO WORK MUCH STIFFER?
I do believe this is at the very core of professional wrestling so I shall persist with the debate.
Would have thought that Bert and Vic were light. A great deal of the lightweights were also. I once saw a very fast and handshaking bout between Fireman Colin Bennett and Tiger Bobby Ryan at Liverpool and they were widely applauded for their efforts. I think they opened the show and it was a draw. Bobby Ryan came and stood behind me after that at the back of the hall. Johnny Saint had to be light and I say maybe Mike Jordan , because he did take a lot of risks , but that was with his own body. Don't think he would have hurt anyone else. Jackie Robinson , I think worked light , but looked like he could mix it if it did take off. Going heavier , maybe Clayton Thomson. I saw early Paul Mitchell quite a lot Anglo and would say he was light , but don't know if his style changed with experience.
Even bigger men I would say Masambula and Catweazle. Some changed of course. A 1960's Tony StClair was light. Always had a smile on his face. I missed his journey as a heavyweight.
Have to mention Ken Joyce, who worked everyone he was in with and made them look a hundred dollars.........and a very light worker when you watch him.
Yes, Paul, it's already another of my threads that risks going in the direction I don't want it to.
I do indeed want to list those who really were light and effective workers. No need to mention the others.
It's far easier to spot those who could do real harm and they have been discussed at gtreat length on here,
So far we have McManus and Colbeck. Coincidentally co-holders of the most repeated bout. But then coincidences don't happen in wrestling. Of course they enjoyed each other's light in-ring company.
Was Paul Mitchell a light worker?
Was being a light worker something you strove to achieve?
Was wrestling light discussed amongst "the lads" as being a badge of honour that all should strive for?
Les wasn't light in thought or deed , surprised he looked like he was.
Alan Colbeck was a light worker and a careful worker, like Mick he had a long and busy in ring career, you don't get that without being a light and safe hand in the ring.
Well ANGLO!-KENDO certainly WASN'T a 'Light Worker' in The 1960's Especially!
The Word PETER said to Me Regarding his Ring Style was 'Robust'!
He told Me of a Bout he Recalled with JOE CORNELIUS in which JOE was expecting
a 'Normal' KENDO Routine!!-It seems the Promoter asked him to go 'Heavy' on The
'DAZZLER' and there was Blood Everywhere-JOE'S of course!-The Last Man to find out
was CORNELIUS himself!-and PETER 'Confided' in Me that KENDO got a 'Nice Bonus'!!
Technical Wrestling aside-for Me the 'Patta-Cake Stuff' was SO obvious and Fuelled
the 'Dissenters' to the Sport to Claim-'They don't really Hurt or get Hurt at All-Fixed'!!
Fast Forward to MARK 'ROLLERBALL' ROCCO-a Fabulous Wrestler who KENT
WALTON often described as 'Vicious' and This Style made Wrestling much more
Believable!- DAVE 'FIT' FINLAY was the Same and to a Lesser Degree MARTY
JONES!
A PALLO 'Punch' wouldn't have Knocked Over My Granny!!
MAIN MASK
As the 1970s progressed all the "big" names from the sixties Les Kellett,Pallo,Kwango were all light workers and not so good at disguising the fact. It needed the heavy handed names further down the bill to get some of us to fork out and attend live events