That's not intended to be a backhanded question - speaking as someone who did not follow wrestling week-to-week during the 50s and 60s, I was hoping to get some input from some of the fans who were. Now, obviously championship belts mattered (look no further than Brian Maxine), but in the grand scheme of things did the champion significantly impact the box-office? Did they have drawing power? Did they consistently top the bill? Did the heavyweight champ over here (Billy Joyce; Ernie Baldwin; Geoff Portz; Albert Wall to name just a few) possess the same level of prestige and reverence in the eyes of the fans and the promoters that, say, a Lou Thesz, Bruno Sammartino, Big Bill Miller, Whipper Billy Watson or a Gene Kiniski had across the Atlantic?
It's probably an asinine question and maybe I'm overthinking it, but it's something that's always fascinated me. Watching some old-school NWA tapes from the 60s/70s/80s, some of the boys (a la Harley Race, Dory Funk Jr. or Ric Flair) would have you believe that their very lives depended on having the belt around their waist - whereas (from my perspective, at least) here in the UK, a championship - and, by extension, the champion - was a non-entity and was merely a tool, a trinket.
The top guys didn't need the belts to draw, but a championship match always looked good on the marquee poster and added to the prestige of the show.
The lighter weights as we got into the late 1960s/early 1970s seemed to be the weights where we saw regular championship matches around the halls and on tv. The heavyweight championship lost a lot of prestige for me in the 1970s as Big Shirley was allowed to plough through almost every heavyweight at Joint (there was one or two that didn't or refused to lie down for him) meaning the heavyweight talent lost a lot of credibility and drawing power.
As has been said, it was all part of the pretence of this being a "real" sport, like Boxing. Jones vs Rocco was always good value for money, did it matter if a belt was at stake?, probably not, but it added to the occasion.
I think they mattered, otherwise they wouldn't have persisted with them.
But it really came down to the individual promoter, and the wrestler involved, to whether they were a useful promotional feature or just window dressing.
I will say what seems to be unique in British wrestling was that many of the billed champions were a lot less infallible than those in other countries.
Good questio. It certainly didn’t do Kendo Nagasak’s pulling power any harm not having a belt . But having said that a title defence or decider did add that extra edge especially if it was one of your favourites. Great post btw.
You’re spot on Hack. Speaking as a regular at Morecambe all I can say is that when Two Rivers, Rikki Starr, Pallo and Kellett et al were billed, attendance was always higher. However, world lightweight champion George Kidd had much the same effect.
bkendo1 distinguishes between championship matches and champions just on the bill. A championship match would add importance to a bill and justify a temporary price. increase. it's also good to hear a professional confirm our much discussed use of championship belts as good service awards.
But as for the original question and champions on a bill in non title matches
Did the champion significantly impact the box-office? No
Did they have drawing power? Not as a consequence of holding the title.
Did they consistently top the bill? No
Did the heavyweight champ over here (Billy Joyce; Ernie Baldwin; Geoff Portz; Albert Wall to name just a few) possess the same level of prestige and reverence in the eyes of the fans and the promoters that, say, a Lou Thesz, Bruno Sammartino, Big Bill Miller, Whipper Billy Watson or a Gene Kiniski had across the Atlantic? I wouldn't know about the comparisons but Baldwin, Joyce, Robinson, Wall were considered the best of the division by fans. When, if ever, this began to change I wouldn't know.
Titles and championship bouts were important pre 1975 to promoters for a increased admission prices in early days b for creditability c Good service awards.They were incredibly important to certain wrestlers others preferred dirty lucre.A sad find in the last days of of Wryton stadium was a beautiful belt in blue plush lined box covered in cowebs and seemingly forgotten.Sorry Ruslan wish I remembered more detail.
I certainly didn't care about who the champion was. I just wanted to see Pallo, The Wildman of Borneo and a masked man ripe for the unmasking. Champions like Joyce, Wall, Riley would be enjoyed and respected, but they were never the ones to draw the crowds. Anyone drawn to watch Rocco, Finlay, Saint or Kidd did so because they enjoyed the performance, not because the word champion was written under the name. Actually, the word champion was often omitted, it was only us die-hard fans who knew all the champions.
The importance of champions and their belts (which were rarely seen) was they brought credibility and legitimacy to wrestling. This was very important in the 1950s and 1960s when wrsetling was portrayed as a legitimate, competitive sport parallel to boxing (but more popular).
Brilliant question, great post, thanks. It has always been a dilemma for fans and researchers, what is the title, is it the promoter's property and he puts it on whomever and whenever he wants...or its something more than that. To be honest its truth promoter can make a champ out of literally anyone and it is ONLY him who owns the title, since there's no such a thing as a title outside a particular promotion. BUT there's always but...some wrestlers are of such caliber and ability to draw crowds THAT THEY DO NOT need nor they care for this stuff. They perform and get paid they don't depend on promoter. Perfect example from US pro wrestling history is - JIM LONDOS THE GOLDEN GREEK, our most successful wrestler in XXc.
My late father-in-law did Belle-Vue in the 1950's.
He said Jack Pye and Bill Benny were the really big players who packed the fans in.
If you add in Bernard's Ghoul at Newcastle , then I guess any good gimmick could beat a championship belt any day.
It was good to see Albert Wall turn up with the belt from time to time , but for me , it was Albert , and I did not care if he had the belt or not , I was there to see his flying headbutt.