Just watching Main Mask and Hack discussing an “aged” Bert Royal in 1971. Neither was very impressed by him.
Personally I thought he was fabulous and I never saw him in a dull bout. Even his technical bouts were enthralling.
Of course, the business ensured all the work they wanted for top rankers once they passed fifty.
But the quality of their performances varied greatly. Wrestling is a creative and artistic business. With intelligence and dedication, old-timers could make up through guile for what they lacked in dropkicks.
Take McManus and Logan. Ostensibly very similar, certainly age wise. But McManus was aware of his age and took steps to camouflage his limitations, In every bout he took three cross-ring throws (he wouldn’t go with the fourth). He squealed and waved his arms around, varied his style dramatically, created surprise. No one could complain that 55-y-o McManus wasn’t value for money.
Logan, on the other hand, was tired and lacking in any imagination. When thrown he rolled at 45 degrees. He had no offence, no aerial moves, but clearly wasn’t even studying. how he could work better. Royal was a similar age but their youtube bout is an embarrassment - all he could muster were about fifty boring forearm smashes, whilst Bert used his wide repertoire as far as he could with such a lethargic co-worker.
I never saw Alan Garfield in the fifties. But I saw him plenty of times in his fifties We have built up an intriguing profile of fifties Garfield “the most exciting character in wrestling” . His final few years were not dynamic or acrobatic or even fierce. But his performances and backchat were captivating.He surely had carefully developed this veteran’s approach.
So who were you 50+ favourites and who went on too long?
I saw Eddie Capelli a few times in the early 1950's and i must admit that I was impressed with him.
I thought that he had the attributes to go far, but he got lost to Morrell land and afterwards I only saw him on bills for D&M.
As has been said, he dropped down the bills then.