Bret Hart On Triple H

[Captain Charisma]

Bret Hart spoke with Wrestle Talk TV Extra. Here are some of the things he had to say about Triple H.
“I have a certain amount of respect for Triple H. I remember when he first came in, I remember commenting on stuff that he did. Because I’d usually give wrestlers my thoughts and try to help them on stuff… Triple H has always been a good wrestler. But great? What is he now, a 1,000 time world champion? How great really is he?

“I look at [CM] Punk… I can look at certain wrestlers and I go, this guy is an innovator. Like a Rey Mysterio, who’s done stuff that no one has ever thought of before. Punk has done stuff — really unique moves and you go, ‘gee I’ve never seen anything like that before.’ They innovate all the time, and they create new sequences and moves and things.

“Then you look at someone like Triple H. When I look at him — he’s always had a good look as far as his body went — he always had a pretty muscular physique. But you look at someone like Hunter and you wonder, what has he really done. One move that he ever created that nobody ever saw before or some highspots or an idea for a match… He’s mostly a guy that just showed up and they made him. He’s always been a decent wrestler — I would consider him a good wrestler and pretty talented. But great? I don’t know, I don’t think so.

“What has he ever done that’s great? He’s never had a great match, I don’t think ever. Whenever I look at Triple H’s matches, including the last one he had with Undertaker — and I don’t really mean it as a knock — but I told myself before I watched it because I’m trying to like Paul now these days, that I want to see him do something to make me think he’s got greatness in him.

“Before Triple H wrestled Undertaker last year, I remember watching it and going, ‘I can picture the whole match in my head, I can tell you exactly what this match is going to be like and how it’s going to go. And I remember watching it and it went exactly how I predicted it… I thought it was mediocre at best, maybe a 4 out of 10, or 3 out of 10.

“I think Paul is a little overrated… overrated for being great. I can sit here and tell you that there was one match that he ever had with anybody that I thought was great. It’s kind of a shame, he should have a great match somewhere with somebody. And you’d think that he would have had it by now, but I don’t think he’s a great wrestler.â€

He is so damn right and shares the same opinion with me. He is a decent wrestler but not great, a wrestler that you can easily find. He is overrated thanks to Vince. What do you guys think? Is Bret right? Is HHH overrated?

 

[Deezy]

While I have an unhealthy man-crush n Bret Hart, I believe he is wrong in his views on Triple H, he is a barebones wrestler who sticks to what makes him, but he is damn great with what he does.

I'm not going to point out how Bret Hart never innovated movesets outside of the stuff that hurts like turnbuckles sternum first, and that great figure four spot.

Because someone will eventually talk about how overrated he was.

Which I would disagree with as well.

 

[ThatGuyFromNukemHigh]

Although I agree with what Bret is saying, at the same time I find it weird that Bret is knocking Trips for basically being a carbon copy of Bret.

Neither Trips nor Bret really did any extremely innovative moves, they are both great at executing the movesets they use.

 

[zigglerHEEL]

This interview really seems like Bret taking a shot at Trips just for the sake of doing it....I mean, he's not really telling us anything we didn't already know but what he is failing to mention is how in the wrestling business, in order to succeed you have to take whatever it is you have and make it work to a point the fans are either behind you or so against you.... What made Bret so good was that he perfected his moveset and was very very good at adapting to the style of his opponent so the matches looked good and believable and like the other guys above me said, Trips does pretty much the same thing... I'm not an over the top Trips guy, always thought he was slightly overrated myself, but to say he's never had a "great" match is pretty absurd...

 

[Airfixx]

HHH/Foley Raw97
HHH/Foley RR2000
HHH/SCSA NWO2001
HHH/HBK SSlam2002
HHH/HBK RR2004
HHH/HBK/Benoit WM20
HHH/Taker WM17 (IMO)

= Bonafide classics.

Bret's talking shit when it comes to match quality and the majority of his comments can also be applied to himself.

 

[Rated R Superstar]

Just seems like Bret still has a hate for Trips. He was very vague in this interview to be honest. He even stated he's trying to like Trips now, so that tells you something.

 

[The Cork]

Bret has 4 matches anybody cares about, and had 5 moves of doom.

Not sure why he is picking faults with people way above him on the G.O.A.T scale.

 

[Slim]

Bret has 4 matches anybody cares about, and had 5 moves of doom.

Not sure why he is picking faults with people way above him on the G.O.A.T scale.

Bret still believes he is the absolute best in the business. Can't come to terms that... he isn't.

 

[We Are Legion]

The only thing I disagree with is him saying Triple H wasn't a great wrestler just because he didn't do "innovated stuff", which judging from the two examples Bret provided (Mysterio and Punk) sounds a lot like saying "He didn't do any high-risk maneuvers off the top rope, so he's not a great wrestler" which is just dumb. It also sounds and awful lot like Bret's trying to make it seem like he doesn't hold any grudges towards HHH, but he still wants to diss him by saying his matches are "3/10-4/10"... so you can still tell Bret clearly does still hold some grudges.

If Bret really wanted to jump in HHH's shit, he could have dug at how little HHH ever drew during his career and the fact that there was always someone else on the roster that was putting most of those butts in the seats. At least that would have been accurate. But HHH is a very good wrestler and always has been. He was never particularly flashy with his moves, but that was never his strength. His biggest strength was his superior use of in-ring psychology which is not only far more important than diving off a turnbuckle, doing flips through the air, and inventing new moves, but it's also an art that very few wrestlers ever utilized as well as HHH, not even Bret.

Not saying Bret wasn't a great wrestler too, because he certainly was. But he didn't command a match like the goddamned general HHH was. Bret was very good at pacing a match and making it look real by targeting specific limbs and body parts systematically while using a perfect mix of agility and power to execute his arsenal, but I never once saw him do anything that no other wrestler did before him. His finishing move wasn't even original and he wasn't even the first popular North American wrestler to use it. The only thing original about Bret was his cult status among Canadian wrestling fans. Bret sold every single show in Canada out as soon as tickets went on sale. HHH never did that anywhere. So again, if Bret wants to bag on HHH, he should stick to areas he actually has a case on.

 

[Cena's Jeans Shorts]

Bret suffers from the same syndrome as Hogan, Flair, Goldberg and other former top guys (or even some midcarders who thought they were the main event). I think a lot of these guys get the mentality of protecting their spots into their way of thinking, once they leave the business they still can't stop. I suppose though it all goes back to the old school way of always being on the work. Much like these shoot interviews that almost everyone that's ever wrestled seems to do, they all know the game and turn them into works as a means of either keeping their names out there and having marks talk about them, or to keep people wanting to pay them to do video "shoots", lavish attention on them because they've created this persona of being a controversial straight shooter.

I don't know how much of that he actually believes. Maybe he's convinced himself that shit really matters, thus making himself more significant than Trips or Flair or anyone else he's tried to crap on. And again, this doesn't just apply to Bret. Hogan and Flair are very guilty of this dubious habit.

Kinda sad that these guys can't admit that others have made their mark and contributed to the show. But I suppose it makes the allure of the business that much more entertaining.

 

[Troy]

Still holding that grudge, pretty ridiculous to say that HHH has never had a great match because it also talks down to the guys that he wrestled throughout his career as well. He is a quality wrestler, he isn't as flashy as some others but he is damn good at what he does. He is the model of consistency as well with his performances. I can't believe that someone like Bret who has been there and done that would be questioning someone like HHH. I would expect it from a mark that hates HHH but not a fellow wrestler. Surely HHH has more than proved himself with his great performances over the past decade and a half. Also never realised that innovating new moves was a requirement for being a great wrestler.

 

[Gimmick]

Wow, looks like someone is still very bitter towards Triple H, eh? He says so many wrong things here that I don't even know where to start.

Was Triple H an innovator? I guess not. But I don't see how that doesn't make someone a very good wrestler. That's just a stupid observation that can be said about pretty much any wrestler.

And to say that Triple H has never been in a great match is just untrue, and pretty disrespectful from someone who never put his body on the line like Triple H did over the years. Triple H has had countless great matches, while Bret Hart has only had a few. He could work brutal hardcore matches against the likes of Mick Foley, technically flawless matches against the likes of Benoit, and matches of storytelling brilliance against the likes of Undertaker. I never saw Bret Hart put on matches like that. He had good ring psychology and could pace a match, but I always felt that he wrestled within his comfort zone and kept everything extremely safe. Just look at his matches against Owen Hart to see the truth behind that. His grudge matches against Owen never looked that heated, and the story of a brother vs. brother type angle never really shone through during their matches. If Triple H has never had a great match, then Bret Hart has never had a good one.

It's things like this that really annoy me about Bret Hart. It's where you really see his smugness come through.

 

[Crippler]

I guess Bret still hasn't watched anything from 2000 yet.

 

[Deezy]

Bitter or not he is still entitled to his oppinon just like we are.

Bret Hart is still one of the greatest wrestlers of all time.

 

[Dod Draper]

There's more;

[video=youtube;LiLtAMCIm7M]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=LiLtAMCIm7M#![/video]

Arda Ocal spoke with former WWE Superstar Bret “HItman” Hart after his comments about Triple H made news. In the interview, Ocal asks what he makes of these comments gaining a large amount of attention. Hart stands his ground, even goes further with his stance:

- Gives Triple H vs Undertaker a grade: “I said I’d give (Taker vs HHH at WrestleMania 28) a 4-out-of-10. I think that was generous.” and goes on to explain why

- “I wouldn’t put him in the top 1000 great wrestlers. To me he was very mediocre.”

- Questioning Triple H’s originality and contributions to pro wrestling

Also in the interview:

- comments on his appearance at the Montreal Screwjob panel at the Royal Rumble and if he’s sick of telling that story. “Sometimes in talking about it you get a new perspective on it.”

- says it doesn’t bother him that Shawn doesn’t really remember the incident. “It doesn’t surprise me. Shawn had his problems back then.”

- Having high praise for Alberto Del Rio and accepting his new nickname the “Canadian Del Rio”

Bret Hart Calls Triple H Very Mediocre, Says He Wouldn’t Put Him In The Top 1000 Wrestlers | PWMania