The last time the Undertaker lost a feud.

[Doomsday]

Food for thought:

Is the Kane-Taker fued over or just on hold?

 

[Veritas]

When they brought Khali in at first and tried to make him a big star, didn't he get put over Taker in a few straight PPVs?

 

[Doomsday]

When they brought Khali in at first and tried to make him a big star, didn't he get put over Taker in a few straight PPVs?

I remember he headbutted the shit out of Kane until he started gushing.

 

[Axis]

Somebody brought up Rey Mysterio and it didn't get enough attention. I like his work for the most part (he's been a bit off this year), but the guy has become a Mexican Hulk Hogan.

 

[GardenStateSaint]

Food for thought:

Is the Kane-Taker fued over or just on hold?

I consider it over when Nexus helped Kane bury Undertaker. Obviously they wanted to bridge into Barrett vs. Taker but even that could be put on hold.

 

[seX-Power]

Somebody brought up Rey Mysterio and it didn't get enough attention. I like his work for the most part (he's been a bit off this year), but the guy has become a Mexican Hulk Hogan.

off for rey is better than most other guys on the roster can ever hope for, tbh

 

[Axis]

Fair enough.

 

[Eddie Guerrero]

With time Undertaker will loose a feud.. Just a matter of time.. I think that the WWE will make Undertaker loose to a new comer - not a completely new comer, but someone who is relativly new to the "game". Which will make him one of the "elite superstars" in WWE.

 

[CMS]

It really depends on your definition of losing a feud. It's hard for babyfaces to lose feuds anyway, but if you consider winning a feud being the most dominant during said feud, then Taker has indeed lost some feuds during the years, as he then only comes back and beats the heel to regain his heat.

In my opinion, Kane defeated Taker for instance. Taker can come back and beat Kane once, but for me, Kane won that feud.

Another example could be said for HHH/Sheamus. HHH will come back and beat Sheamus...would that mean that HHH would have won the feud? Many would say yes, not imo.

 

[He who knows more than Nation]

R.e Rey, he has basically been the best performer not named HBK since the E changed their name with Jericho and Edge closely behind them.

 

[Kaedon]

What about the idea that Kane wins alot of the battles but ultimately doesn't win the war? If the Undertaker and he do have another match to continue this feud and Undertaker wins clearly and cleanly then did Kane really win the feud?

He who laughs last doesn't always laugh best. Kane was WHC, Kane was dominating the show, Kane was THE guy on SD, but if Taker comes back and beats him on one match, the rest of it is invalidated? Please...

 

[seX-Power]

In the mind of the casual fans at least, whoever laughs last does laugh best in 99% of cases.

 

[Kaedon]

The fans aren't going to forget the fact that Kane buried Takers ass (for a second time), and that Kane was champ.

 

[seX-Power]

But they won't care if Taker buries him in some big overbooked gimmick match, which he likely will down the line. Taker will have won the feud in their eyes and Kane's dominant wins may as well have not happened.

 

[Beer]

It's only weird smarks who consider those who win the most matches in a feud overall win the feud. Man, Britain got totally buried by Germany in World War 2, but won with America's help in the end. I would say overall Britain won, wouldn't you?