What If? - The Screwjob Never Happened

[Jacob Fox]

I really think you guys should go back and just look at what me and DualShock said, I just want proper counterpoints to the points I raised.

I don't buy the "the community has considered it being a shoot therefore that should be the default position that the evidence has to prove against/saying the work should be the default position is asking for pro-shooters to prove a negative". Reasons why:

a) Because we are not asking this question the day after the MS, instead over 20 years later, we have allowed a default position to develop for no good reason. If the rule is that all wrestling events are works unless proved otherwise, then that should apply to any event, without nostalgia/the uneducated views of the masses (yes I'm sounding elitist, but I'm trying to prove a point) interfering with this principle.

b) I could equally argue that saying "prove the MS was not a shoot" is a negative.

The only default position really is that it happened. Nobody can deny the existence of the Montreal Screwjob. We are just debating over how it went down.

The default position has to be that it was real. There is no hard evidence that it was a work. It is all speculation. The two people involved, Hart and McMahon, insist that it was real. So yes, that is the correct default. Until someone who was actually involved in the screwjob gives any evidence that it was a work, apart from speculation, that is what their is the most evidence for.

People claim that it is a work because Hart should have seen a screwjob coming. The truth is that he had talked to Big Van Vader, who told him that Vince might screw him. Vader had seen that happen in Japan. He told Hart to not stay in a submission hold for too long and to keep his shoulders off the mat. So yes, Hart was warned. Watch the match and you'll see he did follow Vader's advice.

And it's not like Vince hasn't done this before. He did it to Wendy Richter, having Moolah screw her out of the belt.

But yeah, speculation is not evidence. I think at Wrestlemania 22, Hart attended the Hall of Fame ceremony.. This was mostly because he was allowed to talk about Owen Hart the entire time. However, he refused to make a Wrestlemania appearance with the others. That indicates real animosity. He did something for his brother, but refused to do something for Wrestlemania.

Yeah, but again, the default position is that it is real. Until Bret Hart or Vince McMahon tells us it was fake, it was real.

I want to add something too. The idea that it was a work because everyone benefited from it is a logical fallacy. It is called Escape to the future. No one knew for sure that they would benefit from the screwjob. You can't tell the future. WWF did plenty of things they thought would benefit everyone, but it didn't. So that argument is invalid. It was very possible that the screwjob could have ruined everyone involved in it. There was no way to know beforehand.

 

[bullyballmm]

The two people involved, Hart and McMahon, insist that it was real

And I have insisted multiple times that IF it was a work, then Hart and McMahon would have hardly anything to gain but much to lose by admitting it was a work. Yes, that makes it impossible for the "work" position to be successfully argued, but that doesn't mean a work should be ruled out completely, which is what Goose was doing, and he was calling anybody who thinks there is a possibility the screwjob was a work an idiot.

People claim that it is a work because Hart should have seen a screwjob coming.

Maybe he should have, but I don't put that claim forth. But addressing this claim - if Hart knew/heard rumours of a screwjob coming, why wouldn't he just confront Vince beforehand? Maybe Vince and Bret worked something out, and whatever that was turned into the Montreal Screwjob

But yeah, speculation is not evidence.

Speculation is necessary. It isn't evidence, it's hypotheses - the scientific method is golden. I can't have the evidence to something that somebody doesn't want the rest of the world to know about, but I can use logic when looking at everything (both what happened before and after the event) surrounding the screwjob to form my own view.

I also think this statement:

No one knew for sure that they would benefit from the screwjob. You can't tell the future. WWF did plenty of things they thought would benefit everyone, but it didn't. So that argument is invalid.

is faulty as taking risks is part of any business, but particularly this one. Wrestlers have to back themselves, and Vince has a company to try and micromanage into oblivion (lol)

 

[Jacob Fox]

And I have insisted multiple times that IF it was a work, then Hart and McMahon would have hardly anything to gain but much to lose by admitting it was a work. Yes, that makes it impossible for the "work" position to be successfully argued, but that doesn't mean a work should be ruled out completely, which is what Goose was doing, and he was calling anybody who thinks there is a possibility the screwjob was a work an idiot.

Fair enough. But I am not making an argument about someone's idiocy so that really doesn't apply to my post.

Of course Hart and Vince would have a LOT to gain if they admitted it was a work. It would turn them back to the two most evil heels in wrestling. The controversy alone would shock the wrestling world because most people believe it was real. if they came out and said it was fake... damn, it would open up many story lines.

Maybe he should have, but I don't put that claim forth. But addressing this claim - if Hart knew/heard rumours of a screwjob coming, why wouldn't he just confront Vince beforehand? Maybe Vince and Bret worked something out, and whatever that was turned into the Montreal Screwjob

He didn't confront McMahon because of Earl Hebner. When Vader warned him, Hart commented on his friendship with Hebner, who he saw as a man of integrity that would not double cross him. He felt if he were to be screwed, a different referee would have been assigned.

Speculation is necessary. It isn't evidence, it's hypotheses - the scientific method is golden. I can't have the evidence to something that somebody doesn't want the rest of the world to know about, but I can use logic when looking at everything (both what happened before and after the event) surrounding the screwjob to form my own view.

Sorry but you are absolutely incorrect here. Speculation is the formation of a theory lacking evidence. It is NOT part of the scientific method. If you don't have evidence, it is not a theory. There is NO wiggle room here. 10 years of college here working with the scientific method EVERY day. Speculation is bad.

I also think this statement:



is faulty as taking risks is part of any business, but particularly this one. Wrestlers have to back themselves, and Vince has a company to try and micromanage into oblivion (lol)

No, it is not faulty. It is a formal logical fallacy. In fact, I fail to see how you really addressed what I said.

No one can predict the future. Yes, many people benefited from the screwjob. But there was No way to tell before the screwjob that would benefit from it.

This is how it works:

P1: Currently, there is no evidence that X is true.
P2: In the future, there will be evidence that X is true.
C: X is true.

This is what anyone is doing when they make they claim that the screwjob was a work because people benefited from it. And no, I am not just addressing you, so please do not take offense, my friend. But the claim is illogical.

But anyhow, I just need to add that you know me, and I hope my post doesn't seem confrontational, because I don't mean it to be, my friend. I actually think this is one of the best debates I have had in a long time

 

[bullyballmm]

Of course Hart and Vince would have a LOT to gain if they admitted it was a work. It would turn them back to the two most evil heels in wrestling. The controversy alone would shock the wrestling world because most people believe it was real. if they came out and said it was fake... damn, it would open up many story lines.

I sort of agree and alluded to this in a previous reply of mine. But then again Bret isn't wrestling anymore so unless he wants to have some onscreen heel authority role I don't see how getting this heat will help. And we all know Vince doesn't care for whipping out the Mr. McMahon character (as shown by him wanting to kill off the character but then backflipping because investors were idiots and thought an obvious work was real), and only does it when ratings need to be boosted/the story really needs it (e.g. can't have HHH be a heel heading into this year's Mania so Mr. McMahon is the one to come out and insert Charlotte into the Becky/Ronda match). So I don't see how this heel heat would help, people would just feel annoyed for being lied to for so long - not just fans, but fellow wrestlers that had to be duped if this was a work.

Sorry but you are absolutely incorrect here. Speculation is the formation of a theory lacking evidence. It is NOT part of the scientific method. If you don't have evidence, it is not a theory. There is NO wiggle room here. 10 years of college here working with the scientific method EVERY day. Speculation is bad.

Seems like we just have different preferences over the inductive method vs. the deductive method then. I like coming up with wild theories, briefly looking at the facts + using logic to determine whether running with this theory is a waste of time or not, and then looking for evidence if I've determined it is worth my time to do so.

This is what anyone is doing when they make they claim that the screwjob was a work because people benefited from it.

Ok but that isn't what DualShock is saying, you're misrepresenting his argument. He is saying that the screwjob could be a work because the people involved may have thought they could benefit from it.

But anyhow, I just need to add that you know me, and I hope my post doesn't seem confrontational, because I don't mean it to be, my friend. I actually think this is one of the best debates I have had in a long time

No problem. I actually wish you were here when me and DualShock were debating against Geese, I didn't really care what he thought because it was clear he wasn't changing his mind, I just wanted others to see the possible other side of the shoot vs. work debate.

 

[Jacob Fox]

I sort of agree and alluded to this in a previous reply of mine. But then again Bret isn't wrestling anymore so unless he wants to have some onscreen heel authority role I don't see how getting this heat will help. And we all know Vince doesn't care for whipping out the Mr. McMahon character (as shown by him wanting to kill off the character but then backflipping because investors were idiots and thought an obvious work was real), and only does it when ratings need to be boosted/the story really needs it (e.g. can't have HHH be a heel heading into this year's Mania so Mr. McMahon is the one to come out and insert Charlotte into the Becky/Ronda match). So I don't see how this heel heat would help, people would just feel annoyed for being lied to for so long - not just fans, but fellow wrestlers that had to be duped if this was a work.

I don't think Bret or Vince would have to appear on TV too much. I know Vince doesn't like it anymore. But he is always willing to do it for the good of the company. If he and Bret talked about doing that angle, it would involve more than those two. I mean Triple H is know to be one of the people who was in on the screwjob, even suggesting Vince to do it. You have Shane McMahon, who was working for WWF at the time. They have other people to get involved and honestly, I think that story line would boost ratings because it would bring back people who watched it and want to see how it was handled.

I think it would be brilliant.

Seems like we just have different preferences over the inductive method vs. the deductive method then. I like coming up with wild theories, briefly looking at the facts + using logic to determine whether running with this theory is a waste of time or not, and then looking for evidence if I've determined it is worth my time to do so.

Not really. Inductive and deductive still use evidence. Speculation is just making something up with no evidence. What you are doing is not speculation. You are hypothesizing. Hypothesizing is coming up with an idea and than looking for the evidence. If you were speculating, you would not be looking for evidence. You would just be accepting an idea because you like the idea. Don't call what you are doing speculation, because that is not it. Be proud that you are hypothesizing because that is the basis for the scientific method.

All we are doing is using terms incorrectly. I respect you hypothesizing.

Ok but that isn't what DualShock is saying, you're misrepresenting his argument. He is saying that the screwjob could be a work because the people involved may have thought they could benefit from it.

My comment was not directed specifically to DualShock. But just because he said it "could" instead "it would" does not change the statement. In basis it still is a logical fallacy.

Anyway, there are people who do say it was done because they knew it would benefit them. So I am not addressing DualShock. I am addressing anyone who believes that and many people do.

No problem. I actually wish you were here when me and DualShock were debating against Geese, I didn't really care what he thought because it was clear he wasn't changing his mind, I just wanted others to see the possible other side of the shoot vs. work debate.

@Geese and I did not get along very well when he first came here. I think he and I had a few heated debates. But like I mentioned before, I like stubborn people. Paul Revere was known to be stubborn and wanted more people to be so. So we fought a bit but it's all in the past now. Sometimes now he and I will give a like rating to each other. LOL But we have gotten along fine since.

And yeah, I don't want to shut down the other side. In college I was on the Ethics Bowl team. It was very weird because you debated ethics with another school but the debates were not about disagreeing. Rather than challenge your opponent, you have to make a more complete ethical explanation than the other team. It was all about presenting both sides and completing the argument. So yea, I am happy you present the other side of it.

Stubborn people tend to respect other stubborn people even when they argue.

 

[Jacob Fox]

Honestly, I was happy to see Bret Hart in AEW and I hope he appears there again. Even though I mentioned the angle of admitting it was fake would be interesting, i don't want it to happen.

 

[bullyballmm]

But like I mentioned before, I like stubborn people. Paul Revere was known to be stubborn and wanted more people to be so

Didn't Revere engage in propaganda against the British army? I mean, I'm not choosing sides on that thing because it happened in the past between two countries that I'm not a part of (Aussies don't give a flying fruitcake about being in the Commonwealth), I just don't like people who engage in propaganda.

The only thing that should be stubborn are the facts. I don't mind people believing something and wanting everybody else to think the way they do - in fact, I think everybody should be this way, and if they aren't, then what's the point of them believing in anything? But I do when they refuse to admit when they are wrong and/or employ methods other than good faith debate (I'm not accusing you of this btw, just making my position on stubbornness clear)

I agree with you that it would be interesting as fuck if Vince and Bret came out and said it was a work - especially if it was actually a shoot and they are just pretending it is a work for heel heat

 

[Jacob Fox]

Didn't Revere engage in propaganda against the British army? I mean, I'm not choosing sides on that thing because it happened in the past between two countries that I'm not a part of (Aussies don't give a flying fruitcake about being in the Commonwealth), I just don't like people who engage in propaganda.

Hey I didn't say I liked the guy. I just remember reading that in a book and it supported my position ?

The only thing that should be stubborn are the facts. I don't mind people believing something and wanting everybody else to think the way they do - in fact, I think everybody should be this way, and if they aren't, then what's the point of them believing in anything? But I do when they refuse to admit when they are wrong and/or employ methods other than good faith debate (I'm not accusing you of this btw, just making my position on stubbornness clear)

I think you know I completely agree with this. If you notice how I am, I do get defensive at first. But then, i think about the facts and have no problem admitting I was wrong. Of course then I get stubborn about the other side haha.

I agree with you that it would be interesting as fuck if Vince and Bret came out and said it was a work - especially if it was actually a shoot and they are just pretending it is a work for heel heat :emoji_slight_smile:

That would be fucking awesome. The screwjob is real and they do a work to claim it was a work. Brilliant!

 

[bullyballmm]

I just love it when they do crazy shit in wrestling, and having a shoot, admitting it was a shoot for so long, and then turn around and pretending it was a work would be some crazy, ballsy stuff.

 

[Jacob Fox]

I just love it when they do crazy shit in wrestling, and having a shoot, admitting it was a shoot for so long, and then turn around and pretending it was a work would be some crazy, ballsy stuff.

It might cause a rip in the space continuum. Should you risk it?

 

[bullyballmm]

Should you risk it?

No because then people would say me considering and then taking a risk wouldn't be evidence for others to logically determine why and if I took the risk

Also I want to meet the mes from parallel universes

 

[white crow]

The more you know about this the more you think that it is a work. How can Bret spit in the face of a billionaire and punch him afterwards without facing any consequences? Lol, it just seems that it would result in a lawsuit and put Hart in the jail or milk awful lot of money out of him.

 

[DualShock]

The default position has to be that it was real. There is no hard evidence that it was a work. It is all speculation. The two people involved, Hart and McMahon, insist that it was real. So yes, that is the correct default. Until someone who was actually involved in the screwjob gives any evidence that it was a work, apart from speculation, that is what their is the most evidence for.
out of the belt.

@baseballmm said it best, many fans were young at the time, also the online world of wrestling wasn't that big back then and many fans took some things for granted. Best example is ECW.
WWE and ECW were in a working relationship and Vince McMahon helped ECW financially many times yet in the 90s many ECW fans hated WWE and thought the two companies were enemies (watch how many ECW fans were anti-WWE in the documentary Beyond the Mat). Later it was revealed that the WWE-ECW hate was a work but that didn't stop many ECW fans to be still anti-WWE at ECW reunion shows because they believed something for a decade and telling the truth after so many years wouldn't change how the fans feel.

People claim that it is a work because Hart should have seen a screwjob coming. The truth is that he had talked to Big Van Vader, who told him that Vince might screw him. Vader had seen that happen in Japan. He told Hart to not stay in a submission hold for too long and to keep his shoulders off the mat. So yes, Hart was warned. Watch the match and you'll see he did follow Vader's advice.

And it's not like Vince hasn't done this before. He did it to Wendy Richter, having Moolah screw her out of the belt.

I have no problems to believe that a screwjob can happen or that McMahon was able to instruct the ref to ring the bell but what makes it hard to believe is the way how McMahon was portrayed at the PPV. First Michael Cole asking McMahon before the match who will win and McMahon smiling like the evil Mr. McMahon character saying " I don't know but I will make the things right to make everything will go down as planned,", McMahon interfering in the match yelling at both guys for no reason, being near the announce table watching the match, his first PPV in years with him not being a commentator. It was not just "be careful of submission holds", the whole PPV had that weird vibe, like a bad mafia movie and Bret wasn't aware?
And some people don't think it's a work because Bret should have seen this coming, they think it's a work because Bret was the whole year involved in matches and segments complaining how he was kayfabe screwed by Vince and his company and suddenly it happened for real?

Speculation is not evidence. I think at Wrestlemania 22, Hart attended the Hall of Fame ceremony.. This was mostly because he was allowed to talk about Owen Hart the entire time. However, he refused to make a Wrestlemania appearance with the others. That indicates real animosity. He did something for his brother, but refused to do something for Wrestlemania.

This is a touchy subject so i don't if that's true but I believe the real animosity is because the company forced his brother to do a dangerous stunt leading to his death but that's only my opinion.

Yeah, but again, the default position is that it is real. Until Bret Hart or Vince McMahon tells us it was fake, it was real.

Let's say I am right and the Screwjob was a work, why would the two guys involved in a business that consists of storylines and works have the responsibility to tell anything? I don't see anybody asking if Austin was a criminal because he tried to kill Triple H at Survivor Series 2000 (of course the segment with Austin, Triple H and the car was over the top and obviously a storyline but it's still a storyline just like the Screwjob). Maybe the Screwjob as work was at that moment the best solution to make a win-win situation for everybody but after so many years they have realized they have created a part of wrestling history so why ruin it?

I want to add something too. The idea that it was a work because everyone benefited from it is a logical fallacy. It is called Escape to the future. No one knew for sure that they would benefit from the screwjob. You can't tell the future. WWF did plenty of things they thought would benefit everyone, but it didn't. So that argument is invalid. It was very possible that the screwjob could have ruined everyone involved in it. There was no way to know beforehand.

Actually not, McMahon as the evil boss, Attitude Era being more realistic and controversial, Austin vs. McMahon, Bret leaving for WCW, Shawn as the heel champion heading to WrestleMania, Bret not losing the belt (one idea was Bret vacating the belt next night on Raw) was already planned (and Bret didn't lost, he never said I quit and never tapped out). Bret wasn't unlucky because of the Screwjob, he was unlucky because of how he was used after the Screwjob and then Over the Edge 1999 and Goldberg's kick made things worse for his career and life.

One important thing I have mentioned but is ignored is that as soon as it was announced online that Bret would leave he got booed in Canada and received "You sold out" chants, that's why he was involved in patriotic angles and faced wrestlers who talked bad about Canada to save him. Bret vacating his belt on Raw would make things worse because he would confirm it "I give up this belt and will leave tonight because the other promotion gives me more money"
The other option was him losing his title clean in his last WWE match but that would not make things better. It's one thing to lose his belt and then take a break but most fans knew as long as he's losing the title he will be out for more money so that would make the "you sold out" chants even stronger. The screwjob was the best thing for Bret because it made the fans feel sorry for him overshadowing the "you sold out" thing and at the same time he never really lost the match and his title.

You say nobody could guarantee that WWE would benefit from it and it could ruin everything. True, but keep in mind that WWE at that time was #2 and that WCW was red hot only a month before the epic Hogan vs. Sting match so they had nothing to lose. That was the same situation like in the late 1996 when they decided to make edgier television. WWE was known for the cartoonish, family friendly sports entertainment so there was a big possibility that an edgier and TV-14 WWE could backfire (just like it backfired in WCW because Russo TV was not WCW style) but they took a risk and it worked. Attitude Era was 50x a bigger risk for WWE than the Screwjob.

 

[Jacob Fox]

Well watch out for this guy:

 

[Jacob Fox]

Hey Dual, I am working on a response to your post. Our last kitten just passed away though so I will have to finish posting it later.

I have to tell you though, even though I disagree with you, got me back into making long posts and things like that. You and Base mostly in this thread. I like that.

I will post later.