TheNegation

http://youtube.com/watch?v=qs9j9wjpX9w&feature=related

Now compare it to Wights physique in this.

__________________
A person does not act upon the world, the world acts upon him.

GKY

He was still in the 500 pound area at that time. BTW I found what I was looking for
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QnZZRh61_Z0&NR=1

__________________
Forum Bets: 2-0

TheNegation

What are you basing that assumption on?
Look at him, hes clearly heavier.

God I hated what they turned the undertaker itno at that time....
But that is some impressive strength!

__________________
A person does not act upon the world, the world acts upon him.

GKY

Because I'm pretty sure they billed him at 500 pounds at that time.

And yeah Undertaker was my favorite wrestler ever and the one that got me into in back in 91, so obviously I wasn't a fan of the "Badass" either.

__________________
Forum Bets: 2-0

TheNegation

Underaker was right behind Mick Foley for me, as for as the big wrestlers go.

Nothing beats the Mick and the ECW guys like Taz, Sabu, RVD and NEW JACK! Good times as a kid...good horribly violent times.


I aint arguing that lashley is stronger, I just find his big show lifting as impressive as Brocks, despite him struggling, as that scoop powerslam would have been mad difficult, mure so than an F5.

__________________
A person does not act upon the world, the world acts upon him.

jasvll

I gave up on pro wrestling about a year after Lashley debuted (will they ever get back to what made it great?). What I remember from him was slow-motion. Slow to set up his moves and slow to execute, relatively speaking. What I remember from Lesnar is explosiveness. I don't remember once being impressed by Lashley in the ring the way Lesnar impressed me everytime, especially his shooting star press at Wrestlemania. Dude should be dead. If Lesnar hadn't shown up first, I'd probably be more impressed with Lashley, but that's kind of the point.