Editor's Note: At PWTorch.com we strive for our content whenever possible and practical to be original and unique (i .e. not published on other sites), therefore Guest Editorials submitted to PWTorch. com should be submitted only to PWTorch. com. If you submit a Guest Editorial for consideration, please state at the top of your editorial that you submitted it only to PWTorch. com. For more details on submitting Guest Editorials, check out a detailed submissions guide following today's Guest Editorial below.

GUEST EDITORIAL
By Adam Riemer of New York, N.Y.
PWTorch.com Reader

Every time I read a review of a show from an independent pro wrestling website (ie. Not WWE.com) and there is an unprotected chair shot to the head on the show, every writer is up in arms. The first question that comes to my mind is: Why?

It seems like it is a fad right now to bring every little thing that goes wrong in a wrestler's life (steroids, drugs, concussions, etc.) into comparison with Chris Benoit. Yes, what happened was a travesty; it was unthinkable, unimaginable, and unforeseen. But ever since then, pro wrestling writers and editors have been on a feeding frenzy to criticize a company when there is an unprotected chairshot to the head.

We get it, you don't like it. But when you sit there and write about how story lines and back stage confrontations between wrestlers sometimes bring out the fact that wrestling is staged (a perfect example would be the criticisms from PWTorch.com writers about the HBK-Batista exchanges in regards to the Flair retirement angle), it sounds kind of hypocritical. WWE, TNA, ROH, etc. go out of their way to make everything in someway or another seem real, or try to make it as real as possible.

When wrestlers put their hands up to block chair shots ALL the time, then the fans and viewers start to get annoyed to some extent. I don't really remember ever reading a review from Keller, Mitchell, or anyone else from PWTorch.com that criticized the WWE for Jeff Hardy's stunts. Doing the Whisper in the Wind from on top of a cage is just as dangerous as an unprotected chairshot. Think about, if Jeff were to misjudge the jump or slip for that matter, then its curtain call for Jeff Hardy. When guys like Triple H and Hardy stand on top of a cage as it gets raised, when Ultimate X occurs, or even the Money in the Bank matches that have more dangerous spots in them that most matches in general occur, I never read any harsh criticisms or one-liners about how bad they are.

Every time we read a review and there is a unprotected shot, we get some "witty" remark or condescending remark about how bad this is. It gets annoying actually. We as fans know that the companies involved are trying to give us everything we asked for. It is hard to top the Attitude/NWO era of pro wrestling, but the WWE, TNA, and the others do their best to make it as real as possible. Yes, some gimmicks are stupid, someare as ludicrous and fake as they possibly can get. The same goes with story lines (Vince/Shane vs. HBK/God), but for the most part these companies are trying to make it exciting to watch and get people involved.

I think it is time for writers and editors and columnists to give the “unprotected chair shot” gripes to a minimum at best. We know pro wrestling isn't real, we know that the superstars know that they put their bodies and lives on the line every single night. But if you're going to criticize one dangerous aspect of pro wrestling, then you got to criticize it all. Kurt Angle's neck is damaged; I don't see any columnists writing about how dangerous it is for him to continue. Mick Foley has taken every legit, major bump in history; I don't see any articles or comments criticizing him. Shawn Michaels has a fused back, the implications of damaging that could be as far as paralysis, where are the critics now? Why are there no snide remarks after the description of HBK doing something like jumping off a ladder, jumping over the ropes onto someone on the floor, or even taking a back body drop?

The fact is that most of the writers and columnists out there love to criticize the little things. It's the thing to do now with blaming the little things on the Benoit tragedy, and trying to sound like you know that the wrestlers shouldn't be doing head shots, but come on! There is no reason to harp so much on a chairshot to the head unprotected when you are not harping on every other thing that is dangerous about pro wrestling. The wrestlers know what they are doing, they know what they are getting into. They love it, it's their life, and their job. Instead of harping on the little things we should all be more appreciative to what they are trying to accomplish; and that is ultimatley to entertain the millions, and millions of pro wrestling fans out there today.

WK: For the record, I (and Bruce Mitchell) have been consistently critical of excessive risk taken by wrestlers in all types of ways. Ten years before the Benoit Family Tragedy, I was harshly critical of the excessive chairshots being used, especially in ECW and especially by Foley (who set the bar so high for how chairshots one can absorb and still live that he, selfishly to get over, took away most of the meaning of a single solid chairshot to the head).

I agree to an extent that wrestler know they are taking risks when they are part of the wrestling industry. When risks are taken, though, the promotion should capitalize on the effects so that every risk taken actually means something. When smaller wrestlers are taking tons of dangerous bumps and doing dangerous highspots on opening matches, risks that mean nothing by the end of the show, it's a waste. There will always be wrestlers willing to take greater and greater risks to stand out. It's the responsibility of the promotion to put a cap on those risks, and be sure when a risk is taken, it's fully exploited and not done for nothing.

If there were one unprotected chairshot per year per promotion, and it was treated as a huge deal, it would draw more money than all of the chairshots do currently in any given year which are forgotten within five minutes (or five seconds, in some cases). Pro wrestling has the unique power to define the consequences of moves. Why not cut back on the risk by making a bigger deal out of a single chairshot, and make when a chair is used, the wrestler hit sells it and the wrestler swinging it is treated as a borderline criminal within the world that the promotion creates. Chairshots should elicit gasps, not pops.

Wrestling, by definition, does not need wrestlers to suffer permanent brain damage later in life for us to enjoy the product. Any fan who demands that of wrestlers is selfish and crass for taking advantage of a wrestler's (needless) willingness to potentially give up his future to give you a thrill today.

You are invited to submit a "Torch Guest Editorial" for possible publishing on this site in future days. For submission guidelines and the current email, click here.

We suggest these recent related articles...

VALLEY: The story behind the 1980s wrestler who is suing WWE for egregious mistreatment of its wrestlers over the years

GUEST REVIEWS: Lucha Underground - perspective from TV taping, editorial on strengths & weaknesses of first episode

GUEST EDITORIAL: TNA's Legacy - Helping Future Wrestling Promotions Avoid The Same Mistakes