Pro Wrestling Torch was established in 1987 by Wade Keller. One of the primary traits PWTorch has been credited with over the years is assembling the best and most diverse staff of columnists with broad knowledge, but also areas of specialty where they have a particularly strong grasp of history. Every day PWTorch.com presents that team of writers answering your questions, some of which are fact-based and others of which are opinion-based. Either way, we've got you covered with Bruce Mitchell, Pat McNeill, Sean Radican, Greg Parks, James Caldwell, and Wade Keller. Collectively they have over 80 years working for the Torch, writing about wrestling and studying industry history and trends.

If you have a question you'd like us to respond to, send your question to askpwtorch@gmail.com. I, along with the Torch staff, will address you questions in this feature and also the “Ask PWTorch: All-Star Panel” edition which is also published most days here at PWTorch.

===

PWTorch reader Matt from Sydney asks: Is it just me or is C.M. Punk a massive whiner. It’s like he wants to write his own storylines and when something doesn't suit him he becomes difficult and hard to manage. I am a fan of his character and ring work and do think he could've been utilized better, especially after MITB 2011, but when you earn millions and millions of dollars and even have your own luxury bus to take you from city to city, I don't think there's too much to complain about. Another thing, if he's so offended about being fired on his wedding day, why is his wife still with the company? I just find it weird that she wouldn't take umbrage with it also. Lastly, his indy pals, Cobana and Chris Hero, couldn't quite make the grade in WWE. I wonder if they would be arguing if they had Punk’s salary and company perks. Just my opinion. Cheers guys, keep up the good work.

PWTorch columnist Greg Parks answers: I've heard this argument against Punk, and whatever you think of Punk's personality, I think that takes a backseat to the very serious complaints he levied against WWE. Call him a complainer, call him a whiner, call him someone who isn't a team player, but that to me is all secondary to the accusations made against WWE's concussion protocol, the treatment of him by WWE's ringside doctor, and WWE's insistence on him returning so soon from injuries and surgeries.

PWTorch editor Wade Keller answers: Yeah, there are aspects of Punk’s complaints that feel like he was stomping is feet when he didn’t get his way because management didn’t think of him as being as magnificent and “all that” as he did. That valid discussion point aside, Punk’s other complaints paint a picture of WWE that is backed, anecdote by anecdote, by others who were just less forceful or credible in their descriptions. A lot of what Punk complained about, I’ve been writing about as problems with WWE’s structure for literally decades. Punk can be right about a lot of serious issues while also, just perhaps, thinking more highly of himself and his drawing power than management and having a fit over that discrepancy of perception. That said, you have to respect Punk for walking out out his feelings of injustice and disrespect rather than just accepting it. Just because he was making millions doesn’t mean, as he said, he shouldn’t have been making a lot more. Some people would rather earn less money and feel respected and fairly paid than earn more money but feel that they are being taken advantage of.

===

PWTorch reader Aaron P. asks: What the heck is a stairs match?

PWTorch columnist Sean Radican answers: All stairs are legal.

PWTorch columnist Greg Parks answers: If I understand WWE's booking correctly, the last few times the stairs have been taken apart and used in a match, it's been cause for disqualification. So at TLC, the stairs can be taken apart and used legally however the wrestlers see fit.

PWTorch editor Wade Keller answers: It’s when two stairs are set in the middle of the ring and battle it out to see who the better stairs is. The winner gets to stay at ringside, the loser has to go be a stair somewhere less in the spotlight.

===

PWTorch reader Phil L. asks: I greatly enjoyed the main event of Survivor Series. As I read on PWTorch, I completely agree that it was some of the most compelling drama we've seen out of WWE in quite some time. The Mark Henry KO was awesome, the wrestlers seemed to really want to WIN, Luke Harper is a brute, Dolph Ziggler was so believable in his bumping and comebacks, and I got chills seeing Sting come out. However, there were a couple negatives. The Big Show turn was so blah because his character has no credibility after being turned so much. Why? If I have to sit through John Cena vs. Big Show again, I'm going to chuck my WWE Network-watching iPad into a nearby lake (not really). And as excited as I was to see Sting, is a match really the best thing for either party right now? The match would have to be at WrestleMania, and that's five months away. Are we looking at a slow burn build for a 55 year-old that can't really go anymore?

PWTorch columnist Greg Parks answers: The consensus of that match seems to be that it was good with high drama, and with Big Show's turn being one of the glaring negatives. I'm not sure why WWE felt Show was the right guy to turn there. They're clearly trying to establish Erick Rowan as a face, so he was out. So too were John Cena and Dolph Ziggler. That just left Show or Ryback. And really, if WWE wanted to go for shock value as far as the actual moment of the turn, Show's knockout punch did just that.

As for Sting, I'm not sure what plans are for him, especially in light of him not being booked for Raw. He was mentioned several times, however, so it seems clear he's going to be involved in some fashion in the future. Sting vs. Triple H seems to make the most sense right now, but there's no guarantee he'll be wrestling at WrestleMania. It could happen at a PPV beforehand, allowing Sting to go into the HOF WrestleMania weekend without the distraction of also having to hype his match.

PWTorch Columnist Pat McNeill replies: (1) Vince McMahon believes that star babyfaces should usually face off against larger heels. The reasoning is, fans are less likely to feel sympathy for a wrestler who is fighting someone of the same size or smaller. Also, the McMahons are very reluctant to create new top stars. Feuding with Cena is a cherry gig, and WWE isn't about to hand it to a wrestler they don't trust.

(2) I am not opposed to Sting wrestling Triple H at WrestleMania and getting the victory. It makes good use of both men. You have a point about five months being too long to build this match. But this does give Sting and Triple H ample opportunity to get in ring shape and run through the bout. We'll see how it ends.

===

PWTorch reader David C. asks: I love listening to podcasts, especially when wrestlers are the guests. It's always cool to hear the storied history of the men and women of wrestling because their stories are always so unique (and never addressed unless they get a DVD made for them). Question is, why do you think WWE ignores the personal history of their roster? They don't need to go too deep, but some background information would help humanize the athletes, and possibly give rise to some feuds serendipitously.

PWTorch assistant editor James Caldwell replies: I think WWE underestimates the audience's ability to process and retain information. Yes, the majority of the audience is casual and not as passionate, hardcore, or informed as, say, the Attitude Era, but WWE's video packages are so well-done that it's enough to get everyone caught up to speed on what's going on or backgrounds of certain wrestlers, like you mentioned. It would certainly help bond the wrestlers to the audience - Survivor Series's undercard and pre-show really captured how weak the bond is between certain wrestlers and the audience because of the lack of character development and clear characteristics worth cheering or booing.

PWTorch columnist Greg Parks answers: They've done that with some wrestlers in the past, but WWE likes to "create" histories for their "characters" and thus don't use a lot of real-life stories with the larger-than-life creations. Adam Rose for example, you're not going to use any of his real background for that character. The same goes, probably, for Bo Dallas. There are times when a wrestler's background really works to their advantage (Makin' a Difference Fatu, Droz, etc.), but those are rare occurrences.

===

Catch up on past Ask PWTorch articles...

-ASK PWTORCH - FREE WEBSITE.
-CLICKING HERE - ASK PWTORCH - VIP VERSION

********

(Send your question for PWTorch editor Wade Keller and the PWTorch staff exclusively to pwtorch@gmail.com for consideration! You can hear expanded conversation on the above topics from Wade Keller by becoming a VIP member and gaining access to the daily Wade Keller Hotline, posted every day for VIP members for over 1,000 days straight. Sign up at www.PWTorch.com/govip)

We suggest these recent related articles...

ASK THE SPECIALISTS ROUNDTABLE: Who will be WWE's Next Top Star?

SATURDAY’S ASK PWTORCH STAFF for 4/11: How should WWE cater to Texas at WM32? Does WWE using Sting and Hogan add to chances more TNA wrestlers are hired? Do NXT gimmick wrestlers have a chance? Is El Generico really Sami Zayn?

THURSDAY’S ASK PWTORCH ALL-STARS 4/9: Are El Generico & Sami Zayn the same person? Next MITB cash-in for IC or U.S. belt? What match do you show non-fans so they get it? Why don’t heel teams cheat?