Where would you rate Bret Hart all time?

His in ring skills weren't in question, he was given the ball in arguably the most difficult period in WWF.... His mic skills divide opinions.... All things considered where do you rate him on the all time list?

I would say top 10 myself. If it was based on in-ring skills he would be top 5 without question.

But the whole package.......tough one. I didn't rate his mic skills myself, even in the Hart Foundation days when he played the cocky heel. I would say he would rank 6 or 7 for me. Close, but not close enough.

He's not in Hogan, Rock or Austin's league but I'd rank him in the group below with Michaels, Taker & Savage

1. The Rock
2. Stone Cold
3. Hulk Hogan
4. CM Punk
5. HBK

1. Austin
2. Hulk
3. HBK
4. Bret
5. Rock

NickisBHAFC wrote:1. The Rock
2. Stone Cold
3. Hulk Hogan
4. CM Punk
5. HBK

Punk at 4.... A little early I think

I think it's far to early for Punk, for me Bret is top 10, he was superb, his understanding of the audiance was second to none

In the top bracket I'd have Hogan, Austin, Savage and Rock

Under that I'd put Taker, Shawn, Bret and Flair

Punk above HBK? Jeez thats seriously jumping the gun, Punks not even near the top 20 in my book. Can anyone seriously justify Punk that high after having a few good months, Lesnar still is higher in my mind.

On Hart I rank him top 10, probably top 3 technically. He was however king of a bad era, when wrestling was on the down turn, he was nervous one the mic, and he sucked as a heel in WCW, the USA/Canada rivalry was fun though.

I don't think it's fair to critizes his WCW career. Completely inept booking, that wasn't his fault.

I thought he was decent on the mic.... He's lost his confidence these days though & stumbles over his words badly

I never ever thought Bret was nervous, not great but never nervous, he is now but not then

Sorry i must admit i am having second thoughts by putting Punk 4th

Must i just love the guy so much. He made wwe 2011 in every sense during the summer.

Number 1

Top 2 for me

Only the Rock sits above him in my eyes, of course my age and the era I grew up in have made these 2 my top 2, which of course age and era always come into play with these types of opinion threads, in my opinion.

I voted top 20

He's definatly not in my top 10 US all rounders, he's a top 5 worker but his mic skills were never great, the only time he was any good he was, to be frank, playing a jazzed up version of a forgien heel

Top 5 all rounders

1)HBK
2)Angle
3)Savage
4)Austin
5)Guerrero

If your taking into account all abilities, attributes etc etc then for me he's deff in my top ten which would probably look like this of the top of my head:

1. HBK
2. The Rock
3. Austin
4 Angle
5. Sting
6. Brett Hart
7. Savage
8. Undertaker
9. Hogan
10. Chris Jericho

I'm surprised he's outside the top 5 in most people's lists. For me he is definitely in the top 5, it's a question of where I put him and that changes constantly.

HBK, Bret, Austin, Hogan, Rock are the five for me, and I'd just need to order them.

Top 20 is a bit of a joke I don't think you could put a decent arguement together for 10 better guys than him

Probably just behind Hogan, Austin and The Rock, so Top 5 for me. For wrestling ability and the capablitiy of making others look better than they were he is the best ever. Mic skills imrpoved over time, but it was never his strongest point and he'd probably be the first to admit that.

He was unfortunate that his peak coincided with a downturn for wrestling and in particular WWF, and I'm not sure Vince was ever totally convinced by Bret. WCW were, but they hadn't a clue how to use him.

Good article Brady, i cast my vote before reading all of the posts so i wasnt influenced by others.

Top 10 for me, probably about 7 or 8. In no particular order my tiers would be:

Top Tier: Hogan, Austin, Rock, Taker, Michaels
Second Tier: Savage, Hart, Angle, HHH, Flair.
Third Tier: Sting, Jericho, Cena, Foley, Edge.

Have to be realistic, Punk would probably be 5th tier.

Brady12 wrote:Top 20 is a bit of a joke I don't think you could put a decent arguement together for 10 better guys than him

It depends how you view it

HBK
Austin
Savage
Hogan
Piper
Rock
HHH
Sting
Flair
Steamboat
Curt Hennig
Chris Benoit
Eddy Gurerro
Chris Jericho
Edge

Every single one of those guys has a case to be considered better than Bret, it just depends on how certain people look at it

Brady12 wrote:Top 20 is a bit of a joke I don't think you could put a decent arguement together for 10 better guys than him

I would argue Brady that HBK, Angle, Savage, Austin, Eddy Guerrero, Flair, The Rock, HHH, Edge and Mick Foley were all better than him in all rounder terms, all of them were/are great wrestlers, perhaps not the smooth as silk technical brilliance of Hart but brilliant in there own way and in terms of mic skills all of them trounch Hart who as I said before I think is really poor, I found him very bland and never commanded attention prior to his heel turn, he was slightly better after the turn but it's been proved that the forgien heel gimmick is one of the easiest ways to build cheap heat and as I said before at it's core that was a forgien heel gimmick, after he came back in 2010 his mic work has been frankly unlistenable tbh, I found his return promo to Raw really uncomfertable to listen to and if I hadn't been so excited to see him come back I would honestly have turned off, his promos nowdays are also extremly formulaic and possibly exploitive, 'Owen (pop), Bulldog (pop)'.

Hart was undeniably a great wrestler but when you factor in his ability to talk he slides way down the list.

I have to agree with Brady. There is no way i would rank the likes of Steamboat, Hennig, Guerrero, Benoit, Jericho, Edge and Piper above Bret Hart, i definately wouldnt be able to justify it.

1. HBK
2. Angle
3. Austin
4. Flair
5. Taker
6. Hogan
7. The Rock
8. Savage
9. HART
10. Guerrero

As others have said Brett was so technically gifted, his ability to execute moves and get the best out anyone puts him in a very small collection of pro wresters. However the likes of rock, Austin and HBK had the ability to get the crowd out of their seats in a number of different ways, the raise of an eye brow, the wind up to sweet chin music and the shear presence of Austin could draw a standing ovation from any capacity crowd. To be considered in the top 5 you must have ability to promo in a way that sets up apart from your peers and although competent Brett for me was never able to deliver on the mic or in interviews in that manner. His brilliance inside the ring will always secure a seat for Brett at wrestlings top table but for me he falls just short of the top 5.

That being said I have to agree with Brady and mr h, although edge, Y2J, Mick and others mentioned do have rightful claims to a top 10/20 it's hard to formulate a case to place them above Brett

It has been a while since I last contributed but seeing this article I felt I had to give my 2 cents. I am going to rank using all rounder as others are doing rather than purely in ring based, since we all watch wrestling for the total show.

It is interesting to read some of the opinions. It seems pretty unanimous that everyone feels technically Bret has perhaps some equals but certainly none better. I personally believe only HBK and Mr Perfect can compete on these terms. If we take mic skills, Bret certainly had his weaknesses. He sometimes missed words, promos were sometimes one dimensiona, yet when he spoke everyone in the audience listened (i'm talking 1997 and earlier). Also, his heel turn speech still remains one of the most powerful promos in my eyes ("American fans coast to coast can kiss my a$$") so when Bret got promos right they really worked. I liken this skill of his to Cm Punk's current shoot style promos, although by no means am I saying he was as comfortable on the mic as Punk is. So while not the best, certainly not the worst on the mic, and this is his only weakness in my eyes. Bret also had 2 things I believe put him above most others, a real connection with the fans and an unparralled storytelling ability that to me amde his matches seem the most real in WWE history. An example of this is SS 1997, that match at times looked like a real fight. Regarding the fan base, Bret over the years built up a fanbase that while perhaps not on the same size as Hogan's or Rock's, was fiercely loyal to him and still is today.

When I consider all these factors, and I place most weight on wrestling ability since that's what it ultimately boils down to, Bret Hart ranks joint second for me, along with HBK. Although Bret is my favourite by far, to me these two are inseparable in overall ability. For the record, my top 5 all round is:
1 Austin
2 Bret and HBK
4 Rock
5 Taker

Hogan would be low top 10 for me, simply because in wrestling terms which is what I think is most important, he was not that good.

Mr H wrote:I have to agree with Brady. There is no way i would rank the likes of Steamboat, Hennig, Guerrero, Benoit, Jericho, Edge and Piper above Bret Hart, i definately wouldnt be able to justify it.

That's you though, other people could easily view those guys better and give a good argument why

I'd like to hear someone offer a good argument that Steamboat or Benoit should be ranked higher than Bret Hart.

the-gaffer wrote:

Brady12 wrote:Top 20 is a bit of a joke I don't think you could put a decent arguement together for 10 better guys than him

It depends how you view it

HBK
Austin
Savage
Hogan
Piper
Rock
HHH
Sting
Flair
Steamboat
Curt Hennig
Chris Benoit
Eddy Gurerro
Chris Jericho
Edge

Every single one of those guys has a case to be considered better than Bret, it just depends on how certain people look at it

Ok down to Steamboat you could argue but below that??? Some of the names are silly. Hemming & Steamboat, were decent upper mid carders they never carried the company, headlined Wrestlemania or won 7 world titles like Hart... Benoit are you kidding? Basically Bret Hart - charisma.

H

I'm not a big fan of either to be honest but both could be easily considered as good as him in the ring, in the 80s and early 90s you'd be hard pushed to find anyone better in the ring than Steamboat and almost anyone who worked with Benoit (and still talk about him) admit he was one of the best, Benoit was also hand picked by Bret himself for the Owen tribute match, on this topic I think that's as high and endorsement as you'd get.

I don't personally rate either higher than Bret but being objective I can see why people could

Kurt Angle is another one who has a shout

Guerrero? I don't put him in the greatest ever category because he died in his prime.... It's like saying you consider Duncan Edwards one of the greatest of all time. Fact is they 'could' of been but we'll never know.

Edge... The guy wouldn't of come close to a world title had he been around in the 80's

He wasn't around in the 80s though, he was around in the 00s and how many guys in the 80s would have been able to do what he did, he put his body on the line like no other on such a consistant basis

Also Brady, using headlining WrestleMania and counting World Titles is a dangerous bargaining tool, you then have to say guys like Cena and Batista and Randy Orton have a case

As for you're point on Guerrero, it's a legit point but instead of using Edwards how about Ayrton Senna, he died at his peak and is always considered in a best ever list

Sure, Steamboat and Benoit were good in ring and tremendous workers, but thats about it. They cant talk, havent got as much charisma as Hart and would never get a crowd reaction like Bret Hart. I know you're being objective but personally i cant see how people could rate them higher than Bret. Hart is better than them both, simple as that, anyone who thinks otherwise is just wrong.

Eddie Guerrero and Edge are very good but World Titles have been handed out like candy at a kids party since the brand split. I'd argue that 75% of World Champions since the brand split would never have held the strap post-brand split. But to be honest its hard to compare World Title reigns between one side of the millenium to the other.

Kurt Angle, yes, i can understand if people rate him higher than Bret, thats a legitimate argument.

These debates are great becuase of the diverse opinions, all valid. Ranking people as best is so difficult for 3 reasons:
- hard to compare across eras
- what do you rate on? Popularity, drawing power, success, in ring skills, mic skills, dedication to their craft etc.
- it's hard to rank your favourites objectively.

In saying that, I do feel sometimes things are just wrong. For me, rating people like Piper, Edge, Guerrero, hell even Flair and Hogan above the Hitman are wrong. But then, i'm probably wrong in saying that

I think you're being extremely harsh on Ricky Steamboat, in 1987 Ricky Steamboat was being groomed to be the #2 face in the WWF in the all powerful time that was the 80s (my own personal favourite era) and that spot wasn't just handed out for kicks back then, he lost that spot when he took time off, so he must have been drawing well at houses, we know he was having top matches and the crowd must have had a good connection with him, his NWA WCW matches over the World Title with Flair are legendary

As for Benoit, to say anyone who thinks he's better than Hart is just wrong is a bit short sighted, I didn't like Benoit so I'm the wrong guy to fight his corner but there was a time he was legitimately considered as the best in the World when his booking matched his talent, for that reason alone saying people are just wrong if they rate him higher isn't condusive to a debate.

I'm not trying to change your opinion as I'd choose Hart over Benoit too, however, if we had a Benoit fan then they could go deeper into the facts, I'm not saying he's better though, I'm simply saying he has a genuine case to be considered

theanimal316 wrote:These debates are great becuase of the diverse opinions, all valid. Ranking people as best is so difficult for 3 reasons:
- hard to compare across eras
- what do you rate on? Popularity, drawing power, success, in ring skills, mic skills, dedication to their craft etc.
- it's hard to rank your favourites objectively.

In saying that, I do feel sometimes things are just wrong. For me, rating people like Piper, Edge, Guerrero, hell even Flair and Hogan above the Hitman are wrong. But then, i'm probably wrong in saying that

Piper is always a whacky one to be fair, my reply would be could Bret Hart (in his peak) have did as well as Piper did in gaining unrivaled levels of heat?? Vince McMahon and Hulk Hogan get the credit for WrestleMania, Roddy Piper was everybit as important if not more so in the build up to what's known now as 'The Grand daddy of em all'

For me Guerrero is only just behind Hart as people can see from my list, for me Hart just didn't interest me on the mic, I never paid attention to what he was saying and that is why he is so low.

In ring he is in the top 5 no doubt fighting it out with Angle and HBK for the top 3 spots, it's a shame as if he had been able to hook me on the mic I would probably be a massive Hart mark along with Angle and HBK.

From a personal point of view, he may be in the top 10, maybe just outside. If you are talking pure ability he is one of if not the best ever. But if you are talking who got me on the edge of my seet and I tuned in to see what he did next he isnt anywhere near the top.
Guys like Hogan, Rock, Foley, Austin, Badass Taker, HBK, Y2J, Punk and HHH are greater entertainers on the mic, have hed better stories and have had my interest more.

I would rank Benoit just slightly better than Hart, I wrote a while ago about why I prefer Benoits wrestling and I feel this comment still somes everything up

I went for Chris Benoit in this but it was a hard choice between him and Hart, Both were tremendous workers, with Hart probably being slightly better i must admit, but there was something about the intensity and realism that Benoit brought to his work that really sets him apart, both men were clearly perfectionists when it comes to there in ring work but both translated in different ways, while Hart was smooth as silk in terms of his manouveres Benoit drew you in with blood, sweat and tears intensity, both were masters in the ring but Benoit's style is just my personal preferance..

In terms of charimsa while neither were great shakes Benoit gave off an aura of stone cold intensity while I felt Hart lacked any such aura.

Gaffer a man of your intelligence & wrestling expertise should be able to see that a world title win & mania main event was worth so much more in Bret Harts era than in the present day.

If you look at Bret Harts career as a whole it's pretty impressive reading. One half of one of the greatest tag teams of all time. One of the best IC champs of all time when the belt actually meant something. The man given the role of following Hogan, multi time World Champion, one of only a handful of guys to win WWF & WCW world titles. Only man in history to play a heel in one country & a face at the same time in others. Shawn Michaels apart been involved in most 5 star matches in WWE history. Only man to win King of the Ring twice....

Dr Gregory House MD wrote:I would rank Benoit just slightly better than Hart, I wrote a while ago about why I prefer Benoits wrestling and I feel this comment still somes everything up

I went for Chris Benoit in this but it was a hard choice between him and Hart, Both were tremendous workers, with Hart probably being slightly better i must admit, but there was something about the intensity and realism that Benoit brought to his work that really sets him apart, both men were clearly perfectionists when it comes to there in ring work but both translated in different ways, while Hart was smooth as silk in terms of his manouveres Benoit drew you in with blood, sweat and tears intensity, both were masters in the ring but Benoit's style is just my personal preferance..

In terms of charimsa while neither were great shakes Benoit gave off an aura of stone cold intensity while I felt Hart lacked any such aura.

As Mr H put it 'you are just wrong'.... Benoit never had the following, mic skills or garnered the reaction Hart did

Brady12 wrote:

Dr Gregory House MD wrote:I would rank Benoit just slightly better than Hart, I wrote a while ago about why I prefer Benoits wrestling and I feel this comment still somes everything up

I went for Chris Benoit in this but it was a hard choice between him and Hart, Both were tremendous workers, with Hart probably being slightly better i must admit, but there was something about the intensity and realism that Benoit brought to his work that really sets him apart, both men were clearly perfectionists when it comes to there in ring work but both translated in different ways, while Hart was smooth as silk in terms of his manouveres Benoit drew you in with blood, sweat and tears intensity, both were masters in the ring but Benoit's style is just my personal preferance..

In terms of charimsa while neither were great shakes Benoit gave off an aura of stone cold intensity while I felt Hart lacked any such aura.

As Mr H put it 'you are just wrong'.... Benoit never had the following, mic skills or garnered the reaction Hart did

While I admit Benoit's following or reaction weren't as strong as Hart's, although the emotion when he won the WHC showed there was some love for the Crippler, I don't grade wrestlers based on there fan base, titles or drawing power (well I do but it's a seperate list), and for me Benoit was a better wrestler and had a better aura around him, mic skills were about comparable

Dr Gregory House MD wrote:I would rank Benoit just slightly better than Hart, I wrote a while ago about why I prefer Benoits wrestling and I feel this comment still somes everything up

I went for Chris Benoit in this but it was a hard choice between him and Hart, Both were tremendous workers, with Hart probably being slightly better i must admit, but there was something about the intensity and realism that Benoit brought to his work that really sets him apart, both men were clearly perfectionists when it comes to there in ring work but both translated in different ways, while Hart was smooth as silk in terms of his manouveres Benoit drew you in with blood, sweat and tears intensity, both were masters in the ring but Benoit's style is just my personal preferance..

In terms of charimsa while neither were great shakes Benoit gave off an aura of stone cold intensity while I felt Hart lacked any such aura.

Agreed. Benoit was one of the best at selling a story in the ring. I cant put it any better than you have.

Brady, I can't accept that main eventing WrestleMania IX & X is more impressive than Main Eventing WrestleMania XX or XIV like Benoit and Edge did

In 1993 and 1994 the WWF was so devoid of star power it was unbelievable in 2004 & 2008 when Benoit and Edge main evented the star power was far greater so in my opinion that was easily every bit as impressive an achievment

If you where talking 87-92 then I'd be in full agreement with you, 93-95 though I just can't, those where transitional years

I would argue Gaffer that main eventing Wrestlemania is an easier task to accomplish now, since there are twice as many main event berths at Wrestlemania with the two titles. I do agree about your point that at Wm 9 and 10 when bret main evented that the roster wasn't as strong. However, he had to compete with Lex Luger who received one the biggest pushes ever and still didn't get over enough to take Bret's sport as the number one face at WM.

Animal, I know what you're saying but I consider the main event of WrestleMania the final match which is why I only listed one Edge WM instead of listing all the Mania's he had a title match in

theanimal316 wrote:I would argue Gaffer that main eventing Wrestlemania is an easier task to accomplish now, since there are twice as many main event berths at Wrestlemania with the two titles. I do agree about your point that at Wm 9 and 10 when bret main evented that the roster wasn't as strong. However, he had to compete with Lex Luger who received one the biggest pushes ever and still didn't get over enough to take Bret's sport as the number one face at WM.

While I didn't wan to get involved in an argument over storyline achivements, you could also argue that with 2 titles there is now only a 50:50 chane you will be in what is percived to be the more important match that closes the show (as Edge and Benoit were), where as with 1 world title it was almost a certanty

On a side note, i'm very susrprised no one has argued a case for Sting to be above Bret Hart. I thought Stinger might have been rated higher by some, given his technical prowess and huge charisma

Dr Gregory House MD wrote:

Brady12 wrote:Top 20 is a bit of a joke I don't think you could put a decent arguement together for 10 better guys than him

I would argue Brady that HBK, Angle, Savage, Austin, Eddy Guerrero, Flair, The Rock, HHH, Edge and Mick Foley were all better than him in all rounder terms, all of them were/are great wrestlers, perhaps not the smooth as silk technical brilliance of Hart but brilliant in there own way and in terms of mic skills all of them trounch Hart who as I said before I think is really poor, I found him very bland and never commanded attention prior to his heel turn, he was slightly better after the turn but it's been proved that the forgien heel gimmick is one of the easiest ways to build cheap heat and as I said before at it's core that was a forgien heel gimmick, after he came back in 2010 his mic work has been frankly unlistenable tbh, I found his return promo to Raw really uncomfertable to listen to and if I hadn't been so excited to see him come back I would honestly have turned off, his promos nowdays are also extremly formulaic and possibly exploitive, 'Owen (pop), Bulldog (pop)'.

Hart was undeniably a great wrestler but when you factor in his ability to talk he slides way down the list.

I think to call Hart's heel run simply a 'foreign heel gimmick' is a little short sighted. I believe the crux of it was the Hitman character asking the American fans to look at their values as to why they cheer their heroes. As if Hart was saying 'I haven't turned heel, you have.' For me, since the mind nineties WWE/F has moved away from good vs. evil to cool guy vs. nerd. Hart's mic work around this time wasn't simply the usual 'America and your decadent ways...blah blah blah' but a little more cerebral and for me held a microscope over the industry and it's direction. If you look at wrestling's obsession with worked shoots and self analysis since I'd say that shows Hart was ahead of his time.

I'd also argue that Bret Hart was very good on the mic, he wasn't captivating, I'd never claim that, but he was always clear, coherent and most importantly, always logical and in character. The Hitman character was for me always a spit and shine, hard-working badass. In his promo for SS97 he described himself as the antithesis to Shawn Michaels and represented the truckers and lumberjacks of this world. To that end, it'd make no sense for him to be flamboyant on the mic. However, he always sold the occasion, the opponent and the event. He never buried his opponents (again that would make no sense as everyone looked great when they wrestled him). Up until 97 I'd say he was solid on the mic and it never held him back and in 97 I'd say he absolutely shined on the mic.

I think in the era Hart wrestled in promos were a different animal to the modern age. In the days of kayfabe it was important to promote yourself without burying your opponent, only their character. I.e. Yokozuna lacked respect, Shawn Michaels was an egotist and not take easy pops at them (Yoko's not a real athlete, HBK's a habitual drug user). In current times it seems if a guy is 'over' with the crowd he's given carte blanche to bury his opponent. For example how is CM Punk calling Del Rio uninteresting and highlighting the audience's lack of empathy with his character promoting their match? I think people who critique Hart's mic work need to realise there's more than one way to skin a cat and coming out with witty barbs and slaying your opponent is not always what's best.

Now, of course I'm not claiming that Hart was as good as The Rock, Jericho or CM Punk on the mic. But to call him poor because he didn't adhere to this model is a little off for me.

House, just to be clear that wasn't all directed at you but I was commenting on your 'foreign heel' comment and then carried on

theanimal316 wrote:On a side note, i'm very susrprised no one has argued a case for Sting to be above Bret Hart. I thought Stinger might have been rated higher by some, given his technical prowess and huge charisma

Animal whilst I respect Sting for everything he has done I have just never liked him, he was great in the ring for WCW but terrible on the mic and in TNA he is much much better on the mic but his days of being great in ring are past him, he just was not the kind of guy that I could of gotten into and it is the same problem I mentioned with Bret earlier, unless a guy can grab my attention on the mic I just don't really "get" them.