In the pre-scripted world of professional wrestling, does it really matter who wins and who loses? Many in the WWE would argue that a victory is less meaningful now than it used to be while many fans feel a superstar's ability to win greatly influences their perception of his place in the company.
Thanks to the latest effort by PWStream, we can compare and contrast some of WWE's greatest stars and make the final decision for ourselves. On their twitter account, PWStream has begun to release career stats for some of WWE's greatest stars. When you look closely at these stats, ask yourself if a star losing more than they have won has changed how you view their character.
In an August interview with ESPN, Triple H admitted that he doesn't keep track of the win/loss column.
"Do I keep track of the exact wins and losses of talent? No. To me, all of this stuff is a feel. All of it is a feel. Sometimes you're beating a talent because you want to beat them and that's the sympathetic reaction you're trying to elicit. There are some talents that, when you beat them, they get more popular, but as soon as they start on a winning path, their popularity begins to wane. ... People want that underdog to strive to succeed and then get a little bit of success and then get knocked back off that perch and be the underdog again."
"People don't understand it when Vince [McMahon] will say it's not about wins and losses or those things. Do they matter? Sure. Are they the be all, end all? Absolutely not. I suppose there's a stone somewhere that it's written on that says, 'Thou shalt not book 50/50 because it won't lead to success for your promotion.' We'll stand on that stone while we're selling out Brooklyn three days in a row."
Note that these numbers are skewed by house show matches. WWE is more than willing to let a heel lose a match far removed from the WWE television cameras so that they can send the paid audience home happy.
Still, the question remains: does watching a superstar win or lose time and time again effect how the WWE Universe views them?
Scroll down to see these surprising win loss records and decide for yourself.
The biggest knock on Bray Wyatt has been that WWE continues to give him the same storyline with every top babyface. A lot of mind games with very few victories. WWE likes to say wins and losses don't matter in the New Era, but there's only so many times fans can buy into Wyatt being a threat when he can't back up his voodoo magic with actual victories. If his recent feud with Seth Rollins is any indication, WWE clearly knew it was time to give the Wyatt fam patriarch something in the W column.prevnext
This one is surprising. Considering Rollins was a Mr. Money In The Bank winner and a US and WWE Champion, it feels like Seth would be on the 63% winning side at the least. However, if you think back to his actual WWE Championship run, it felt like the Architecht was losing every single non-title match WWE put him in.
Also, when you think back to his time as a heel, he was probably losing a boat load of house shows to Roman Reigns.prevnext
Ouch. The current WWE Champion has only won 18% of his matches. Jinder's staggering loss total is hardly surprising, considering he was, at best, a mid-card jobber until getting shipped to SmackDown in the Superstar Shake-Up.
Jinder's pathetic win loss record is either an example of how losing can make it hard for the WWE Universe to accept a former jobber getting pushed to the top or how quickly a few key wins can change everyone's mind. Winning is actually WWE's greatest currency and easiest way to tell the audience that a superstar is a big deal. The Maharaja's road to the top was such a jolting u-turn that it definitely put the significance of a losing record into greater focus.prevnext
Bow down to the King of the Cruiserweights. The Man That Gravity Forgot would likely have somewhere around a 50% win record. Thankfully for Neville, WWE found the perfect role for him as the Game of Thrones-esque ruler of 205 Live. Neville is one of the greatest in-ring performers in the WWE and it's nice to see that his win/loss record reflects that. Until 205 Live can find another performer with the star power to rival The King, look for the W's to keep mounting.prevnext
John Cena has been the most dominant superstar of the past 15 years and perhaps the most dominant in WWE history. It would be surprising to see him not have such an enormous winning percentage. Still, to see the 232 losses just goes to show how the knock against him refusing to "put people over" is just ridiculous. Cena wins because it's best for business. If he loses, it's to turn someone else into a mega star. What they do after they're done being a part of his storyline is, well, another story entirely.prevnext
The yard may belong to him, but The Big Dog has taken plenty of losses in his WWE career. It may feel like he's booked as an invincible superman, but Roman Reigns is often on the wrong side of a three count. With the former WWE Champion coming off retiring The Undertaker (or so we think) look for the wins to keep on coming this year. Unless Braun Strowman decides he's still not finished with him, of course.prevnext
Listen here Mean Gene, the Hulkster didn't want to lay down for just anybody, brothers! The 141-30-6 record does not take his WCW record into consideration. From 1985-90, Hulk Hogan had a vice grip on the WWE Championship. Most of Hogan's 30 losses were by nefarious means such as a DQ or a countout. Hogan only lost cleanly 5 times in his WWE career with 4 of those losses coming during his final 2002 run with the company.
Was Hulk Hogan viewed as a big deal because he won all the time? You're damn right he was. Would fans embrace another run like that in the modern WWE? Hell no. If you think Roman Reigns gets booed for "being shoved down our throats", imagine what they would do to the Hulkster.0comments
We modern wrestling fans are a finicky bunch. We want wins and losses to matter, but we don't want anyone to lose or win too many times. Or at the wrong time.
I don't envy the WWE's job of trying to appease us.prev