Talk:Grand Slam (professional wrestling)/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

2007

Commentary

Why is April 2006 listed as the day that the WWE Tag Titles were considered equal to World tag titles? Michael Cole had mentioned Kurt Angle as a grand slam champion at No Mercy 2002 when he first won the belts. Is it because saying things on commentary doesn't count such as JBL alling himself a Grand Slam champion but somehow doesn't count. What's the deal.--24.184.169.37 08:26, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

The deal is that WWE.com also called Kurt Angle a former grand slam champion when he quit WWE, that's the deal. Now sign in and get a user name, 24.184.169.37, and then we can discuss this properly. What's the deal with unsigned IP users? Darrenhusted 11:36, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

People are allowed to comment under their IP address if they choose to, they aren't forced to create an account. — Moe 02:48, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

First of all Darrenhusted don't get nasty theres no reason to. I have a right to ask the question as Moe politely pointed out. However, how does that ansewr my question. I was asking why people aren't pointing out the first time that WWE considered the Smackdown! tag belts a viable part of the grand slam. I've seen the match at No Mercy 2002 where Michael Cole states that Kurt would become a Grand Slam champ by winning the match, which he did. Michael Cole also reffered to Kurt as a Grand Slam Champ at Royal Rumble 03 during Kurt's unbelivable match with Benoit. The point I was bringing up was, why aren't statements made on commentary during a match count as a source?.--24.184.173.132 13:43, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Could you please provide a source as to when Michael Cole stated this. Although he may have said it and you may be correct, Wikipedia requires a reliable source to add information (and this has been a sensative issue for the past few months). Currently, the earlist information we have is the one already listed, but if you could provide an external link that dates back earlier to than the ones we have, we will consider it for making changes. Sometimes commentary isn't included because commentators have a habit of making mistakes refering to wrong title belts lineage, times of weeks events happened and other easy mistakes. Most commentary has to be accounted for as kayfabe, meaning 'not literaly' in professional wrestling terms. Besides for it to be on Wikipedia, you must follow guidelines and policies when making claims like these (see No original research, External links, Citing sources and Reliable sources. Commentary usually doesn't give us grounds to add this kind of material. Thanks! — Moe 18:12, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Here [1]. Michael Cole calls Kurt Angle a grand slam champ sometime during this match. It's Kurt Angle & Benoit vs. Edge & Mysterio at No Mercy 2002.--24.184.169.37 06:44, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

MySpace, unless it's the offical website of a person(s) is not considered reliable.

This video, or portion, is copyrighted. If you could provide a website, written in text, which is usually more of a permanent link than video, than that would be acceptable. — Moe 03:54, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

So the upshot "24.184.169.37" is you want to change a stated reliable source in a wikipedia articel to an unreliable source. For what reason? The article already establishes that the Smackdown tag team belts are part of the triple crown and the grand slam, what reason is there to introduce an unreliable source when we have a reliable one? Darrenhusted 11:18, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

If you look back through the past edits of this article, the source of calling Kurt Angle a Slam winner was actually WWE.com on their auction page.

Ohgltxg 08:33 20 February, 2007 (UTC)

JBL

JBL should be a Grand Slam Champion. Due Raw having The IC Championship and Tag Team Championships, Stephanie McMahon (when she was general manager) made the SmackDown Tag Team Championships (sorry cant remember if thier the WWE tag championships or World Tag Championships) she then also brought back the U.S. Title. Though the IC title is obviously more of an honour to hold the US title is Smackdowns second belt and so should be accepted that he is a Grand Slam champion (however if the brand extension gets taken away then he should not be.) Black6989 12:14, 18 February 2007 (UTC)Black6989

The whole point of the U.S. Title debate is that the U.S. Title is equal to the I-C Belt. By saying it's more of an honor to win the I-C Belt, you are defeating your own arguement.

And if the brand extension is taken away, then should Kurt Angle and Eddie Guerrero be stripped of their Slam, as they won the newer Tag Belts and not the originals?

Not the best arguement there. Ohgltxg 20:14 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Besides, again, as long as it's not included in the TC, it's can't be included in the Grand Slam. Anakinjmt 14:38, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

The US Title counts towards both the TC and the GS. TJ Spyke 04:44, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

The US title counts towards neither, hence the pages of discussion. Darrenhusted 12:16, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

OH. yeah i see your point. fair enough. but then does that mean that for someone today to become a grand slam champion they must win the ic, us respective world championship and tag team championship. Or can only people who held the european before it was disbanded be grand slam champions? Black6989 13:50, 2 March 2007 (UTC)Black6989

They must have won the European title in addition to the IC title, WWE/World Tag Team title, and WWE/World Heavyweight title. As of now, the US title and the ECW title do not count. Anakinjmt 14:31, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

To end this, yes the IC and US Titles are equal, but the WWE never “made it official”. Logically yes, officially no. We’re all SMARKS here. We know the deal.--Prince Patrick 15:02, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Team 3D - "Tag Team Grand Slam?"

According to commentary on TNA iMPACT!, Team 3D was revered to as having accomplished "the grand slam" of World Tag Team Championships. Can we make a brand new section to refer to them as "Grand Slam Tag Team Champions" or is this better left to their individual pages John cena123 01:49, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

A: I don't watch TNA, but to have won a "Grand Slam of Tag Teams", I assume this means they've won the NWA Tag Team Titles? B: I really don't think that's necessary. I've never heard of a Grand Slam Tag Team Champion or anything like that. Maybe if it happened more often. Besides, in theory, you will have had to won the ECW, WCW, WWE, World, and NWA Tag Team Championship, and there's virtually no one that's done that or really come close. Anakinjmt 12:53, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

That would be complete original research, as would mentioning L.O.D having won the "Triple Crown" of tag team championships by winning the AWA, NWA and WWF Tag championships. Cross-promotional championship wins are hard to claim as a "Triple Crown" or such because it all depends on the era and whose considered a major promotion. Bmg916^Speak_Sign 13:06, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Anak--3D won exactly the combo of titles you layed out to win a "TTGS" (8 ECW, 8 World, 1 each WWE, WCW, NWA)

Mike Tenay and Don West did use the term "Grand Slam Champion" about 746 times during Team 3D's match.

If you talk about active companies from the last 15 years, then yes 3D would have to be considered Slam winners.

You can differentiate between a mere WWE Slam and an overall Slam for all of wrestling.

Interesting little monkey wrench the crew at TNA threw in to the works, ain't it?

Ohgltxg 21:43 40 April, 2007 (UTC)

Try to include a TNA World Tag Team Championship reign as of this past summer, mate. Johnluisocasio (talk) 22:24, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

United States Championship: Second-tier, or Third-tier?

• Because the INTERCONTINENTAL CHAMPIONSHIP, defined being the title for both continents (north american and south american), and the UNITED STATES CHAMPIONSHIP means being the champion for even less then a whole continent, it should be considered a Third-tier belt.

• Now, if you consider the previous North-American Championship as a Second-tier belt, then there is no reason that the European and the United States not be considered Second-tier belts.

I don't know who you are, or who you are SHOUTING at. So let me put your mind at ease. First tier; WWE previously WWF and WWWF championship, World championship (the big gold belt), second tier IC belt, or US title (in WCW) or now on SD!. The TV title in WCW and Euro title are third tier belts, because they are winnable by all. Then there are the Women's and Cruiser belts which sit between second and third because they cannot be won by all. Then at the bottom are the Hardcore belts (in WCW and WWE). Tag belts sit below first but above second because they are winnable by all but you have to be a tag team to win them. Note the following, a non cruiser has won the CW belt, a man has won the women's title and the Tag titles have been defended by one person alone. Darrenhusted 18:44, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

• if what you say is true, why isn't the united states championship considered part of the grand slam? Lex94 7:29pm - April 8, 2007

Because WWE has never officially stated it is. On their websites in various bios of wrestlers, they've mentioned winning the WHC or the WWE Tag team titles and being Grand Slam champion. No such look with the US title. And, apparently, comments made by commentators doesn't count. BTW, what non-CW won the CW title? The only possible one I can think of is Matt Hardy, but he was billed as being 220, right at the weight cap. Anakinjmt 02:49, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Matt Hardy was who I was thinking of, of course they did the story of him losing the weight to get in to the division, but he's not really a cruiserweight like Rey or Chavo. Darrenhusted 11:21, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Chavo Classic was far from a crusierweight... Eastlygod 10:40, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

• Technically, Oklahoma was 260 lbs when he won the cruiserweight title Lex94 23:27, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

The US title isn't considered second tier, as winners of the US, first tier, and Tag Team championships haven't been declared a Triple Crown champion (officially). I would imagine it would be a third tier, but as stated above, that would mean winners of the US, IC, World/WWE, and Tag Team a Grand Slam champion. But I don't think that is true, all I know is that it isn't considered a second tier championship. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.144.177.39 (talk) 19:06, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

No, WWE stated that the Grand Slam was the triple crown plus the Euro title specifically, not just any third tier belt. And please sign your posts. (Sawyer 06:49, 1 December 2007 (UTC))

If I went and tried to contact the WWE to see what's what, would you all have a cup of tea? Lemon Demon (talk) 16:06, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

When JBL was U.S. Champion he claimed to be a Grand Slam Champion. Since his promos are written by WWE brass, would that not mean that the WWE is saying the US Championship is a replacement for the Intercontinental Title? 24.164.136.207 (talk) 14:56, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

No. Darrenhusted (talk) 15:22, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Edge

Is Edge not a grand slam champion, after winning the world heavyweight championship

Actually he is i think, but no spoilers in the article i guess! --82.83.155.78 15:05, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

• Edge needs a European Title to get the Slam.

And that title was discontinued 5 years ago, so unless he invents a time machine. And there is no spoiler here, he won the WWE title last year, if he was a Grand Slam Champion he would have been so after last year's NYR, not because of SD! this week. Darrenhusted 21:37, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Cruiserweight Championship

Should the Cruiserweight Championship be considered a 3rd tier? Lex94 03:17, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

No. It can't be won by every wrestler on the roster, like the Women's title, and given the current alignment of the belts (Raw has Women's, SD! has CW) they can be viewed as comparable much like the respective Tag titles and US/IC titles are. I don't even know why you would want to add the CW belt and bring in a mountain of debate to what is already a contentious article. Darrenhusted 23:02, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

The title unification

Becuase RVD def. Jeff to unify the IC and European Championships, which means only 1 title now represented both. That means, that everyone after RVD's reign who won the IC title, also won the European Championship. This means that Chris Benoit, Kane, Booker T, Randy Orton, Edge and Johnny Nitro are Grand Slam Champions. Lex94 05:11, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

No, it doesn't. Darrenhusted 11:46, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Why not? Read title unification. It clearly states it.

Discount Johnny Nitro.

No, that page does not make that argument. That is just OR. Darrenhusted 14:53, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

While title unifications such as the Hardcore into the IC and European into the IC have the IC title inheriting those titles' histories, the aforementioned titles are deactivated and cease to exist except within the dominant title's history. You're not winning those two old titles, you're winning a single title that has those old titles absorbed, it doesn't count. TonyFreakinAlmeida 00:36, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

• You are holding the 3 titles when you win an IC Championship (IC, Hardcore and EU), because the latter titles have been absorbed by the IC. So, everyone who has won an IC Championship after that unification clearly held the EU and IC in one single belt
• Plus, you can't just count the Grand Slam as impossible to achieve if you don't have a previous European Championship reign, because the European Championship wasn't retired, it was unified. Lex94 23:53, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

• From the WWE European Championship page:

...The WWE European Championship, as it was next known, was retired in a ladder match on July 22, 2002 when Rob Van Dam put his WWE Intercontinental Championship on the line, along with Jeff Hardy's European Championship. By winning that match, Rob Van Dam merged the two titles together, and continued to hold the Intercontinental Title...

There is your answer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.144.177.39 (talk) 19:12, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

European Championship

Shouldnt the wrestlers who have won the Intercontinental Championship since it was unified with the European Championship in 2002, have a European Championship reign. Because the European Championship wasnt abandond it was unified, isnt that like holding both championships. Now I know you can argue the fact of other unified championships but I am just stating this because for those who havent ever had the oppertunity to wrestle for the European Championship should still be able to complete the Grand Slam. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.90.56.236 (talk) 03:32, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Dude, I made that argument down there at Talk:Grand Slam Championship#the title unification. I find that it should qualify, but they seem to disagree. Lex94 03:43, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

King Of The Ring

Should the King of the Ring be added here? For a number of years it was the 4th title in the WWF. Even continuing when the women's title went dormant. If so, then Bret the Hit Man Hart should be the 1st grand slam winner. And Savage a triple crown winner —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.87.40.172 (talk • contribs)

The King of the Ring isn't a championship. It's an event you win just like the Royal Rumble. It worked just like the Rumble in the fact that just about every winner of the King of the Ring would get a huge push and eventually win the WWE Championship. So, in other words, it's not a championship and isn't even considered with being a Grand Slam champion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.144.177.39 (talk) 19:20, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

WCW Grand Slam?

Shouldn't there be info on WCW Grand Slam champions since WCW also had a third tier title (The WCW TV title) —Preceding unsigned comment added by SlamingGamer (talk • contribs) 02:06, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you with that. Examples are like Booker T and Scott Steiner. Possible ones were Dustin Rhodes, Rick Steiner, "Stone Cold" Steve Austin, Scott Hall, etc. Johnluisocasio (talk) 22:17, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

That is all OR as WCW never acknowledged the achievement. Darrenhusted (talk) 11:58, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Also, as far as I know, WCW never acknowledged that the TV Title was a third tier title, as the WWE clearly did with the European Title. In kayfabe, it may have been considered on the same level as the US Title. (Sawyer 06:45, 1 December 2007 (UTC))

Christian Cage

If Christian Cage would return to the WWE, he might have a chance to be a Grand Slam Champion and to be the first one to achieve so while also winning a WWE Hardcore title and a WWE Light-Heavyweight title. Johnluisocasio (talk) 22:24, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

....And? No offense, but that's not relevant. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 04:16, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

What do you mean? And if could be said for Jeff Hardy, who's active and needs either the WWE Championship or WWE's World Heavyweight Championship. Johnluisocasio 13:42, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Christian needs to be listed under potential champions, because he meets all the requirements save the World/WWE title. THe same is true for Test, who just needs a heavyweight reign andpepsisucks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.184.213.227 (talk) 23:42, 6 May 2008 (UTC)