View RSS Feed


undertaker vs. hhh

Rate this Entry
has anyone else noticed that wwe has not brought up the fact that triple h has lost to taker before at wrestlemania 17? i'm curious to hear from anyone as to why this may be as i have not a clue. i think it could have been used as a good part of mind games on takers part against triple h. also triple h is the 3rd person taker has faced for a second time at 'mania. why do they have him face people he has beaten before, any ideas anyone?

Submit "undertaker vs. hhh" to Digg Submit "undertaker vs. hhh" to Submit "undertaker vs. hhh" to StumbleUpon Submit "undertaker vs. hhh" to Google



  1. tad locust's Avatar
    I dont know why they wouldnt wanna mention it, that was one of takers best WM matches. Also the fact that it was the tenth anniversery of it would put much needed intrest in this match. Sadly, in the PG era these dumbass kids arent even aware they wrestled already.
  2. Deano x's Avatar
    VKM declared that the match not be spoken of. The reminder that it has already happened would diminish the importance of it supposedly. For currently storyline purposes, the match never happened.
  3. maar13's Avatar
    They are not mentioning it because it can play a counter productive scenario. While it could be used for mind games, Wehn you over expose someone's victory over another individual you are pretty much declaring the man who has been defeated will emerge victorious: Example, John Cena VS Batista. Not just the Wrestlemania Scenario, Cena had never really beated Batista in a big situation: Royal Rumble 2005, Summerslam 2008, EC 2010. They palyed until tiresome and the big pay ouy was Batista tapping out to Cena last year. Same happened with Taker VS HBK at WM 25, In the past Taker although undefeated at Mania, Never defeated Michaels before that night and Michaels played that a lot into the feud.

    Also like Deano said, it would diminish the importance of it by the simple fact that HHH as The One, had failed in the past, besides, they were really two different people back then and the Streak was not even acknowleged as such.

    Also, Taker and HHH faced a couple of times between 2008 and 2009, as the mather of fact, Taker was the last man HHH pinned to become Champion at the Elimination Chamber of 2009, they could also brough that up to back up HHH case but decided not to.

    Also, this case is because they are going for some one at Taker's current level since they saw there was not a real big match for the event and while Barret VS Taker or Sheamus VS Taker sounds attractive, HHH VS Taker sounds more like a legends match.

    I thing they got scared that they have so many new guys at the top that it would not fit well with out a big, big match like that.
    Updated 03-31-2011 at 03:57 PM by maar13
  4. steveorton's Avatar
    This is not a blog it is a post, just a thought post it under new threads and more persons will respond, trust me, I'm jus sayin...

© 2011 eWrestlingNews, All Rights Reserved.