Bret Hart’s blistering critique of Triple H is ironic considering Triple H is exactly the same as Hart: A B-plus wrestler.
By way of definition:
The IWC and so-called wrestling “journalists” far overrate most performers. In reality, Grade A wrestlers are few and far between. I define a Grade A wrestler as one who is superior in every way: Ring work, promos, look, persona, drawing power, track record, reliability, employability. There’s also an intangible feeling that accompanies, a larger-than-life vibe.
Using such criteria, the past 20 years have produced just four Grade A wrestlers: Steve Austin, Shawn Michaels, The Rock and Undertaker.
Everybody else, at best, is a B-plus wrestler. A B-plus wrestler is real good, almost great, but comes up short in some small way.
Circumstance dictates, too. It’s impossible to be a Grade A wrestler in Impact. Impact is the promotion that falls in the forest. That’s why Kurt Angle, despite an incredible performance level, can’t be Grade A.
C.M. Punk’s look is the chink is his armor. John Cena’s lack of love from certain male demographics does him in. Hart and Triple H fall short on intangibles: They’re just not quite there with the “big four.” Hart’s stint in WCW diminished him. Triple H hasn’t had enough memorable matches.
I’m a Bret Hart fan. But his posture as judge, jury and hangman when it comes to rating wrestlers (with him setting the bar) is more than just a bit precious. If the WWE steroid scandal hadn’t (quite literally) downsized the promotion, Bret would have spent his career as a tag-team specialist.
That said, Bret got his shot and succeeded. Well done. But to put Bret in a class with the aforementioned “big four” is inaccurate. To put him in a class with Grade A wrestlers from previous eras (like Ric Flair) is inaccurate.
Bret Hart is a B-plus wrestler. Just like Triple H. It’s not an insult.