AEW reveals 'Broken Rules' for Hardy-Guevara at All Out

[Big Red Machine]

https://www.f4wonline.com/wwe-news/aew- ... out-319021

By Bryan Rose | @br26 | Aug 31, 2020 8:40 pm

A new match has been added to AEW All Out.

During the Road to All Out video that premiered tonight, Sammy Guevara challenged Matt Hardy to a match, allowing him to pick the stipulations. Hardy agreed to the match, and made the stipulation that if he were to lose, he would leave.

The match graphic later read that the match will be under ‘Broken Rules’. AEW's social media later announced what those rules are:

The winner will the person who is the Last Man Standing.
The finish can take place anywhere.
There must be a winner.
If Matt Hardy loses, he must leave AEW forever.

Hardy and Guevarra have been feuding over the last several weeks. Hardy was busted open after being hit by a chair several weeks ago that required stitches. During last week’s edition of Dynamite, Guevara and Hardy wrestled in a table match. Although Hardy was able to return the favor and by busting Guevara open, Guevara won the match.

Matches already announced for All Out include Jon Moxley defending the AEW World title against MJF, Chris Jericho vs. Orange Cassidy in a Mimosa Mayhem match, Kenny Omega & Adam Page vs. FTR for the AEW World Tag Team titles, Hikaru Shida vs. Thunder Rosa for the AEW Women’s title, a 21-man Casino battle royale, and The Dark Order vs. Matt Cardona, Scorpio Sky, and The Natural Nightmares.

[Big Red Machine]

So it's just Last Man Standing, but also Matt's career is on the line? That last part is kind of random and out of nowhere.


Also, this is the sort of thing that just baffles me about AEW. They'll assume that people know what they mean when they say the winner is the "Last Man Standing," but also feel the need to tell us that the finish can take place anywhere. In the same statement they will say one thing that assumes prior knowledge and yet also include something else which assumes no prior knowledge.

[NWK2000]

So it's just Last Man Standing, but also Matt's career is on the line? That last part is kind of random and out of nowhere.


Also, this is the sort of thing that just baffles me about AEW. They'll assume that people know what they mean when they say the winner is the "Last Man Standing," but also feel the need to tell us that the finish can take place anywhere. In the same statement they will say one thing that assumes prior knowledge and yet also include something else which assumes no prior knowledge.

I mean, maybe they don't know the specific wrestling context, but I think Last Man Standing very clearly implies that you have to beat someone up until they can't stand up under their own power. That's easily understood, and very serious sounding

Also semi off-topic, but BRING BACK TEXAS DEATH MATCHES

[Big Red Machine]

Also semi off-topic, but BRING BACK TEXAS DEATH MATCHES

Or don't. Just use Last Man Standing, which achieves the same goal but without cheapening pinfalls.

[cero2k]

Last man standing matches suck. They should get cancelled all together

[NWK2000]

Also semi off-topic, but BRING BACK TEXAS DEATH MATCHES

Or don't. Just use Last Man Standing, which achieves the same goal but without cheapening pinfalls.

Idk. Always thought having to pin someone leads to a more a more definitive beginning, middle, and end structure to a match, as opposed to "Wrestler gets knocked down but gets up relatively quickly because we're early into an LMS match. Pinfalls are cheapened, surely, but more cheapened is a wrestling move that ends with the opponent knocked down for as long as the referee deems necessary to start counting.

[Big Red Machine]

Last man standing matches suck. They should get cancelled all together

I'd mostly be fine with this. They just aren't able to have the drama that other matches can because the difference between victory and defeat isn't a split second.

[Big Red Machine]

Also semi off-topic, but BRING BACK TEXAS DEATH MATCHES

Or don't. Just use Last Man Standing, which achieves the same goal but without cheapening pinfalls.

Idk. Always thought having to pin someone leads to a more a more definitive beginning, middle, and end structure to a match, as opposed to "Wrestler gets knocked down but gets up relatively quickly because we're early into an LMS match. Pinfalls are cheapened, surely, but more cheapened is a wrestling move that ends with the opponent knocked down for as long as the referee deems necessary to start counting.

1. Sometimes the wrestler takes their time to get up so they can recover
2. That's why you have to work it more carefully. You either start really small and gradually increase the counts, or you do very few counts but they're all after big moves and all at least go to five.

[cero2k]

I'd mostly be fine with this. They just aren't able to have the drama that other matches can because the difference between victory and defeat isn't a split second.

it's a match designed to kill the momentum in order to get the decision, and it happens over and over and over again.

[NWK2000]

I'd mostly be fine with this. They just aren't able to have the drama that other matches can because the difference between victory and defeat isn't a split second.

it's a match designed to kill the momentum in order to get the decision, and it happens over and over and over again.

That's kind of why I prefer Texas Deathmatches. Kicking out of a pin before the 10 count means there's less momentum killing.

[cero2k]

That's kind of why I prefer Texas Deathmatches. Kicking out of a pin before the 10 count means there's less momentum killing.

yeap, if anything, it takes longer to get to the 'counting' part of the match. Normal LMS matches, you start ten counts like 5 minutes in

[Big Red Machine]

I'd mostly be fine with this. They just aren't able to have the drama that other matches can because the difference between victory and defeat isn't a split second.

it's a match designed to kill the momentum in order to get the decision, and it happens over and over and over again.

That's kind of why I prefer Texas Deathmatches. Kicking out of a pin before the 10 count means there's less momentum killing.

But why would you ever kick out of a pin? The other guy can't touch you during the count, so it's just extra time to recover.

[Serujuunin]

I feel like I Quit matches serve this purpose well too. IMO it’s less predictable than LMS, and still has this feeling that it can end whenever, especially because they usually keep building up to bigger and bigger spots, it’s harder to predict when it’ll end, and it’s pretty definitive, with less risk of shenanigans.

[NWK2000]

it's a match designed to kill the momentum in order to get the decision, and it happens over and over and over again.

That's kind of why I prefer Texas Deathmatches. Kicking out of a pin before the 10 count means there's less momentum killing.

But why would you ever kick out of a pin? The other guy can't touch you during the count, so it's just extra time to recover.

I've always thought that commentary should really sell that, during wrestling school, wrestlers train to do "kick out at 2 1/2 drills," sometimes at the end of a multiple hour workout session, so wrestlers kick out of things on instinct regardless of how beaten down they are. The amount of which they're able to kick out is equal parts how effective their opponent's offense is and their physical endurance. A side effect is also if someone's on top of you you try and kick out.

[Big Red Machine]

I feel like I Quit matches serve this purpose well too. IMO it’s less predictable than LMS, and still has this feeling that it can end whenever, especially because they usually keep building up to bigger and bigger spots, it’s harder to predict when it’ll end, and it’s pretty definitive, with less risk of shenanigans.

This, too.

And the way you build them up is pretty much the same (it's just a difference between physical ability in one and mental will in the other)