Reviews later.  For now… let’s preview tonight’s WWE show.  TLC (Tables Ladders & Chairs) is a hangover from the period when the company was experimenting with gimmicks for every show, and also from the days when they were a lot more cavalier about the injury risks in matches.  TLC matches started as amped-up versions of the ladder match, with added weaponry and more convoluted stunts, some of which were genuinely unwise.  Today’s product is a lot more restrained than that, and the random shoehorning of TLC matches into storylines that don’t call for them hasn’t helped either.  The upshot is that the TLC show now sits at the tail end of the pay per view calendar in a rather toned down form.

The established set-up is to have one TLC match coupled with one ladder match (winner is the first person to climb the ladder and the retrieve the whatever), one tables match (winner is the first person to throw their opponent through a cheap plywood table – it made more sense when ECW originated the idea, since they actually used those tables for their timekeepers), and one chairs match (in which, uh, chairs are legal as weapons – nobody had ever heard of such a pointless gimmick until the WWE had to invent it for the purpose of this show).

Two other things worth noting before we get to the matches.

First, John Cena is not booked on the show.  That doesn’t mean he won’t be on it.  But he’s not advertised to wrestle, and he says he won’t be there.  Cena almost never misses a show except due to genuine injury, but there’s no obvious place for him on the card here, and perhaps they just don’t want to risk him in an unnecessary gimmick match.

Second, since I last wrote one of these, the company has announced its intention to launch something called the WWE Network to coincide with Wrestlemania 2012 (i.e., in the spring).  There is talk that the minor PPVs, like this show, will be shunted over to that station, to air as specials.  This might not be such a bad idea, since it’s not like they’re doing great business on PPV.  Presumably it won’t make any difference to international showings.

The WWE Network idea has been floating around for a while.  The basic idea makes a degree of sense.  The company realises that without television, it has nothing – which means that it’s very vulnerable when its timeslots come up for renewal.  So to hedge against that risk, they want to set up their own network.  The problem is what you put on that network in the meantime that might attract people to watch it – the Internet shows NXT and Superstars will presumably be aired, but they’re hardly a draw.  There’s only a limited audience for archive wrestling.  The company’s occasional forays beyond the world of wrestling have been uniformly disastrous.  And by all accounts the company is woefully underprepared for the launch of this network, which can only fuel speculation that another XFL-style fiasco might be in the offing.

1.  WWE Title, TLC match: CM Punk v. Alberto Del Rio v. The Miz.  Raw’s title match seems like filler.  Punk is the defending champion (and, in Cena’s absence, the top babyface on the show).  Del Rio was the previous champion, but Punk’s already beaten him decisively in a rematch, so it doesn’t seem likely that he’s going to get the title back.  Miz held the title earlier in the year, but seems to have been downgraded to the midcard.  They might be trying to move him back up to the main event, though they still haven’t quite hit on the right formula for him; the current approach is to present him as a killer, but he’s just not that sort of heel.

This doesn’t seem like a sensible place to change the title (not that that necessarily stops them), and I rather suspect that this is just a case of throwing some challengers at Punk to tide him over for a month.  All of three of these guys have been in major ladder matches before, so in theory they ought to be able to have a decent match together.

2.  World Heavyweight Title… (ahem) Chairs match: Mark Henry v Big Show.  Yes, the dreaded chairs match, in which two wrestlers have to work portable furniture into their match, in order to comply with the overall gimmick of the show.

This is the Smackdown title match, and Henry is still the defending champion.  He’s been very effective in the monster heel role, and ratings have actually been okay under his reign, something that most people wouldn’t have predicted given how long he’s been floating around the roster as a midcard act.  That being said, his feud with the Big Show has now been protracted beyond all logic.  Their match on the previous show was not well received, and it seems unlikely to be improved by any muted chair shots.  Presumably this is just another piece of filler so that Henry can start a more interesting feud in time for January’s Royal Rumble, a more important show.   At any rate, let’s hope that Henry finally wins the feud and we get to move on.

The fact that both title matches feel like an exercise in marking time is not a good sign.

3.  Ladder match: Triple H v Kevin Nash.  This has got people intrigued, but for all the wrong reasons.  Audiences are used to ladder matches being displays of athletic spectacle.  Well, they won’t be getting that from these two.

Kevin Nash was WWE champion back in the 90s, when the company was going through a rough patch.  He’s better remembered for his run in WCW later that decade.  Either way, he’s over a decade past his prime, and he wasn’t what you’d call a high flyer even then.  Frankly, it’s hard to avoid the suspicion that when Kevin Nash climbs a ladder for any reason at all – say, to retrieve a suitcase from the attic – it’s an enterprise fraught with jeopardy.

Theoretically, he and Triple H are having a “friends who fell out” grudge feud, but it hasn’t really been connecting with the audience, most of whom are either too young to remember Nash, or old enough to know why they don’t want to see him wrestle.  Triple H, though semi-retired, is still capable of having perfectly good matches – but in a ladder match against Kevin Nash?  It’s almost unimaginable that this could be anything other than diabolical.  It should be fascinating.

Not to watch.  It’ll be unutterably boring to watch.  But it’ll be fascinating to read about later.

This is a slightly unusual ladder match (and hey, there might be a reason for that): suspended over the ring is Triple H’s sledgehammer, and whoever retrieves it gets to use it.  Triple H’s sledgehammer has always strained even the suspension of disbelief available to professional wrestling, but let’s leave that aside.  Two other points occur.  First, since retrieving the sledgehammer apparently does not end the match, presumably victory is by pinfall or submission – but if you can put your opponent down for long enough to climb the ladder, why not just pin them and be done with it?  (Okay, yes, granted, the theory is that they want to use the sledgehammer… but seriously now.)  And second, since ladder matches are no-DQ anyway, what’s to stop the other person from using the sledgehammer once their opponent has kindly retrieved it for them?

This has all the hallmarks of something that seemed a moderately good idea on paper, but doesn’t lend itself to a sensible match, and certainly doesn’t lend itself to the wrestlers who are being used.  I expect a train wreck, and not in a good way.  Triple H should presumably win, unless the company is somehow still convinced that there’s value in Nash.

4.  Tables match: Randy Orton v Wade Barrett.  Since Mark Henry is currently the Smackdown champion, and Orton can’t lose to him every month, Smackdown’s top babyface is occupying his time elsewhere.  Currently, he’s feuding with Wade Barrett, who used to have a main event role as leader of the Nexus, but was long since relegated back to the midcard.  Having belatedly realised that they’re running short of main eventers, the company seems now to be trying to build Barrett up again – either that, or they’ve been trying to get him into a position where they can feed him to Orton for a couple of months.  Personally, I’d say Barrett needs this win a lot more than Orton does, and even if Orton’s bound to ultimately win the feud, Barrett ought to get a couple of wins along the way.  He may not be the greatest wrestler ever, but they simply have to position some more characters as potential title challengers, and Barrett’s a viable candidate for that role.

Of course, just because Barrett should win, it doesn’t mean he will.  Still, this should be decent enough, as an upper midcard match.

5.  Intercontinental Title: Cody Rhodes v Booker T.  In recognition of the fact that they desperately need to make him a credible main evener down the line, Cody Rhodes has been liberated from his protective-mask gimmick and turned back into a straight wrestler.  Now, he’s going to defend his IC title (the secondary belt on Smackdown) against commentator Booker T.  Not quite sure that’s how I’d have tried to build Rhodes up.

That said, while Booker is retired, he’s not that long retired, and he still makes for a reasonably credible opponent.  Quite what happens if he actually wins is anybody’s guess, but something tells me that’s not going to be happening.  The whole point of bringing guys out of retirement is to put over the newer stars, and I assume that’s what Booker’s going to be doing.  Rhodes is good (though he’s yet to really come across as a credible main event star), and Booker was always fine when he was motivated, so I expect this to be solid.

6.  United States Title: Dolph Ziggler v. Zack Ryder.  Zack Ryder finally gets the title shot he’s been lobbying for for months.  Not that the writers have done him any favours here.  Ryder is supposed to be a beloved underdog babyface with a cult fan base – which he is, but entirely through his own efforts to publicise himself on YouTube.  The current writing team don’t seem to have a clue how to write this sort of character; the result is a weird stop-start push where he gets TV time but also gets regularly and cleanly beaten.  It would be one thing if he was constantly getting screwed over, but the reality is that the character just loses a lot, which begs the question of why we’re supposed to think that he deserves a shot at the US title.

That being said, he has at least been allowed to pin the heel champion on several occasions, which gives him some legitimate claim to a title match.  Given the build-up, this storyline really has to end with Ryder winning and becoming underdog champion (and boy, if you thought the WWE had a bad track record for writing underdog challengers, wait till you see what they do with underdog champions).  Since the WWE remains inexplicably averse to having its secondary champions compete for the world titles, losing the belt would also free Ziggler up for the main event stories that he really ought to be in – he’s long overdue for promotion to the top ranks.

That said, this is their first title match, and I think there’s some mileage in having the heels cheat to retain, so that Ryder gets his big win on the Royal Rumble in January instead.  Either is fine.  What definitely doesn’t work is a clean win for Ziggler, which just puts everyone back where they started; or a fluke win for Ryder, which just damages the title.  Sadly, it’s difficult to have confidence that the writing crew will avoid these obvious blunders.  Still, the actual match should be good.

Worth getting?  Well, both main events are filler, the Smackdown main event isn’t promising, and the ladder match looks disastrous.  On the other hand, the Raw main event could at least be a good match, and the undercard is fairly promising.  It still looks like one to skip, if you ask me.