Welcome to the second instalment of Mark vs Mark, a series of articles where I reassess my opinion of The Undertaker. If you haven’t read the previous article then I highly recommend starting here. If you have read that article, and you still think that reading this is a good idea, then let’s begin with the second part of this Undertaker reassessment project. This part looks at his matches against two of the WWF’s biggest stars of the 1990’s: Bret Hart & Stone Cold Steve Austin.

Match 3 – The Undertaker vs Bret Hart, One Night Only, 20^th September 1997, Birmingham, England

The WWF in 1997 was full of matches that were not meant to happen. Bret Hart vs Steve Austin at WrestleMania 13 was one example. Another example was this match, originally billed as being Bret Hart vs Steve Austin before Austin’s broken neck meant that alternatives were required.

What immediately struck me about this match was how much it felt like The Undertaker was plugged into a Bret Hart match. The extended period of leg work to set up the Sharpshooter was obvious, as was The Undertaker being less stoic and much more emotional. I’m not saying that The Undertaker was showing fear, but there was a sense of wanting to avoid pain and a mild sense of desperation at times. It was like being in Hart’s orbit instilled The Undertaker with an element of vulnerability. Hart’s grounded nature and submission focused offence required The Undertaker to feel more human, whereas Shawn Michaels’ performance at Bad Blood saw The Undertaker pushed in the opposite direction: Feeling more like an emotionless force which, from my perspective, gave the match less emotional resonance because I didn’t feel The Undertaker’s satisfaction when he gained some sense of vengeance.

The other way that this felt like a Bret Hart match was seeing The Undertaker perform moves like a crucifix pin. That felt very much like a choice that The Undertaker would not have made against anyone else. Choice is a key part of this series. With the evolution of The Undertaker character and the changing style of the WWFs in ring product, so many of these matches were the consequence of choices. Does Mark Calloway lean into stoicism, or focus on feeling more human? Does he wrestle as a dominant force, or does he show weakness? Does he adapt to the strengths and styles of his opponent? Like anything in life, wrestling is defined by choices.

The finish deserves a mention here. It was one of the better DQ losses that I have seen. The spot where Hart’s head is trapped between the ring ropes is one of those very Bret Hart choices: Something that feels a little like a throwback while being executed perfectly and feeling unique to a Bret Hart match. The Undertaker finally felt like he could get his frustrations out, which cost him the match. The decision to have The Undertaker immediately Chokeslam Mike Chioda & Gerald Brisco after the DQ loss was great as it moved the audiences focus, giving them something cool to help them forget their disappointment.

This match was the most consistent one that I have seen so far in this project. The action and quality were good throughout. The pace never felt plodding due to both Hart’s ability to engagingly work the leg and The Undertaker’s strong emotive leg selling when Hart was in control. In fact, aside from some incredibly loose pinfall covers and easing off on the leg selling in the finishing stretch, The Undertaker’s performance was great here. Hart was great as the aggressive wrestler pushing the boundaries of sportsmanship without feeling like a cartoonish villain. I prefer Hart when he is a heel or feels like he is driven by irritation or anger, and at this point of his career he is excellent at working in a way that lets people see what suits their opinion of Hart. This was a great match and a good example of The Undertaker being good at things that he did not do a lot. It also made me realise that this project might be less about how well The Undertaker does things, and more about what Mark Calloway chooses to do.

Match 4 – The Undertaker vs Steve Austin, SummerSlam 1998, 30^th August 1998, New York City, New York

It’s fitting that this list included a match at WWE’s most legendary regular venue, Madison Square Garden. A building that has hosted hundreds of wrestlers, including most of wrestling’s biggest stars. Jerry Lynn wrestled there.

This was definitely not a Jerry Lynn match. The crowd was incredibly hot for Steve Austin. As someone who first saw Austin wrestle after The Rock was established as a main eventer, I have found watching pre 2000’s Austin fascinating. In terms of style, The Rock felt like the better version of the protagonist to me in 2000: flashier, more athletic, with a more impressive physique and more moves. In this match, you could clearly feel the crowd connection with Austin. It was also clear how much more limited he was compared to WrestleMania 13, fifteen months earlier. Despite the clear physical limitations due to Austin’s broken neck, he had the crowd in the palm of his hand and made any deviations from his regular move set mean more because of when he did it. The crowd always bought into his comebacks and hope spots. He knew how to make everything count.

This was fascinating when watched back-to-back with the One Night Only match. The matches had the same throughline of The Undertaker’s leg getting worked over. The Undertaker’s Old School was countered in both matches. And yet, these matches could not feel any more different. The One Night Only match felt like pure Bret Hart, with the style and toolbox that you expect in a Bret Hart Match. This match felt more like an evolutionary step towards the WWF main event style that I first saw in 2000. The quality of the baseline action was less well executed and less engaging. For example, The Undertaker’s basic control segments felt uninspired at times. Instead, the match was about the big moments, like The Undertaker chokeslamming Austin into the ring or hitting an insane top rope leg drop onto Austin, who was on the commentary table. Who remembers weak looking stomps when that is burned into your brain?

This was an interesting Undertaker performance, and played into the feeling that he works to the level or style of his opponents. Austin’s fire and intensity carried the match when Austin was on top, while The Undertaker was pushed into performing bigger and more spectacular spots to make the match feel special. That was what he focused on, and while the execution of those big spots was not always crisp, they were what the match needed. It was also fascinating to see The Undertaker’s humility in defeat, showing him as a person with honour. This match was a little too slow and disjointed at times for my liking, but I can see why this match engaged the fans at the time. It was a good example of how The Undertaker was prepared to carry the weight of expectations while working around his opponents limitations.


Match 5 – First Blood match: The Undertaker vs Steve Austin, Fully Loaded 1999, 25^th July 1999, Buffalo, New York

The worst stipulation matches are the ones where wrestlers don’t work to the logic of the stipulation. The best are the ones that play into the stipulation to provide something different but just as engaging and exciting as a normal match. In terms of being a first blood match, this was impeccable. Everything was focused on either making your opponent bleed or trying not to bleed yourself. The tone was set by Austin, well known for being unafraid to throw punches while getting hit, having to cover up to avoid The Undertaker opening up a head wound. Throughout the match, both wrestlers kept checking to see if they were bleeding. They constantly looked to use metallic objects to bust open their opponent.

Like most Austin matches during his peak, this was a brawl. So much of the action took place outside of the ring that I think Austin got thrown over the guardrail more than he was whipped into the ropes. This match used elements from SummerSlam 1998, like Austin attacking Undertaker’s legs to overcome the size advantage, and the return of the drop toe hold. The moment where The Undertaker got trapped in the ropes felt like a call back to One Night Only. Unlike the SummerSlam 1998 match, there were no wild Undertaker highspots to pop the crowd. Instead, the crowd, who felt incredibly subdued for a lot of the match, came alive for the Austin vs McMahon storyline. They roared when The Undertaker was trapped in the ropes and vulnerable. Each of the run ins got a big reaction, even X-Pac running to Austin’s rescue. This felt like a match where storylines had gotten the WWF so much success that they needed to have those interweaving story elements in the match in order to deliver what the crowd wanted.

This was a match designed to make the crowd cheer. While they were quiet in the first half, there were so many spots to pop the crowd: big weapon spots, multiple stunners, run ins before AND after the match was over, and especially McMahon getting his comeuppance. That was a good way to book around a stipulation that removes the tension and drama that are a product of nearfalls. It also felt like pure Monday Night Wars booking, with the post-match being focused less on the crowd savouring victory and more on making you want to watch the next night’s episode of RAW.

To me, this was a brilliantly worked First Blood match that suffered due to the crowd not connecting for much of the first half. Maybe the match could have been a little tighter, or maybe spending the first 4 and a half minutes on the floor didn’t help. The second half of the match delivered exactly what this era of WWF needed to. In a match where the stipulation removes the value of nearfalls, the run ins were a perfect choice to generate excitement and tension instead. In terms of The Undertaker’s performance, I have never seen him this expressive this early in his WWF career. There was a scream of pain, constant smirks and sneers, a sense of anger. Although, this was more of a snarling villain than the honourable human that we saw glimpses of at SummerSlam 1998. Like Austin, he was logical in how he adapted to the stipulation (aside from not going for the kill with his chair shot) and some spots, like removing a turnbuckle pad while standing on Austin’s face were brilliant. This was a match that delivered what it promised and did it well. A great first blood match, but maybe it would have been better with a different stipulation.  


Watching The Undertaker against Hart and Austin let me see that The Undertaker is perfectly capable of adapting to both his opponent and the situation. When he needed to sell the leg, he was great. When he needed to show vulnerability or emotions, he could do that really well. When he had to perform big spots to hide his opponent’s limitations, he was confident and capable. The Last Blood match was probably the best worked Last Blood match that I have seen in terms of how they treated the stipulation. Each match showed me a different aspect of being a performer and showed me what The Undertaker could bring. While the matches won’t go on my mental list of favourite matches, they helped make me think differently about The Undertaker.