It's not a slur on the current crop of wrestlers but in reality there's not that many quality training schools or trainers out there.

Whilst this may (or may not, I don't know, at least not from experience) be true, but the bigger problem is that wrestlers aren't really encouraged to deliver well-thought out, logical, good wrestling matches. Instead, to "entertain" the fans in the simplest way(s) possible, or to put it a different way, in the overly-obvious panto/spotFU ways.

I don't buy that a logically built, deep, smart wrestling match "wouldn't entertain" the crowd (Austin was the biggest star of "the modern era" this side of the world and would work deeper, smarter wrestling matches than anyone before him in the WWF). Of course there's no real evidence in this country (we do have a much younger audience than America on average I'm certain; how many young children do you see at an American show compared to, percentage-wise, a British show) and it was the character of "Stone Cold" that got Austin over, obviously. Even if you look at older British Wrestling, it was _base_d around exhibitions of technique rather than coherent stories, build and depth in/between matches. From the way David explained it in a previous thread, it may have indeed been *looked down upon* because "Oh, that's so the Americans can cover up their legitimate shooting ability" (which is a ridiculous way to look at it, of course, and probably not true...).

As an example... Recently was the first time in almost two years of asking trainees where I found an example of a trainer (Majik) giving a trainee (Jetta) a tape featuring lots of high-end matches to learn from (or even just encouraging them to get tapes of people/matches). That, sadly, says it all...