At first glance, the First Blood match is a winner: red means green, after all, and if the objective of the match is to make your opponent bleed, then youve effectively told your audience to look out for the first sign of blood. Thats money right? Now, stick with me here... but good god, no it's not. Blood is supposed to help sell the drama of a match, not the finish. Its supposed to up the ante, to get the crowd even more invested in whats going on. The correct place to blade in a match will be at a specific point in the narrative, depending on how long youve been allocated for the bout and the spots thatll bring it home. That place is not the end of the match and in a First Blood match, itll automatically be the end of the match. Even if theres a protracted beatdown segment planned for the post-match angle, the match is still over and so is the reason that the crowd came to see it. So it makes no creative sense and its also a bugger to plan for. You cant guarantee that hardway will come off properly ask Mick Foley how annoying it is to have someone legitimately pounding upon your eyebrow area and failing to bust you open and theres no guarantee that the bleeder will know how to blade. And what if the whole match is plotted out and both men are experienced juicers but one gets opened up hardway by accident in the first five minutes? The second the referee sees red, the match is supposed to be over, and theres no way of fudging a referee decision when the crowd at home and in person can see blood on the canvas. Whichever way you look at it, the idea of a First Blood match is pointless.
Professional writer, punk werewolf and nesting place for starfish. Obsessed with squid, spirals and story. I publish short weird fiction online at desincarne.com, and tweet nonsense under the name Jack The Bodiless. You can follow me all you like, just don't touch my stuff.
