Recommended Posts

Absolutely creasing at the fat angry CM Punk fan - Genius!!

I've just spotted an even more ridiculous one... http://www.manolith.com/2013/01/30/man-shot-in-the-eye-says-the-worst-part-of-his-week-was-wwe-royal-rumble-outcome-video/

To sum it up: a 77 year old liquor store said Rock beating Punk was "the worst thing that has happened to me all week", in the same week that he also got shot in the eye during a robbery, and fell in critical condition. :blink:

Earlier today a story came out about The Undertaker being undecided at this moment about working WrestleMania this year. Several people close to The Undertaker have said that they have been given a different version of that story. It's being said that the hold up here is the result of the match. When Taker said he wanted to work with Punk at WM he told WWE officials he wants The Streak to end and to retire, and Punk is his personal choice to pull it off. Higher up officials in WWE have been trying to convince Taker to pull back on that, as they are against the idea of Punk ending it. As of now the two sides have yet to reach an agreement, and both seem to remain very stern in their views.

if Taker wants to retire, then for love of god let him choose how he wants to go out. If he wants the streak to be broken by Punk, then so be it. Taker has been around way to long to have people dictate to him how his match is going to go.

  • Like 1

if Taker wants to retire, then for love of god let him choose how he wants to go out. If he wants the streak to be broken by Punk, then so be it. Taker has been around way to long to have people dictate to him how his match is going to go.

AMEN!

if Taker wants to retire, then for love of god let him choose how he wants to go out. If he wants the streak to be broken by Punk, then so be it. Taker has been around way to long to have people dictate to him how his match is going to go.

Agree 110%. The perfect version would have been if Punk went into that match as the champion: "Respect (and Title) vs. Streak". It would be the ultimate seal of approval for CM Punk.

if Taker wants to retire, then for love of god let him choose how he wants to go out. If he wants the streak to be broken by Punk, then so be it. Taker has been around way to long to have people dictate to him how his match is going to go.

If taker wanted punk to take away the streak so he can retire it would have been so much better to have a belt vs streak match. No interference from anyone just a 1 on 1.

If taker wanted punk to take away the streak so he can retire it would have been so much better to have a belt vs streak match. No interference from anyone just a 1 on 1.

Maybe he's getting it back at EC so he could challenge taker, or taker challenge him

Maybe he's getting it back at EC so he could challenge taker, or taker challenge him

That would be an interesting twist, but I can't see them doing that. They've been going down the predictable route for a while now; it just became most obvious at the Royal Rumble.

That would be interesting twist, but I can't see them doing that. They've been going down the predictable route for a while now; it just became most obvious at the Royal Rumble.

true but how long is the rock staying? and i don't mean via satteliet ;)

  • Like 1

I can kind of see where the WWE are coming at with this. Ending the streak would be a huge deal and give that wrestler a massive push. Someone like Punk is already an established main eventer, he doesn't really need it.

That said, Taker is the one person who should be able to decide how he gets booked and they should do whatever he wants.

I can kind of see where the WWE are coming at with this. Ending the streak would be a huge deal and give that wrestler a massive push. Someone like Punk is already an established main eventer, he doesn't really need it.

But then you'd cause a lot more outrage if you gave the honour of ending the streak to a midcarder. It's best if it's ended by an established main eventer, as it propels them into immortality. And CM Punk definitely is a worthy candidate; he's worked his arse off to get where he is now, and after having to give up the title to a part-timer with some movies to plug, the least he deserves is just facing The Undertaker at WrestleMania.

Maybe they're upset that Taker wants to lose to Punk and not their golden boy... :shifty:

If that's the case, then that's their punishment for taking "Once in a Lifetime" and making it "Twice in a Lifetime". ;)

Punk has the potential to be a wunderkind for WWE. Shifting merch, getting outlets talking that tend to write off WWE. He could be their saving grace when it comes to bringing any sort of legitimacy to the WWE.

But he's not a VKM "product". Vince needs to see beyond his own ass and let taker do what he wants. If he wants Punk to end the streak, then nobody has the right to argue with that. Vince will argue that the streak is just a product that he created. BS - I understand what's real and not, but Taker is the reason for the streak, the guy gave WWE everything!

Heck, it writes itself. Lesnar comes back and F5's VKM. Heyman's focus shifts from CM Punk to Lesnar. CM Punk get's frustrated, including blaming Heyman for Shield involvement costing him his match. Punk whines on about not being respected by Heyman too. Taker comes back and they play the whole "Who's gonna face him this year" thing. Everyone expects Lesnar. Taker cuts an amazing promo about respect - how he earned it rather than just assuming it - Heyman interrupts commenting on how Taker showed no respect at the UFC event a few years back. Taker calls out punk, saying he respects his indie wrestling background, but to get respect in the big leagues you have to beat the big boys. Lesnar interupts and takes out Taker - Punk is ****ed because once again a Heyman stable member has interrupted something that mattered to him. Taker has one of those "decide who I face" segments, still people suspect Lesnar. Taker choses punk and openly admits that should Punk win, then he will have Taker's respect. Match set up. Turns Punk face (where he sold more merch), let's taker retire on his own terms, sets up Punk Lesnar. Nobody looks weak.

If taker wanted punk to take away the streak so he can retire it would have been so much better to have a belt vs streak match. No interference from anyone just a 1 on 1.

Not really. Belt vs Streak you KNOW the outcome. UT would never hold the title. He can't even work a Rock schedule.

Better if the title isn't on the line.

With Cena going over Rock at WM29 already basically known as an outcome, you can't have two matches 100% predictable as the top two on your card.

Maybe they're upset that Taker wants to lose to Punk and not their golden boy... :shifty:

if anyone doesn't need the rub from taking UT's steak, its John Cena.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • My father still uses a programme written in dbase3. Still manages to work with a little help from dosbox. 
    • Microsoft hides these secret Windows 11 performance boost settings available on every PC by Sayan Sen Windows enthusiasts often look for ways to extract as much performance out of their systems as possible, and it's often the case that they try and do so while trying to minimize the heat and power consumption. This is especially relevant in the case of mobile Windows PCs since laptops and notebooks tend to get hot and management of that heat and power is harder in such a form factor. As such users often turn to techniques like under-volting which can be used to squeeze out the maximum capabilities of a chip while also maintaining lowered power levels. There are official apps from AMD and Intel with the likes of Ryzen Master and XTU (Extreme Tuning Utility). While these are quite handy, most enthusiasts probably prefer to dig into the BIOS and play around with settings there like Curve Optimizer on Ryzen, which lets users set various frequency-voltage scaling values. These are essentially called P-States. If you are not familiar with them, Processor Power Management is done through Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) P-states and C-states. While P-states or performance pwoer states handle CPU voltage-frequency scaling, C-states deal with CPU sleep states so that some of the CPU functions, which are not necessary at that moment, can be disabled. The P-states and C-states work together to make the processor run more efficiently. It helps the OS and apps determine which cores can be parked and which should be boosted. Of course not every user is an enthusiast or knows the technicalities and integrities of how things like overclocking or undervolting work. Thankfully for them Windows itself offers something pretty cool, though it is hidden by default on all systems. By default, Windows only has two P-States, "Minimum Processor State" and "Maximum Processor State." However, this can be changed with a Registry trick to expand the options under a secret "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown. This essentially enables the HWP or hardware P-States available on a device, and these are not controlled just by the OS itself as the underlying hardware gets involved too. In total there are five Processor Performance Boost Mode profiles that control how Windows requests and allows CPU turbo/boost behavior under the different power policies. They are: Disabled: In this mode, processor boosting is effectively turned off. The CPU will avoid entering turbo or boost frequencies and instead operate closer to its base frequency ceiling. This can significantly reduce power consumption and heat output, but at the cost of reduced burst performance and responsiveness in short workloads. Enabled: This is the standard behavior where boost functionality is allowed under normal conditions. The processor can opportunistically increase frequency when workload demands it, balancing performance gains with power and thermal constraints as managed by the system. Aggressive: Aggressive mode favors performance more heavily, allowing the CPU to enter higher boost states more readily and sustain them longer. This should in theory improve responsiveness under bursty or heavy workloads but increases power draw and thermal output compared to the default enabled behavior. Efficient Enabled: This mode still allows boosting, but with a stronger bias toward energy efficiency. The system attempts to use boost more selectively, avoiding unnecessary frequency spikes when the performance gain is marginal. Efficient Aggressive: This is a hybrid approach where boost is still performance-responsive, but the system continuously weighs efficiency more heavily than in Aggressive mode. It aims to deliver noticeable performance improvements while reducing wasted power in less demanding scenarios. Here's how to enable the Processor performance boost mode: Open Registry Editor: Press Win+R, type regedit, and click OK. Go to: HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\be337238-0d82-4146-a960-4f3749d470c7 (where HKLM stands for HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE_) Modify the value of Attributes from 1 to 2 (you can find modify option by right-clicking) After that, exit Registry, you should now be able to see the new "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown menu: As you can see there are now five new P-States or CPPC states or power profile available that help define the boost mode processor setting on your PC. Wrapping it up here's a quick run-down of the settings as defined by Microsoft itself. Setting Description Disabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is disabled. Collaborative Processor Performance Control (CPPC) behaviour is disabled. Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Efficient Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Efficient Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows calculates the desired extra performance above the guaranteed performance level, and asks the processor to deliver that specific performance level. Efficient Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows always asks the processor to deliver the highest possible performance above the guaranteed performance level. In the next part we shall be comparing these settings to explore how much of a benefit or regression they can provide in terms of performance and power efficiency. If you decide to change the values on your system and are experiencing problems like crashes or an overheating PC, make sure to revert the steps back to the original state.
    • I think he means you haven't reviewed previous UFC games. Of course it doesn't matter... Every time you just report on something that involves the President even if just simply what happened you guys usually get accused of being anti-Trump. We live in fun times.
    • So how did you solve the problem? Disabling Secure Boot isn’t a solution.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      Leroy Jethro Gibbs earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Conversation Starter
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      AndreaB earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      agatameier earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      agatameier earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      518
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      198
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      147
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      93
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!