Tonight in This Very Ring: A Fan's History of Professional Wrestling Paperback – November 1, 2002

I have always enjoyed Scott Keith's rants on WWE's shows on the internet so I figured I'd pick this up. This is an excellent read and I liked it enough to read it again. I read a review that said this book would be for new fans only. I wouldn't completely agree with that. I've been a wrestling fan for 23 years and while granted the chapter covering 1963-1993 is brief, it gives a decent overview of what was going on. And I agree on Scott's opinion that it would be best to skip the 1980's anyway because the late 90's was a much more exciting period. The paragraphs in shaded grey in the book gives you information that most wrestling fans (except the diehards) wouldn't have known. Scott has his share of match rants in here, but not to the point where it overshadows the content. Chapters 2 though 5 are fantastic as it gives an excellent view of how exciting the WWE was becoming with the rise of Steve Austin, Rock and HHH. The book loses some steam in the last chapter but I think that's because the WWF was losing steam as well at this time. I'd love for Mr. Keith to write about a book about the rise and fall of WCW next since that would be even more interesting read than the WWF (e). All told, a great book that both casual and dedicated wrestling fans will enjoy.

Normally, I like Scott Keith's writing fairly well, but that's usually in short doses when he recaps various shows and videos. The problem is, his schtick kinda wears really thin over the course of a full-length book. There's only so many times in a book someone can write about how they don't like this person or they don't like this idea without it getting pretty repetitive. And what makes it worse is that Ketih is pretty unoriginal with his jabs at Triple H, Vince McMahon, etc. often repeating the same things several times. Not that he doesn't have valid points, but they lose their impact when he spends the majority of the pages saying some combination of the same things. There are moments of real insight and you tell Keith is really interested when he talks about some angles in such detail that he spends two or three pages on one or two months worth of shows. But, in contrast, sometimes he sums up half a year in the same amount of space as well.Like I said, I normally like Scott Keith and his rant-style, but it just kinda gets old after a hundred or so pages. I guess that's why I'm dissapointed with the book, because I'm a wrestling fan, but Keith, whether he meant to or not, geared this book to the "marks" and the less knowledgeable of wrestling's history and backstage politics. I'll keep reading his Smark rants, but when I want long form wrestling writing, I'll stick with Chris Hyatte.

Todd Martin just wrote a comprehensive review on wrestlingobserver.com that absolutely destroys this book. That review is particularly informative as to the plethora of factual errors and unfounded rumors one finds in the book. I am a big fan of Scott Keith's work, but after two books, it has become immensely clear the former "Netcop" should confine himself to the net.The title itself is misleading, as several reviewers have pointed out. The book is not a "history" of pro wrestling, but a chronicle of the last five years. The "history" of the previous 30 years is little more than a rushed introduction. Arguably, Scott Keith isn't a "fan" either. He admitted that after Owen Hart's tragic death, it's immensely difficult for him to be entertained by the WWF/E anymore.I had two major problems with the book. Firstly, much of it is composed of material that can be obtained online for free .... While it may have made sense for Keith to include his "King Lear" and "Lazarus" rants, it was a huge mistake for him to include his match reviews of pay-per-view events, written when they had occurred. Since Keith simply pasted the reviews without editing them to fit the context of the book, they often seem out of place, confusing and at times, even contradictory to what he just wrote. They would refer to storylines and characters not mentioned in the book, and often Keith would speculate in a review about what would happen the next night on Raw (without informing the reader of what actually did occur). This was a double-edged sword. Readers who'd never read the reviews before would be confused, fans who did read the reviews when they were originally written would justifiably feel ripped off.The other major problem is that despite the title advertising this as a "history" book, not one of Keith's assertions is backed up by a citation. This is particularly troubling given the rather gruesome drug (and sex)-related allegations Keith makes about people such as Missy Hyatt, Tammy Sytch, Jimmy Snuka and a whole host others. It is virtually impossible for the reader to distinguish between documented fact and unfounded internet rumor.The really sad aspect of all this is that Shaun Assael (a writer for ESPN) came out with a book a year before this one detailing virtually the same time period in wrestling, Sex, Lies and Headlocks. Despite the fact that Keith has probably seen more wrestling in the past year than Assael has in his lifetime, the latter's book is clearly superior in terms of accuracy, writing style and research. I strongly recommend that book, especially if you want to learn about past WWF scandals such as the 1994 steroid trial. Tonight . . . In This Very Ring is not worth your money.