3 reasons why Jon Moxley is better than Dean Ambrose and 2 reasons why he isn't

#2 Why Dean Ambrose is better: Ambrose was a better overall competitor

Dean Ambrose at a WWE Live event.

Now, it might seem contradictory to the previous point, but Dean Ambrose is a better overall in-ring wrestler than Moxley. Moxley has competed in many high-quality bouts. But plenty of those matches get overlooked by the hardcore stuff that Moxley does.

Want to enjoy one of Dean's best matches? Roadblock vs Triple H. Just sit back and enjoy.

— iLL. (@WadeiLLson) September 17, 2018

Moxley is famous for hardcore wrestling. But the excessive usage of weapons in his matches often overshadows Moxley's in-ring ability. He often gets criticized for doing too many hardcore spots. Out of Moxley's seven pay-per-view appearances in AEW, six of them involved the usage of weapons.

.@WWERollins has had ENOUGH of @TheDeanAmbrose. #Raw pic.twitter.com/8yti0qAuHo

— WWE (@WWE) December 4, 2018

Some fans see this as a weakness. Relying on weapons can make it seem like Moxley is unable to tell a story in the ring. Legendary Superstars like Stone Cold Steve Austin and The Rock didn't always use weapons to assert their dominance.

Even within WWE's strict limits, Dean Ambrose managed to create his image as a dangerous character. In his matches with Rollins and Styles, Ambrose was able to tell a compelling story without using weapons.

Although he wasn't excellent in the ring, Dean Ambrose always delivered solid performances in the ring. He was able to channel the crowd's reactions during his matches. He was also a safe worker. Ambrose was a great seller, and he made his opponents look good in the ring. Moxley should also reduce the usage of weapons in his matches so he can look even stronger in the ring.