TNA’s hero problem

Stephen T Stone on Lockdown:

Any good story, wrestling or otherwise, ends on a big climax — the point where the hero conquers his obstacles, defeats his foes, and claims his prize — but TNA hardly ever follows through with a quality climax at the right time.

Stone is right: TNA’s major events generally end with a villain winning. Lockdown gave us a moral victory for Storm, but Roode kept the title, so the villain won by accident (a few cage matches have ended this way). But I think he’s (and everyone) is wrong to ever expect this. It is a company that’s given its audience this sort of ending for ten straight years. Why would we ever expect heroes to win in TNA?

You can suggest that this is a problem, but I don’t think TNA sees it that way. Because the rules of their particular universe so heavily favours the bastard, you could argue that there are no heroes on the show. There are only those who have yet to be corrupted.