Jump to content
TSM Forums
  • entries
    20
  • comments
    146
  • views
    10278

Things

Sign in to follow this  
Guest

361 views

So when did this trend of rating matches highly solely based on the story it tells, completely ignoring every other factor, start? Or is it just a by-product of the gradual change of the smart community to the anti-conformist, WWE fan? These people are usually the first to crucify a match for being too spotty. "Good wrestling isn't all about spots!!!". Well, good wrestling isn't all about the story either. If the story of the match is good, but the story is told poorly, does the match deserve as much praise as as a match that has a good story and also tells it in a superior way? Because that's basically what I'm seeing with people throwing around ****+ ratings to matches full of poor looking punches, restholds and crummy selling.

 

And another thing that's getting annoying is people who look way too far into a match to try and justify certain spots or actions. If something is so far buried underneath layer and layer of analysis, to the point where it becomes doubtful that the wrestlers even intended the spot in question to have such meaning, it's time to re-examine your priorities. This is something I've seen from all types of people, from the previously mentioned new age WWE-smart mark to others who are generally good wrestling analysts. But really, one can find meaning in anything that happens in a wrestling match if they really want to. I'm not one of those "watch with your brain turned off" people, but there is such a thing as over-analysis.

 

 

I'm getting rather perturbed by posts that incorrectly criticise someone for trying to pass off their opinion as fact. This is despite the fact that the person never even insinuated such a thing and the only reason they're being singled out is because they didn't actually say it was their opinion. How lame is that? It's an online forum. I would like to think that everyone knows that when people post things, it's almost always their opinion. If I say "Toshiaki Kawada is the best wrestler ever.", that's just an opinion, and I shouldn't have to explain that it's just an opinion. It should be obvious, even without saying "In my opinion <blah>". But if I say "WWE drew a 51% house at their 7/1 Saitama show", it's a fact, and if someone calls me on that point, I will say so. So for you people who like to jump on others for this, maybe you should wait until the person actually acts like what they're saying is the only truth. Then go nuts. Otherwise just assume everyone is just innocently giving their opinion, rather than trying to pass it off as fact.

 

P.S. /me shoots on DrVenkman

Sign in to follow this  


1 Comment


Recommended Comments

×