Negative Star Ratings
This is something that I had floating in my head the last few days. A lot of wrestling reviewers will give negative star ratings to a particularly bad match. Often times it is prompted not by the workers involved, but the sheer idiocy of the booking of the match. In many cases the reviewer goes into the match expecting to hate it. But what truly merits negative stars? In my opinion, it is not enough to put together a boring match. I think a negative star match must fit one of X criteria.
1. The match contained several noticeable, blown spots.
Let's see what they messed up here.
1. Nowinski comes in late to break up a pin attempt.
2. Trish attempts a springboard manuever but Gayda is out of position.
3. Trish attempts a leg sweep but Gayda fails to take the move properly, stumbling to the mat.
4. Trish tries twice to set up the bulldog but Gayda fails to position herself properly.
5. When Trish does go for the bulldog, she misses completely. Gayda sells it anyway.
That is an easy one, it won Wrestling Observer's Worst Match of the Year award for 2002. Now, even good wrestlers will blow spots. Good workers will work it into the flow of the match, making it somewhat indistinguishable for casual wrestling fans. Knowledgeable wrestling fans notice, but they know it is a work anyway.
2. The match contained booking so bad that it insulted the intelligence of the viewing audience.
The Fingerpoke of Doom. WCW advertised Goldberg vs. Kevin Nash and instead gave the fans a ten second "angle" match that turned many against WCW for good.
When does a comedy match merit negative stars? For the most part, if the crowd dies. If the crowd is into the match, you can't really punish the workers because you did not like it. I give an exception to a match such as The Four Doinks at Survivor Series '93. When working the match requires ignoring the established rules of the game, that falls under bad booking.
3. The match denigrated into a shoot with the wrestlers losing all cooperation, preventing the match from reaching an intended conclusion.
This one is extremely interesting, Bruiser Brody vs. Lex Luger. Brody sees fit not to sell anything Luger does until Luger just gives up, draws the DQ and leaves the cage.
I wish I could find Andre the Giant vs. Akira Maeda. I have seen it before. There is a perception often that a better worker gave it to the lesser worker and taught him a lesson, or exposed him. More often it just becomes a disorganized mess with both wrestlers standing awkwardly until someone steps in. Failing to complete a wrestling match is an overlooked, but deserving reason to issue negative stars.
What does not merit negative stars? Two workers stepping into the ring, giving a reasonably competent exhibition of professional wrestling but boring the audience. That merits a dud IMO. Dave Meltzer gave Andre the Giant vs. Big John Studd negative stars. That was a pretty dull match with no high spots outside the finish. But it looked legit and the crowd enjoyed it. That can not possibly be negative stars.
I rarely rate matches but if I did, my scale would give a basic match at least *, just for stepping in the ring. If the match was bad, that lowers the score as far as a dud, providing the combatants did not at least embarrass the sport. In my view, that is the criteria for negative stars.
7 Comments
Recommended Comments