Guest Doyo Report post Posted February 2, 2003 Look at my posts in this thread - I have not admitted to watching any wrestling matches ever. Again, my only point was that there are people who are really into wrestling who liked those two particular matches. I've never seen Tamura vs. Kohsaka or the Dream Rush main. I've seen the Dream Slam II main which I believe had the same participants. Even though I've been watching puro here and there since 1993, you may very well know a lot more about it than me. I just don't think that is a reason to a cop an attitude with people who don't know as much. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest wolverine Report post Posted February 2, 2003 There are some people who have seen enough wrestling to where they are able to decipher quality much more easily than people whose only opinions revolve around 2001 comp tapes. And for those who can't recognize that, it's their loss. Enjoy what you're watching, just don't expect praise if it doesn't deserve it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jubuki Report post Posted February 2, 2003 "I have not admitted to receiving blowjobs from any interns in my life. However, if someone wants to say that Monica Lewinsky was a great choice to kneel in front of the leader of the free world, even though many men consider her to be an unattractive, fat cow and Mr. Clinton could certainly have done better when it came to choosing, it's their choice to say she was worthwhile." The reason to 'cop an attitude' is that you kids ask for people's opinions and then gripe like babies when you get them. The regulars here have vociferously proclaimed these tapes to be a waste of money, but, rather than weigh in with, y'know, EVIDENCE as to why they're a worthy purchase or a good way to spend time, this thread has uselessly been lengthened time and again by those out to defend a single piece of shit match on the tapes, all the while admitting their own ignorance and reliance upon halfwit sources. Any clearer to you now? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RavishingRickRudo Report post Posted February 2, 2003 This isn't really wrestling related, but hear me out: I remember back in 1998 I was talking to one of my friends about a simpsons eps. He says that he doesn't watch the simpsons anymore and I am like "why?". And he says it sucks. This just blows my mind - how could he say such things? But that comment was planted into my mind the next time I watched a new eps. And I began to realize that the newer episodes did indeed begin to suck. And then I found out why, noticed when the change was made, discovered why the old eps. were great and why the new episodes were just plain bad. I can appreciate the good ones more and won't waste my time with the bad ones. All you need to do is look. The same goes for wrestling. I recall talking to someone about the Austin/Hart Wm 13 match and how it lacked proper psychology - how bret didn't play the old school role that he should have played. But then that person said that Bret had changed and became like Austin... That just changed my whole perspective on the match. So I guess the moral of the story is - listen and look. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Doyo Report post Posted February 2, 2003 Wolverine - again Meltzer has probably seen way more wrestling than you, so therefore if he and his many readers like something then, *GASP*, others may like it too! Jubuki, if we can't point out that Meltzer and some of readers like particular matches, then who the hell can we point out? Should we just pay attention to Jubuki, Wolverine and a few other's opinions and ignore everybody else? Gorilla Monsoon says" Give me a break!" I haven't seen either match! Again, my only point is that a lot of intelligent people like them, so therefore El Dandy may also. If that troubles anyone so much then there is something wrong with you. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest The Mighty Damaramu Report post Posted February 2, 2003 Well to clarify. I do listen to what you guys have to say. Remember I sent you some PM's a while back asking for your opinions on what to watch. So yes I usually put a lot of stock into what guys like Wolverine and Jubuki have to say. But I was just saying that if someone likes a match you shouldn't jump on them. But I wasn't trying to discount your opinions. I mean it is all opinions and I do put more stock into the opinions of those who have seen a lot more than me. Just saying....... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest wolverine Report post Posted February 2, 2003 WATCH THE MATCHES. Sorry, but that line needed to be dusted off again (this time in a bad way). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest The Mighty Damaramu Report post Posted February 2, 2003 Are you talking to me? I watch every match I have. And I usually go over them with a fine tooth comb. But everyone has personal tastes. I mean can you think of a personal taste that you like in a match? I know I like to see someone get a vicious shit kicking. That's why I enjoy the famous Misawa/Kobashi v. Kawada/Taue. The things they do to that mans leg is just vicious. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest wolverine Report post Posted February 2, 2003 It wasn't directed at you. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest The Mighty Damaramu Report post Posted February 2, 2003 I realizethat now. I will now slink back into my hole where I email Jeff Lynch all day getting price quotes......... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RickyChosyu Report post Posted February 2, 2003 Wow, I'm starting to think this arguement is a seasonal one. Some new faces, but generally the same deal. Sheesh. Wolverine - again Meltzer has probably seen way more wrestling than you, so therefore if he and his many readers like something then, *GASP*, others may like it too! Sure, Meltzer may like something that you'll like. But that's not a reviewer's job. A reviewer's job is to inform you what is good and bad about the material and give you a reliable second opinion to give you a feeling of whether you'll enjoy it or not. Meltzer rarely, if ever does that. Maybe he's just burnt out on it, but either way, he's not reliable anymore (assuming that he was, at one point, reliable). "Jubuki, if we can't point out that Meltzer and some of readers like particular matches, then who the hell can we point out? Should we just pay attention to Jubuki, Wolverine and a few other's opinions and ignore everybody else?" If he didn't want our opinions he wouldn't have posted the thread. Meltzer's reviews are available, as are plenty of others. No one's forcing you to accept their opinions around here, just offering their own when asked. I'm not trying to blow the horn of this forum or anything, but I've seen a hell of a lot more in depth analysis of ring work and match quality from Chris, Tim, and Wolverine than I could ever hope to see from Meltzer. They discuss it at a level that most either either chose not to go into or simply can't, including Metlzer. It all goes back to what you value: reliability in writing a news letter or reliability in rating matches. I think I've made it clear where I stand on the issue. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest NoSelfWorth Report post Posted February 2, 2003 No one's forcing you to accept their opinions around here. Could have fooled me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Agent of Oblivion Report post Posted February 2, 2003 This reeks of the Taue chokeslam thread. Just get some Dynamite/Tiger Mask and be done with it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest PlatypusFool Report post Posted February 2, 2003 This is fun isn't it? I always enjoy this, every time we do it. It all comes down to a difference in the base level way that people look at wrestling. Some see it as an art form , and treat it as such, while some see it as entertainment, and treat it as such. Those that treat it as an art form will look more with a more discerning eye at wrestling than those that don't. For example, take an art critic. They've seen thousands of paintings throughout their careers, they understand painting as an art form, and can identify individual parts to great paintings (like accomplished composition) that make them great and, crucially, allow the painting to speak to the viewer. The fact of the matter is, Jubuki, Wolverine etc. have seen more truly great matches than the other people in this thread. In a similar way to our art critic, they have had the experience necessary to deconstruct matches effectively, see what it is about matches that makes them great (like selling, like logical behaviour given the background of the participants etc.) and judge the matches on those things. However, while this approach is perhaps more intelligent, there are other ways to appreciate wrestling, as there are other ways to appreciate paintings. Some paintings, just like some matches, are complex, and become more than the sum of their parts, but some paintings, just like some matches, are very simple, and excel in one area to provide a basic aesthetic pleasure to the viewer. The great AJPW mid-90's matches then, represent probably the zenith of complex wrestling. The characters of all the wrestlers are kept logical and constant, the work is realistic, the pacing is near perfection, and even the individual moves provide the aesthetic thrill which simpler matches provide. But there is also worth to be found in these simpler matches. Matches like Lyger vs. Ultimo at the J Cup 95, for example, are not complex affairs. There is no deep storytelling, the work doesn't really go any way to exhibiting the characters of Lyger ot Ultimo, but there is still great worth in the match - the simple, aesthetic, thrill of smooth matwork and perfect sequences, even though it is frequently meaningless. The same goes for matches like Kawada vs. Mutoh (not seen the 2002 iteration, so basing this on the 2001 match). For fans of the two wrestlers, there is a great and simple (but still worthwhile) aesthetic thrill to watching the two wrestlers do their stuff - they 'mark out' for Mutoh's move set and characteristics, leading to enjoyment. My point is that whichever way you look at wrestling, there is worth in that view. Whether you elect to seek out complex and meaningful wrestling, or simple, base level, thrilling wrestling, or as I have chosen, both, that's ok. If you somply don't enjoy either of the two types of matches I have highlighted, then that is your personal preference. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest wolverine Report post Posted February 2, 2003 Thanks for bringing me up, Ricky, but I rarely write stuff on in-ring analysis. To get something out of what I write, you've got to read between the lines. Some get it, some don't. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest PlatypusFool Report post Posted February 2, 2003 And just to answer the original point of this thread, there is plenty from 2002 that is very much worth seeing, but there is a lot of unecessary fluff on those compilations as well. I've enjoyed a lot of NJPW stuff from this year, especially the G1 Climax shows, and even more specifically, Yoshihiro Takayama and Osamu Nishimura's matches. I've heard a lot of good things about selected NOAH as well, especially the Lyger & co. vs. Kikuchi & co. junior tags, the Takayama vs. Misawa title match, and most of Akiyama & Saito's tag title defences. Finally, Momoe Nakanishi's work from this year, especially vs. Ito, is likely to be fantastic from what I've heard. There hasn't been anythign from AJPW this year worth of a compilation, except maybe Tenryu vs. Kojima, which has massive limitations, but I still find it enjoyable. Anything else is just pointless extras. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest The Thread Killer Report post Posted February 2, 2003 PlatypusFool, that explanation should be pinned at the top of this forum. You managed to explain yourself perfectly, without being a rude, obnoxious, arrogant, patronizing, self satisfied, bitter, asshole like some people in this thread (and folder) do on a daily basis. You used logic and knowledge, and made a point, without being rude. Bravo. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest BionicRedneck Report post Posted February 2, 2003 I just finished watching some more of my stuff from 2002 (including Kojima/Tenryu), and there is some enjoyable stuff. Like 2 tapes worth. They must have tried really, really hard to fill up six tapes. Some good stuff (IMO): Hiroyoshi Tenzan + Satoshi Kojima vs. Mike Barton + Jim Steele - G-1 Tag League Finals (New Japan - December 11, 2001) . Mitsuharu Misawa + Kenta Kobashi vs. Yuji Nagata + Jun Akiyama (NOAH - February 17, 2002) Jushin Lyger, Minoru Tanaka, El Samurai, Masayuki Naruse + Masahito Kakihara vs. Koji Kanemoto, Black Tiger, Eddie Guerrero, Gedo + Jado - 2/3 Falls Match (New Japan - March 14, 2002) Yuji Nagata + Manabu Nakanishi vs. Masahiro Chono + Hiroyoshi Tenzan - IWGP Tag Team Title Tournament Final Match (New Japan - March 24, 2002) Jushin Lyger + Minoru Tanaka vs. Tsuyoshi Kikuchi + Yoshinobu Kanemaru (NOAH - April 7, 2002) Jushin Lyger, Minoru Tanaka, Masayuki Naruse + Masahito Kakihara vs. Koji Kanemoto, Black Tiger, Jado + Gedo - Elimination Match (New Japan - April 16, 2002) Yoshihiro Takayama vs. IWGP Heavyweight Champion Yuji Nagata (New Japan - May 2, 2002) Manabu Nakanishi + Osamu Nishimura vs. IWGP Tag Team Champions Masahiro Chono + Hiroyoshi Tenzan (New Japan - June 5, 2002) Shinjiro Ohtani vs. Masato Tanaka - Fire Festival Tournament (Zero-One - July 31, 2002) Yuji Nagata vs. Osamu Nishimura - G-1 Climax Tournament (New Japan - August 8, 2002) Yoshihiro Takayama vs. Masahiro Chono - G-1 Climax Finals (New Japan - August 11, 2002) Not classics, but all decent/good/very good. Why someone felt it was needed to put on shit like Yasuda, I don't know. There are alot of really, really average matches there, and some that are just crappy. Don't get too excited by Kojima/Tenryu II either. After just recently seeing it for the first time it isn't anywhere near the ****3/4 given by Meltzer and others. I may be wrong, so I will re-watch it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RickyChosyu Report post Posted February 2, 2003 No one's forcing you to accept their opinions around here. Could have fooled me. You'd be pretty easilly fooled, then. People tend to give their opinions when asked. Just because you don't like what you're hearing doesn't make it forcefull. Other, less "opinionated" threads are just a click away. Thanks for bringing me up, Ricky, but I rarely write stuff on in-ring analysis. To get something out of what I write, you've got to read between the lines. Some get it, some don't. Well, there was that writing on Momoe/Ito that you did, but yes, for the most part you offer your well-constructed opinions on matches when asked. Still a worthy contribution, I think. PlatypusFool, that explanation should be pinned at the top of this forum. You managed to explain yourself perfectly, without being a rude, obnoxious, arrogant, patronizing, self satisfied, bitter, asshole like some people in this thread (and folder) do on a daily basis. Great, now we get the "these guys are just bitter" spot in this all too-familiar thread. If you want things spoon fed to you while you kick and scream at the thought of people disagreeing with the WON awards, by all means, try another message board. Here's a few: http://www.liveaudiowrestling.com/wo/comment/ http://a1wrestling.com/ http://wrestlingclassics.com/ If you're not going to contribute to the discusion, waste someone's time elsewhere, thanks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest The Thread Killer Report post Posted February 2, 2003 I could care less about who won the WON awards. But there is no excuse for rude and ignorant behavior, and that happens all the time in this folder, whether you want to admit it or not. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest EL BRUJ0 Report post Posted February 2, 2003 This thread is screaming for a Puro Boy dick fuck, like the slut that it is. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jubuki Report post Posted February 2, 2003 Funny - seems to me that the "puro boys" are wearing people out by criticizing the matches, criticizing people's inability/unwillingness to look at the matches on any worthwhile level, and criticizing anyone's choice to buy the tapes in question. Looks to me like it's the rest of you out to cut a promo on us and try to make a name for yourself by calling us assholes and pointing out how 'rude' we are. Either talk about the matches, or run along somewhere else. At least if you have something to say about the wrestling, you might stand a chance of looking like you want to learn, even if we hand you your ass. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest The Thread Killer Report post Posted February 2, 2003 The very fact that you think somebody would try and "make a name" for themselves by “cutting a promo” on you says more about you than I ever could Mr. Coey. Since I work for TSM, and have been around here since the Delphi days, even if I WANTED to get somebody’s attention, I would pick somebody with a bigger name than YOU to try and do it with. People keep saying that this is “all too-familiar.” WHY do you think that IS? Everything that you have said about those Best of Japan Tapes is probably true. I myself would not buy them. If I were looking to get into classic puro, I would buy some 1993 AJPW from TABE'S TAPES. If I needed advice, I would email Tabe and ask him, since he has a very solid knowledge of his puro, and is polite when asked about it. Before I even did that, I would go back through this folder, and visit tOa and read up on what experienced puro fans watch. HOWEVER, if I was ASKED what I thought, I’d be POLITE, and use LOGIC, like PlatypusFool did. I would conduct myself with some kindness and class, instead of being rude. That is my point. Not everybody knows as much about puro as some of the people in this folder do. But it seems to me that a lot of people know more about manners. PlatypusFool’s post was educational, whereas many others are just insulting. That doesn’t help anybody. I have no need to “go elsewhere”, I’ve been here for years, and I will probably be here after some of you have left. Telling people that they should leave, or complaining when an argument comes up “again” is a wonderful obfuscation of the point, and that point is… Not everyone can have knowledge, but everyone SHOULD have manners. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jubuki Report post Posted February 2, 2003 Manners? Sort of like how you made your presence first known in this thread? Was that the example we should all follow? Bravo yourself, Sparky. And please tell me where I mentioned myself specifically. Looks to me like I said, "us", meaning Ricky, wolverine, Tim, Platypus - anyone who bothers to give dissenting opinions in this folder and asks for some sort of reasoning from those who pimp a match or make a claim about something/someone being great or good or terrible or anything, only to get drivel in exchange. Please, for once in your life, read the threads - see what happens. Take a look at some of the other damn fools to run through here, like Jingus and Banky, with nothing more to add than "I want everyone to know what a jerk you are, wonk wonk wonk." Just silly-ass run-ins that have nothing to do with whatever question was asked or whatever point was being made. If you want someone to defend, maybe you should find better "victims" than them, or Brujo, or Dandy, yes? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RickyChosyu Report post Posted February 2, 2003 But there is no excuse for rude and ignorant behavior, and that happens all the time in this folder, whether you want to admit it or not. Who are you accusing? As far as ignorant behavior goes, I would say that NoSelfWorth came off as ignorant to me because he was unwilling to discus the matches. When myself and others listed the reasons that we hated Kawada/Mutoh, he didn't defend his stance even though he himself had seen it. After that he basically ducked out of the thread. If our will to seperate the shit from the chocolate characterizes ignorance to you, I'd say you probably don't know what the word means. Then we get Doyo, who basically says that because Thurston and Meltzer rated it highly, our opinions don't matter. Who's ignorant in that situation? Then he does himself one better and says that because the WON READERS liked it, our opinions are worthless. Keep in mind, he said these things in a thread where someone asked _us_ for our opinions. "How dare you tell us not to buy the tape in a thread about whether or not to buy the tape!" -- Battle Cry of the Mutoh/Kawada Defender? We gave him reasons for Meltzer and Thurston being untrustworthy with reviews, but he didn't want to listen. Once again, you seem to have the deffinition of "ignorance" confused with our serious attitude about match quality. If you dislike some people in this forum for being analytical, fine, but at least call us that as opposed to just making up insults. If you want to sling mud, once again, go to another message board. People keep saying that this is “all too-familiar.” WHY do you think that IS? Because certain people are stuck in this anti-intellectualism mold that should have been burried in the 1970's and don't know how to pull their heads out of their collective asses and argue a point. If you want to talk about the matches, you could do worse than this forum, but no one ever wants to do that, do they? Says a lot about ignorance, if you ask me. Everything that you have said about those Best of Japan Tapes is probably true. I myself would not buy them. If I were looking to get into classic puro, I would buy some 1993 AJPW from TABE'S TAPES. If I needed advice, I would email Tabe and ask him, since he has a very solid knowledge of his puro, and is polite when asked about it. Tabe is a very reliable tape dealer and helpfull when it comes to information, but I don't agree with his reviews very often. His ***** rating for the Guererro/Malenko match from ECW, in particular, seems ridiculous to me. 1993 AJPW is great, though, and Tabe has a great deal of it for sale. HOWEVER, if I was ASKED what I thought, I’d be POLITE, and use LOGIC, like PlatypusFool did. I would conduct myself with some kindness and class, instead of being rude. Again, I'd like to know who you're accusing and why. Dandy asked if it was worth it, and pretty much everyone on here gave him a resounding "no." When asked why Kawada/Mutoh was a bad match, Tim gave several reasons that I think pretty much everyone agreed with. When people sited Meltzer and Thurston for reviews, we explained why they weren't trustworthy. I'm not seeing where the surly heels in this thread started cheating before you ran in to make the save. Seems to me they just overwelmed the uncooperative defenders (many of whom hadn't even seen the match) with logical, straight-forward debate. If you want to point out to me why your interferance was required, feel free, but otherwise you're just dragging things farther away from the intended point of discusion, that being, the matches. I have no need to “go elsewhere”, I’ve been here for years, and I will probably be here after some of you have left. Telling people that they should leave, or complaining when an argument comes up “again” is a wonderful obfuscation of the point, and that point is… You're welcome to stay all you like, but if you want a place where people respond to stuborn, short-sited individuals with Tender Loving Care, you'd probably be happier elsewhere. It's ludicrous for you to demand that myself, and the other "accused" play nice with everyone when they won't play fair. Hate to sound "rude" but if someone won't listen to what I have to say I'm not about to listen to them. "If you want to learn something, listening wouldn't be a bad place to start." -- Ricky Chosyu, the broken record on this issue Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Evil Ash Report post Posted February 2, 2003 Wow, this place is a magnet for this sort of conversation. Wonder if there's some sort of causal reasoning behind it ... What makes a critic good? Well, hopefully they can rise above simple "taste" and add some reasoning to things. But in the end, that's about it. The only thing of real importance is how one critic's views agree with your own. If you regularily read three wrestling critics and find yourself agreeing with one of them more than the other two than that one is the 'better' critic. One of the arguements being tossed around is that Fanboy A has a better opinion than Fanboy B because he watched more wrestling and because he has found others who agree with him, others he himself has deemed 'knowledgeable', but probably only because they agree in the first place. Anyway, let's say three people just read "The Sound and the Fury" by Faulkner. (Yeah, I'm the annoying asshole who keeps comparing wrestling and literature. Whatever, I'm bored): Person #1 says: "This narrative hurts my head? What is this bullshit? I'm going back to John Grisham novels." Person #2 says: "Person #1, you're a tool. The stream of consciousness narrative allows us to get into the heads of the main characters, and allows us to understand them from the inside out. Your mediocre mind wasn't able to grasp all the subtle aspects of the story and major themes because you're ignorant. Truly the book is one of the best written in the english language, for various reasons, which I shall explain shortly ... " Person #3 says: "Faulkner is an incredible writer, and the narrative he used was intense and complex, to such an extent that no other writer I can think of (save Joyce) could match it. The themes of the book, and the characters, are among some of the deepest I have read. In the end, though, I didn't think that stream of consciousness narrative helped the book so much as it hindered the reader from an understanding that could have been apparent with a more conventional narrative, and the benefits of such storytelling did not outweight the negatives. Though I understood the various plot points they did not reach me on any level of importance to me like, say, Lolita was able to. In the end, I think it was hardly worth my time." Now, clearly you shouldn't listen to #1 if you want to be taken seriously, but #2 and #3 both (seem to) know what they're talking about. So, the ]better reviewer is nothing more than the one you agree with. Shit, what the hell was I talkin' about? Oh yeah, you should buy some AJ TV from 93, or maybe some general NJ/AJ TV from 89 or somethin'. They're really fun. I hear good things about Volk Han, so maybe you should check him out. And my dealings with Goldenboy Tapes have always been good, though he seems to let an email or two slip by him from time to time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Doyo Report post Posted February 3, 2003 Then we get Doyo, who basically says that because Thurston and Meltzer rated it highly, our opinions don't matter. Who's ignorant in that situation? Then he does himself one better and says that because the WON READERS liked it, our opinions are worthless. Please don't put words in my mouth. Nowhere in this thread have I attacked anyone's opinions. I'll repeat what I posted and why one last time. I'm going to try and make this as simple as possible.... A couple guys on here were saying that they had not read any good reviews of two particular matches, so I pointed out some examples of sources that did like those two matches. Please don't read anymore into it than that. If I'm with some friends and they say "We saw the new Daredevil movie and didn't like it and we haven't heard anything good about it." and then I say "Well Ebert & Roeper both liked it." At this point my friends aren't going to jump all over me and be like "How dare you mention those idiots and tell us our opinions don't matter! Blah, blah, blah!" That would be like something from the Twilight Zone. But that is the feeling that I get of how some of you react on here. When people sited Meltzer and Thurston for reviews, we explained why they weren't trustworthy. No, all that has been explained is that Meltzer and Thurston's opinions on certain matches may be different than yours, therefore it is a crime around here to even mention them. Yes, it is a good point that Meltzer doesn't always back up his reviews. If you wish to not even consider his opinions because of this, then good for you. I and others, though, have valid reasons to pay attention to him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jubuki Report post Posted February 3, 2003 Why, because he's a news guy? I haven't met one yet - Zach, Meltz, Brandon, Stuart - who can actually say why a match works to save his life. Dave has in the past, but lately he's just been out-of-his-gourd weird with his opinions on Japanese work. I may as well listen to Scott Keith as one of them, considering the average "analysis" of a match from them is a pile of play-by-play with maybe 2 sentences towards the end that tell why they did or didn't like the match. People harp on me for "ruining" matches because I explain why they work - I don't understand why no one harps on Stuart or Keith or someone like that for doing by-rote play-by-play and failing to leave a single moment untranscribed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Coffin Surfer Report post Posted February 3, 2003 I agree with Jubuki on the play by play style of reviewing, it blows. I would much rather read about the meaning of the moves, the logic of the match, the back story, an anlysis or interperation of the match's storyline and psychology, and what not rather than the just a replay of the match. As somebody said earlier in this thread, anybody can throw out random snow flakes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest The Mighty Damaramu Report post Posted February 3, 2003 Well you know. They aren't actually telling you guys you can't enjoy a match. I mean there telling you what they liked and didn't like about the match and telling you what certain things in the match meant. And then they give you there snowflakes for the match. Hell they could rate it ** and you still liked it. But then they could also say "Well that was very bad and you liked it. So why don't you try this match? I rated it **** and here's why." Hell when I first started watching Puro that's pretty much what happened. "I liked this match."...."Well that match was pretty average. So if you liked it you should LOVE this." Read in between the lines guys. If you feel insulted by something they say, ignore it. They're some guy you'll never meet. Hell if Jubuki flamed the hell out of you but still gave you a legitimate reason that he didn't like the match and recommended a different one, ignore the flaming and read what he said about the match. And once again nobody's telling you that you can't like a certain match. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
