Guest OnlyMe Report post Posted September 12, 2003 (edited) 1) When you give a match a star rating, what do you take into account? As in... what exactly ARE you rating? 2) What was the last WWF/E match that you gave ***** to? (If you believe WWF/E have never put on a ***** match, what match do you give the highest rating to, and what is that rating?) That is all Edited September 12, 2003 by OnlyMe Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Goodear Report post Posted September 12, 2003 Star Ratings are different things to different people and so you are liable to get about a billion different criteria regarding what makes up a particular rating. I myself take into account a number of details including... 1) Psychology (or ability to tell a story which takes into account pacing, the appropriate nature of the moves used, and the acting ability of the wrestlers) 2) Execution of maneuvers (i.e. a lack of blown spots that are not intentional) And thats pretty much it although point #1 is EXTREMELY broad and can be modified to allow for all sorts of different kinds of matches to reach the pinacle of five stars. However as far as I'm aware, I have never seen a WWE or WWF match get that high although Bret vs Owen WMX, Bret vs Austin WMXXIII, and Shawn vs. Razor Ladder Match WMX are about as close as I can recall coming in around the **** - ****1/2 range. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest OnlyMe Report post Posted September 12, 2003 Star Ratings are different things to different people and so you are liable to get about a billion different criteria regarding what makes up a particular rating. I myself take into account a number of details including... Good... that's what I'm hoping for Nik (researching ) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JHawk 0 Report post Posted September 13, 2003 I look at: The psychology of the match Execution of moves Entertainment value Finish The finish is usually a minor factor, as I don't necessarily take off for a DQ if it makes sense within the context of a feud, but a nonsensical finish can take away from a good match. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest croweater Report post Posted September 13, 2003 I rate matches by how entertained I am by them. Workrate, Psycology, context and selling (along with billions of other factors) are all, of course, a part of that, but I don't analize things to death. If I really enjoy the match it gets a good rating. I thought Benoit and Angle was ***** Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest TheArchiteck Report post Posted September 13, 2003 I really don't rate matches but crowd responses should also play a huge part of it. They should be able to pull each and every fan to their feet to get the 5-stars. Some smart marks may say that a match with amazing spots or damn near perfect psychology would be a 4-5 star match; even though the fans couldn't give a damn about it. When your able to feel the excitement from others in the air, you'll enjoy the match a hell of a lot more. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Salacious Crumb Report post Posted September 13, 2003 Nothing recent comes in at ***** for me personally but there have been several that have come close. Benoit vs. Angle from the Rumble was ****1/2 - ****3/4 Benoit/Angle vs. Edge/Mysterio was ****1/2 - ****3/4 Benoit vs. Angle vs. Mysterio is probably one of the best Triple Threat matches ever. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Ray Report post Posted September 13, 2003 If a match has stupid shit like no-selling, blown spots, or unrealistic things (like Shawn nipping up after 10 minutes of back work), it loses *'s. WWF/E has never had a ***** match. Hart/Hart was the best WWF match ever, and I'd put it no higher than ****1/2. Angle/Benoit isn't ***** or ****3/4. It can't be due to Angle's poor selling. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest croweater Report post Posted September 13, 2003 It was dramatic adn extremely entertaining. A match doesn't have to be flawless to be ***** because that's impossible. Benoit vs. Angle was an amazing match and unbelieviable entertaining. I rate it ***** regardless of a bit of shoddy selling, which I didn't notice at all when watching the match. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Showstoppa Icon Report post Posted September 13, 2003 i think im the only smark who liked HBK-y2J WM as much or better than Benoit-Angle RR Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
caboose 0 Report post Posted September 13, 2003 i think im the only smark who liked HBK-y2J WM as much or better than Benoit-Angle RR No your not. I'm not going to argue that Jericho-HBK was a better wrestling match, because it probably wasn't. But I enjoyed it a lot of a lot more than Angle-Benoit. If something entertains me, then I'll enjoy it. I'm not saying I don't appreciate technical wrestling, but give me Hogan-Rock from WM18 over any other match, because for pure unadulterated entertainment, that match gets ***** from me. My point is, star ratings are wholly subjective and in the context of arguing over the quality of a wrestling match, they are really useless in summing up a match. It is much better to argue different areas of a match and then summarise the match with a comment, rather than a one dimensional score. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest The Real Nosferatu Report post Posted September 13, 2003 I cant compare Angle/Benoit to HBK/Jericho I was going into HBK/Jericho hyped, so really, the match would have sucked and Id love it. Angle/Benoit had to follow the WORST. MATCH. EVER (of the year) so I was pretty much dead, but it had me on my feet for most of the match. On a side note, I lvoe how some reviewers swithc their judgement several times in one show. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RavishingRickRudo 0 Report post Posted September 13, 2003 I base my ratings on Technical Merit and Artistic Merit... Kinda like Figure Skating. There should be a variety of moves, and if there isn't then the moves performed should be performed well. There should be a story and it should be presented clearly and effectively. The degree of difficulty for each (technical and artistic) is taken into consideration as is general atmosphere... actually, I'm bullshitting here since I don't often rate matches, but if I were to evaluate and analyze a match it would be under this system. "The Canadian Judge just gave Bret Hart and Steve Austin an 8.3 for Technical and a 9.8 for Artistic" I like Star Ratings, mainly because I like visual aids and physical represenations. If I want to know how good a match is quick and sweet, boom ****. Of course, not all stars are created equal. I can tell you this, I would never want a recommendation from some people in this thread given their method(s) of evaluation. "It was good cause I liked it and stuff. It made me feel all warm inside, or was that the beer?? Aniwayz *****1/2" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
godthedog 0 Report post Posted September 13, 2003 don't feel like going into my criteria, but the absolute ESSENTIAL thing is the drama. execution, innovation, etc., only help inasmuch as they add to the drama, and anything that takes away from the drama (something like botching a move or changing the pace in a way that doesn't feel right) knocks it down. i think flair/steamboat from wrestlewar is THE classic example of this; everything that was done, was done to build the drama. (i wouldn't give that match 5*, but i think it's the most obvious example of how the little things can add so much to the drama of a match when everything clicks). the last wwf match i'd give 5* to is the bret/austin submission match. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest The Real Nosferatu Report post Posted September 13, 2003 HHH/Cactus from RR 00 was 5* to me. It's a match I can watch over and over at anytime and not get tired of it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Doyo Report post Posted September 13, 2003 from the old RSPW newsgroup FAQ: -----How do I rate a match? When rating a match, or reading match ratings, it is important to consider what exactly is being rated. Some people prefer to rate matches based on how much they enjoyed the match, others rate matches based on the workrate involved in the match. The most popular way of rating matches is through the 5-star system, originated by Norm Dooley and Jim Cornette. It was originally designed to rate the workrate of a match. Here's how Dave Meltzer, editor of the Wrestling Observer Newsletter, has described the 5-star rating system. ***** Match of the year candidate ****1/2 An almost-perfect match **** Excellent ***1/2 Extremely good *** Good **1/2 Better than average but nothing special ** Average *1/2 Below average but not atrocious * Pretty bad, but at least some action 1/2* Terrible, but at least a high spot in there somewhere DUD Of no value -stars Not only terrible, but completely offensive to the ticket-buying public In the end, any form of match ratings is *always* a matter of personal opinion. One person's match of the year is another person's snoozer. I'm not sure where they got that information from. There are a lot of match of the year candidates, but Meltzer rarely tosses out the 5 star rating. In judged sports like figure skating and gymnastics there are strict guidelines that the judges are suppose to follow, but there are still differences in opinion among them. With wrestling, there are no set-in-stone guidelines so differences are going to be even more prevalent. Pretty much the only purpose star ratings serve is when a majority of people give a match a high rating, you know it is probably worth seeing Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Coffey Report post Posted September 13, 2003 (edited) I take a lot of things into account. As a fan of wrestling, does the match draw me in? As a fan of entertainment, does the match draw me in? Are there any botched spots? Is the match innovative? Does the crowd care? Is there emotion or drama surrounding the match? Has the storyline been decent? Does the right person go over? Is the finish clean? A lot of things are brought into my equation. Sometimes one of the categories can be so great that it can cover up some of the negative aspects. I don't give out duds or ***** very often. The biggest thing I take into account is botched spots. If a match has even one, there is no way that it can get a perfect score. 5-star means that a match is flawless. So, I hardly ever, if ever, give them out. Selling & ring psychology are up there too. That's why I'm not a big fan of HBK because his "classic comeback" pretty much negates both categories. Even if it's supposed to be a last ditch effort that requires all of his heart and soul or whatever. Kurt Angle Vs. Chris Benoit @ Royal Rumble 2003 was very good. I'd give it about ****1/4. Another thing I try to take into account is previous ratings that I have given out. For example, I liked Bret Hart Vs. Owen Hart @ Wrestlemania X, but I didn't think that it was better than Angle/Benoit @ RR 03, so it can't be rated higher than that match. Thus, I gave it around ****. Had the finish came in a different way, perhaps I would feel different. However, I'm not a fan of School Boy, Rollup or Small Package finishes. Edited September 13, 2003 by Mr. Jag0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RavishingRickRudo 0 Report post Posted September 13, 2003 I agree with everything you said after the first paragraph (and most of the things said in the first paragraph) - well said. The only problem is with the "did it draw me in" part - there are external factors which effects whether or not you get drawn into the match. Ratings should be as objective as possible and if you have someone beside you talking your ear off I bet it's pretty hard to get into a match - so should the rating suffer because of that? Yes, personal enjoyment is very important, but in terms of assessing a matches worth, it shouldn't really play a big role... or any. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Coffey Report post Posted September 13, 2003 Very true, and overlooked. That is why I always record the wrestling shows too. Good point. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Tino Standard 0 Report post Posted September 13, 2003 I pretty much go with the exact same criteria of JHawk. Also, if the HBK-Jericho match from Wrestlemania had ended when Jericho caught Michaels in the Walls, that match would've come off 10x better. Recycling the same roll-up pinfall used in the HBK-HHH match at SummerSlam 02 completely wrecked the WM match for me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheFranchise 0 Report post Posted September 13, 2003 i think im the only smark who liked HBK-y2J WM as much or better than Benoit-Angle RR You're not, because as much as i love a technical match, i thought that Angle/Benoit went a little TOO long (Yeah, this wont end well for me) and partially because as a Bret Hart fan, i wanted to see Mr Canada be put over Michaels at the biggest stage. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KingPK 0 Report post Posted September 13, 2003 Well, I use the 10 point system, which is a little better to use IMO because you have more numbers to play with. Basically, my criteria boils down to (in order of importance): 1) Entertainment value 2) Cleanliness (less for blown spots, sloppiness, etc.) 3) Psychology (I'm not really familiar with the whole psychology bit yet, so that is weighed less.) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SamoaRowe 0 Report post Posted September 13, 2003 1) When you give a match a star rating, what do you take into account? As in... what exactly ARE you rating? 2) What was the last WWF/E match that you gave ***** to? (If you believe WWF/E have never put on a ***** match, what match do you give the highest rating to, and what is that rating?) That is all I give star ratings out due to how entertained I was by the match. This way, a fun and well put together five minute match can do as much for me as an awesomely built up 20 minue match. I've never seen a five star match before. The closest that comes to mind are a few different matches involving Chris Benoit and Kurt Angle (against eachover and others). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RavishingRickRudo 0 Report post Posted September 13, 2003 I'm not going go into a huge rant against the "entertainment value" of matches, but what exactly is the difference between the entertainment value of wrestling and the entertainment value of say, Friends? Or The Simpsons? Or any other form or "entertainment"??? I mean, it's you being entertained and that's all that matters, right? So what does it matter if it's wrestling? Anyone seeing my point here? How about this... what's more entertaining.... A Benoit/Angle match with you alone in a darkened, smelly, room with two people talking very loudly in the next room - or a Nash/Hogan match with you getting a blow-job while watching it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Robfather 0 Report post Posted September 13, 2003 why would someone be watching a Nash/Hogan match while getting a blow job? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheFranchise 0 Report post Posted September 13, 2003 why would someone be watching a Nash/Hogan match? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RavishingRickRudo 0 Report post Posted September 13, 2003 It's amazing how out of both those replies, no answer was given. Did the point go over everyones head??? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Coffey Report post Posted September 13, 2003 (edited) I understood the point and understand what you're trying to get at. When I think of wrestling entertainment, I think more along the lines of what is entertaining in the sport outside the ring. Like, an episode of Seinfeld or Friends that is entertaining, just means that you get drawn into the story and maybe have a couple of laughs. In wrestling though, it could be things like Austin driving a truck to the ring to whoop Vince's ass...or "Bang 3:16" A wrestling match that is entertaining can mean a varity of things. Sometimes I'm entertained by the high spots and sometimes I'm entertained by the mat work. Usually when I think of wrestling entertainment aside from wrestling talent however, I'm usually talking about things that you really, really have to supend belief in order to enjoy. Like Hulk Hogan "hulking up," or "The People's Elbow." Yeah, those were the only two examples that I could think of off the top of my head, but I think you'll get what I'm trying to say. It depends on what your definition of entertainment is too. Like, I wouldn't call a bj entertainment, I would call it pleasure. I think they are two vastly different things. That's not the point though, I'm just saying... If you look at it like I do though, sometimes you can be jaded by it. Maybe that's why people always praise Benoit, Angle & Guerrero & bash Goldberg, Nash & Hogan. They are bigger on the wrestling aspect not the entertainment aspect. It makes sense. Edited September 14, 2003 by Mr. Jag0 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest OnlyMe Report post Posted September 14, 2003 Thanks everyone. Much appreciated, especially Triple R and Mr. Jag0. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tawren 0 Report post Posted September 14, 2003 I'm a lot more generous than most people, but to me, my ratings go like this: negative stars: an embarrassment DUD: just crap 1/4* to *: barely above crap *1/4 to **: almost semi-decent **1/4 or **1/2: decent **3/4: good enough ***: good match, not great ***1/4 or ***1/2: almost great ***3/4: almost a classic, not quite ****: great match ****1/4 to ****3/4: awesome match, worth going out of your way to see *****: spectacular match, just awesome top to bottom. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
