Jump to content


Photo

Is Dave right?


  • Please log in to reply
41 replies to this topic

#21 BrianB

BrianB
  • Members
  • 199 posts

Posted 04 November 2016 - 12:52 PM

Here's an eyebrow raising tweet

 

https://twitter.com/...265889302396928

 

I think he gave that match ***1/4 in the WO. I don't even know what to say if he's being serious.



#22 WingedEagle

WingedEagle
  • Members
  • 5071 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 04 November 2016 - 01:51 PM

I don't think there's much of a chance he's being serious.  That's not how he deals with silly questions.



#23 smfk24

smfk24
  • Members
  • 2 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indian Occupied Kashmir
  • Interests:ProWres, MMA, Endurance workouts, Medicine.

Posted 05 November 2016 - 10:29 PM

Agree with Dave. Context is what makes matches special. You take any Unit Disband Match from Dragon Gate and put it in front of a crowd that doesn't know or care about any of the wrestlers and the units involved. All the specialness of such a match is instantly lost. Hence,I'd figure a drop in rating from a Korakuen or Osaka crowd to a Florida or Alabama crowd because the crowd has no emotional investment. 



#24 Grimmas

Grimmas

    a Wrestling Feminist

  • Members
  • 7726 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Posted 06 November 2016 - 09:32 AM

Agree with Dave. Context is what makes matches special. You take any Unit Disband Match from Dragon Gate and put it in front of a crowd that doesn't know or care about any of the wrestlers and the units involved. All the specialness of such a match is instantly lost. Hence,I'd figure a drop in rating from a Korakuen or Osaka crowd to a Florida or Alabama crowd because the crowd has no emotional investment. 

The statement this match is better due to having a great crowd is fine.

 

The statement this WWE match in the Tokyo Dome is automatically better is stupid.



#25 WingedEagle

WingedEagle
  • Members
  • 5071 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 November 2016 - 11:43 AM

 

Agree with Dave. Context is what makes matches special. You take any Unit Disband Match from Dragon Gate and put it in front of a crowd that doesn't know or care about any of the wrestlers and the units involved. All the specialness of such a match is instantly lost. Hence,I'd figure a drop in rating from a Korakuen or Osaka crowd to a Florida or Alabama crowd because the crowd has no emotional investment. 

The statement this match is better due to having a great crowd is fine.

 

The statement this WWE match in the Tokyo Dome is automatically better is stupid.

 

 

One could say the same for analyzing Dave's tweets when he has gone out of his way to use Twitter to drive traffic by engaging with trolls.



#26 overbooked

overbooked
  • Members
  • 155 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 November 2016 - 04:15 AM

Doesn't all this just show that:

 

1. Star ratings, while a handy short-hand, really aren't a great way of articulating how good a match is.

2. The ranking culture to which star ratings are so linked leads to a really reductive way of critiquing wrestling, as ordered lists, MOTYs etc are valued more than genuine analysis and insight.

3. Dave is a great reporter and historian, but not so great as a wrestling "critic".



#27 JerryvonKramer

JerryvonKramer
  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 11316 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 November 2016 - 04:31 AM

I always feel kinda frustrated when wrestling reviews lack ratings, dunno just feels like a cop out. If people beeline to the ratings and don't read the words, that's on them.

I think stars carry a certain weight. On wtbbp recently we looked at the Jan 93 Tokyo Dome show co-promoted by WCW. We both gave Dustin / Norton vs Saito / Hash 3.75 and also came across Scott Keith tearing the match to pieces and giving it 1/2*

After the show dropped several listeners went and watched that match themselves. I think the disparity in star ratings between us and Keith was a factor. Not just what we said and what he said, but the ratings. Of course another factor is that it's Hash and Dustin and fucking Mr Saito all in the same match, with Scott Norton working as a lost Steiner Brother.

I think it's easy to throw out words like "reductive" but in practice I see that ratings have a genuine function in the community from day to day. Although here I think people are are generally good at explaining why they give certain ratings. The first thing I think when I see a Meltzer rating I'm puzzled by is "hmm, why did he give this that rating, what was he thinking?" It is fair to say that Dave is not a great critic.

#28 Loss

Loss
  • Admins
  • 43381 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 November 2016 - 06:31 AM

I will say that I usually don't read match reviews until after I've watched a match. Most of the time, I look for the star rating (or similar value assignment) and determine if the reviewer is saying it's worth my time, yes or no. After I've watched it, I'll go back and read the review to see how the thoughts match up to my own. I do that because I don't want to be influenced by existing opinion as much as I can help it.



#29 Matt D

Matt D

    4:40

  • Members
  • 10161 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 November 2016 - 06:37 AM

I only give wrestler star ratings, not match star ratings. Terry Funk is a 5* wrestler. Hercules Hernandez is a 2 1/4* wrestler. 



#30 JerryvonKramer

JerryvonKramer
  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 11316 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 November 2016 - 06:40 AM

I only give wrestler star ratings, not match star ratings. Terry Funk is a 5* wrestler. Hercules Hernandez is a 2.25* wrestler.


I'd have thought the example of Scott Keith's reviews would discourage this line of thought.

In the right circumstances even the Mighty Hercules could have a great match (theoretically), and Funker can (and did) have off days.

#31 Matt D

Matt D

    4:40

  • Members
  • 10161 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 November 2016 - 06:44 AM

Parv has only a 1.5* ability to register sarcasm. He also drops his selling on offense. Some speculate that is because he hangs out too much backstage with Rob Van Dam, Matt Sydal, and Johnny Sorrow.



#32 JerryvonKramer

JerryvonKramer
  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 11316 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 November 2016 - 07:57 AM

People need to start doing [/sarcasm] on their non-serious posts. I can no longer tell.

#33 El McKell

El McKell

    Actually The Worst

  • Members
  • 323 posts
  • Gender:Female

Posted 07 November 2016 - 08:43 AM

I will say that I usually don't read match reviews until after I've watched a match. Most of the time, I look for the star rating (or similar value assignment) and determine if the reviewer is saying it's worth my time, yes or no. After I've watched it, I'll go back and read the review to see how the thoughts match up to my own. I do that because I don't want to be influenced by existing opinion as much as I can help it.

So much this, reading reviews/discussion on matches before I see them affects the way I think about the match too much and I end up thinking about reviews while I'm watching which kills a lot of the enjoyment for me. But at the same time star ratings are a great help for knowing what is and isn't worth my time.



#34 goc

goc

    A disgrace to Joe Blanchard

  • Members
  • 7352 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 07 November 2016 - 09:19 AM

Parv has only a 1.5* ability to register sarcasm. He also drops his selling on offense. Some speculate that is because he hangs out too much backstage with Rob Van Dam, Matt Sydal, and Johnny Sorrow.

5* post. I think this board needs to add the ability to give star ratings to individual posts and not just threads.



#35 JerryvonKramer

JerryvonKramer
  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 11316 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 November 2016 - 09:35 AM

Goc, you should bring more of your A-material to the board. Five days letting everyone know Jimmy Golden invented the Ganso bomb is wasted on the twitter plebs. Show us how it's done.

#36 goc

goc

    A disgrace to Joe Blanchard

  • Members
  • 7352 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 07 November 2016 - 09:38 AM

People don't respond to things I post in the animated gif thread. Pretty much this board has become the plebs and twitter is the audience worth my time now. People think they're too good to look at animated gifs of the professional wrestling? Well I now think I am too good for YOU!



#37 JerryvonKramer

JerryvonKramer
  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 11316 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 November 2016 - 09:47 AM

In this age of hyper awareness in which everyone is more self-aware than everyone else, in which all discourse is always-already framed for an implied audience, the ultimate irony is that no one is watching, and that people have never before lacked self-awareness on such a grand scale.

#38 goc

goc

    A disgrace to Joe Blanchard

  • Members
  • 7352 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia

Posted 07 November 2016 - 09:56 AM

In this age of hyper awareness in which everyone is more self-aware than everyone else, in which all discourse is always-already framed for an implied audience, the ultimate irony is that no one is watching, and that people have never before lacked self-awareness on such a grand scale.

DUD



#39 JerryvonKramer

JerryvonKramer
  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 11316 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 November 2016 - 09:59 AM

Back to twitter then I guess.

#40 smfk24

smfk24
  • Members
  • 2 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indian Occupied Kashmir
  • Interests:ProWres, MMA, Endurance workouts, Medicine.

Posted 07 November 2016 - 10:03 AM

I will say that I usually don't read match reviews until after I've watched a match. Most of the time, I look for the star rating (or similar value assignment) and determine if the reviewer is saying it's worth my time, yes or no. After I've watched it, I'll go back and read the review to see how the thoughts match up to my own. I do that because I don't want to be influenced by existing opinion as much as I can help it.

This pretty much how I do it as well. Star ratings help in telling the reader what matches are must-see,what were absolute disasters and everything in between.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users