Jump to content


Photo

Your Own Ratings


  • Please log in to reply
88 replies to this topic

#81 Microstatistics

Microstatistics
  • Members
  • 647 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 10 January 2017 - 06:31 PM

@OJ - I do think that's what people do though.

For example, Jimmy Redman's top 10 matches of all time, as of April 2016:

10. John Cena vs Brock Lesnar - WWE Extreme Rules 2012
9. Shawn Michaels vs Undertaker - WWE Wrestlemania 26
8. Triple H vs Undertaker - WWE Wrestlemania 28 (Hell in a Cell)
7. Triple H vs Undertaker - WWE Wrestlemania 27
6. Shawn Michaels vs Undertaker - WWE Wrestlemania 25
5. Trish Stratus vs Lita - WWE Unforgiven 2006
4. Trish Stratus vs Mickie James - WWE Wrestlemania 22
3. John Cena vs Shawn Michaels - WWE Raw 23rd April 2007
2. Team Austin vs Team Bischoff - WWE Survivor Series 2003
1. John Cena vs Umaga - WWE Royal Rumble 2007 (Last Man Standing)

My top 10 matches of all time, as of October 2015:

10. Ric Flair vs. Ricky Steamboat, 2/20/89 Chi-Town Rumble, JCP/NWA/WCW
9. Mitsuharu Misawa and Kenta Kobashi vs. Akira Taue and Toshiaki Kawada, 12/3/93, AJPW
8. Wargames, 5/17/92 Wrestlewar, JCP/NWA/WCW
7. Mitsuharu Misawa, Kenta Kobashi, and Toshiaki Kawada vs. Jumbo Tsuruta, Akira Taue, and Masa Fuchi, 4/20/91, AJPW
6. Jumbo Tsuruta and Genichiro Tenryu vs. Riki Choshu and Yoshiaki Yatsu, 1/28/86, AJPW
5. Dory Funk Jr. and Terry Funk vs. The Sheik and Abdullah the Butcher, 9/19/78, AJPW
4. Mitsuharu Misawa vs. Toshiaki Kawada, 6/3/94, AJPW
3. Magnum T.A. vs. Tully Blanchard, 11/28/85 Starrcade I Quit Cage Match, JCP/NWA/WCW
2. Jumbo Tsuruta vs. Genichiro Tenryu, 6/5/89, AJPW
1. Ric Flair vs. Ricky Steamboat, 4/2/89 Clash of the Champions VI, JCP/NWA/WCW

Since these are our top 10 matches, you can be sure that we think all 10 are "5 star" affairs.

There's no two ways around saying that my list reflects my values and Jimmy's reflect her values.

There are matches on her top 10 I know for sure that I wouldn't rate 5 stars. It's possible there are matches on mine she wouldn't rate 5 stars.

I mean, it used to be the case that people would just have no problem saying "well, it's clear Parv's is the better list", but we live in different times now. If GWE proved nothing else, it proved that.

 

On PWO maybe but not necessarily in other circles. If you posted that list on reddit or something, where the vast majority only watch WWE, it wouldn't look that aberrant. Only the Trish matches would raise a few eyebrows.



#82 G. Badger

G. Badger
  • Members
  • 224 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 January 2017 - 07:59 PM

I'm more likely to use ratings like OK, Fun, recommended, highly recommended, great, and classic for my own notes or giving suggestions or reviews.

Those are a little more interpretative than the star ratings in what most people would say is the 3.5-4.25 plus range. Sometimes people will shy away from 3.5 type matches by just going on rating alone...and they may be missing something that they might end up loving.

I think that's why certain people or matches have been rediscovered in the past few years... Someone online may have shit on Fujiwara 15 years ago and panned his matches with **1/2,***, or the like so, I wouldn't go near his stuff on that alone. My mistake because no one has an aura of violence like Fujiwara...

But, in conversation, if someones using stars I'll join in...its a good starting point...

#83 Loss

Loss
  • Admins
  • 43385 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 12 January 2017 - 10:39 PM

I'm glad you brought that up. To me, anything I see rated *** and above is worth making an effort to see. I don't really care to watch a lot of bad or uneventful matches, but I don't really want to limit myself to just sprawling MOTYCs either. Even matches below ***, if they have a gimmick, are for a title or are otherwise notable, if I'm following the promotion closely, I will probably check out. That's the compass we are using for PWO2K even. I don't need a match to be great to be worth my time -- it just needs to demonstrate something affirmatively in a positive sense, even if that's just "look how over these guys are" or "this isn't very good, but check this out to see how far this guy has come since then" or "look how great of a job they were doing building this match before it completely fell apart". 



#84 Microstatistics

Microstatistics
  • Members
  • 647 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 14 January 2017 - 12:42 AM

My current classifications -

 

*****:  A transcendent piece of pro wrestling. Would be a lock for an all time Top 50 list, likely make the Top 25.

 

**** 3/4: An absolute all time classic that ranges from strong MOTYC to MOTD. Would be a lock for an all time Top 100 list, probably make the Top 50.

 

**** 1/2: A superb, outstanding match that is a solid MOTYC in most years. The higher end matches in this category have an extremely good chance of finishing in a Top 100 list.

 

**** 1/4: A fantastic match that could range from low end MOTYC level to a strong MOTYC level, depending on how loaded the year is. Wouldn't make a Top 100 but is worth watching many, many times.

 

****: The threshold for a match to truly be considered great.

 

*** 3/4: A really good match that borders on the great.

 

*** 1/2: A very good match. Anything at or above this level is truly high quality stuff.

 

*** 1/4: A good match that executes what it aimed to achieve quite well. I often give this rating to highly pimped matches that I found very disappointing but still enjoyed quite a bit.

 

***: A decent/pretty good match that is worth watching.



#85 G. Badger

G. Badger
  • Members
  • 224 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 January 2017 - 12:06 AM

I am totally on board with this star rating layout. Its like *** matches have something neat like a good sequence, a crazy dive, a heated moment or finish, or something that makes you get excited like snug matwork. If you have the time, watch the match! If you miss it or don't care for the wrestlers don't beat yourself up.

A primo three star example to me is Stan Hansen in AWA when he was champ going up "Baby Bull" Leon White. Better than the infamous 'eye' match...

#86 bradhindsight

bradhindsight
  • Moderators
  • 1551 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 14 February 2017 - 09:39 AM

Yeah I think Microstatistics summed up the scale I use myself perfectly.



#87 gordi

gordi
  • Members
  • 1203 posts

Posted 14 February 2017 - 08:16 PM

I'm glad you brought that up. To me, anything I see rated *** and above is worth making an effort to see. I don't really care to watch a lot of bad or uneventful matches, but I don't really want to limit myself to just sprawling MOTYCs either. Even matches below ***, if they have a gimmick, are for a title or are otherwise notable, if I'm following the promotion closely, I will probably check out. That's the compass we are using for PWO2K even. I don't need a match to be great to be worth my time -- it just needs to demonstrate something affirmatively in a positive sense, even if that's just "look how over these guys are" or "this isn't very good, but check this out to see how far this guy has come since then" or "look how great of a job they were doing building this match before it completely fell apart".

This may sound insane, but I am actually Quite tired of watching consensus ***** matches. This is particularly the case with recent many-snowflake bouts, as I am growing sick to death with what El-P calls "Self Concious Epic" match structure and in-ring work. I hated, hated, hated the man event of New Japan's recent Dome Show. It just felt like those guys were - very self-consciously - trying to earn a high ranking, whatever it took, rather than organically expressing themselves/telling the right story in the ring. I think of it as "HHH Syndrome" based on my (possibly false) impression that HHH was always trying to show everyone that he was "As Good As Flair" rather than just being HHH.

The stuff I have enjoyed the most, by far, in the PWO2K project has been the stuff where guys (and ladies) have seemed content to go in there and work a good match in their particular style. The stuff that has bored or frustrated me has been the stuff where they seem to be trying to inflate things to Epic status.

So, in a way, and particularly when it comes to matches wrestled after, say, 1995, a ***** rating is a useful red flag for me, letting me know that I probably will end up frustrated by the match in question. Three and a half stars matches often sound way more inviting to me, recently.

#88 Boss Rock

Boss Rock
  • Members
  • 117 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 July 2017 - 10:59 AM

I use star ratings because they're an easy way for me to critique a match and determine how much I enjoyed it. Like a great match but not necessarily a MOTYC? Most likely I'll give it a 4.25. 4.5 is when you possibly might have a MOTY argument, 4.75 is a surefire MOTYC, and 5 is a classic even if it isn't necessarily flawless.



#89 Victator

Victator
  • Members
  • 1310 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 26 July 2017 - 03:21 AM

I abandoned star ratings over a decade ago. I can see their value for other people, but for me it became muddled, probably because of ECW. 

I was watching November to Remember 97 and I really enjoyed the four team tag title match. I'm sitting there trying to rate it and I can't because it did a bunch of stuff that went against my own logical values of what I think wrestling should be. So if I go by that, its maybe two stars. 

Or something from a TNA Weekly PPV like New Church vs ECW guys. It was stupid and violent but I loved it. I can't lie to myself and try to say something I like is bad. If I am being emotionally honest, I think it is good. 

So from that point forward my ratings became pass/fail, if anyone needs more detail, I'm happy to discuss it. 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users