Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted June 16, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted June 16, 2011 I dont get how Rock vs Hogan doesnt get five stars but Kobashi and Joe did. The match structure was the same. Both matches were all about the spectical and the crowd response and the novelty of each persons trademark moves being performed on the opponent they'd never thought they see him face. If you took away the aura and the crowd, neither match is a masterpiece. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapnut Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 Star ratings are so shit. Why not just rate them out of 20 stars? That's essentially what Meltz does with his quarter-star and half-star bollocks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Rob Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 5/16/04 John Cena vs. Rene Dupree *** Funniest one for me is Awesome/Tanaka at ONS. : Yeah, seems a bit high, I much preferred the main event tag. Â Star ratings are so shit. Why not just rate them out of 20 stars? That's essentially what Meltz does with his quarter-star and half-star bollocks. Technically, it's not "his", it's Jim Cornette's - he invented the rating system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWEisJericho Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 A Few of my thoughts on some of the Wrestlemania ratings-  WM 23 - HHH vs. Batista: **3/4 Seems very very harsh or am i remembering it being better than it was?  WM 19 - Chris Jericho vs. Shawn Michaels: ****1/4 - I would call this a 5* match but then im biased but this was a classic  WM24 - Ric Flair vs. Shawn Michaels: ***1/2 - Also seems harsh, maybe in terms of in ring work with Flair obviously being pretty run down at this stage but with the emotion attached it goes down as a classic in my eyes  WM17 - Steve Austin vs. Rock: ****1/2 - Seriously no pleasing this guy is there?  To be fair though the ratings aren't a million miles away in most instances and i like that 5* matches are few and far between but in recent years the amount of superb matches that WWE has put on surely some of them should have hit the 5* mark? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members air_raid Posted June 16, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted June 16, 2011 I must admit, I dont mind anyone being selective on a match being "5 stars" because to me, 5 stars would mean you've seen a perfect match, which should be a very rare occurance, surely? Â Having said that, looking at the matches that the Meltz HAS gone whole hog on, and reading the notable omissions.... Â 10/20/02 Kurt Angle/Chris Benoit vs. Edge/Rey Mysterio ****3/4 Â I wonder what he took quarter star off that for? That was the best match I'd seen in years. Â On another note, the much-masturbated over Rockers/Orients match I have mentioned before, I believe possibly even in threads with Reznor input, there is something that really added to that match on top of the dynamism of the actual wrestling - the absolutely molten Miami crowd. They were as passionate about wanting a Rockers win in that match as they were for Warrior and Hulkster later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cum Doctor Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 WM 23 - HHH vs. Batista: **3/4 Seems very very harsh or am i remembering it being better than it was? Â I think this rating is fair enough. I thought they had a cracker the month later at Backlash though. Obvious the HIAC is the best of their matches, but that Backlash match was damn good. Â WM17 - Steve Austin vs. Rock: ****1/2 - Seriously no pleasing this guy is there? Â Indeed. I'd possibly have it at ****3/4 because I thought they took the ending a wee bit too far, but other than that, it's an absolute classic. Â Other ratings that really bug the shit out of me is 4* for the Rock/HHH Iron Man which I honestly think is the best match of all time, and Rock/HHH at Backlash 2000 at ***3/4?!?! WHAT THE FUCK?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiffy Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 WM 23 - HHH vs. Batista: **3/4 Seems very very harsh or am i remembering it being better than it was? Â I think this rating is fair enough. I thought they had a cracker the month later at Backlash though. Obvious the HIAC is the best of their matches, but that Backlash match was damn good. Â WM17 - Steve Austin vs. Rock: ****1/2 - Seriously no pleasing this guy is there? Â Indeed. I'd possibly have it at ****3/4 because I thought they took the ending a wee bit too far, but other than that, it's an absolute classic. Â Other ratings that really bug the shit out of me is 4* for the Rock/HHH Iron Man which I honestly think is the best match of all time, and Rock/HHH at Backlash 2000 at ***3/4?!?! WHAT THE FUCK?! Â I think ya need a finish which works well with the match, built up to and stuff to get the full 5. In that respect, rock austin, as amazing as it was, vince mcmahon on assisted chair providing duties was always going to cheapen in slightly. And it didn't work, cos ya can't turn austin heel in texas. So that loses a good half snowflake for me, which is a shame, as it was such an incredible match that with a proper finish, it might well have been the best wwf match ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWEisJericho Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 I must admit, I dont mind anyone being selective on a match being "5 stars" because to me, 5 stars would mean you've seen a perfect match, which should be a very rare occurance, surely? Agreed, should be a special occurance but from the matches he hasnt given 5* in recent years there are a few glaring ommisions  Other ratings that really bug the shit out of me is 4* for the Rock/HHH Iron Man which I honestly think is the best match of all time, and Rock/HHH at Backlash 2000 at ***3/4?!?! WHAT THE FUCK?! Ha im with you on the Rock/HHH Ironman, Love it! When Taker returns and cleans house, one of the loudest pops i can remember Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members JNLister Posted June 16, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted June 16, 2011 I think Rock-Austin as opposed to the other WM17 matches is one that looks better with hindsight. On the day, it was more a case of "look at that workrate!" for Benoit-Angle and "look at those moves" for TLC. Rock-Austin was one where as time passes it becomes more symbolicly huge -- not just the two top guys of their generation meeting in the biggest selling match in US history (even to this day), but also the literal peak of the boom and the last moment before it all started going downhill. Â It's also the type of match that has lots more facets to the in-ring story (whether by design or just perceived by viewers) that means its one of the few bouts that looks better the more you see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Carbomb Posted June 16, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted June 16, 2011 And some of the ROH matches he gave ***** to are ridiculous. Â Too true. Do Fixer vs Blood Generation for instance, while a breathtaking and exciting spotfest which is enjoyable, is a complete murder of psychology at the end with people diving back in about 90 seconds after taking a sheer head drop, and managed in no way shape or form to make me care about who was going to win. Â What bugs me about the rating is that that was a standard DG sprint match as well - you see them all the time in DragonGate. But no, it happened in RoH, who only get the best wrestling, dontcha know, so fuck all those DG matches. Â Also, I love DG, but even I'll admit that the whole point of sprints is for pure fun, not because they're actually that good as matches. There's a reason they reserve the singles and regular tags for main events and fill the rest of the cards with multi-man matches. Â I dont get how Rock vs Hogan doesnt get five stars but Kobashi and Joe did. The match structure was the same. Both matches were all about the spectical and the crowd response and the novelty of each persons trademark moves being performed on the opponent they'd never thought they see him face. If you took away the aura and the crowd, neither match is a masterpiece. Â Joe/Kobashi was NOT that good. Kobashi is my joint-top favourite wrestler of all time, and I've seen him in plenty better. If I'm honest, I thought he looked off-pace in this, and I've never understood the praise that Joe gets, as I've ranted about many times. Â Y'know which Kobashi match I immediately thought of as superior to Joe/Kobashi? Kobashi against Ogawa Yoshinari for the GHC title, and THAT wasn't five stars either - bloody good match, but not perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cum Doctor Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 What bugs me about the rating is that that was a standard DG sprint match as well - you see them all the time in DragonGate. But no, it happened in RoH, who only get the best wrestling, dontcha know, so fuck all those DG matches.  I've watched and still watch loads of those kinds of matches and the only match I think that's as good is the Kobe match from 2005. Other than that, I'd say it's the best multi-man tag I've seen from Dragon Gate.  Also, I love DG, but even I'll admit that the whole point of sprints is for pure fun, not because they're actually that good as matches  The way I see it, if a match is fun, then it's good. That's the whole point of a match for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiffy Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 I think Rock-Austin as opposed to the other WM17 matches is one that looks better with hindsight. On the day, it was more a case of "look at that workrate!" for Benoit-Angle and "look at those moves" for TLC. Rock-Austin was one where as time passes it becomes more symbolicly huge -- not just the two top guys of their generation meeting in the biggest selling match in US history (even to this day), but also the literal peak of the boom and the last moment before it all started going downhill. It's also the type of match that has lots more facets to the in-ring story (whether by design or just perceived by viewers) that means its one of the few bouts that looks better the more you see it.  And that's what makes the ending such a shame, it was such a peak, and such an iconic moment, to leave it without a proper finish, just seems something's missing. Ach well, such is life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members air_raid Posted June 16, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted June 16, 2011 There's a reason they reserve the singles and regular tags for main events and fill the rest of the cards with multi-man matches. Â Isn't the Open The Triangle Gate title usually the main event, when defended? Or was that just when it was Toryumon? Obviously the main storylines all centre around the ever-rotating factions, and I was under the distinct impression that the faction v faction multi-man skirmish was always on last? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cum Doctor Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 Isn't the Open The Triangle Gate title usually the main event, when defended? Or was that just when it was Toryumon? Â Main shows are usually main evented with Open The Dream Gate matches. The Twin Gate title mostly gets priority on such shows as well, depending on the importance of the six man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digforvictory Posted June 16, 2011 Share Posted June 16, 2011 What did Meltzer give the Umaga/Cena Last Man Standing match out of interest? Because in my opinion that was an absolutely incredible match from start to finish. I'd say there hasn't been a title match since that has been anywhere near as good or exciting as that. Â I think Meltzer gets an unfair rep. I think he's actually quite positive most of the time, especially compared to 99% of other Wrestling journalists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.