Dave Meltzer

[LEGIT]

I get the criticism of Meltzer's ratings but it doesn't bother me that much and think it's impossible for someone to be consistent over decades.

But yeah I get the criticism to a point, for example if a movie critic was giving five stars to every good or decent movie that came out now, but was much more selective of praise and high ratings in the 80s and 90s, he too would be criticised and his opinion would ultimately mean less to people.

 

[davertfnewman]

My gripe with his ratings has always been that it's only based on match quality. What if it was based on interview quality or angle quality? Then you would find that some people who never got highly rated for matches and had a smattering of "good matches" but consistently kill it on the mic might start overtaking people who always had good matches because those guys can't talk or aren't believable outside of an action setting.

[The Gaffer]

We definitely crossed a threshold for me awhile back where people complaining about the ratings and telling everyone how they don't matter got more annoying than the ratings themselves. I like them. They're a silly wee style guide based on one guy's preferences. Meltzer's an island with a lot of what he does and I think things would be that little bit less interesting without him around. He's sort of part of the wrestling world's furniture. 

He'd be a photocopier, obviously. 

[Michael_3165]

I do like looking at his match ratings in general because he likes alot of what I do. Though he does go a bit wacky sometimes. 

 

[theringmaster]

On 9/2/2023 at 1:10 PM, Michael_3165 said:

Didn't see this posted anywhere else here... 

 

Old Dave's ratings for All In 23'...

• Aussie Open (c) vs. MJF & Adam Cole – ROH World Tag Team Titles **3/4
• Jack Perry (c) vs. Hook – FTW Title ***1/4
• CM Punk (c) vs. Samoa Joe – “Real” World Title ***1/2
• Bullet Club Gold vs. The Golden Elite ****1/2
• FTR (c) vs. The Young Bucks – AEW World Tag Team Titles ****3/4
• Best Friends, Orange Cassidy, Penta & Eddie Kingston vs. Blackpool Combat Club, Santana & Ortiz ****1/2
• Hikaru Shida (c) vs. Saraya vs. Toni Storm vs. Britt Baker – AEW Women’s World Title **3/4
• Darby Allin & Sting vs. Swerve Strickland & Christian Cage ****1/4
• Will Ospreay vs. Chris Jericho ****3/4
• The House of Black (c) vs. The Acclaimed – AEW World Trios Title **1/2
• MJF (c) vs. Adam Cole – AEW World Title ****1/2

I have no idea where he gets these ratings from  or what criteria he uses. How on earth did he rate Jericho v Ospreay, the 6 man ft Omega or FTR v Bucks as 4.5+* ? 

He has lost all credibility some time back, but it just goes to show how bias he is about his lads. Those matches in the same league as Michaels v Taker HIAC or Hart v Austin WM13?  Ludicrous. 

Like most thing from Dave, it get's taken completely out of context online.

In the newsletter he states this before giving his ratings:

 

"Regarding the star ratings here, I was at the event live in the press section, which was far away and very different from watching on TV. The ratings are based on that vantage point and it would be better to watch the show again but I haven’t had the time since returning."

[WyattSheepMask]

It must’ve absolutely pained him to not give Osprey 5 stars

[Loki]

Kurt Angle, possibly the greatest in-ring performer in wrestling history, was never in a Meltzer 5 stars.

I always have that in the back of my mind when these discussions come up.  It’s just one bloke’s immediate reaction to a match, it’s about as important as a Gladstone MCU film review.

[garynysmon]

2 hours ago, WyattSheepMask said:

It must’ve absolutely pained him to not give Osprey 5 stars

Meltzer when Will Ospreay is wrestling for Impact in October.

[IronSheik]

He only gave Hogan v Rock at Mania 18 THREE stars. Which tells me he weighs his ratings disproportionately in favour of technical flippy dippy bullshit and doesn't value working an audience's emotions, telling a story in the ring, changing gears on the fly based on an unexpected crowd reaction, incredible false finishes, drawing a massive box office number and blowing the fucking roof off a building at the highest level under pressure. Fair enough, it's his system I suppose. 

[Magnum Milano]

13 minutes ago, IronSheik said:

He only gave Hogan v Rock at Mania 18 THREE stars. Which tells me he weighs his ratings disproportionately in favour of technical flippy dippy bullshit and doesn't value working an audience's emotions, telling a story in the ring, changing gears on the fly based on an unexpected crowd reaction, incredible false finishes, drawing a massive box office number and blowing the fucking roof off a building at the highest level under pressure. Fair enough, it's his system I suppose. 

How much "flippy, dippy bullshit" did Austin vs Bret at Mania 13 have? 

Did Austin vs Bret not work an audience's emotions? Did it not tell a story in the ring?  He gave that five stars by the way.

[Vamp]

On 9/4/2023 at 5:19 PM, WyattSheepMask said:

It must’ve absolutely pained him to not give Osprey 5 stars

Wasn't the Tokyo Dome.

[BomberPat]

I don't particularly care about star ratings, I think they're a stupid topic that Meltzer doesn't care about half as much as his critics, but it's funny how you can somehow spin Meltzer not giving an Ospreay match five stars into a complaint about how he always gives Ospreay matches five stars.

[69MeDon]

5 minutes ago, BomberPat said:

I don't particularly care about star ratings, I think they're a stupid topic that Meltzer doesn't care about half as much as his critics, but it's funny how you can somehow spin Meltzer not giving an Ospreay match five stars into a complaint about how he always gives Ospreay matches five stars.

Meltzer Derangement Syndrome.

[air_raid]

12 hours ago, IronSheik said:

He only gave Hogan v Rock at Mania 18 THREE stars. Which tells me he weighs his ratings disproportionately in favour of technical flippy dippy bullshit and doesn't value working an audience's emotions, telling a story in the ring, changing gears on the fly based on an unexpected crowd reaction, incredible false finishes drawing a massive box office number and blowing the fucking roof off a building at the highest level under pressure. Fair enough, it's his system I suppose. 

Well, his highest ever rating was for the Okada vs Omega 2/3 falls match, their third for the belt and fourth overall, sitting tied on 1-1-1. The match had a match-long injury story, played on audience expectations (likelihood of seldom-beaten Okada dropping two consecutive falls after winning the first), and built in an uncountable number of moves/sequences telling stories that revisited and built on previous matches they'd had with each other, and from rivalries with others, the antithesis of moves for the sake of moves. And yes, the live crowd lost their minds when Kenny won. While "lore" is a dirty word round these parts, and there's the same "MCU" criticism of have they told a story bell to bell if it's dependent on you having seen multiple other stories for everything to resonate, nonetheless, it's clear that telling a story is pretty critical to Dave's stars, regardless of if we agree with how the story was told and whether or not we agree with how much he liked the story.

Or maybe we shouldn't evaluate his system based on one match.

Or maybe - the real answer - we shouldn't give a shit.

[David]

I don't understand why everyone is upset about his star ratings when he and Alvarez use the "thumbs up, thumbs down, thumbs in the middle" nonsense. That has to be one of the most annoying things ever. 

What the fuck even is "thumbs in the middle"?