Sorry Dave, rating matches is harder than I thought

[Bo Rida]

I always tend to forget matches at the end of the year when we're discussing our highlights and as what I've watched is often different to the general discourse I thought I'd keep a record of my favourite matches of 2023.

However I've never liked Meltzer's stupid quarter star ratings so thought I'd rate matches out of 10. Also don't have a set criteria of what makes a match great so will rate more matches higher, not just the more traditional 5 star match contenders.
It was a great plan except only doing my favourites meant I'm only really using 7-10. At which point I'm better off using the quarter stars, sorry Dave it's a better sytem than I realised. Not having a set criteria also makes it harder to differentiate what's a 9 what's a 10 etc.

That combined with me being too lazy to do it properly (eg adding dates, consistent naming etc) and ironically forgetting to add some means I've bascially given up already. I have a new found respect for those here that keep their own stats for everything, just recording my favourites was too much.

Anyone curious can see my favourite matches so far below, it's not with scores or in order but those towards the bottom are a tier below those at the top. This is basically half of the complete list.

SPOILER: Click to show

Kenoh vs Kaito Kiyomiya - Noah
Will Osprey vs kenny Omega - NJPW
Brian Danielson vs Bandido - aew
CDK vs Onyro and Ram Kaichow - Baka gaijin and friends
jamie hayter vs emi sakura - aew
Maki Itoh and Miyu vs Hyper Misao and Shoka - tjpw
Takeshita vs MJF - aew
Chris Brookes vs Yukihi Maya - Baka gaijin and friends
Rika vs Miu Watanabe - tjpw
Misao and Shoka vs Panda and Neko - tjpw
Omega vs Vikingo - aew
yokihko and chris brookes vs Mao and Shumna - ddt
Komander vs vikingo - roh
Brian Danielson vs Takeshita - aew
Mark Briscoe vs Lethal - aew
Mox vs Hangman - aew
Darby Allin, Sting, Muta vs Hakushi, Akira, Marifuja - noah
Darby Allin vs Samoa Joe - aew
Danielson vs Rush - aew
Mike Bailey vs Greshham - gcw
Veny vs Joey Janella - gcw
Itoh, Rina and Veny vs Starkz, Sawyer and Janai Kai - gcw
mao/shumna vs Higuchi and Ryota Nakatsu - ddt
ibushi vs janella - gcw
mdk vs bussy - gcw

[Jindrak Mark]

It really is. I loved Okada v Omega and Sami Zayn v Johnny Knoxville pretty much the same amount but it'd feel weird rating them on the same scale because they're so wildly different.

I've never liked rating stuff in general and when I do I'm usually pretty conservative, rarely going outside a 4-8 out of 10. When I see the most voted numbers on polls though it's usually always the extremes, like 0-1 or 9-10. To me that means some of the best/worst stuff ever and will realistically rarely happen but people regularly vote 0s for run of the mill stuff that clearly wasn't all-time bad or 10s for stuff that will be forgotten in a week. Like if I give a 9 or a 10 to every random thing I enjoyed what do I give when an actual GOAT contender emerges? I'd have to pull a Meltzer and break the scale like he did when he went above 5 stars.

And don't get me started on rating movies lol. A while back I created an account on one of those apps that tracks every movie you've ever watched and asks you to rate them all against each other. I uninstalled 10 minutes later out of frustration trying to figure out whether I should rank No Country For Old Men, The Exorcist or Tropic Thunder higher. I love them all! But for completely different reasons and depending on mood and what kind of thing I feel like watching on a certain day. I couldn't even begin to decide the order of everything.

[ANuclearError]

For me personally, the trick is not think of it as "How good is the thing?" but rather "How much would I recommend the thing?".

[ace]

I rate movies on a five star scale only using half stars and not quarters. There are times I really want to break it and use a quarter but then I’d have to go back and redefine the meaning of the numbers and don’t want to do it.

Basically my rating breaks down like this:

5 - Masterpiece
4 - Great
3 - Good
2 - Fine/Watchable
1 - Bad

Then I use the half If the movie has something of note worth rewarding. Like…a 4.5 is still a great movie…but it was a great movie that did something or said something or tried something that made it stand out as a great movie with a bit extra in there. Something to give it a distinction over the other 4 star rated movies…but it’s not a 5.

Most of the time I want to use a quarter it’s for a movie where it’s like…a 3 so it’s good. And it does a little something that’s neat but it’s not that big a deal and doesn’t measure up to the 3.5’s that exist already. And you kind of want to acknowledge it…but it doesn’t really raise the tide so to speak.

Put into practice it would be like this…

Halloween is a masterpiece. That’s an easy 5.

It Follows is a great movie…so it’s a 4. But it’s also standing out from other 4s because of the music and cinematography and an expert pacing. So I would bump that to a 4.5 and say…this is a great movie and on top of that there are aspects worth extra attention.

I don’t know if that helps translate to wrestling…because I don’t rate matches. But if I did it would be the same idea. A good match? That’s getting 3 stars. Did it do something to earn it a bit more distinction? If yes…then I’d add the half or, in this case, quarters.

[Dr. Bolty, Disaster Enby]

I kinda love that your using a ten point scale convinced you of the use case of quarter stars, because my go to argument is that if you can accept the difference between 9.5 and 10, you can accept the mathematically identical difference between ****3/4 and *****.

[salz4life]

I couldn't do it. I respect what Dave does. I don't always agree (honestly, I disagree a lot) but I think he definitely serves a purpose and has the credibility do what he does. He makes mistakes, but since Cornette went the morning radio shock jock way that he did, Dave is the encyclopedia we have.

[XIII]

I know that it’s just Dave’s opinions, but I can’t take it too seriously when he’s giving out 6s and 7s. Dude needs to go back and re-rate some Manami Toyota matches I think. lol

I like to use the metric of how caught up I get in the match. I think that combines everything: ring work, atmosphere/crowd, character work, stakes, etc.

[Cranjis McBasketball]

Apr 15, 2023 17:32:20 GMT -5 ace said:

I rate movies on a five star scale only using half stars and not quarters. There are times I really want to break it and use a quarter but then I’d have to go back and redefine the meaning of the numbers and don’t want to do it.

Basically my rating breaks down like this:

5 - Masterpiece
4 - Great
3 - Good
2 - Fine/Watchable
1 - Bad

Then I use the half If the movie has something of note worth rewarding. Like…a 4.5 is still a great movie…but it was a great movie that did something or said something or tried something that made it stand out as a great movie with a bit extra in there. Something to give it a distinction over the other 4 star rated movies…but it’s not a 5.

Most of the time I want to use a quarter it’s for a movie where it’s like…a 3 so it’s good. And it does a little something that’s neat but it’s not that big a deal and doesn’t measure up to the 3.5’s that exist already. And you kind of want to acknowledge it…but it doesn’t really raise the tide so to speak.

Put into practice it would be like this…

Halloween is a masterpiece. That’s an easy 5.

It Follows is a great movie…so it’s a 4. But it’s also standing out from other 4s because of the music and cinematography and an expert pacing. So I would bump that to a 4.5 and say…this is a great movie and on top of that there are aspects worth extra attention.

I don’t know if that helps translate to wrestling…because I don’t rate matches. But if I did it would be the same idea. A good match? That’s getting 3 stars. Did it do something to earn it a bit more distinction? If yes…then I’d add the half or, in this case, quarters.

11 million stars - Took place in Tokyo Dome

[pinja]

It is with every rating of artistic work. I feel much more confident talking about the goods and bads of movies and books, yet I don't want to rate them. At least not conclusively. If something is really important, I feel like I'm devaluing it by putting a number on it. Like who would rate the bible as a 5 star book? It just is an immeasurable work of culture. Wrestling of course should be easier to rate. You can judge a match solely within its context because it rarely trancends it. But how would anyone properly rate Ali vs Inoki for example?

[tirtefaa]

I've always wanted Dave to explain the difference between a 3.25 star match and a 3.5 star match.

I'm sure the answer would be; "Well, you see umm...the thing uh about that...as I umm...you know... here's the thing...umm...it's a .25 difference."

[Deleted]

Apr 15, 2023 17:22:43 GMT -5 Jindrak Mark said:

It really is. I loved Okada v Omega and Sami Zayn v Johnny Knoxville pretty much the same amount but it'd feel weird rating them on the same scale because they're so wildly different.

I generally agree with Dave's modern day ratings, but his takes during the golden age are a perfect example of why it's so hard to compare wrestling matches, because they all set out to accomplish different things. It's a flawed system where you're constantly comparing apples to oranges.

There's no world in which Hogan/Andre at Wrestlemania 3 deserves negative-four stars. That match set out exactly to do what people wanted out of it, hit every story beat it needed to, and created a moment that will be talked about for as long as pro wrestling is remembered. On the other hand, Cody Rhodes vs. Sammy Guevara got 5 stars from Dave, and as much as I'm a huge AEW fan and enjoy both guys, I can't remember a single thing about that match. Was it really over twice as good as Hogan/Andre? From a technical standpoint, absolutely - it's not even comparable how much better the in-ring work was, but I could not recall a single thing about it other than the fact that it happened.

I totally get that Dave's star ratings are just his personal preference as a wrestling journalist, but I think to be completely fair and objective, you'd need to grade wrestling matches on multiple criteria that looks at them from all angles, and even then, some of it would be subjective.

Crowd reaction? Did the match exceed expectations or fall short? Did it feel important, or like a throwaway match? Technical wrestling? High-flying? Hard-hitting?

Those are just some criteria off the top of my head which could be better streamlined by someone else, I'm sure, but if you start awarding points in categories and tallying up scores, the playing field evens out a lot.

If you were grading on "met audience expectations," I'm pretty sure the -4 star Hogan/Andre match would swap places with the 4.5 star Omega/Moxley Exploding Barbed Wire Death Match.

And, for full disclosure, I vastly prefer the "flippy shit." The flippier the better. But you can't quite directly compare that to McIntyre/Sheamus/Gunther at Wrestlemania, which was also excellent in a wholly different fashion.

[Clash, Never a Meter Maid]

I don’t use any rating systems when I review stuff, but that’s just me. I know it works well for others, but my opinion on not just matches, but movies and shows and games or books can constantly be in flux as my tastes evolve. That just makes for me trying to keep an organized system too much of a hassle. Much easier for me to just state “I’d highly recommend or slightly recommend this, or not at all”.

I guess that’s still a system, but it’s one simple enough for me to keep track of without going back like “I rated this 3.75 or a B- three years again but today with the new format it’s B or 3.9996”or something.

[Mochi Lone Wolf]

Dave's ratings were always whatever to me. I respect them and agree with about 80 percent of them. My biggest issue with them is that he doesn't do what Roger Ebert did with movies.


Roger Ebert rated Goodfellas and Iron Man the same but, he made it clear that there's a difference between the quality of the two. His point was always that a four-star movie does what it set out to do perfectly.


I don't think that's the standard Dave holds wrestling matches to.