According to Meltzer...

[antimcmahon]

According to Dave Meltzer the following are the only WWF/E matches rated 5 stars.

WrestleMania X: Shawn Michaels vs. Razor Ramon (Ladder match)

SummerSlam 1994: Bret Hart vs. Owen Hart (Steel Cage match)

WrestleMania 13: Bret Hart vs. Stone Cold Steve Austin (Submission match)

In Your House: Badd Blood: Shawn Michaels vs. The Undertaker (Hell in a Cell)


Now I don't doubt Meltzer's credentials. And believe me I do think that Taker vs. HBK HIAC is well deserving of that rating. But is it just me or have there been several WWF/E matches better than the HIAC in the last few years? I mean how could Kurt Angle not atleast get voted for one match?

Personally I think that the following matches were better...

Kurt Angle vs. Shawn Michaels WM21

Shawn Michaels vs. Chris Benoit vs. HHH WM20

Kurt Angle vs. Chris Benoit Royal Rumble 03

Undertaker vs. Kurt Angle 02 episode of Sd! (from Taker's dvd)

Rey Mysterio & Edge vs. Chris Benoit & Kurt Angle 2 out of 3 falls for the tag titles on SD! (which was only rated 4 and 3/4 stars).

or even Bret Hart vs. Owen Hart WMX

Can anyone else come up with any they thought were better?

[Johnny Danger (Godz)]

Meltzer is just a mark who's made a "career" out of hating the WWE. Thats really all I've got to say. If 1989's Ric Flair faced 2003's Kurt Angle in an Iron Man Match in a WWE ring, he'd take a s*** on it

[Lance Uppercut]

Don't show Angle this... he'll snap Meltzer's ankle, tea bag him, and has his wife urinate on him...

[Corporate H]

jmoney said:

Don't show Angle this... he'll snap Meltzer's ankle, tea bag him, and has his wife urinate on him...

And then...he'll sodomize his wife...allegedly.

[pegasuswarrior]

Any wrestling fan who doesn't have British Bulldog vs. Bret Hart Summerslam 92 on that list is going to hell.

[Deleted]

Steamboat/Savage anyone?

[canary]

Road Dogg Jesse James vs Double J anyone?!!?!?

The biggest feud the city of Nashville has ever seen!

[Rocky Van Heineken]

Steamboat and Savage is THE match of the 80's, IMO. That's one of the first matches I think about when I think about 80's WWF.

[Chuckie Finster]

Here's a page of Meltzer rated matches from WWE since 1986 and has links to other companies.

["IcePic" Rick Cobos]

godz said:

Meltzer is just a mark who's made a "career" out of hating the WWE. Thats really all I've got to say. If 1989's Ric Flair faced 2003's Kurt Angle in an Iron Man Match in a WWE ring, he'd take a s*** on it

lol

[MGH]

I don't get why anyone cares what Meltzer "rates" matches. People all rate matches on a different scale and from different perspectives. Meltzer is no more qualified to "rate" a match than I am.

[Dr. Bolty, Disaster Enby]

Meltzer doesn't give WWE the full five so often. So the hell what? First off, it's not a big deal. At all.

Secondly, almost all the matches commonly argued as five-star matches got ****3/4 from him. Feel free to argue how little difference a quarter star makes, but if the rating is going to exist, then logically it has to be used more often than the full five.

[-Lithium-]

The Triple Threat match at Wrestlemania 20 is ***** no doubt. Build up, great match, great atomsphere, great ending. There is nothing it was missing. He just biased against WWE...

[Dr. Bolty, Disaster Enby]

No, he's biased toward Kobashi, Kawada, and Misawa in their prime. Obviously he thinks that nothing else, ever, can measure up to what those three did against each other.

Seriously! Do you think TNA gets high ratings more often than WWE? Or how about his common pick for "Worst Promotion," NEW JAPAN? People hear that he never gives WWE five stars and assume that he's biased against Vince's boys. If anything, it's because of the way that Vince de-emphasizes matches in favor of storyline; the WWE style is not exactly conducive to "perfect" matches (what with the seeming inability to end a match without some kind of interference).

[JMA]

If Meltzer is a mark then I hate to think what that makes the rest of the IWC (including the people they don't think they're members of it, even though they are). Speaking objectively, Meltzer is an insider with his own opinion. No more and no less. (The fact that so many sites blatantly steal from him or at least cite his newsletter shows that he's important in his field, despite the views of his detractors.)

That being said, I strongly disagree with him here. He's overlooking some great matches and wrestlers. And that's all I'm going to say in this thread.

[G✇JI☈A]

Damn him for having an opinion!

Well I trust his opinion more than some other guy who should remain nameless (His initials are W.K ). You want proof go and see what W.K rated that abortion of a Ladder Match between RVD and the Big Show last year from a ECW show.

["IcePic" Rick Cobos]

mygreatesthour said:

I don't get why anyone cares what Meltzer "rates" matches. People all rate matches on a different scale and from different perspectives. Meltzer is no more qualified to "rate" a match than I am.

Personally, he is one of my references if I have not seen a match yet, as often his opinions of matches gel with mine.

[HMARK Center]

Shawn Michaels vs. Chris Benoit vs. HHH WM20

Absolutely, unequivocally not.

A very good match, definitely not "perfect".

[vinniemac]

ravenm said:

The Triple Threat match at Wrestlemania 20 is ***** no doubt. Build up, great match, great atomsphere, great ending. There is nothing it was missing. He just biased against WWE...

No way. In fact, Meltzer is one of the most objective cats in the business when it comes to WWE. He doesn't kiss their ass, but he has spoken highly of them when he felt they did something admirable, and he's been very objective when they F-up: BADLY.

5 * matches are not something he doles out like candy on halloween, at least not these days.

WM20's "triple threat" match is so grotesquely overrated, at best it's a 3* match. Even with the botched spots, Eddie & Kurt's match was 4*s and blew that dial-it-in Trips'n'Shawn pony ride (poor Benoit) out of the water.

Just because WWE doesn't allow workers to pull too many 5* matches out of their hats, and just because Meltzer isn't a WWE mark doesn't mean he's anti-WWE.


I'll take the opinions of an old fart who could tell you about any 5* match Pampero Firpo had, all the way to the present, with ROH 5* matches, over people who think WM20's "triple threat" match was 5*s and accuse anyone who believes otherwise as "Anti-WWE," without having much evidence to actually back up that assessment.

[KLRA]

The thing is that most people forget about a lot of the matches on the list, is that you need to look at them for the time that they were had. 5* matches tend to be matches that pretty much set themselves apart and are without a doubt a GREAT match.

One of the problems with Angle that Meltzer has stated is that sometimes his matches start to become repetitive.

Also another thing with the WWE is that Meltzer takes crowd reaction into account. If a crowd is sitting on their hands for the majority of the match, then chances are that it's not going to get rated high.