Interesting question I feel

[Andrew is Good]

I listened to Raven's Secrets of the Ring Vol 5 again (I just listen to them now at work) and I was thinking about something interesting he said. He talked about some of Ring of Honor's 5 star matches, and big 4 star matches or more they've had, and that the crowd was reacting very little. However, in matches that feature Hacksaw Jim Duggan for example (I think Raven is a closet Duggan mark myself), they may not be the most technical, but the crowd is always into it and is always going crazy.

So what is better. A good wrestling match where there is little reaction, or a subpar wrestling match where there is lots of reaction.

[Andrew is Good]

I feel the two, like, you can go with either of them for many reasons. With the 4 star match with little reaction, you have a technical masterpiece. It's like going to an art gallary and looking at all the great paintings. Now, I'm not really into art, but if I was, that's probably what I would liken it too.

With the 2 star match, you have what makes the wrestling buisness so fun, and what is the main art of professional wrestling, and that's working the crowd, getting them into the match, and making them believe in it. I was watching Heat recently, and it was a match between The Highlanders and Jim Duggan vs Viscera and Cade/Murdoch, and the crowd was rocking. I felt they were really into the match, and while all 6 are not going to be in many great technical matches, they all knew how to get a crowd into the match.

I feel that the second option is better, because if I were in attendance for something like that, yeah, I would appreciate the technical wrestling match more, but I'd probably have a lot more fun with guys who can't wrestle as well pumping up everybody and getting everybody into their match.

[Arturo Classico]

To me you need fan reaction to make a match great. No matter how good a match is if it gets no reaction whats the point. Look at the Helms-Yang match it was good but get no reaction and chanted boring.

[MGH]

Give me the greater match. (Shocking, I know )

[Deleted]

I'm not sure really...I can't imagine a match I'd consider to be 4 star without fan interaction so I find it hard to answer.

[Jeff]

Fan reaction is key

[Jason Todd Grisham]

Here's my opinion, if you can't get the crowd to react how can it be considered four stars in the first place? It can't be that good of a match if you are not connecting with the audience. If a four star match doesn't get the reaction of a two star there is something wrong with that match.

[MGH]

a2j88 said:

Here's my opinion, if you can't get the crowd to react how can it be considered four stars in the first place? It can't be that good of a match if you are not connecting with the audience. If a four star match doesn't get the reaction of a two star there is something wrong with that match.

This is where I'll disagree, at least in the case of ROH. Whenever they run in Dayton or Long Island it seems, the crowds are always dead. Recent case scenario is ROH Suffocation. Delirious and Matt Sydal went out there and had another great match. Lots of good action. At Survival of the Fittest these two had the crowd ready to piss themselves. Dayton sat on their hands. There were awesome matches on that show that would have gotten tons of crowd reaction anywhere else but Dayton. Some crowds just react oddly, so you can't always put it on the match.

[Jason Todd Grisham]

How would you define it as an awesome match? Do the crowds refuse to get into it? Do they ever get into sporting events? Or whenever there's a football game in Dayton they stay quiet?

The absolute measure of success is if the people were entertained. A way to measure whether they were entertained or not is how much they get sucked into the drama. Perhaps they get sucked in different ways than you see? Or do they need to wrestle a different style?

[Andrew is Good]

One example Raven actually gave were the matches between Joe and Punk, where he said people were sitting on their hands, and they get 5 stars. While the action is good, and while the wrestling maybe good, they lack crowd psychology. Yeah, Sydal and Delirious did a lot of cool things in their match, but they didn't involve the crowd, or made the crowd feel that the match and the outcome was important.

Then again, it didn't have the face/heel dynamic. I remember at that same show, there was a match between the Kings of Wrestling vs Colt Cabana and Jimmy Jacobs, and while it wasn't as good as Sydal/Delirious, I loved it because it had a good face/heel dynamic, and both teams played off each other well and the crowd loved it.

[Stevie J]

It's the two star match for the people in attendance, and the four star match for the people watching on TV. Since being there live always owns watching it on TV, I voted for the two star.

[J is Justice]

I cannot enjoy a match if the crowd isn't up for it, so I voted for 2 stars.