|
Post by puropotsy on Feb 20, 2023 17:14:54 GMT -5
I have missed doing past years, but am all in on doing a list this year
|
|
|
Post by elliott on Feb 20, 2023 17:50:51 GMT -5
I have 262 matches rated 5 stars and counting Awesome. I thought I had a lot. I am not nearly as stingy with my stars as a lot of people. I probably never will be.
I feel like I've gone over my ratings system a thousand times. I'm a generous rater. I have just over 100 5* matches. , around 200 something 4.75* and who the fuck knows how many 4-4.5* matches. I don't know any other way to live.
I just don't agree with the mindset that there can only be one or a very small select number. These aren't movies or albums people put years of thought & time into and then take possibly years to even produce. They're live performances by people who perform 3, 5, sometimes 7 nights a week. I think of 5 star matches as like a great day at your job or if you prefer more separation from a day job, think of something like a great basketball game. It would be insane to say Michael Jordan only had one "5 star" basketball game in his career. Wilt Chamberlain averaged 50 points per game in a season and only one of those was "5 stars?" No way. So I don't really get why some folks do that with wrestling. Or Laurence Olivier only had one 5 star performance on stage? Just no way.
|
|
|
Post by elliott on Feb 20, 2023 17:51:17 GMT -5
I have missed doing past years, but am all in on doing a list this year AWESOME!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by [Darren] on Feb 20, 2023 18:34:53 GMT -5
Awesome. I thought I had a lot. I am not nearly as stingy with my stars as a lot of people. I probably never will be.
I feel like I've gone over my ratings system a thousand times. I'm a generous rater. I have just over 100 5* matches. , around 200 something 4.75* and who the fuck knows how many 4-4.5* matches. I don't know any other way to live.
I just don't agree with the mindset that there can only be one or a very small select number. These aren't movies or albums people put years of thought & time into and then take possibly years to even produce. They're live performances by people who perform 3, 5, sometimes 7 nights a week. I think of 5 star matches as like a great day at your job or if you prefer more separation from a day job, think of something like a great basketball game. It would be insane to say Michael Jordan only had one "5 star" basketball game in his career. Wilt Chamberlain averaged 50 points per game in a season and only one of those was "5 stars?" No way. So I don't really get why some folks do that with wrestling. Or Laurence Olivier only had one 5 star performance on stage? Just no way. Excellent point.
|
|
|
Post by Grimmas on Feb 21, 2023 10:25:00 GMT -5
I'm doing my each year MOTY/GOTY lists, so that will help towards the project.
One thing I am doing differently in 2023 is that I am not putting anything on my list that I haven't watched since I started noted when I last watched something (which was 2021.)
From those projects and the joshi chrono watch there will be a lot of new additions for me this time around.
|
|
|
Post by elliott on Feb 21, 2023 12:56:43 GMT -5
Make sure you nominate anything that hasn't been nominated!
|
|
|
Post by tetsujin on Feb 21, 2023 18:54:58 GMT -5
#92: Steve Austin vs Bret Hart (Submission Match - WWE - 23/03/1997): Shocking, yeah. I'm in peace with this match now. I understand it is one of the greatest, most important matches ever made, and it's one I 100% love and enjoy, but I just can't overlook the lack of pyschollogy when setting up some key spots. Could you elaborate on this, if you don't mind my asking? This is probably the one match I've watched more than any other and I've never noticed any glaring holes in the psychology. Bien sur. The biggest example I can recall is how they bring the ringbell to the match. Bret basically takes it and leaves it at the apron, inmediately going to do other stuff. The bell just needed to be there for the headshot spot later on. Austin's leg selling comes and goes whenever the match needs it, too. I know it sounds nitpicky (because it is), but I'm a guy who thinks that when comparing the absolute best matches ever you just have to nitpick a lot if you wanna build a list like this one. I still love the match and I agree it's one of the easiest matches to revisit time and time again.
Ok, these are the matches that I voted for last time that (sadly) won't make it this time . . #97: Arn Anderson/Tully Blanchard vs Barry Windham/Lex Luger (NWA - 27/03/1988): Unfortunately, this one is just too simple to compete against the true top 100 contenders. Being a great match is one thing, and being an excellent one is other. Still fun as fuck, though. #95: Nick Bockwinkel vs Wahoo McDaniel (AWA - 28/03/1983): Maybe the same can be said here. I adore Bock and this is one of his finest performances but it's just way too minimalist. That's interesting. I'm kinda the opposite in that I'm very high on meat and potatoes stuff done brilliantly at the moment - Wild Bull Curry vs Johnny Valentine, Atsushi Onita & Tarzan Goto vs Dragonmaster & Masanobu Kurisu, Caribbean Sunshine Boys... that sort of thing. I really like when they go to the point in my wrestling, but when considering the greatest matches ever, there's just an awful lot of matches that will tell super strong stories, or have very complex and well structured action, really impressive pacing, or whatever. You can even achieve something like that with a minimalist approach, for sure (Hash/Choshu from the 96 G1 Climax is a 5* to me and was my -iirc- #12 last time, for example. Or the infamous Ishii/Shibata, too), but great matches that just follow an usual, easy formula and "just" do it greatly can't compete with those, in my eyes. The COTC tag is just your typical southern tag match sprint, and Bock/Wahoo is just another "underdog laying a beating on the chicken shit heel and then some shenanigans happen for a polemic ending" 80s brawl. They're awesome examples of each, but there's nothing more to them, except maybe a couple of golden details or something. They're definitely great matches. But, to me in the GME context, greatness might not be enough. I demand some ambition.
|
|
|
Post by elliott on Feb 21, 2023 19:08:03 GMT -5
Could you elaborate on this, if you don't mind my asking? This is probably the one match I've watched more than any other and I've never noticed any glaring holes in the psychology. Bien sur. The biggest example I can recall is how they bring the ringbell to the match. Bret basically takes it and leaves it at the apron, inmediately going to do other stuff. The bell just needed to be there for the headshot spot later on. Austin's leg selling comes and goes whenever the match needs it, too. I know it sounds nitpicky (because it is), but I'm a guy who thinks that when comparing the absolute best matches ever you just have to nitpick a lot if you wanna build a list like this one. I still love the match and I agree it's one of the easiest matches to revisit time and time again.
One piece of criticism of the match I've seen that I can understand that POV is that its a submission match and Austin never went for the cobra clutch. It was the only submission he'd used as a finisher in the WWF and it was part of the iconic finish of the Survivor Series match. A great spot would've been Austin puts Bret in the cobra clutch, Bret kicks off the ropes to reverse it but now he's caught because pinfalls don't count. They could've thought it was too much of a babyface spot for Bret. But they could've done some sort of attempt at a cobra clutch at least for Austin.
|
|
|
Post by tetsujin on Feb 21, 2023 19:13:56 GMT -5
As for the stinginess debate, yeah I'm one of those hahaha. I have only ~15 five star matches rated as of today. I really try to make myself understand the difference between a great match and an all timer. The sports comparison is interesting, but I guess the better comparison would be about wrestler's performances. Like, yeah, for sure, Kenta Kobashi is my favourite wrestler and I would say he had a fucking ton of excellent performances throughout his career. But not all of them made excellent matches, because a wrestling match is not something only one guy can craft (except if you're Kota Ibushi with a doll). In producing a wrestling match there are more factors than just how motivated one particular wrestler might have felt when working it. The opponent(s) matters, the context matters, the right booking decisions matter, the fans reception matters. The small little details matter, if only when you're trying to break a tie between two matches that look very, very, very, very similar in quality. Not everything matters the same amount, but I hope I'm explaining myself right.
I want my five star matches to make me feel like they trascend wrestling, if that makes some sense. 9/6/95 is one of the best stories I've ever been told, but that's the easiest example. The "best matches of all time" should remain loyal to their name and be able to resonate with me not only becaue "they were great on their time". I look at Shield/Wyatts and I can feel that match fucking tearing the house down in 80s Arena México, or in a January 4th Tokyo Dome show from golden age NJPW. This is super, super subjective, I'm aware of that, but that's how those few matches make me feel. If I look at the Streak vs Career match and they told me the exact same story, with the same build up and the same ringwork, and it happened at WrestleMania 6 instead of 26, it would still be a five stars match to me (and obviously a much better main event for that show hehe).
Tl;dr: to me, if everything is great, in the end nothing is. That said, I don't mind people having a lot of 5* matches. It's weird to me, but that can only mean that those people really enjoy wrestling in their own way, and that's amazing. This is a very interesting debate, for sure.
|
|
|
Post by tetsujin on Feb 21, 2023 19:18:00 GMT -5
Bien sur. The biggest example I can recall is how they bring the ringbell to the match. Bret basically takes it and leaves it at the apron, inmediately going to do other stuff. The bell just needed to be there for the headshot spot later on. Austin's leg selling comes and goes whenever the match needs it, too. I know it sounds nitpicky (because it is), but I'm a guy who thinks that when comparing the absolute best matches ever you just have to nitpick a lot if you wanna build a list like this one. I still love the match and I agree it's one of the easiest matches to revisit time and time again.
One piece of criticism of the match I've seen that I can understand that POV is that its a submission match and Austin never went for the cobra clutch. It was the only submission he'd used as a finisher in the WWF and it was part of the iconic finish of the Survivor Series match. A great spot would've been Austin puts Bret in the cobra clutch, Bret kicks off the ropes to reverse it but now he's caught because pinfalls don't count. They could've thought it was too much of a babyface spot for Bret. But they could've done some sort of attempt at a cobra clutch at least for Austin. That would have been amazing and I don't know how I never thought about it, specially considering the big part the hold had on their SVS match, yeah. If I remember correctly, part of the build up centered around how Austin would manage against Bret in a match that obviously benefits the latter, while Austin was obviously not known for his technical stuff. So maybe he was already moving away from the clutch and didn't want to contradict the build?
|
|
|
Post by elliott on Feb 21, 2023 19:22:38 GMT -5
Pretty sure Austin was promising to beat him into submission.
So I can see both sides of doing a spot like that and not.
|
|
|
Post by club on Feb 22, 2023 16:35:32 GMT -5
As for the stinginess debate, yeah I'm one of those hahaha. I have only ~15 five star matches rated as of today. I really try to make myself understand the difference between a great match and an all timer. The sports comparison is interesting, but I guess the better comparison would be about wrestler's performances. Like, yeah, for sure, Kenta Kobashi is my favourite wrestler and I would say he had a fucking ton of excellent performances throughout his career. But not all of them made excellent matches, because a wrestling match is not something only one guy can craft (except if you're Kota Ibushi with a doll). In producing a wrestling match there are more factors than just how motivated one particular wrestler might have felt when working it. The opponent(s) matters, the context matters, the right booking decisions matter, the fans reception matters. The small little details matter, if only when you're trying to break a tie between two matches that look very, very, very, very similar in quality. Not everything matters the same amount, but I hope I'm explaining myself right. I want my five star matches to make me feel like they trascend wrestling, if that makes some sense. 9/6/95 is one of the best stories I've ever been told, but that's the easiest example. The "best matches of all time" should remain loyal to their name and be able to resonate with me not only becaue "they were great on their time". I look at Shield/Wyatts and I can feel that match fucking tearing the house down in 80s Arena México, or in a January 4th Tokyo Dome show from golden age NJPW. This is super, super subjective, I'm aware of that, but that's how those few matches make me feel. If I look at the Streak vs Career match and they told me the exact same story, with the same build up and the same ringwork, and it happened at WrestleMania 6 instead of 26, it would still be a five stars match to me (and obviously a much better main event for that show hehe). Tl;dr: to me, if everything is great, in the end nothing is. That said, I don't mind people having a lot of 5* matches. It's weird to me, but that can only mean that those people really enjoy wrestling in their own way, and that's amazing. This is a very interesting debate, for sure. With you on the great performance ≠ great match thing. I watched Genichiro Tenryu vs George Takano a couple of days ago (see noms section). A great Tenryu performance resulting in a match that is much better than I'd expect given that one half of it is George Takano. An example of why Tenryu belongs in the pantheon of all time great wrestler and certainly a worthwhile watch, but not in the pantheon of all time great matches as far as I'm concerned. Another point you raise is that ***** means different things to different people. I've been thinking along similar lines for a while when looking at this project the GWE project. A point that comes up from time to time is that wrestler X so many great matches, or had more great matches than wrestler Y. But not all 'great' matches are created equal. What are we really talking about? For example Fit Finlay has had more great matches than Chigusa Nagayo. But Chigusa Nagayo has had more all-time best-of-the-best transcendent matches. If I was to give star ratings, those would be the matches I would give 5 to. Probably about 70 of them tops.
|
|
|
Post by microstatistics on Feb 22, 2023 21:06:01 GMT -5
Awesome. I thought I had a lot. I am not nearly as stingy with my stars as a lot of people. I probably never will be.
I feel like I've gone over my ratings system a thousand times. I'm a generous rater. I have just over 100 5* matches. , around 200 something 4.75* and who the fuck knows how many 4-4.5* matches. I don't know any other way to live.
I just don't agree with the mindset that there can only be one or a very small select number. These aren't movies or albums people put years of thought & time into and then take possibly years to even produce. They're live performances by people who perform 3, 5, sometimes 7 nights a week. I think of 5 star matches as like a great day at your job or if you prefer more separation from a day job, think of something like a great basketball game. It would be insane to say Michael Jordan only had one "5 star" basketball game in his career. Wilt Chamberlain averaged 50 points per game in a season and only one of those was "5 stars?" No way. So I don't really get why some folks do that with wrestling. Or Laurence Olivier only had one 5 star performance on stage? Just no way.
This is a cogent point. That's why I apply an equivalent rating system for movies (and albums) and, in the process, am far more strict in critiquing them. For instance, if a ****1/4 match is a potential Top 50 contender, an analogous ****1/4 film would be a Top 5 contender.
|
|
|
Post by Kadaveri on Feb 22, 2023 22:00:18 GMT -5
The analogy doesn't work for me becoming if I'm rating a match highly it's not really awarding top marks to the wrestlers (although obviously there's a correlation), I'm assessing the match itself as an end product. There's plenty of matches where a wrestler probably had a '5 star performance', but it's not a 5 star match because it was e.g. a short TV match with no build in front of an initially disinterested crowd, stuff that's relevant for GWE cases but have no place on a GME list. Likewise, for a match to be truly top tier, there were almost always a bunch of factors outside of the wrestler's control that helped it become something greater. In that way wrestling matches just aren't that similar to movies/albums, for one thing those aren't performed in front of live crowds whose reactions strongly affect the quality of the end product.
|
|
|
Post by elliott on Feb 23, 2023 0:12:26 GMT -5
It's not a perfect analogy nor was it intended to be. I really just wanted to highlight the idea that there are many opportunities to produce great or 5 star matches compared to other things you often see rated (Star ratings, letter grades, 1-100 whatever): movies, books, albums, whatever. And thats where my POV comes from that there can be many 5 star matches instead of just a small few. And obviously one person's 5 star match is another person's DUD so I'm just trying to explain my thinking of what led me to having 100s of matches I consider 5 stars.
But I was specifically not comparing matches to movies/albums nor am I saying a great pro wrestling match is equivalent to a basketball player having a great game. I'm just highlighting the sheer amount opportunities to produce something because wrestlers are performing 100, 150, 250 times per year and there are however many 100s of wrestlers at active at a particular time.
"These aren't movies or albums..."
|
|