Rating The System
It wasn't so long ago that a system was created to rate matches. This system was a star rating system originally created by Jim Cornette and Norm Dooley and later pioneered by Dave Meltzer. The system works in virtually the same fashion as other rating systems that are used for movies and music and like its counterparts, it is largely subjective. While rating the match, the things too look out for are workrate, the way in which moves are used, and how crisply spots are performed as well as the story told within the match.
The presence of a star ratings system hasn't really changed the wrestling business internally but, in my opinion, has changed wrestling fans. Rather than watching a match just to watch the match and base it on more traditional and more accurate system of good or bad, fans sit to critique. Wrestling is what it is: a performing art, so what is the point of rating such a performance art with so many different variants with so many different areas and objectives on a star rating system. It's a wrestling match; it's not a hotel, it's a match. In the world of movies, a similar argument often comes to the forefront of reviewers. Arguments like how can a movie like Terminator be rated on the same merit system as a movie like The Godfather arise. To use the same system on two vastly different things is inaccurate to begin with and the same can be said for wrestling. Trying to differentiate two matches' quality based on this system cannot work. For example, comparing Ricky Steamboat versus Ric Flair to a match like a TLC match on the same system doesn't work. It is differentiating the quality of that match from that of the vast majority of completely different styles of matches that cannot and should not be rated the same, which is a very faulty logic system at work.
The fact is that my main problem with the star rating system isn't in fact these authorities on pro wrestling that give out the star ratings as an opinion is an opinion, but my problem rather lies in the thought process behind it. You look at a guy like Dave Meltzer, and I am in no way bashing Dave Metlzer, but he almost seems drained of the enjoyment of pro wrestling because he doesn't get too sit down and watch a wrestling show anymore; he has to rate it and decipher the positives and flaws of each match. Your average wrestling fan Joe Smith sitting on the couch at home will sit and watch a show with the intention of having a good time and being and entertained without the burden of having to rate everything he sees, but still has the ability to differentiate between a good and bad match. On one side, you have a guy who is deciphering how many stars a match should get and you have the other guy sitting on his couch looking too have a good time. Nine out of ten times, Joe Smith on his couch will enjoy the show more then Mr. Meltzer. You see the thing with a guy like Dave Meltzer is he is considered important in the world of professional wrestling and has the job of trying to inform people with the most accurate details he possibly can. Although I don't agree with Metlzer's rating system, it's his job to provide what he sees as accurate details and I am in no way bashing him as he is doing it as a job and profession.
My problem lies with just general fans.
As I browse the web it seems everyone has to be an authority on professional wrestling sitting and analyzing everything they watch. People who afford star ratings to things say things like, "I had to take 1/4 of a star off because the headlock was too long." You see, you shouldn't be watching wrestling in that sort of frame of mind because you will never enjoy yourself. Wrestling isn't about some crappy rehearsed looking chain wrestling that you do every match because it is what you do; it's about making a connection with the audience and telling them a story and this will always be hard to follow if you're looking to critique the match rather then to indulge in it. People who give star ratings to matches or talk about someone carrying someone to x amount of stars don't know what good wrestling actually is because good wrestling is something you enjoy and trying to rate something generally removes the enjoyment factor from the event. Sometimes a match may catch you by surprise and blow you away and you give it five stars. When rating, wrestling, it becomes a job rather then something you sit down to enjoy. I still stick to my guns in thinking that star rating systems are faulty and inaccurate, but the biggest problem I find with it is the critical nature which removes the fantasy and generally fun aspect of wrestling. I urge all fans next time they watch a wrestling event to call upon your inner child, to sit down, and to watch the show and if at the end you had a good time and enjoyed yourself, the only rating system you will need to use is in declaring "that show was good I had a great time watching it." I guarantee you will be a happier wrestling enthusiast.
Urging You To Enjoy Yourself
Matthew James
Copyright © 2005; TheWrestlingVoice.com & Douglas Nunnally.
All Rights Reserved.
Disclaimer & Privacy Statement
| What Did You Think About WWE Backlash 2008? |
|
|