RATE - Wrestlemania 9

[Eunos]

Welcome Back

So Wrestlemania 8 Scores an excellent 90.6.. Not good enough to knock Wrestlemania 3 of it's thrown but good enough for second place.

Anyway today is a Wrestlemania that i doubt will do aswell
http://www.wwe.com/content/media/images/Headers/wrestlemania9banner
And your Results
Tatanka def. Shawn Michaels w/ Luna Vachon by count-out

The Steiner Brothers def. The Headshrinkers w/ Afa

Doink def. Crush

Razor Ramon def. Bob Backlund

World Tag Team Championship
Money Inc. def. Hulk Hogan & Brutus “The Barber” Beefcake w/ Jimmy Hart by DQ

“The Narcissist” Lex Luger def. Mr. Perfect

Undertaker w/ Paul Bearer def. Giant Gonzales w/ Harvey Wippleman by DQ

Main Event for WWE Championship
Yokozuna w/ Mr. Fuji and Jim Cornette def. Bret “Hit Man” Hart to become new champion

After the match, Hulk Hogan def. Yokozuna w/ Mr. Fuji and Jim Cornette to become new champion
---------------------------------------
I havent actually seen this Wrestlemania yet so ill sit this one out for those of you who have let us know :)
------------------------------------
WM rating History
Wrestlemania 1: 81.3
Wrestlemania 2: 48.7
Wrestlemania 3: 95
Wrestlemania 4: 67.4
Wrestlemania 5: 79.4
Wrestlemania 6: 86.9
Wrestlemania 7: 71
Wrestlemania 8: 90.6

Current Order
Wrestlemania 3: 95
Wrestlemania 8: 90.6
Wrestlemania 6: 86.9
Wrestlemania 1: 81.3
Wrestlemania 5: 79.4
Wrestlemania 7: 71
Wrestlemania 4: 67.4
Wrestlemania 2: 48.7

[D Mac]

Just watched it today on DVD. Entertaining but only enough to warrent a 7.

That Hogan shit at the end pissed me off.

[Blitz]

An 8, if only for the fact that it was the first PPV I saw.

:heart: nostalgia

[Astley316]

My first wrestlemania, back in the day i really enjoyed it, but against other wrestlemania's 6

[The One]

TERRIBLE WRESTLEMANIA! Absolutly horrible. Without question the worst WrestleMania ever, and certainly warrents a place amoung the worst PPVs of any kind of all time.

0.0 - And no, I am not joking.

[James Steele]

0.5 just because Money Inc. won

[Corndad]

I would say the worst Wrestlemania ever. Yes. Even worse then 15. Im gonna give this PPV a 3...because it had someone atleast believeable at that time might beat Undertaker even if we look back now and see exactly what Gonzalez was. then again he was on Baywatch one time. alright. 2.5.

[The One]

If you think it's the worst...why give it a 3??? Does no one understand the concept of rating something 0-10? 0 (or 1 if you need) is the worst! We aren't rating this against other PPVs...this is rating WrestleMania against WrestleMania. God damn I am fucking confused as to why the fuck people will explain they think it sucks and then give it a 3! Same with Rate The Tag Team and Rate The Wrestlers...someone, and explaination as to why the worst deserves a 3.

[Corndad]

If you think it's the worst...why give it a 3??? Does no one understand the concept of rating something 0-10? 0 (or 1 if you need) is the worst! We aren't rating this against other PPVs...this is rating WrestleMania against WrestleMania. God damn I am fucking confused as to why the fuck people will explain they think it sucks and then give it a 3! Same with Rate The Tag Team and Rate The Wrestlers...someone, and explaination as to why the worst deserves a 3.

It wasn't a zero thats why. It did have a few good things in it, I mean Bret Hart did Headline it. Other Wrestlemanias were better and will be rated better then a 3. Zero doesn't have to be the bottom there buddy.

[James Steele]

:lol:

I missed you The One.

[Destor]

Other than 11 this is the worst WM for my money. 0.1

[Destor]

Doink/Crush was good though...

[Bad Company]

4

[The One]

It wasn't a zero thats why. It did have a few good things in it, I mean Bret Hart did Headline it. Other Wrestlemanias were better and will be rated better then a 3. Zero doesn't have to be the bottom there buddy.

By WrestleMania standards it was. If it is the worst, it deserves the lowest possible score. That is the point of opinion based ratings with the 1 to 10 standard. Does that mean that in this instance it was all bad (well in my opinion it was, but clearly not yours), no. It means that when you compare this particular WrestleMania with others, it scores the lowest possible score. I have seen more 10s handed out then numbers below 5. Does anyone see a problem with this? The concept is for every 10 there is a 1, a 2, a 3, and so forth. That's why we have the rating systems. By your logic we should start rating things on a scale of 3 to 10. 3 being the absolute lowest you can score...Also by your standards we should rate things 3 to 7...because if THE WORST has at least 3 possitive things about it, then the absolute best should by simple logic have at least 3 things wrong with it. So from now on we rate things on a scale of 3 to 7. Yeah, let's do that...

Ric Flair as a wrestler...7
Vicsera as a wrestler...3

Wow, who knew only 4 points seperated the best from the worst. I mean Flair isn't a perfect 10, he has made a few mistakes along the way, and Vis deserves at least a 3...come on, he once did a fairly impressive cartwheel kick thing. So there you have it. If we base these ratings on one or two things being able to save them from a 0, then he have to say one or two mistakes means it can't be a perfect 10...

The fact is, rating something 1-10 is a form of comparison, not of ultimate judgement. If something is the worst in a specific catagory, it deserves the lowest score possible (a 0...or if they insist on doing 1-10, a 1).

[Jordan]

5

[Xerzes]

I rate Wrestlemania 9 a negative three and polio.

If that's not an option, then 0.

[Corndad]

By WrestleMania standards it was. If it is the worst, it deserves the lowest possible score. That is the point of opinion based ratings with the 1 to 10 standard. Does that mean that in this instance it was all bad (well in my opinion it was, but clearly not yours), no. It means that when you compare this particular WrestleMania with others, it scores the lowest possible score. I have seen more 10s handed out then numbers below 5. Does anyone see a problem with this? The concept is for every 10 there is a 1, a 2, a 3, and so forth. That's why we have the rating systems. By your logic we should start rating things on a scale of 3 to 10. 3 being the absolute lowest you can score...Also by your standards we should rate things 3 to 7...because if THE WORST has at least 3 possitive things about it, then the absolute best should by simple logic have at least 3 things wrong with it. So from now on we rate things on a scale of 3 to 7. Yeah, let's do that...

Ric Flair as a wrestler...7
Vicsera as a wrestler...3

Wow, who knew only 4 points seperated the best from the worst. I mean Flair isn't a perfect 10, he has made a few mistakes along the way, and Vis deserves at least a 3...come on, he once did a fairly impressive cartwheel kick thing. So there you have it. If we base these ratings on one or two things being able to save them from a 0, then he have to say one or two mistakes means it can't be a perfect 10...

The fact is, rating something 1-10 is a form of comparison, not of ultimate judgement. If something is the worst in a specific catagory, it deserves the lowest score possible (a 0...or if they insist on doing 1-10, a 1).


Look. I see your point and it is a valid one. However a 0 to me means it served no purpose and nothing good came out of it. Its just my opinion. if so whats the difference between a 3 and a 4 or a 1 or a 1.5. not as much as 1 or 2 and 10.

With your example we can only give 1 Wrestlemania a 10. There were a couple I was planing on it. X-7 was one of them. 14 was another. Does that mean I can't give them both a 10? thats the part of the argument I don't understand.

[94 SVT Cobra]

Doink/Crush was good though...

Yea, and ten years from now when were talkingh about this years mania well be saying "carlita/masters vs kane and big show was alright"....doesnt say much

[Destor]

I gave it a .1 That doesn't say much either.

[Goulet]

1... worst WM ever

[Skippord]

1

[D Mac]

Doink/Crush was good though...

Still can't figure out how Doink did that illusion. :shifty:

[Dave Youell]

TERRIBLE WRESTLEMANIA! Absolutly horrible. Without question the worst WrestleMania ever, and certainly warrents a place amoung the worst PPVs of any kind of all time.

0.0 - And no, I am not joking.
:y:

[Dave Youell]

Still can't figure out how Doink did that illusion. :shifty:
He used Lugars mirrors

[wwe2222]

im going to give it a 7

I have always enjoyed this wrestlemania. I liked the theme they put to it. I liked Bret Hart headlining the show, I liked Hogan winning the belt out of nowhere. Money Inc. retains the tag titles, started the brief HBK-Mr Perfect fued here.

[Disturbed316]

8

Fucking loved it as a kid. So I'm going by that feeling back then.

[Gone Mad]

4, twas also my first real PPV and I really liked Bret headlining, even though Hogan would come out and win the damn belt. ...Freakin' Thunder in Paradise. :mad: And also didn't like Taker v. Giant Gonzalez although Taker's intro was cool.

Seriously though, all I can remember from that was that it seemed like Taker was fighting a tree, because he would just stay there and swing around.

[XL]

I'm suprised how many people are rating this highly. Personally I like WM9, think it was the first one I saw where I didn't have to wait for the video release.

Was gutted Tatanka didn't win the IC Title, marked at the Hogan win after being upset about Bret losing the title, Crush/Doink was fun, loved the setting.

Think I'll go with a 7.

Also gotta agree with The One about peoples ratings, but at the other end of the scale.

Personally I'm only gonna give one 10 to my absolute favourite.

[Karlsberg]

2

[mrslackalack]

3 The best match on the card in my opinion was HBK vs Tantanka.

[The Genius]

scott steiner reallly botched a frankensteiner on fatu (or was it samu)......just watched it on my anthology. didnt Hogan threaten to leave wwf if he didnt get to win the title in some way?

[FakeLaser]

1, terrible

[Loose Cannon]

7

I remember this Mania really pissing me off when I went to bed that night

I was extremely pissed when Luger cheated to win, then KO'ed Perfect with the forearm.

Pissed when Hart lost the Title

And pissed Money Inc didn't lose thier straps.

[NeanderCarl]

10. Simply because it was the first WrestleMania that I ever saw the build-up too as a young mark, and I loved it. Things just seemed so exciting then. I loved the look of the outdoor arena in Caesars Palace car park. I was so excited because I started watching seriously around, or just after, the time of WrestleMania 8, so this was my first chance to see the legendary Hulk Hogan wrestle live on TV (I say "live", I think it was first broadcast the following afternoon in the UK.)

The debut of Jim Ross, who I knew was from WCW by their magazines but I had never actually seen before. The anticipation of KNOWING that Tatanka was going to win the I-C gold (I was devastated)!!! How the hell would Bret Hart be able to beat the massive Royal Rumble winner, Yokozuna??? Not just Hogan, but Beefcake was back too! And Jimmy Hart had turned! WOW!

And that damn clown had brutally attacked Crush. Boy, was he going to take a kicking!

LOL, oh to be a mark again! Well, for sentimental reasons mainly, and for the glitz and ceremony, I give this a 10. I would've gone for a 9 probably but this event is taking such a critical pasting I thought I'd defend it (although it may be too late).