Quote:
|
Originally Posted by What Would Kevin Do?
A wrestling match is a wrestling match. There are some people who are not going to like a specific match. I can watch the WM triple threat, and I can watch the above mentioned ROH triple threat, and I can say the RoH match was better. How many tickets they sell, or how many people that are watching has no effect on the match quality of the match itself. The only thing it alters is that more people may see the WM match, so it's likely to have more critics. To say that one match is better than another due to one match having more critics that say the match is good is ludacrious. By that logic, the majority of WWE matches are better than the majority of indy matches in America.
|
Well they are better.
Its kinda like what Rob touched on. Generally when you read a report form an ROH show, every match is above 3 1/2 stars, which is totally inaccurate. Dont get me worng, they have some cats who can work, but the people who rate the matches tend to be ROH feinds who are hardly objective. Oh and they are also supporters of a pedophile, but thats not really relevant for this discussion, just shows what kind of people we're dealing with.
In terms of rating a match, its all personal opinion. One thing I hate about wrestling journalists is when they talk about star ratings for matches. To me that makes no sense. What one fan finds entertaining can be totally different from what another fan likes. So all you're getting is an opinion based on that person's likes and dislikes.
There is no set criteria for what makes a good wrestling match, so the only tangible thing to go by is how much money the people draw who are in the match. Everything else is just personal opinion and means jack.