That score

>A scale of 10 and a scale of 5 are the same thing
A scale of 10 has more bullshit granularity that is completely arbitrary.

5 stars. No half stars. No quarter stars. No over the rating. No below the rating. A match is either 1 stars, 2 stars, 3 stars, 4 stars or 5 stars. That's it.

And this was 4 stars.

I thought the same. Honestly I wasn't a fan of it ending so soon. I was hoping Ishii would get a hope spot and they would go another 3 or 4 minutes. Still a very good match and yet another reason you could call Ishii the BITW.

That's retarded, 1 to 10 gives you more to work with. That match was about a 7 out of 10, being generous. 4 out of 5 is way too much.

Star rating traditionally include half stars. 1/4 and 3/4 is cringe shit though.

>1 to 10 gives you more to work with
It's arbitrary and bullshit. There's no way you can accurately pinpoint every 6/10 and 7/10 match. You might as well start rating matches out of a 1000

Can’t wait until Meltz gives it 5 stars and the purofags BOIL

He probably will,Meltzer is a shill for AEW and overrates main events after all.

4 out of 5 is 8 out of 10 which is an incredible score. Limiting yourself that much means you have to equal something above average with something really great. That's pretty fucking retarded. You should try having a brain sometime. Low scales like out of 5 or Ebert's 4 stars always have half stars and they only use the shorter scale because they're print reviewers and they need to use a little space for their printed stars as possible.
Not critic rates on such an autistic scale as "only whole numbers, 2 to 5". You need to have a single digit IQ to think that makes sense.

Out of the 3 guys in the shield. BBDRR is the one with the highest stars.
Also carried to a 4 star match with taker and shane o mac

I repeat: There's no way you can accurately pinpoint every 6/10 and 7/10 match
You have definitely rated matches 6/10 that you like more than matches you rated 7/10, because you're reaching arbitrary-tier granularity for the sake of being autistic

Anyone with a lick of common sense knows Meltzer stars mean absolutely nothing when being applied to his precious baby boys

>rating a fight based on performance

I miss the days when no one cared about how "good" a match was. All that mattered was the outcome.

he really is the BBD

You don't know anything about criticism. Watch 50 matches and try to justify giving an alright one the same score as a good one with your retarded idea. Critics whole scale on 1 to 10 have to use decimals. Critics who rate out of 100 have to use decimals sometimes. You don't know anything about criticism, why do you even care about ratings? Saying that match was 4 out of 5 makes it equivalent to Psycho by Hitchcock intermedially which is obviously retarded.
>hurr durr, wrestling is different then films so the best wrestling match is as good as an average film at best
You don't understand criticism and ratings systems.

>Watch 50 matches and try to justify giving an alright one the same score as a good one with your retarded idea
1 star = Horrible
2 stars = Bad
3 stars = Decent
4 stars = Good
5 stars = Excellent
Moxley VS Ishii was good, thus it gets 4 stars

I already acknowledged that you don't understand criticism, you don't have to explicitly show me that again.

it's 10/10 for people who like moxley and haven't watched much Ishii

and don’t know anything about wrestling

Fair take, on an edrones cake it would be much higher.

That,there is no way you would even equate this match to Ospreay vs Ibushi or Ishii vs White unless you are an e-drone,it would be way more correct to equate it to Naito vs Taichi or Tana vs Kenta

there is a reason why less and less people watch or like wrestling anymore

The people who don't watch are the people who never cared about ratings and only watched WWE. Every other fed except NOAH has grown.

NOAH has grown. DDT is on the decline though.

>cagematch ratings
>meltman stars
Anything other than the original Dooley scale is unnecessary.
>One star: “Wow, I couldn’t wait for that to be over.”
>Two stars: “Well, that’s about what we expected.”
>Three stars: “That was pretty f---in’ good.”
>Four stars: “Holy s---, they tore the f---in’ house down.”
Arguing over what's a perfect match is incredibly autistic.

DDT should be alright once they push the handsome young boys and stop trying with Takeshita.

I'm not sure why you think it's difficult to discern a 6/7 out of 10.
Examples from this G1. I'd say Archer/KENTA was 7/10, Tanahashi and Ibushi/KENTA was 6/10. Okada/ZSJ was 6/10, Goto/Juice was 7/10.
It's like rating ANYTHING else. Video games, movies, excessive granularity would be 1-100, then it becomes finicky and imprecise. If you can't discern placement on a 1-10 scale you don't know what you're looking for to begin with.

Best match I've seen in years
I legit clapped at the end