Mild Mannered Madman
Toulouse
Level: 70
   
Posts: 1148/1270
EXP: 2897508
For next: 118318
Since: 1.3.02
From: Westminster, CA
Since last post: 789 days
Last activity: 42 days
|  #1 Posted on 14.10.04 0249.42
Reposted on: 14.10.11 0250.57 | I was reading Scott Keith's review of the Eddy DVD, when something caught my eye.
"- WCW Cruiserweight title: Chris Jericho v. Eddie Guerrero. This is from Fall Brawl '97, and an odd choice because it's not that great of a match or anything... "
At the end of the match review, he gives it 4 stars.
Huh?
| Promote this thread! |             | SeVen ™
Kishke
Level: 43
Posts: 378/422
EXP: 558305
For next: 6746
Since: 11.1.02
From: Japan
Since last post: 1930 days
Last activity: 1761 days
| #2 Posted on 14.10.04 0301.37
Reposted on: 14.10.11 0301.37 | | Maybe he means, it's not as great of a match that they are CAPABLE of performing. But then again it is Scott Keith so I don't know. | CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator
Level: 205
Posts: 5199/15435
EXP: 123984013
For next: 1484863
Since: 9.12.01
From: ミネアポリス
Since last post: 1 hour
Last activity: 6 min.
| #3 Posted on 14.10.04 0426.00
Reposted on: 14.10.11 0426.12 | Originally posted by Mild Mannered Madman
I was reading Scott Keith
I believe you have diagnosed your own problem! | rspwfaq
Cotechino
Level: 22
Posts: 84/91
EXP: 54885
For next: 3466
Since: 10.6.02
From: Saskatoon
Since last post: 2723 days
Last activity: 1 hour
|  #4 Posted on 14.10.04 1110.03
Reposted on: 14.10.11 1110.40 | Eddie had way better matches during his WCW period, such as the Mysterio one that followed the Jericho one on the DVD. It just struck me as a really odd choice, given the near-total lack of significance.
(edited by rspwfaq on 14.10.04 1012) | SC
Potato korv
Level: 53
Posts: 555/683
EXP: 1153867
For next: 3259
Since: 11.12.01
From: Valparaiso, IN
Since last post: 807 days
Last activity: 141 days
| AIM: |  |
| | |
| #5 Posted on 14.10.04 1159.25
Reposted on: 14.10.11 1159.26 | Originally posted by rspwfaq
Eddie had way better matches during his WCW period, such as the Mysterio one that followed the Jericho one on the DVD. It just struck me as a really odd choice, given the near-total lack of significance.
I would wager a guess that it was just because it was WWE Superstar Eddie Guerrero v. WWE Superstar Chris Jericho, and you get to see their humble beginnings in humble WCW, and look at how much cooler they are now! Assclown! Holmes!
(edited by ScottChrist on 14.10.04 1534) | CANADIAN BULLDOG
Andouille
Level: 83
Posts: 1481/1962
EXP: 5307275
For next: 124969
Since: 5.3.03
From: TORONTO
Since last post: 25 days
Last activity: 24 days
| | ICQ: |  |
| |
| #6 Posted on 14.10.04 1402.27
Reposted on: 14.10.11 1402.27 | | Now that I've actually seen the match, I've got to agree. It was good, but it wasn't "Eddie Guerrero vs. Chris Jericho" good. | Mild Mannered Madman
Toulouse
Level: 70
Posts: 1150/1270
EXP: 2897508
For next: 118318
Since: 1.3.02
From: Westminster, CA
Since last post: 789 days
Last activity: 42 days
| #7 Posted on 14.10.04 1859.11
Reposted on: 14.10.11 1900.30 | Originally posted by CANADIAN BULLDOG
Now that I've actually seen the match, I've got to agree. It was good, but it wasn't "Eddie Guerrero vs. Chris Jericho" good.
Which would mean it's not really deserving of 4 stars.
| DJ FrostyFreeze
Knackwurst
Level: 105
Posts: 1692/3291
EXP: 12172017
For next: 90283
Since: 2.1.02
From: Hawthorne, CA
Since last post: 6 days
Last activity: 5 hours
| #8 Posted on 15.10.04 2000.32
Reposted on: 15.10.11 2000.59 | Judged based on a scale of only their own matches with each other, prolly not. But maybe it deserves the 4 stars when compared with everyone elses matches?
I dont know what I'm talking about. | rspwfaq
Cotechino
Level: 22
Posts: 85/91
EXP: 54885
For next: 3466
Since: 10.6.02
From: Saskatoon
Since last post: 2723 days
Last activity: 1 hour
| #9 Posted on 16.10.04 0122.21
Reposted on: 16.10.11 0125.46 | Originally posted by Mild Mannered Madman
Which would mean it's not really deserving of 4 stars.
I just want to add that arguing star ratings or any other subjective system of analysis is really quite pointless and stupid.
That being said, one more time, it was a very good match, but Eddie has had much better.
| CANADIAN BULLDOG
Andouille
Level: 83
Posts: 1483/1962
EXP: 5307275
For next: 124969
Since: 5.3.03
From: TORONTO
Since last post: 25 days
Last activity: 24 days
| | ICQ: | |
| |
| #10 Posted on 16.10.04 0937.38
Reposted on: 16.10.11 0938.08 | Originally posted by Mild Mannered Madman
Originally posted by CANADIAN BULLDOG
Now that I've actually seen the match, I've got to agree. It was good, but it wasn't "Eddie Guerrero vs. Chris Jericho" good.
Which would mean it's not really deserving of 4 stars.
I don't know - isn't it all subjective? They put on a match in 1997 or whenever it was, and you could enjoy it a helluva lot, but perhaps you know that today, the two of them can do ever better. But that shouldn't necessarily detract from your opinion of the first match.... | Loss
Medisterpoelse
Level: 3
Posts: 1/1
EXP: 56
For next: 72
Since: 17.10.04
From: Little Rock, AR
Since last post: 3138 days
Last activity: 3137 days
| AIM: |  |
| | |
|  #11 Posted on 17.10.04 0117.56
Reposted on: 17.10.11 0127.33 | | All that's wanted is for you to explain yourself, Scott. "****" means "excellent". If it's "not great" or "very good", why didn't you give it a lower star rating? | Jim Smith
Goetta
Level: 36
Posts: 1/303
EXP: 295456
For next: 12657
Since: 17.10.04
From: Bloomington, IL
Since last post: 1779 days
Last activity: 1210 days
| #12 Posted on 17.10.04 0141.49
Reposted on: 17.10.11 0143.36 | For pete's sake...
What he's saying is a four-star Eddie vs. Jericho is "not great" in comparison to all the five-star Eddie matches that could have been put on the DVD, but weren't.
The "not great" comment is judging it in terms of Eddie Guerrero matches. The star rating is judging it against all wrestling matches Scott's ever seen. There's no reason to expect the judgements to be the same when the criteria for each one is different. | JustinShapiro
Scrapple
Moderator
Level: 124
Posts: 714/4803
EXP: 21513387
For next: 323275
Since: 12.12.01
From: Pittsburgh, PA
Since last post: 1 hour
Last activity: 59 min.
| #13 Posted on 17.10.04 0147.05
Reposted on: 17.10.11 0148.07 | ANALOGY: Steve Austin and Kurt Angle had a **** match at Unforgiven '01. It was an excellent match, but nowhere near the match they had the month before and nowhere near the level of Austin's best matches. Soooo if it was included on a Steve Austin DVD, that would be an odd choice, even though as a standalone match it's plenty good in its own right.
However, I'd say the other Scott, Christ, provided the exact reason it was on the DVD, which was because a match between Eddie Guerrero and Chris Jericho from WCW would have a lot more relevance to the WWE DVD Buyer than a hypothetical equivalently-good match between Eddie and, I dunno, Juventud Guerrera.
(edited by JustinShapiro on 17.10.04 0249) | ges7184
Lap cheong
Level: 75
Posts: 1073/1488
EXP: 3698274
For next: 128647
Since: 7.1.02
From: Birmingham, AL
Since last post: 86 days
Last activity: 6 hours
| #14 Posted on 17.10.04 1125.07
Reposted on: 17.10.11 1127.00 | Originally posted by rspwfaq
Originally posted by Mild Mannered Madman
Which would mean it's not really deserving of 4 stars.
I just want to add that arguing star ratings or any other subjective system of analysis is really quite pointless and stupid.
That being said, one more time, it was a very good match, but Eddie has had much better.
Am I the only one who feels that if you removed "arguing" from the above statement, it would still pretty much be true? | BigSteve
Pepperoni
Level: 63
Posts: 135/1091
EXP: 2045900
For next: 51263
Since: 23.7.04
From: Baltimore, MD
Since last post: 2321 days
Last activity: 2049 days
| #15 Posted on 17.10.04 1326.14
Reposted on: 17.10.11 1326.56 | Originally posted by ges7184
Originally posted by rspwfaq
Originally posted by Mild Mannered Madman
Which would mean it's not really deserving of 4 stars.
I just want to add that arguing star ratings or any other subjective system of analysis is really quite pointless and stupid.
That being said, one more time, it was a very good match, but Eddie has had much better.
Am I the only one who feels that if you removed "arguing" from the above statement, it would still pretty much be true?
I disagree with that. I think that there are flaws with some subjective ratings, especially if there are clear biases involved with some systems, but, in general, ratings can be helpful in a lot of things. After all, in the case of star ratings, I think they give you a general picture of how good the match is. I don't see many matches that are rated 4 and a quarter by on person being rated two and a half by another. | | ALL ORIGINAL POSTS IN THIS THREAD ARE NOW AVAILABLE |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
