The W
Views: 99399238
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
1.10.14 2146
The W - Guest Columns - Workrate - Cubs Fan
This thread has 6 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1(872 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (2 total)
skorpio17
Morcilla








Since: 11.7.02
From: New Jersey

Since last post: 2388 days
Last activity: 2388 days
#1 Posted on
Just wanted to say that I like the reposting of older columns on slash. I liked this column a lot. Many people have tried to come up with formulas to analyze a guy’s workrate. Most have given up.

I am also a numbers guy. I’d like to come up with a formula and do some analysis when I have more time. For what counts as an offensive move, I can agree with you. Also, I think submission moves and pinning moves would count. Taunts would not count as moves.

The one addition I’d make to your formula is to count damage taken and give credit for taking bumps. Your formula is good for judging a wrestler’s offence, but not defense. For example, in the Hell in the Cell Match with Mankind vs. Undertaker from KotR 98, Foley took two super bumps, one off the top of the cage off a table, and a fall threw the cage. In your system Taker gets 2 pts. And Mankind 0. I’d like to give Foley 3 pts. per super bump = 6 pts. and Taker 1 pt for the push off the top and 2 pts. for the chokeslam = 3 pts.

Also in judging workrate, most of the time a wrestler’s workrate is only as good as his opponents. Put Rey Mysterio in a match vs. the Big Show and his workrate will have a rapid decline. Once Rey spends 3 minutes in a Big Show bear hug, both workrates will only go down. On the other hand, I think Kurt Angle has a great workrate. During his matches vs. Hulk Hogan, he provides most of both the offensive moves and the bumps. This match would be one of the first that I would look at.




-Brian Popkin
Promote this thread!
thecubsfan
Scrapple
Moderator








Since: 10.12.01
From: Aurora, IL

Since last post: 9 hours
Last activity: 1 hour
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 10.00
I had this written, but accidently had it deleted when a link opened in the wrong window. EditPad is my real friend.

Anyway, this takes me back. There was actually a follow-up article - I don't know if I forget to send it to CRZ or whatever, but I do know you can read it if you Click Here and avoid the pop ups. I evoluved the system and took care of one thing you mention later on, which we'll get to then. I think I started to write a third part but stopped due to disinterest.

>I am also a numbers guy. I’d like to come up with a formula and do some analysis when I have more
>time. For what counts as an offensive move, I can agree with you. Also, I think submission moves
>and pinning moves would count.

I don't think I was seeing enough submission moves (except chinlocks) and pinning moves at the time to even think to throw them in, but yea, I'd count them. Normal covers wouldn't count, but if they rolled them up in a small package, that's a move so sure.

>Taunts would not count as moves.

Of course.

>The one addition I’d make to your formula is to count damage taken and give credit for taking
>bumps. Your formula is good for judging a wrestler’s offence, but not defense. For example, in
>the Hell in the Cell Match with Mankind vs. Undertaker from KotR 98, Foley took two super bumps,
>one off the top of the cage off a table, and a fall threw the cage. In your system Taker gets 2
>pts. And Mankind 0. I’d like to give Foley 3 pts. per super bump = 6 pts. and Taker 1 pt for the
>push off the top and 2 pts. for the chokeslam = 3 pts.

My goal was to make the system as quantitative as possible. If I started determing the value of moves, we reach the point where not everyone would agree on those values, and the system becomes no more statisically valid than star ratings - just one man's opinion, and numbers used to support it without much more meaning than that. Take the HitC example - while you'd give bonus points, I'm pretty sure I could troll some people over on tOA to give them parital points because they were less wrestling moves and more stuntman gimmicks.

If we can define what a "move" is, than we can count moves. And I believe we can do that. But there's no way to define what moves are better, since it depends on the situation and person watching. That goes into the whole psychology aspect, which I don't think we can hope to quantify.

Basically, I figured out batting average (which is only moderatly useful, but commonly accesible), but lack the ability to define "double", so slugging percantage if out of the question. (On Base would be...um, not counting time spent in submission holds? I'm reaching for an analogy there, but I think that works.)

>Also in judging workrate, most of the time a wrestler’s workrate is only as good as his
>opponents. Put Rey Mysterio in a match vs. the Big Show and his workrate will have a rapid
>decline. Once Rey spends 3 minutes in a Big Show bear hug, both workrates will only go down. On
>the other hand, I think Kurt Angle has a great workrate. During his matches vs. Hulk Hogan, he
>provides most of both the offensive moves and the bumps. This match would be one of the first
>that I would look at.

This was my big change the second time around - instead of diving moves by match time, I went and figured out the time each wrestler was in control of the match - from momentuem gained to momentuem lost - and used that number instad. I think it ended up giving a much fairer number...

...but at the same time, was a big pain. With the old system, I could work with the information I already collated - pick out the moves for each person in my recap, and than use the time I already did. With the new system, I had to go back and start and stop a clock each time they got control, and with that many starts and stops, you have a lot more room for error, and you have a more room to question when momentuem changed and if it was really a meaningful shift and all that question work gets us away from the pure numbers I wanted.

Looking back at it now, I think that while, assuming that you could be spot on with the mo-shifts and define mo-shifts while you're at it, that might prove to be a more accurate system.

But at the same time, the real accuracy only comes over time - it's the difference between saying "X has a good work rate in that match" and "X has a good work rate, period". If you went and took two months worth of action (which sounds like boatloads of fun - but then you're likely to get at least a half hour of bell to bell time for most people), you'll probably wipe out any single match where the control wasn't as well spread as normal, and you'll get a better handle on who's consistently good, instead who just happened to be in a peppy mood that week.

And besides all of this, I this was a hopefully romantic idea - we can distill anything from numbers and learn from them! - which lacked real world use. It still can't tell you if they're good or bad, or if they're thinking about what they're doing and putting it together in some coherent way, it just tells you who doesn't waste time punching in a match. Not helpful enough.
Pages: 1Thread ahead: Cast of Characters
Next thread: Debaser love
Previous thread: Parts Unknown...Free vs. PPV
(872 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The FBI bit - funny. The "Andrew the Giant" move - priceless. (Hey - am I old when I remember that kind of stuff?)
The W - Guest Columns - Workrate - Cubs FanRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.098 seconds.