How can i tell if a match is good or not?
>>19235805Study cagematch and get back to me.
Do you start giving a shit about who wins while you watch it>yesgood match>noeh
>>19235805If Meltzer gave it a good star rating
>>19235835This. This shit is subjective. The only thing that matters is whether you enjoyed it.
>>19236041that's not even what anon is saying, he's saying a good match is one where you actually care about the outcome. you can enjoy a match for other reasons but if you ultimately didn't give a fuck about the winner and loser then it wasn't a "good" match. I agree with him.
>>19235805I compile Meltzer's star ratings with Cagematch averages inside a spreadsheet so I can mathematically calculate it
>>19235835I think this is a good answer. If they made you care about the outcome of the match, they did something right.
And let me add something else, the easiest way to make people care about a match is by working it into a story. Doesn't even have to be a big complex story, just some kind of story. Tony and Gedo have totally forgotten this fact and so they think all they need are the matches themselves. WWE hasn't forgotten this, but they have such uncreative people running things that it doesn't seem to matter.
>>19236049That part.
>>19236048I got what he was saying. I agree partially but not completely. That's still allowed, right?
I trained an AI to watch every match that Dave has ever rated, and to read his review and star rating of that match, to create an objective metric for determining the quality of matches. Now I can ask the machine to watch any match and it will use that criteria to tell me if the match is good or now.
>>19236121I see one objective flaw with your methodology.Garbage in, garbage out.
>>19236129Sorry bro, Dave is objectively the greatest wrestling critic ever.
