What was the match rating he got most wrong?
>>19758691every single one of them, what are this guy credentials to judge wrestling? did he wrestle for 20 years? no?
>>19758691flair's WWE retirement match***.5 for that... really
Andre vs Hogan at Mania 3: -5 starsDeserved at least like 2.5 stars desu. No major botches. Crowd loved it. Iconic moment.He's just a fag.
>>19758701seriously?
>>19758691None because they're just his opinion. His opinion can't be 'wrong.' The only probably there's ever been with Dave's ratings is people who try and make them out to be 'right'
>>19758691All the ones over 5 stars
Hogan/Rock
Whichever Omega/Okada match really broke the scale, because he's had to overrate every big match since.
>>19758691Mainstream fans vs the sickos
>>19758691wasn't there a johnny gargano vs adam cole match in nxt that he lost his shit over? it was just like 40 minutes of kickouts and shocked reaction faces
>>19758691There's at least 3 Kurt Angle matches that were 5 star he misrated
>>19758837he's given all the matches they had together good ratings, but in specific, gargano vs cole at NXT takeover 2/3 falls, he gave 5.5 stars to, the highest rating he has ever given a WWE match.
>>19758699that part
>>19758708Sure they are his opinions but he shouldn't also be rating stuff in the negatives. No star should mean the absolute worst shit imaginable in a ring.
Meltzer is a faggot, useless and always wrong
>>19758881>No star should mean the absolute worst shit imaginable in a ring.what would be an example of thisjeff hardy vs sting at victory road was my go-to but maybe there's worse than that, and he didn't even rate thatbeen a while since we've seed a "dud" ratingfor comparison, these are the 25 worst matches ever from cagematch
>>19758916I imagine nearly everything on TV wouldn't be zero stars/dud. Sting/Jeff is definitely one of the few though.
TLC 2
>>19758691I think funk v Lawler didn't do very well iirc otherwise I don't give a fuck about him or ratings. But I can't read so I'm safe from his silly billy antics
>>19758708This.Also people misunderstand his ratings. Originally, anything over 2.5 was good and worth checking out. I think he started going over 5 stars because people misunderstood this and wanted to emphasize that he really liked matches that he probably would have given 3 or 3 and a half stars to in the past.
>>19759006dave re-explained his system yesterday because people have been tweeting at him about no kurt fiveys again all week
>>19759067>5.5 is better than 5wow what a genius
>>19759067>2 stars is average in a scale that goes to 7
>>19759067Deep down, he must regret the 7 star rating
>>19758837i think webm related got 4.5 stars kek
>>19759067>women's blood and guts>****1/2 super special, go out of your way to seekek
>>19759154That got 4 stars.The other two matches both got over 5
>>19759067>a 5 star match is MOTY level>has given 62 matches over 5 stars during the 2020s thus fardoesn't really make too much sense to me desu. If it's MOTY level too him and he gives over 5 stars so often, than no, it's not MOTY level
>>19758708pretty much, it's something he started a very long time ago, in a much different context and probably 99% just for fun, that I assume was somewhat useful for talent scouting back in the day just because things were less accessible
