The Star Rating System

[Headfirst For Hardcore]

Does anyone here use it or do their own?

I personally don't like it. I really can't base a match on what someone says, or the number of stars someone gives due to their system. Just because Dave Meltzer gives something 5 stars, it doesn't mean it's like "OMGZ GREATEST MATCH EVERz!" I know Meltzer would be doing that, and it probably would be for some Japanese guy. It's more based on personal opinion, and I think it's stupid for someone to base how good a match is based on what someone else rates it. I'm just basically saying that I hate the star rating system and showing my hate for internet journalists like Dave Meltzer.

 

[Soulpower]

I don't believe I've ever used the "star ratings" in my reviews. While I agree with some of the matches that have been rated 5 stars, I have to admit that they're all subjective ratings. Some people are going to love certain matches and some people aren't. Its that simple, and its why I try to avoid the star ratings.

 

[Axis]

Not really. I really just use "It sucks" "It was okay" "It was good" and "It was great".

 

[Montana]

I actually really like it, assuming the person who gives the ratings whos what they are talking about. If you miss a ppv/show you can see if the matches are worth watching. If your thinking about buying a dvd, you kinda know what to expect before hand. Again, you kinda need to be familar with how each organization is rated. WWE/tna/roh are all rated differently.

 

[PeepShow]

Star ratings are the whole reason behind reviews imo. They make you decide if you need to watch the show or whatever. All this however, is depending on if the rater knows what he is talking about. I enjoy the system and use it quite a bit.

 

[Headfirst For Hardcore]

Maybe it's just because I don't really over analyze wrestling and enjoy it for what it is, I just hate the star rating system.

 

[Nancy Di Loreto]

Well, if a reviewer writes down all the action from say, SmackDown, and doesn't give star ratings; is the general public going to read it? NO~! If they give one match * 1/2, and another *** 3/4, i think we all know which match we're gonan tune into to watch...

 

[KenFan4life]

meh...star ratings are ok'ish...

but its basically just bull-$hit that stupid people use so as to attempt to sound like some "SMART" Jack-Off when reviewing a show...


like, usually if someone basically just writes in

Ice Cube vs Ice T: ***1/2
and they could just basically write a bunch of bullshit about tha-match and people will sit there "Mezmerized" like..

OMG!GREAT POSTER!!!


and its like....mmmkay..sure...

so like..I don't care 'bout ratings...
its usaually ok and all...

but I don't judge anything and stuff...

basically if I were to hand out "Star-Ratings", then Umaga-Cena LastManStanding Match would be *****1/2 stars cause it was so good or something...ka-durh!?

 

[Beer Money Army]

I use the star ratings on mind... but when i'm getting some dvd's or if PPV just happen Or if someone tells me a show i usually read J.D. Dunn/or someone from 411 reviews as dunn reviews are pretty solid...

But i got all my stars ratings or /10 scale reviews on my computer...

but if someone wrote

Cena Vs Khali = **** or Colt Cabana vs Danelson = *****

i wouldnt believe it, because I would tune in for myself and my review will be different...