Most Overrated 5 Star Matches

[El-P]

For what it's worth, I agree that there's a difference between a submission match and an I Quit match that isn't just semantic. Submission matches are about submission. I Quit matches are about surrender.

 

To submit is basically to say "I quit". Tapping out, which is a gesture that only appeared, or at least got popular, in the late 90's with Ken Shamrock getting in the WWF, doesn't mean anything other than "I quit". Before that, the guys caught in a submission hold (like the Sharpshooter or the Figure Four) would either signal to the referee that they were submitting, hence "quitting", or pass out, hence physically "quitting".

 

The gimmick matches were not worked the same way : one was usually meaning "no pinfall, only a submission (implied hold because it's the most simple way to attain that goal) can end the match" while the other had to have the oral signal of quitting, heard true a live mic, but in the end this is exactly the same thing in term of meaning.

 

So yes, there's a difference in semantic only. And in term of pro-wrestling, in execution of the gimmick (which I why I said I could understand nitpicking with the Austin vs Bret match to some extent, although like it's been said, it doesn't really matter, the match is a classic that goes beyond the gimmick and reducing it to the maybe non-conform execution of said gimmick is ridiculous)

[WingedEagle]

I'm not reading all of this at the moment but I have always been bothered by the fact that Austin didn't have a true submission hold coming into that match. That's a long standing criticism of mine going back 20 years and I don't think it is needlessly pedantic. .

 

Its more than a valid point, especially with the Sharpshooter entrenched as a finisher for Bret. Always been an odd bit of booking. Was there even a particularly compelling angle to set up that stipulation? I don't remember one but not about to rely on that having not watched TV from then in ages.

[El-P]

Its more than a valid point, especially with the Sharpshooter entrenched as a finisher for Bret. Always been an odd bit of booking. Was there even a particularly compelling angle to set up that stipulation?

 

To introduce Ken Shamrock. That was basically it.

[WingedEagle]

 

Its more than a valid point, especially with the Sharpshooter entrenched as a finisher for Bret. Always been an odd bit of booking. Was there even a particularly compelling angle to set up that stipulation?

 

To introduce Ken Shamrock. That was basically it.

 

 

That worked out well. Though I guess given the cash they coughed up to compel him to ditch NJPW at the time, he was going to be a big focus. Still odd.

[Loss]

 

For what it's worth, I agree that there's a difference between a submission match and an I Quit match that isn't just semantic. Submission matches are about submission. I Quit matches are about surrender.

 

To submit is basically to say "I quit". Tapping out, which is a gesture that only appeared, or at least got popular, in the late 90's with Ken Shamrock getting in the WWF, doesn't mean anything other than "I quit". Before that, the guys caught in a submission hold (like the Sharpshooter or the Figure Four) would either signal to the referee that they were submitting, hence "quitting", or pass out, hence physically "quitting".

 

The gimmick matches were not worked the same way : one was usually meaning "no pinfall, only a submission (implied hold because it's the most simple way to attain that goal) can end the match" while the other had to have the oral signal of quitting, heard true a live mic, but in the end this is exactly the same thing in term of meaning.

 

So yes, there's a difference in semantic only. And in term of pro-wrestling, in execution of the gimmick (which I why I said I could understand nitpicking with the Austin vs Bret match to some extent, although like it's been said, it doesn't really matter, the match is a classic that goes beyond the gimmick and reducing it to the maybe non-conform execution of said gimmick is ridiculous)

 

 

Submission matches set expectations that the finish will be a hold. That's not an implicit or explicit expectation in I Quit matches. Magnum-Tully couldn't have been a submission match because the match wasn't based around wrestling.

[Matt D]

I'm not reading all of this at the moment but I have always been bothered by the fact that Austin didn't have a true submission hold coming into that match. That's a long standing criticism of mine going back 20 years and I don't think it is needlessly pedantic. .

 

I'm certainly not saying someone can't have an opinion the match without any other supplementary material, but anyone who cares enough to have an opinion that's lasted 20 years really ought to listen to the recent podcast where they talk about the match, including that very specific issue and their own reluctance when it was told to them that it was happening.

[El-P]

Submission matches set expectations that the finish will be a hold. That's not an implicit or explicit expectation in I Quit matches. Magnum-Tully couldn't have been a submission match because the match wasn't based around wrestling.

 

That's what I said, basically. But it's more a matter of execution and semantics than anything else. The end result is the same : the looser ins't pinned, he quits because of too much pain inflicted on himself.

 

BTW, a contradictory instance would be Backlund vs Bret at Mania, which was an I Quit match ending with a submission.

[El-P]

I'm certainly not saying someone can't have an opinion the match without any other supplementary material, but anyone who cares enough to have an opinion that's lasted 20 years really ought to listen to the recent podcast where they talk about the match, including that very specific issue and their own reluctance when it was told to them that it was happening.

 

Is that on Austin's podcast ? I'm quite curious about it. I've heard Austin before talked about how odd that seemed to him because he basically had no submission hold in his repertoire apart from the old Million Dollar Dream that he actually busted out at the Garden too, leading to a pin (that was something, but not enough).

 

Then again, one can argue that the I Quit gimmick, with the live mic, can be obtrusive to the style of match Austin & Bret would want to have. Especially after Bret & Backlund laid an egg with the same stipulation. So, that was a way to have one guy having to quit while not getting a mic in the way (well, plus putting over Shamrock's character, like I mentioned before)

[Zoo Enthusiast]

 

I'm certainly not saying someone can't have an opinion the match without any other supplementary material, but anyone who cares enough to have an opinion that's lasted 20 years really ought to listen to the recent podcast where they talk about the match, including that very specific issue and their own reluctance when it was told to them that it was happening.

 

Is that on Austin's podcast ? I'm quite curious about it. I've heard Austin before talked about how odd that seemed to him because he basically had no submission hold in his repertoire apart from the old Million Dollar Dream that he actually busted out at the Garden too, leading to a pin (that was something, but not enough).

 

Then again, one can argue that the I Quit gimmick, with the live mic, can be obtrusive to the style of match Austin & Bret would want to have. Especially after Bret & Backlund laid an egg with the same stipulation. So, that was a way to have one guy having to quit while not getting a mic in the way (well, plus putting over Shamrock's character, like I mentioned before)

Its Edge & Christians. Was terrific.

 

https://art19.com/shows/ecs-pod-of-awesomeness/episodes/1260e1ce-5d04-42ac-ac51-7a222bdad6af

[Boss Rock]

Have really enjoyed reading this thread in regards to Hart-Austin. I always thought it was interesting that it was a "submission match" when it was almost completely an out-of-control brawl. Ultimately I think I fall on the semantics side where the match was basically a fight to see who would quit first and Austin would understandably want to brawl with Hart instead of taking him to the mat. And I think El-P's point about using the stip to introduce Shamrock is a valid one.

[The Thread Killer]

For what it's worth, I agree that there's a difference between a submission match and an I Quit match that isn't just semantic. Submission matches are about submission. I Quit matches are about surrender.

 

Exactly. Whenever I hear the phrase "I Quit Match" I automatically think about Magnum TA and Tully Blanchard. When they booked the Rock vs. Mankind I Quit match, I didn't go into that expecting to see them trading submission holds. I expected to see them try and kill each other. Hell, same for the JBL/Cena I Quit match. To me it means there are no rules and you try and kill the guy to get him to give up. I guess the Flair/Funk match in 89 was more technically based, but even still, that feud was based on Funk doing evil shit to Flair like trying to piledrive him through tables and putting a plastic bag over his head...not make him submit to a technical hold.

 

When they announced the Hart/Austin match for Wrestlemania 13, I automatically expected a brawl - especially based on the context of the feud. Sure, Hart's biggest weapon was the Sharpshooter, but even before his neck injury Austin was starting to transform into an asskicker who also wrestled. I never once thought about submission holds from Austin, I just assumed Austin was going to try and run over Hart with an ambulance or something. I assume they didn't promote it as an "I Quit" match because maybe that was a match JCP made famous, so they called it a submission match instead?

[DR Ackermann]

As a kid/teenager I always misremembered Austin/Bret as an I Quit match because of how it was worked.

[shodate]

As a kid/teenager I always misremembered Austin/Bret as an I Quit match because of how it was worked.

my point was worked like an i quit match 100%

[C.S.]

He gave the NXT North American Title Ladder Match a five-star rating?!

 

Wow. For me, it's probably 3.5 at best - 4 if I'm feeling generous.

 

What am I missing here?

[Matt D]

He gave the NXT North American Title Ladder Match a five-star rating?!

 

Wow. For me, it's probably 3.5 at best - 4 if I'm feeling generous.

 

What am I missing here?

Eternal youth?

[Mad Dog]

He gave the NXT North American Title Ladder Match a five-star rating?!

 

Wow. For me, it's probably 3.5 at best - 4 if I'm feeling generous.

 

What am I missing here?

 

It's his kind of match done really well.

[brockobama]

I have always been bothered by the fact that Austin didn't have a true submission hold coming into that match.

 

What are you talking about, brother, he had the Million Dollar Dream.

 

re: the Bret/Austin talk, though, to what degree does this overrated talk stem from people thinking the Survivor Series match is better? Did that mindset exist immediately from the time of WM13 or did that only build and build in the years afterward?

 

As for my own answers a few spring to mind. Most of the lesser AJPW fivers, basically anything that has anybody but the core four and Jumbo/Fuchi before them feels overplayed to me. Joe/Kobashi is probably the only ROH match that holds up to that level for me, though I might go high on a few Dave didn't.

 

The big one(s) for me, though, are WarGames. I recognize that a huge part of my disconnect is merely an unfamiliarity, as I know just about nothing about the build and every attempt I make at doing a deep dive into WCW ends with frustration about TV, but even aside from that they're just sort of above average cage matches to me. I also think that the man advantage/strategy of them never hits quite where I'd like it to. Were I a star-rating man I'd still have them around or above four flakes, since it's a whole bunch of mega-talented dudes going all out, but none of the ones I've seen have ever struck me on a "this is one of the best matches of all time" level.

[C.S.]

 

He gave the NXT North American Title Ladder Match a five-star rating?!

 

Wow. For me, it's probably 3.5 at best - 4 if I'm feeling generous.

 

What am I missing here?

Eternal youth?

 

 

Not sure if you're trying to suggest that I'm "old" and out of touch.

 

I'm really, really, really fucking sick of WWE car crash matches. *Shrug*

 

With that said, this was a very good one.

 

Not five-star good, though - IMO.

 

I thought Meltz was very selective about what he gave five stars to, which makes this all the more shocking - especially with the legit five-star Gargano vs. Ciampa match on the same show (which he also rated five stars).

 

'Course, I'm not one to put much stock in his ratings to begin with - I'm just surprised.

[gordi]

 

 

He gave the NXT North American Title Ladder Match a five-star rating?!

 

Wow. For me, it's probably 3.5 at best - 4 if I'm feeling generous.

 

What am I missing here?

Eternal youth?

 

 

Not sure if you're trying to suggest that I'm "old" and out of touch.

 

I'm really, really, really fucking sick of WWE car crash matches. *Shrug*

 

With that said, this was a very good one.

 

Not five-star good, though - IMO.

 

I thought Meltz was very selective about what he gave five stars to, which makes this all the more shocking - especially with the legit five-star Gargano vs. Ciampa match on the same show (which he also rated five stars).

 

'Course, I'm not one to put much stock in his ratings to begin with - I'm just surprised.

 

 

I am definitely old and out of touch and the only attention I pay to Dave Meltzer these days is what I read on here...

 

That being said, it very much seems to me that Meltzer has discovered that there is money to be made in pandering to the younger generation of internet wrestling fans (to make a broad generalization: he's pandering to those fans who have recently discovered New Japan and the US indies and who have not yet grown tired of flashy moves and contrived spots - not too different from the kind of fans that we were maybe 15 or 20 years ago).

 

Handing out high star ratings right and left seems to be his way of courting their approval. They are the "grade inflation" generation, and I figure that doling out extra-high grades to matches that are merely flashy or exciting is his way of playing to their sensibilities.

[Matt D]

 

 

He gave the NXT North American Title Ladder Match a five-star rating?!

 

Wow. For me, it's probably 3.5 at best - 4 if I'm feeling generous.

 

What am I missing here?

Eternal youth?

 

 

Not sure if you're trying to suggest that I'm "old" and out of touch.

 

I'm really, really, really fucking sick of WWE car crash matches. *Shrug*

 

With that said, this was a very good one.

 

Not five-star good, though - IMO.

 

I thought Meltz was very selective about what he gave five stars to, which makes this all the more shocking - especially with the legit five-star Gargano vs. Ciampa match on the same show (which he also rated five stars).

 

'Course, I'm not one to put much stock in his ratings to begin with - I'm just surprised.

 

 

It seemed less petulant and more even-handed and even potentially positive than me saying that what you were lacking was "Arrested Development."

[fxnj]

 

I have always been bothered by the fact that Austin didn't have a true submission hold coming into that match.

 

What are you talking about, brother, he had the Million Dollar Dream.

 

re: the Bret/Austin talk, though, to what degree does this overrated talk stem from people thinking the Survivor Series match is better? Did that mindset exist immediately from the time of WM13 or did that only build and build in the years afterward?

He did have the Million Dollar Dream, and him never going for it made the lack of near falls all the more egregious to me the last time I watched it. I would still have it at ****1/2, but nitpicks like that definitely count against it when you're talking about whether or not something deserves *****.

 

Speaking personally, I always had difficulty analyzing the match because of how it's been canonized by WWE and for how much I love the overall feud. It wasn't until I listened to Austin's podcast commentary on the match a while back that I've been able to take a step back and think about it more critically. His commentary is great at breaking down both the things the match did well and in raising some valid points on how the match could have been improved. Specifically, as iconic as that image of Austin bleeding in the sharpshooter is, the finish when watched in a vacuum does him seem kind of flat with him just passing out as soon as Hart gets it locked in. It could have been a lot better if they worked more of a struggle and had Austin reverse the move, which also could have helped fix the aforementioned issue with Austin not getting any near falls.

[Grimmas]

 

Its more than a valid point, especially with the Sharpshooter entrenched as a finisher for Bret. Always been an odd bit of booking. Was there even a particularly compelling angle to set up that stipulation?

 

To introduce Ken Shamrock. That was basically it.

 

Rewatch Survivor Series. Austin uses the Texas Cloverleaf and the Octopus in an attempt to make Bret submit. JR and Vince talked a lot about making the other one submit. Heck Austin lost because he didn't let go of the Million Dollar Dream.

 

The submission match was a logical extension of Survivor Series.

[Johnny Sorrow]

I honestly feel that no one is allowed to comment on Austin vs Hart at Mania 13 until theyve listened to them break down the match on the Edge and Christian podcast, as brought up earlier. If youre going to break down one of the most important matches ever, you need the perspective of the performers who did it.

[zep81]

I honestly feel that no one is allowed to comment on Austin vs Hart at Mania 13 until theyve listened to them break down the match on the Edge and Christian podcast, as brought up earlier. If youre going to break down one of the most important matches ever, you need the perspective of the performers who did it.

 

I missed this. Could you offer a link to it pls.

[cactus]

There's quite a few for me. Richards/Elgin is one that I don't even think is a solid match, it's downright bad. I wasn't a fan of The Golden Lovers/Young Bucks match, but I can see why people like it.

 

 

I was in the crowd for Joe vs Kobashi, and it was off the charts great as a live experience. I dont know if it comes off as amazing on DVD or whatever.

 

Amazing on tape as well. That match was a big gateway drug for me in terms of deepening my exploration of both the indies and Japan. Is it one of those time and place things in terms of the 5 stars? Probably, but I will always feel great affection for it.

 

 

I can see that being a big reason why it got the 5 star treatment. It was one of the first matches I saw when I got into puro and I agree on the gateway drug comment. Does anyone know if Meltzer was in the crowd for it?