Jump to content

King of Sports: New Japan Pro-Wrestling Discussion Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Just watched GL vs Cody and Page and Ospreay vs Scurll before work. Its crazy no matter how many times Ospreay and Scurll face each other they manage to make it feel new every single time. That Spanish Fly was disgusting and the stomps later were hard to watch in the best way possible.

 

GL vs Cody/Page was whatever. I dont know how I would react if I knew that big ass gash above my eye. I guess adrenalin is strong as hell. Im honestly just ready for Supercard at this point. I want to see this settled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was fear following Sundays NJPW Sakura Genesis that Will Ospreay would not be able to compete during WrestleMania week, due to ongoing neck issues that were made worse during his match with Scurll. He posted the following today on Twitter

 

https://twitter.com/WillOspreay/status/981166940860252160

https://411mania.com/wrestling/will-ospreay-compete-new-orleans-wrestlemania-weekend/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure I remember one of the main reasons Meltzer didn't give HBK/Taker @ WMXV the full 5 stars is due to the botch and possibility of injury from the infamous suicide dive (even though I personally think it added to the match), but here he gives Ospreay/Scurll 5* despite an unarguably more dangerous (and obvious) botch. I can't say for sure what his reasons for rating the match were, and it of course doesn't take away from how great the match was, but I reckon this is Meltzer's bias for New Japan in full swing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure I remember one of the main reasons Meltzer didn't give HBK/Taker @ WMXV the full 5 stars is due to the botch and possibility of injury from the infamous suicide dive (even though I personally think it added to the match), but here he gives Ospreay/Scurll 5* despite an unarguably more dangerous (and obvious) botch. I can't say for sure what his reasons for rating the match were, and it of course doesn't take away from how great the match was, but I reckon this is Meltzer's bias for New Japan in full swing.

The suicide dive of the HBK/Taker match was a criticism on his part, but it didn't factor into the match rating as a minus because of a botch... Meltzer hardly ever rates via "Well without the botch it would have been x-stars".

 

And a 4.75 star rating is still one of the greatest matches he has seen, since he doesn't hand high ratings out for every match that was simply great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bias? Or New Japan consistently earning the benefit of the doubt with the high quality product they put out with every event?

 

 

Im sorry it just bothers me when people say Dave is biased in favor of New Japan as if the matches dont deserve the praise they get. I can understand if WWE was consistently competing with New Japan as far as match quality goes but theyre not, we all know it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'm sure I remember one of the main reasons Meltzer didn't give HBK/Taker @ WMXV the full 5 stars is due to the botch and possibility of injury from the infamous suicide dive (even though I personally think it added to the match), but here he gives Ospreay/Scurll 5* despite an unarguably more dangerous (and obvious) botch. I can't say for sure what his reasons for rating the match were, and it of course doesn't take away from how great the match was, but I reckon this is Meltzer's bias for New Japan in full swing.

The suicide dive of the HBK/Taker match was a criticism on his part, but it didn't factor into the match rating as a minus because of a botch... Meltzer hardly ever rates via "Well without the botch it would have been x-stars".

 

He actually said that spot added to the match lol. I do love the New Japan bias narrative, though.

Bias? Or New Japan consistently earning the benefit of the doubt with the high quality product they put out with every event?

 

Im sorry it just bothers me when people say Dave is biased in favor of New Japan as if the matches dont deserve the praise they get. I can understand if WWE was consistently competing with New Japan as far as match quality goes but theyre not, we all know it.

 

Everyone who reviews wrestling acknowledges that New Japan has the best in ring product in the world but LOLNEWJAPANBIAS is easier to say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bias? Or New Japan consistently earning the benefit of the doubt with the high quality product they put out with every event?

 

 

Im sorry it just bothers me when people say Dave is biased in favor of New Japan as if the matches dont deserve the praise they get. I can understand if WWE was consistently competing with New Japan as far as match quality goes but theyre not, we all know it.

 

Not all of us, sadly. And that's fine.

 

One of the my biggest issues right now is the Dave Meltzer hate with him supposedly being "bias" when it comes to rating practically any given NJPW match because people think he has a hard-on for anything outside of WWE, especially in NJPW. Maybe he doesn't, maybe he does - but if it's the latter, then I can't *censored*ing blame him at all. I'm not a super avid watcher of NJPW, but whenever I do opt to watch a match (like recently with Okada/Ospreay and Scurll/Ospreay just to name a few), I'm usually blown the *Censored* away.

 

The worst thing about it, is that I've realized some people who criticize Meltzer for giving out 4.5 to 5 star ratings for these NJPW matches never actually go back to watch the matches themselves to make their own judgement on it. They seem to automatically assume Meltzer is adding in a few extra stars for the simple fact that it's a NJPW and not for the actual quality of it - and NJPW hardly ever fails to deliver in that regard in comparison to WWE...so again, I can't blame him.

 

This pretty much all started after he gave Okada/Omega a 5-star match rating and dubbed it "the best match he's ever seen" or something along those lines. Personally, I don't think it was (probably because I was spoiled on who the winner was, idk), but if he feels that way, let him. Even with the spoilers, I believe that one match Okada/Omega had was better than a majority of high-profile matches WWE has produced over the past few years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of the matches he gives 5 stars are worthy of praise whether it gets that rating or not, that's obvious. I said that clearly in my original post regarding Scurll/Ospreay. But regardless, I still feel Meltzer is biased towards New Japan. Not as a company necessarily, but perhaps towards the style or the wrestlers, or it's just a matter of his personal investment/attachment at this particular moment in time. And that's fine, cos he's just one person and of course he's gonna be biased. He's a nice starting point to determine the general quality of matches, but it's not like he's an objective standard.

 

To respond to EJ, is it bias or NJPW having a consistently great product, my response is why can't it be both? Does Meltzer being subjective and having his own biases take away at all from the product (or anyone's opinion of it)? Do you, or anyone else, actually need these matches to get 5 stars to back up your own view of them? Oh and your unwarranted remark about WWE only shows that you're the one trying to bring in the WWE vs NJPW argument, not me. I didn't mention the 'E once (until now).

To Lil Kazu, New Japan does have the best wrestling today by far, but that doesn't mean there still can't be LOLNEWJAPANBIAS (as you eloquently put it). Again, the quality of the product and Meltzer's opinion towards said product don't exist exclusive of each other

 

My original post was primarily about the botch, rather than the quality of the match as a whole. If I got my info wrong, then my comparison of HBK/Taker and Scurll/Ospreay can be discounted. Nevertheless, now that I think about it more, the more I do feel like Meltzer is bias towards New Japan. And if we're adopting his 5 star scale, do I think some of the matches don't deserve that rating? Yes, and does that take away from the quality of the match? Maybe, considering I'm rating it lower than the best it can get, but it still doesn't take away from the quality of the product as a whole. That's what I find funny about this, how my post about a serious botch (in one match) affecting the rating of that match somehow equates to demeaning the quality of the entire product.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well you could say I have an opinion of his opinion, and you have an opinion of mine, but I personally think that's a shit route to take.

 

Again, I feel like it's obvious that Meltzer is bias, if we're equating bias to subjectivity, because he simply can't be objective. By giving New Japan higher ratings, that proof of his bias in itself. Just because your idea of quality and his align, it doesn't mean he isn't biased. If his idea of high quality wrestling suddenly relied on the implementation of comedy and a loads of matches from DDT suddenly got 5 stars, would you consider this biased? And if so, would that be because it doesn't align with your idea of high quality wrestling? Again, I'm not trying to demean New Japan's product by any means, I just find it strange that people get so defensive over Meltzer's opinion and the 5 star rating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your argument was 'Meltzer is biased towards New Japan becuase he gave Ospreay/Scurll 5 stars when it had a big botch and didn't give Taker/Michaels 5 stars because of the botch' which isn't true. From then on I wasn't even talking about you in particular, just in general about the idea that Meltzer is biased towards New Japan and in particular 'against' WWE.

 

I actually think it's the other way around when it comes to his ratings, and he's said as much. Plenty of WWE matches he rated 4 or 4.5 stars would get a lower rating if they'd happened in New Japan or PWG, I'm certain of it.

 

But the thing is when people say he's biased towards New Japan they're completely ignoring history. He went years without rating giving them a 4.5 star match, let alone a 5 star one. And the argument about they NJPW style doesn't add up either because part of the appeal when it comes to New Japan is the various amount of wrestling styles they present. Ospreay vs Scurll is completely different than ZSJ vs Tanahashi which is completely different from Ishii vs Shibata.


Well you could say I have an opinion of his opinion, and you have an opinion of mine, but I personally think that's a shit route to take.

 

Again, I feel like it's obvious that Meltzer is bias, if we're equating bias to subjectivity, because he simply can't be objective. By giving New Japan higher ratings, that proof of his bias in itself. Just because your idea of quality and his align, it doesn't mean he isn't biased. If his idea of high quality wrestling suddenly relied on the implementation of comedy and a loads of matches from DDT suddenly got 5 stars, would you consider this biased? And if so, would that be because it doesn't align with your idea of high quality wrestling? Again, I'm not trying to demean New Japan's product by any means, I just find it strange that people get so defensive over Meltzer's opinion and the 5 star rating.

 

I had written my post before reading this, if it had been the other way around I wouldn't have even bothered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be bias if Meltzer gave every single match in the WWE 0 stars or 1 star. But he's given out some 3 or 4-4.5 star matches in the WWE in recent years. There are some matches at Mania that he'll probably give four stars to, like Nakamura/Styles, Asuka vs. Charlotte and the IC Title three way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^So him giving New Japan 5 stars isn't bias, but him giving WWE 0/1 stars is? Are you suggesting that bias (in this context) can only apply if it's negative and/or to do with WWE? Aside from Taker/HBK (which I feel isn't part of the conversation anymore), I haven't mentioned WWE once. What I dislike is the notion that you can't discuss New Japan and Meltzer without some suggestion of bias towards WWE being brought in (i.e. 'you don't like Meltzer rating NJPW high cos you're a WWE mark'). Full disclosure, I think New Japan's product is miles better than WWE's, and if I was Meltzer, I'm sure my bias would reflect in my star ratings.

 

I almost feel that your mention of the Mania matches (particularly AJ/Naka) and Kazu mentioning WWE matches in other promotions furthers my point, because it suggest that Meltzer's ratings are based on his own subjective expectations of each individual company, further highlighting his bias. Consider this, if AJ/Naka hadn't happened at WK10, and they had their first ever match this Sunday, and it was the exact same as the Wrestle Kingdom match - would it get 5 stars from Meltzer? I don't think it would. It's of course a hypothetical scenario which can be a bit weak, but I feel like it wouldn't and it could be said that highlights Meltzer's bias.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think he understands what a bias is. Of course we're gonna bring up WWE because if he's biased that means he's for New Japan in another company's detriment. He would be biased if, had that Ospreay vs Scurll match happened in WWE, he'd given it 4 stars or something. A bias would be if he rated matches higher just because they happened in New Japan when it's actually the other way around when it comes to WWE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...