Might I ask why this was at all interesting to a human that isn't a fan of pro wrestling? I'm glad it was, but I just didn't really figure it would be.
This is a very interesting and fascinating approach to analyzing something like this, and it obvious took a LOT of work. It's a shame that Dave pretty much destroyed his own rating scale, especially since it's the only one that's really given any weight within the industry. At the end of the day, though, what should matter is what *you* think of the match.
Also, I'm kind of surprised that Manami Toyota or Kyoko Inoue didn't rank higher because he LOVED those two back in the day. Maybe they didn't have enough matches rated?
Thank you very much my friend. To give you a pat on the back, I'd still say this took less effort than chronicling the whole of 1990, but yes this did take a lot of my time. This project is why my Friday article had to be about me, and not something any more substantive.
In the end, who cares what Dave Meltzer thinks of wrestling matches? This is just a fun exercise I did because it was planted in my head by a conversation I was engaged in. There's a reason I did not title this anything like who's the best wrestler, because that would assume Dave's scale is objective, which is an assumption I am not near comfortable making.
You are correct that the two women are not included in this exercise because of sample size, but just for you Ryan I'll throw them in here:
Manami Toyota: 53 matches, average Meltzer percentage 91.4, good for first place if she had managed to have a few more matches.
Kyoko Inoue: 47 matches, average Meltzer percentage 89.4, good for second place (behind only Toyota) if she had broken the 60 match barrier.
You can see that yes, Dave does love both of these women to death, but the volume is very limited. Both stuffed all of their best stuff into a five year window from 1991-1996 (slightly less so for Toyota, but the pattern is still pronounced). If either had been on top just a little longer they could've made this list, likely in the top ten. It's not their fault their promotion fell apart around them, but it is what it is.
Pretty, pretty, pretty, pretty good.
Thank you very, very, very, very much my friend!
Might I ask why this was at all interesting to a human that isn't a fan of pro wrestling? I'm glad it was, but I just didn't really figure it would be.
This is a very interesting and fascinating approach to analyzing something like this, and it obvious took a LOT of work. It's a shame that Dave pretty much destroyed his own rating scale, especially since it's the only one that's really given any weight within the industry. At the end of the day, though, what should matter is what *you* think of the match.
Also, I'm kind of surprised that Manami Toyota or Kyoko Inoue didn't rank higher because he LOVED those two back in the day. Maybe they didn't have enough matches rated?
Thank you very much my friend. To give you a pat on the back, I'd still say this took less effort than chronicling the whole of 1990, but yes this did take a lot of my time. This project is why my Friday article had to be about me, and not something any more substantive.
In the end, who cares what Dave Meltzer thinks of wrestling matches? This is just a fun exercise I did because it was planted in my head by a conversation I was engaged in. There's a reason I did not title this anything like who's the best wrestler, because that would assume Dave's scale is objective, which is an assumption I am not near comfortable making.
You are correct that the two women are not included in this exercise because of sample size, but just for you Ryan I'll throw them in here:
Manami Toyota: 53 matches, average Meltzer percentage 91.4, good for first place if she had managed to have a few more matches.
Kyoko Inoue: 47 matches, average Meltzer percentage 89.4, good for second place (behind only Toyota) if she had broken the 60 match barrier.
You can see that yes, Dave does love both of these women to death, but the volume is very limited. Both stuffed all of their best stuff into a five year window from 1991-1996 (slightly less so for Toyota, but the pattern is still pronounced). If either had been on top just a little longer they could've made this list, likely in the top ten. It's not their fault their promotion fell apart around them, but it is what it is.