Over the past few months we have received criticism off some readers about our current ratings system, and after listening to all of you and having many internal discussions, we decided to come up with a new one. The new system is based on a rubric and everything is rated on the five star scale in order for us to be more consistent. Below you can see the details and criteria of our new system!
| Starting Word for promos/Matches and bolded: | Increments of Star Rating: |
| EMBARRASSING | 0 to 0.75 |
| AWFUL | 1.0 to 1.25 |
| BAD | 1.5 to 1.75 |
| BELOW AVERAGE | 2 to 2.25 |
| AVERAGE | 2.5 to 2.75 |
| GOOD | 3.0 to 3.25 |
| GREAT | 3.5 to 3.75 |
| AMAZING | 4.0 to 4.25 |
| MUST WATCH | 4.5 to 4.75 |
| PERFECT | 5 Stars |
Match Rating:
“Formula”: Fundamentals Value + Atmosphere Value + Storytelling / Match Structure Value + Psychology Value + Innovation Value = Total Match rating out of 5 Stars.
| Match Rating Rubric | 0 Stars | 0.25 Star | 0.50 Star | 0.75 Star | 1 Star |
| Fundamentals: Describing the overall wrestling aspect of the match. Including bumping correctly, using traditional wrestling holds and whether or not botches existed, and/or were recovered smoothly. | -Multiple botches with poor recoveries -Traditional wrestling holds have not been used or attempted. -Bumps were taken poorly | -Botches had attempted to be covered up -Traditional wrestling holds have been attempted to be used but were performed poorly -Most bumps were taken well, but a few looked dangerous | -Most botches were covered up convincingly -Traditional wrestling holds have been used to a decent standard but lacked realism at times -A couple of bumps looked harsh, but most were performed well | -Any botches were covered up convincingly -Traditional wrestling holds have been used correctly -Bumps were performed well and taken mostly safely | -Botches were either non existent, or the rare botches were covered up convincingly -Traditional wrestling holds have been performed perfectly -Bumps were performed well and taken safely |
| Atmosphere: Atmosphere describes the feeling in the room: Was the crowd dead or alive, did the wrestlers play off of the crowd’s emotion and how much of the match were they invested in. | -Crowd was dead -Wrestlers failed to involve or acknowledge the crowd in the match at times -Crowd wasn’t invested in the match at times | -Crowd was active for some of the match -Wrestlers involved the crowd in the match at times -Crowd were invested in the match at times | -Crowd was active for most of the match -Wrestlers involved the crowd in the match -Crowd were invested in the match by the end of it | -Crowd was active for the vast majority of the match -Big match feel around the arena -Wrestlers involved the crowd in the match well -Crowd were on the edge of their seats towards the end of the match | -Crowd was active for the entirety of the match -Big match feel around the arena -Crowd were on the edge of their seats and were going crazy by the end of the match -Wrestlers involved/acknowledged the crowd in the match perfectly |
| Storytelling/Match Structure Describe what Storytelling/Match Structure means here. | -No real story was told and fans were confused as to who to cheer/boo for | -A basic story was told through in ring action and fans knew who to cheer/boo for | -A story was told through in ring action -The match had a decent build for what it was | -A good story was told through in ring action -The build to the match was done well to create a level of excitement -The story advanced slightly throughout the match -The rules of the match have been followed throughout and haven’t tried to insult the intelligence of the fans by forgetting about them | -A great story was told throughout the match through the in ring action (For example spots from previous matches were teased or developed on) -The storyline in the build up to the match was performed brilliantly and created a feeling of excitement for the bout. -The story advanced throughout the match -The rules of the match have been followed throughout and haven’t tried to insult the intelligence of the fans by forgetting about them |
| Psychology: Psychology relates to the overall story being told with the wrestling of it. Were moves being sold as damaging. Were body parts being worked on, and previous injuries that were included integrated into the match itself. | -Most moves were not sold. -Wrestlers haven’t sold any injuries they suffered during the match -No specific limbs/body parts were targeted throughout parts of the match. | -Moves have been attempted to be sold correctly -Wrestlers have tried to sell any injuries they suffered during the match -A specific limb/body part was targeted throughout parts of the match. | -Moves have been mostly sold correctly -Wrestlers have attempted to sell any injuries they suffered during the match -A specific limb/body part was targeted throughout parts of the match. | -Moves have been sold correctly -Wrestlers mostly sold any injuries they suffered during the match -A specific limb/body part was targeted throughout the match. (Optional: Not always going to be present. )If a wrestler is working an injury angle, (wrapped arm, tape around the ribs etc. ) The selling and attention to the injury already achieved is slightly obvious. | -Moves have been sold correctly -Wrestlers continued to sell any injuries they suffered during the match -A specific limb/body part was clearly targeted and emphasized throughout the match. (Optional: Not always going to be present. )If a wrestler is working an injury angle, (wrapped arm, tape around the ribs etc. ) The selling and attention to the injury already achieved is obvious. |
| Innovation: Spots and sequences within the match were rare and unique. | The match had a nothing unique or exciting about it | The match had a couple of exciting spots but nothing unique or rare | The match included a spot/sequence which was rare and felts special | The match included a spot/sequence which was unique and has never been seen before, or rarely done. | -The match included spots/sequences which were unique and has never been seen before |
Promo Ratings:
“Formula”: Dialogue/Structure + Crowd Involvement + Expressions/Emotions + Character Development/Consistency + Authenticity/Believability = Total Show rating out of 5 Stars.
| Promo Rubric: | 0 | 0.25 | 0.5 | .75 | 1 |
| Dialogue/ Content / Structure: | -The flow of the promo by a wrestler or by wrestlers was good. | ||||
| Crowd Involvement: How well was the crowd integrated into the promo. Did it help or hinder the promo? | -Wrestler(s) failed to get reactions from the crowd for some of the promo | -Wrestler(s) were getting reactions from the crowd for some of the promo and attempted to involve the fans | -The crowd was invested in the promo by the end of it. Whether they were alive or quiet to respect the wrestler(s). -Wrestler(s) were getting reactions from the crowd for most of the promo. | -The crowd was invested in the promo for the majority of it. Whether they were alive or quiet to respect the wrestler(s). -Wrestler(s) were getting reactions from the crowd and adapting the promo based on the reactions | -The crowd was visibly invested in the promo. Whether they were alive or quiet to respect the wrestler(s). -Wrestler(s) were easily getting reactions from the crowd and adapting the promo based on the reactions |
| Expressions / Emotions: Were feelings expressed and were emotions shown correctly. | -The performer seemed awkward and did not manage to successfully show any emotion through their promo and their facial expressions. | -The performers tried to express their emotions throughout the promo and involved facial expressions, but it came across as somewhat awkward. | -The performers emotions and facial expressions seemed fairly realistic but slightly awkward at times | -The performers emotions and facial expressions seemed genuine | -The performers emotions and facial expressions seemed completely real while also feeling dramatic |
| Character Development and Consistency: In relating to the character, was the character/gimmick of the wrestler developed further with the promo? Did the promo’s content match other recent promos? | -The promo wasn’t consistent with things the wrestler has said in the past and ignored their morals or past storylines. -Despite there being no real character development, the promo did not harm the character | -The promo was mostly consistent with things the wrestler has said in the past and didn’t ignore their morals or past storylines. -Despite there being no real character development, the promo did not harm the character | -The promo was consistent with things the wrestler has said in the past and didn’t ignore their morals or past storylines. -Despite there being no real character development, the promo did not harm the character | -The wrestlers character/gimmick was slightly developed during the segment -The promo was consistent with things the wrestler has said in the past and didn’t ignore their morals or past storylines. | -The wrestlers character/gimmick was developed during the segment -The promo was consistent with things the wrestler has said in the past and didn’t ignore their morals or past storylines. -Things from the characters’ past were mentioned instead of being ignored. |
| Authenticity and Believability: Did the promo feel scripted? Did the promo feel believable as something the wrestler would say/do. | -Promo felt scripted and was forced | -Some of promo did not feel like it was scripted -Promo felt forced at times | -Most of the promo did not feel like it was scripted -Promo felt forced at times but still performed to a decent level. | -The promo did not feel like it was scripted for the majority of it -What was being said, and the delivery of what was said didn’t feel overly forced. | -The promo did not feel like it was scripted and made logical sense -What was being said, and the delivery of what was said didn’t feel forced. |
Overall Show Rubric:
“Formula”: Matches + Show Structure + Atmosphere + Storytelling + Production = Total Show rating out of 5 Stars.
| Overall Show Rating: | 0 Star | 0.25 Star | 0.5 Star | 0.75 Stars | 1 Stars |
| Matches: Matches means exactly what you think it means. The quality of the matches during the show and the locations of the matches in our star rating system. | -Majority of matches are under 2.5 stars | -Majority of matches are around 2.5 stars or above -At least one 2.75+ star match | -Majority of matches are around 3 stars or above -At least one 3.5+ star match | -Majority of matches are around 3.5 stars or above -At least one 4.25+ star match | -Majority of matches are 4 stars or above -At least one 5 star match |
| Show Structure: The Show Structure could also be described as the blueprint or the order that things fall into. | -Show Structure was very poor with matches being in a bad order. -Show dragged on and was so hard to get through. | -The show structure was good at times however did have several weakness such as the main event not feeling like one, or -Matches were mostly placed in a good order with promos and segments distributed well. | -The show structure was mostly good -Matches were mostly placed in a good order with promos and segments distributed well. | -The show structure was good with the show building up to the main event nicely. -Matches were placed in a good order, with any promos and Segments were distributed well throughout. -Show felt easy to watch for the majority of it | -Show structure from start to finish was fantastic. Match quality was consistent, or increased, throughout the show. Matches were placed in the perfect order, with correct placement of any promos/segments. -Show was easy to watch from start to finish, and was consistent in engaging the viewer. |
| Atmosphere/Crowd/Commentary: In this case the atmosphere of the show relates to the importance given and received from the crowd themselves. | -Crowd was dead the majority of the show with wrestlers trying with very little effort to get them involved. | -Crowd was hot for close to half of the show with wrestlers rarely managing to get the crowd to be active | -Crowd was hot for over half of the show. -Wrestlers have involved fan interaction -Commentary had its good and bad moments throughout the show. Importance was given but not always shown. | -Crowd is consistently loud and involved throughout the majority of the show -Wrestlers have involved fan interaction for most of the show -Commentary had its good moments throughout the show. Importance was given and rarely wasn’t shown. | -Crowd is consistently loud and involved throughout the show -Wrestlers have involved fan interaction throughout -Commentary has done its job well and not taken away/distracted fans from the match (if applicable) |
| Storytelling: The Storytelling aspects relate to the overall show and the stories involved. Were the stories being presented in a strong and engaging way? Did the company you are watching focus on investing you into the product for next week? | -No storylines have been told/advanced to an acceptable level -The storylines haven’t been engaging to the audience -After the show you have no interest to see what happens next | -Barely any storylines have been told/advanced to an alright level -Some storylines have been barely engaging to the audience -After the show you are somewhat looking forward to one or two storylines to see what happens next | -Most storylines have been told/advanced to an acceptable level -The storylines have been slightly engaging to the audience -After the show you are looking forward to seeing what happens next in at least a few storylines | -Several storylines have been told/advanced to a good/great level -The storylines have been mostly engaging to the audience -After the show you are actively looking forward to some storylines to see what happens next | -Several storylines have been told/advanced to an exceptional level -The storylines have been engaging to the audience -After the show you are actively looking forward to the next show to see what happens next |
| Production/Theme: Production and Theme of the shows are based on the production. Excellent camera work with pyro and effects. Excellent lighting and how the event felt in terms of a theme of importance. | -Poor production with no real attempt at lighting and very poor camera work -No real theme/look to the presentation of the show | -Satisfactory production including a good attempt at lighting and camera work -Satisfactory theme/look to the presentation of the show | -Good production including with good lighting and solid camera work -Decent theme/look to the presentation of the show | -High level production including some pyro, good lighting and easy to watch camera work -Good theme/look to the presentation of the show | -High level production including pyro, special effects, perfect lighting and amazing camera work -Unique theme with a special look/feel to the show/ the event felt important. |
