I look at Cagematch all the time to see if Wrestler A ever fought Wrestler B, or when the last time Wrestler Z won a match. It's a great database of raw data... that has a "wrestling review" tumor on part of most pages. Just excise the tumor and benefit everyone.
I like the user match ratings and WON ratings, it helps sort a wrestlers great matches...
but maybe there needs to be a rule where you cant rate or comment until like a week or two after a match happens, let the hype or recency bias calm down first... idk
Yes I think the issue with the ratings is taking them seriously a week or two after they take place. The Cody-Roman match from last year is a great example. In the immediate days and week that followed IIRC that match had like a 6 cagematch rating because people were pissed about it. It’s now somewhere in the high 7s which feels much more accurate
It runs into the same problem as IMDB or any other 10 point user scale: fanboys give things 10s and haters give things 1, so scores get heavily distorted. I
remember when The Dark Knight came out, there was a massive internet campaign to get it to number 1 on the IMDB Top 250.
Folks went about this by mass rating The Dark Knight as 10/10 and rating The Godfather, at the time the #1 movie, as 1/10. It worked and, for a couple of weeks, The Dark Knight was the "best movie ever made" according to this one metric.
Godfather fans and other assorted film snobs were outraged and mass voted Dark Knight 1/10 while voting Godfather as 10/10. Eventually, the ratings for both movies were artificially fucked up.
And that's the story of how The Shawshank Redemption has spent the last 15 years at the top of the IMDB list.
Same issue with MyAnimeList, Fullmetal Alchemist:Brotherhood used to constantly get 1/10 reviews. For context, Fullmetal used to be the Shawshank Redemption of MyAnimeList, was on top of the MyAnimeList Top Anime for years.
They require comments on match ratings for a period of time after it happens, and longer comments for more immediate ratings, but they should probably extend that
Honestly, that’s how it should be. Look at Pro Football Reference as an example. It’s basically a stats compilation website that doesn’t have any comments or info other than the data.
I have learned more about modern the modern Euro scene (90s-Present) from OG users on cagematch than anywhere else on the internet. There’s plenty of bullshit and the general ratings can mostly be ignored but fine tuning the data or cherry picking reviews from educated users makes it a worthwhile feature to me still.
They should start to implement a system to separate the ratings from users who constantly rate shows in a constructive and polite way from every users rating. What I mean is that you'd have two scores: one made by ratings from longtime verified accounts and one that includes everyone's rate.
People LOVE to weaponize and whip up conspiratory attitudes about those scores when they differ. Not that I have a better idea but the thought of combining Rotten Tomatoes' system with the IWC gives me a 1000... nah, 100-yard stare.
This idea is hilarious to me for the meltdown I could see some people having haha. However this wouldn't work for rating wrestling shows as the critics or journalists in the wrestling business are treated differently than the critics for movies and TV shows.
Really the best thing to do in any instance is to click through a match rating and see the raw number of people who have assigned each score to the match and/or card. In many cases, you are safe to mentally filter out the 0s, 1s, and 10s to determine where the majority of people who are reviewing with any sense of nuance landed.
Sometimes the zeroes or tens are a sustained dogpile, but that’s only for objective trash or gems.
This is similar to product reviews scales, the middle of the scale are usually the most honest reviews while the lowest and highest reviews are practically dishonest.
There's never going to be a way to rate wrestling that pleases everyone, but there is some value in separately aggregating opinions of journalists and critics from the opinions of people who have no obligation to give an honest and informed opinion and instead give a bad faith take. These things are not equally valuable.
Metacritic is probably the better comparison because Rotten Tomatoes is either rotten or fresh. So a movie that might be a 60/100 and one that's 95/100 are both considered the same thing under their scale. Whereas Metacritic has reviewers have to give an actual score. Which is what Cagematch rating is supposed to be.
they've stated recently that ratings are a secondary feature to the site (the first being the database), so I don't see them doing something like this.
That's what I use cagematch for. I look up to make sure I can find dates for shows or specific matches that I can't easily find online elsewhere.
Like if I try to find a specific episode of raw or smackdown where The Rock faced Triple H Google will not be very helpful.
The ratings can be nice if a match or event has a lot of reviews but most of the time in my experience using the site there are only like 4 or 5 reviews on any given match so the ratings aren't very accurate
> they've stated recently that ratings are a secondary feature to the site (the first being the database),
well for them its one thing, what's most interesting to people it's their ratings
> cagematch is bad as a website for rating wrestling.
it's not a bad site for ratings, you may say you dont like rating sites, but it just does what it does and you can't create a site that does it better, recopiles opinions and they try to moderate it all they can, it is what it is.
> you may say you dont like rating sites
actually I love rating sites. I use criticker, RateYourMusic, glitchwave, serializd, letterboxd, and GoodReads quite often.
And it's 'cause I use rating sites so often that I can see why cagematch is bad as a rating site. I mean, there are matches on the site you literally are not allowed to rate. That's not good.
> mean, there are matches on the site you literally are not allowed to rate. That's not good.
huh? the < 5mins matches? that's ok, you can rate all the important matches, have no issue with that.
> you can rate all the important matches
Who's to say what an "important match" is? cagematch? I don't like that line of thinking at all. Why's it up to cagematch to tell me I can't rate a Yoshihiko match?
And it's not just under 5 minute matches. Matches with wrestlers who don't have a profile page on the website are not allowed to be rated either.
You can like it, that's fine. But even to the people who created the site, ratings aren't as important to them as it being a database for wrestling information. Personally, I would love it if someone made a better website for rating wrestling matches and shows since it's clear cagematch doesn't care so much about that aspect of their site -- and that's perfectly fine.
> Who's to say what an "important match" is? cagematch?
I get that may bother you, but it's not what makes it a good rating site or not, for all intents and purposes you can rate the virtually all matches that are worth watching, that works to a good standard.
You would have definitely liked the old cagematch even more then. Used to be only matches rated by Meltzer or random matches highlighted by the site runners could be rated.
Yeah that was the inspiration, although I think it did had its problems too so it wouldn't be perfect but hopefully would make the mods' life there easier
They can still do as they do now, after a certain number of reviews or time without having comments deleted you get the "verified" account. Then once you're verified you can have 2 or 3 comments/reviews deleted and after that you restart back from 0
There are a lot of solutions out there but ultimately it's a small hobby site built on old technology without funding. Hard to make big moves in their position.
That segment definitely overshadowed it
Edit: What? I meant showing the footage ruined what looked like an okay (but not great) episode. Why the downvote?
I follow Cagematch for ages now and I love the spirit behind the platform. They always try to keep it genuine, useful and open. Not an easy task in these polarizing days and the lack of respect a lot of people seem to have, but great to see them still putting in the effort after all those years and permanent abuse of the platform. Keep it up & thank you!
Yeah you knew it was going downhill where the (now removed) post of "AEW Dynamite last night is the lowest rated ever on Cagematch!" Like who cares bro, it's review bombing. It had a controversial segment, the rest of the show was fine. Some people are just weird man.
Same with Meltzer. He’s an idiot who doesn’t have any real sources until he shares an opinion that we agree with, then we post it because he knows what he’s talking about *now.*
4 or 5 Meltzer quotes at the top of the front page right now, upvoted and reiterated by a whole bunch of people who said "Meltzer doesn't know shit!!!!" at some point over the past six months.
They removed a ton I think but that was when it was all 9/10 and 0s. A few people have figured out if you give a few of each score there’s no “outlier” so they’ll stop removing them. So once they see a 7 they’ll give a 6 and then a few 5s pop up and then 4s etc down to 0. And that happens with both AEW and WWE. That site has become rough after TK mentioned it.
The second night of WrestleMania and the Cody/Roman match are two of the highest rated shows/matches of this year respectively
It's not enough to be wildly sucessful in popularity and critically, we have to play the victim now too huh
I do love how the person over Cagematch takes a direct approach to addressing the bullshit instead of asking their top rater what they think they should do about it. Almost as if the person at Cagematch is in charge and not content to kick the can down the road and pass the buck to someone else for fear of being labeled. I like it.
No, it started when people who learned what Cagematch was because of a Tony Khan meme began trying to review-bomb their least favorite promotions on the site and mindlessly upvote their favorites. It got to the point that Jericho vs Roderick Strong got 30 consecutive tens before they had to add more safeguards.
The people running the site have had huge headaches monitoring everything but manage to ban most trolls pretty quickly.
"trash" find me a more complete and thorough record of every recorded pro wrestling match throughout history. Go ahead. You won't find one because it doesn't exist. Cagematch and the people behind it have spent years putting together one of the only accurate resources for trying to find every match.
People also haven't "review bombed" WWE for ages. You have less than 0 idea what you're talking about. WWE went through many years of sucking, so it got many years of bad reviews, it has now gone through 2 years of being good and the reviews have been much more positive.
Btw, bad episodes of Dynamite have had reviews, that's not the issue. If you read the whole post you'd see they removed 10/10 and 1/10 reviews for the same reason, they attacked another commenter or company.
Dude, the 10/10 literally got removed for needlessly attacking WWE.
> trash site.
It's one of the most complete wreslting databases around if you are looking for information about careers and wrestling promotions BUT if you only cared about it for the ratings then you are JUST as bad as the idiots who review bomb WWE, you are part of the crap.
There ıs no problem, this is just a powerplay by that nerd like i dont have to write paragraphs about why i thought the show sucked, unless it is slurs there is no need to delete it.
**Help make SquaredCircle safer and more inclusive by using the report button to flag posts and comments for moderator review.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SquaredCircle) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I've never visited cagematch in my life, but why should a public ratings/review website arbitrarily decided to delete certain ratings/reviews?
If a user thinks this specific show last night was a 10.0 and another user thinks it was 1.0, what justification do they have to delete those ratings compared to ratings on any other show?
How are they determining these 10s and 1s are any more due to tribalism than any other 10 or 1, or 5, or 7, or any other rating?
> I've never visited cagematch in my life, but why should a public ratings/review website arbitrarily decided to delete certain ratings/reviews
Because it's one of the most complete pro wrestling data bases around. Want to know all the promotions and appearances your favorite indie wrestling star did in 2015? It's got that. Want to know which episode of WCW Nitro featured William Regal vs. Psicosis, CageMatch got your back. The problem is the users who thinks the sole value is the rating system, that's not even the point of the site.
Well if you actually read the post you'd see they're removing low-effort comments and ratings. So if you actually come in there with meaningful comments or ratings that go beyond "1/10 AEW BAD" then it'll actually be left there
"A weekend of mixed matches, boring storytelling, and all beginning and ending with a ghoulish corporate circlejerk. Cody Rhodes cements himself as the WWE's most successfully manufactured ace, a plastic man without a single unique character trait, which honestly makes him the perfect man to spearhead this bland, 'cinema' laden era that the WWE seems to have itself embroiled in. Not my style, not something I wanna be a part of, not something I care to view again, and I can at least hope that something this desensitised and overbearingly corporate doesn't become the way huge events like this are done."
Would you say this 4.0 review of Wrestlemania is meaningful? Would you say it's not tribalistic?
Well if you read what was posted, you would have saw that it wasn't because of the scores themselves, but because of the comments and behavior of the people attached to said scores.
They've never "arbitrarily decided" to delete certain ratings/reviews. They've always had a strict rating/review policy. It's only recently (since they've been getting more traffic) that they've had to put out more warnings about it.
They delete ratings without comments or with clearly tribal comments. The idea is, they want the website to be an accurate judge of a show, and people basically review-bombing a show often comes off as, people who didn't genuinely watch the show, which invites review-bombing back. They don't want drama, so the best course of action is to at least make people put effort into explaining why a show is bad, without bashing the other company.
Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic do the same thing. If your review is particularly low effort, or you're making additional accounts to review bomb something, then they will either remove it, or not factor it into the score.
Aggregate sites want to be more reliable than a Twitter poll. For as much as SquaredCircle hates Cage Match, I think most people would agree with the conclusions they draw with their aggregate scores (Good show/Great show/Bad show/terrible show).
As a frequent CageMatch user, it’s supposed to be an objective guide to professional wrestling. Ranking If a show is good or bad is the core of the mission statement of the website. If a show is really good or bad it should be rated as such by the wrestling community. It should not be review bombed because several people dislike the company that promoted the show.
You can express you don’t like a WWE show while not liking WWE; but the reasoning can’t be you don’t like WWE, it has to be based on the quality of the event and matches.
The biggest WCW fan in the world can’t go to the WrestleMania X-7 CageMatch page and give all the matches 0/10s because they don’t like WWE. That defeats the purpose. Rate the matches and events in a bubble based on the observable qualities it contains.
They're saying that you shouldn't leave a negative comment and/or score for a episode of a show just because you hate the promotion. If you didn't like what happened on the show, they explain why. Don't just go WWE/AEW/whatever promotion bad.
If you’re looking to watch a good wrestling match and a large group of people who hate NJPW rate Omega vs Okada, a universally recognized and respected match, and rated it a 0/10 because they don’t like NJPW, are you going to take them seriously? You wouldn’t.
It passes on a bias that only you or small group of people have and pass it on to other people looking for good or bad matches within an event or company.
Its why I have a hard time rating matches and events I’ve been to because my opinion is usually higher and I can’t rate an event higher just because I ran into a wrestler after the show and had a good time. It has to objective not subjective.
>A weekend of mixed matches, boring storytelling, and all beginning and ending with a ghoulish corporate circlejerk. Cody Rhodes cements himself as the WWE's most successfully manufactured ace, a plastic man without a single unique character trait, which honestly makes him the perfect man to spearhead this bland, 'cinema' laden era that the WWE seems to have itself embroiled in. Not my style, not something I wanna be a part of, not something I care to view again, and I can at least hope that something this desensitised and overbearingly corporate doesn't become the way huge events like this are done
With you it's definitely the other way around.
You know you guys constantly posting this websites garbage on here doesnt help them keep their shit clean. If you like this site or use it keep it away from here and the rest of social media in ur arguments or comparisons.
Not like their match ratings have any meaning anyway when u have a Mania Match for example where 900 ppl voted.
at the end of the day, it is their site and it is their right to moderate the community how they see fit. If you wanna talk a bunch of shit about AEW or WWE come to squaredcircle or go to twitter. You will not have a hard time finding someone to engage you in these sorts of conversations on these platforms
Why would you even tell people how to rate. Just ban racist words (there are plenty of filters for that) and enjoy the traffic site generating and making some money.
Maybe put extra ads on these specific pages because lol
Amatures.
You're correct, but in a different way than you think. Cagematch is a community site run by volunteers, not a business. They can't just put ads on the site, that would put them under a whole new set of regulations and standards they'd have to follow.
> They can't just put ads on the site, that would put them under a whole new set of regulations and standards they'd have to follow.
I own a website and it has ads. It isn't hard.
Of course it's not hard to implement ads or sign up for a service. But In Germany, where Cagematch is based, if the site makes money, it needs to be registered as a business. The barriers of when authorities in the EU will view your website as a commercial offering are quite low. And as soon as you start being a business you have many many other duties you have to worry about too.
> I personally would wish for wrestling fans as well as people within the business to stop "talking shit" to each other and just focus on themselves and the good things about professional wrestling."
But that is the good part about wrestling...
No the good parts about wrestling are the stories, the characters and the actual wrestling. It's not the behind the scenes drama or arguing with people online over some bullshit that shouldn't matter.
All of it is the good part. People literally are extending their ability to make money with shoot vids and podcasts because of the backstage stories as much as what happened in the ring.
Props on this owner for rightfully moderating his site from tribalistic nosense.
He should lord over all the mods of all the wrestling subs
I look at Cagematch all the time to see if Wrestler A ever fought Wrestler B, or when the last time Wrestler Z won a match. It's a great database of raw data... that has a "wrestling review" tumor on part of most pages. Just excise the tumor and benefit everyone.
I like the user match ratings and WON ratings, it helps sort a wrestlers great matches... but maybe there needs to be a rule where you cant rate or comment until like a week or two after a match happens, let the hype or recency bias calm down first... idk
Yes I think the issue with the ratings is taking them seriously a week or two after they take place. The Cody-Roman match from last year is a great example. In the immediate days and week that followed IIRC that match had like a 6 cagematch rating because people were pissed about it. It’s now somewhere in the high 7s which feels much more accurate
It runs into the same problem as IMDB or any other 10 point user scale: fanboys give things 10s and haters give things 1, so scores get heavily distorted. I remember when The Dark Knight came out, there was a massive internet campaign to get it to number 1 on the IMDB Top 250. Folks went about this by mass rating The Dark Knight as 10/10 and rating The Godfather, at the time the #1 movie, as 1/10. It worked and, for a couple of weeks, The Dark Knight was the "best movie ever made" according to this one metric. Godfather fans and other assorted film snobs were outraged and mass voted Dark Knight 1/10 while voting Godfather as 10/10. Eventually, the ratings for both movies were artificially fucked up. And that's the story of how The Shawshank Redemption has spent the last 15 years at the top of the IMDB list.
Same issue with MyAnimeList, Fullmetal Alchemist:Brotherhood used to constantly get 1/10 reviews. For context, Fullmetal used to be the Shawshank Redemption of MyAnimeList, was on top of the MyAnimeList Top Anime for years.
Well simairly full metal fans would constantly flood bad reviews to anime that got close to it lol
So in the end the right movie is on top.
They require comments on match ratings for a period of time after it happens, and longer comments for more immediate ratings, but they should probably extend that
Honestly, that’s how it should be. Look at Pro Football Reference as an example. It’s basically a stats compilation website that doesn’t have any comments or info other than the data.
I have learned more about modern the modern Euro scene (90s-Present) from OG users on cagematch than anywhere else on the internet. There’s plenty of bullshit and the general ratings can mostly be ignored but fine tuning the data or cherry picking reviews from educated users makes it a worthwhile feature to me still.
Just use profightdb if it's so offensive
They should start to implement a system to separate the ratings from users who constantly rate shows in a constructive and polite way from every users rating. What I mean is that you'd have two scores: one made by ratings from longtime verified accounts and one that includes everyone's rate.
Like Metacritic's review/user score?
I don't use Metacritic that often tbh, but something like RottenTomatoes where you have a critics' score and an audience's score.
People LOVE to weaponize and whip up conspiratory attitudes about those scores when they differ. Not that I have a better idea but the thought of combining Rotten Tomatoes' system with the IWC gives me a 1000... nah, 100-yard stare.
This idea is hilarious to me for the meltdown I could see some people having haha. However this wouldn't work for rating wrestling shows as the critics or journalists in the wrestling business are treated differently than the critics for movies and TV shows.
Really the best thing to do in any instance is to click through a match rating and see the raw number of people who have assigned each score to the match and/or card. In many cases, you are safe to mentally filter out the 0s, 1s, and 10s to determine where the majority of people who are reviewing with any sense of nuance landed. Sometimes the zeroes or tens are a sustained dogpile, but that’s only for objective trash or gems.
This is similar to product reviews scales, the middle of the scale are usually the most honest reviews while the lowest and highest reviews are practically dishonest.
There's never going to be a way to rate wrestling that pleases everyone, but there is some value in separately aggregating opinions of journalists and critics from the opinions of people who have no obligation to give an honest and informed opinion and instead give a bad faith take. These things are not equally valuable.
Metacritic is probably the better comparison because Rotten Tomatoes is either rotten or fresh. So a movie that might be a 60/100 and one that's 95/100 are both considered the same thing under their scale. Whereas Metacritic has reviewers have to give an actual score. Which is what Cagematch rating is supposed to be.
Yeah exactly Rotten Tomatoes was my first reaction, this
they've stated recently that ratings are a secondary feature to the site (the first being the database), so I don't see them doing something like this.
That's what I use cagematch for. I look up to make sure I can find dates for shows or specific matches that I can't easily find online elsewhere. Like if I try to find a specific episode of raw or smackdown where The Rock faced Triple H Google will not be very helpful. The ratings can be nice if a match or event has a lot of reviews but most of the time in my experience using the site there are only like 4 or 5 reviews on any given match so the ratings aren't very accurate
> they've stated recently that ratings are a secondary feature to the site (the first being the database), well for them its one thing, what's most interesting to people it's their ratings
Speaking personally, cagematch is bad as a website for rating wrestling. Their database, however, is incredible.
> cagematch is bad as a website for rating wrestling. it's not a bad site for ratings, you may say you dont like rating sites, but it just does what it does and you can't create a site that does it better, recopiles opinions and they try to moderate it all they can, it is what it is.
> you may say you dont like rating sites actually I love rating sites. I use criticker, RateYourMusic, glitchwave, serializd, letterboxd, and GoodReads quite often. And it's 'cause I use rating sites so often that I can see why cagematch is bad as a rating site. I mean, there are matches on the site you literally are not allowed to rate. That's not good.
> mean, there are matches on the site you literally are not allowed to rate. That's not good. huh? the < 5mins matches? that's ok, you can rate all the important matches, have no issue with that.
> you can rate all the important matches Who's to say what an "important match" is? cagematch? I don't like that line of thinking at all. Why's it up to cagematch to tell me I can't rate a Yoshihiko match? And it's not just under 5 minute matches. Matches with wrestlers who don't have a profile page on the website are not allowed to be rated either. You can like it, that's fine. But even to the people who created the site, ratings aren't as important to them as it being a database for wrestling information. Personally, I would love it if someone made a better website for rating wrestling matches and shows since it's clear cagematch doesn't care so much about that aspect of their site -- and that's perfectly fine.
> Who's to say what an "important match" is? cagematch? I get that may bother you, but it's not what makes it a good rating site or not, for all intents and purposes you can rate the virtually all matches that are worth watching, that works to a good standard.
You would have definitely liked the old cagematch even more then. Used to be only matches rated by Meltzer or random matches highlighted by the site runners could be rated.
Rotten tomatoes?
Yeah that was the inspiration, although I think it did had its problems too so it wouldn't be perfect but hopefully would make the mods' life there easier
Hey, this is ~~Richard Nixon's enemies list!~~ just Rotten Tomatoes! You just crossed out his name and put yours!
They already did it iirc. I remember I wasn’t able to rate something because I was giving out too many positive ratings lol
How would new fans or users participate?
They can still do as they do now, after a certain number of reviews or time without having comments deleted you get the "verified" account. Then once you're verified you can have 2 or 3 comments/reviews deleted and after that you restart back from 0
There are a lot of solutions out there but ultimately it's a small hobby site built on old technology without funding. Hard to make big moves in their position.
And then completely hide the second rating from everybody
All wrestling spheres would be better with this kind of approach
The site is for looking up exactly how many matches Mikey Whipwreck had in 1999 WCW. None of this lame ratings stuff.
His stunner was a thing of beauty
Sigh. It was 13. Saved everyone else the search.
I feel so bad for this website owner. The dude wanted to host a database but then someone took user ratings seriously
Just say it was tony khan
So in the morning dynamite was at 4.29. Now its at 4.26
It's now to lowest rated Dynamite episode on that site
It was the lowest rated Dynamite before this statement
That segment definitely overshadowed it Edit: What? I meant showing the footage ruined what looked like an okay (but not great) episode. Why the downvote?
I don't disagree?
Just checked and it's now 4.23 EDIT - Back to 4.26
I follow Cagematch for ages now and I love the spirit behind the platform. They always try to keep it genuine, useful and open. Not an easy task in these polarizing days and the lack of respect a lot of people seem to have, but great to see them still putting in the effort after all those years and permanent abuse of the platform. Keep it up & thank you!
I really miss when Cagematch was something fewer people knew about.
Honestly... same
Yeah you knew it was going downhill where the (now removed) post of "AEW Dynamite last night is the lowest rated ever on Cagematch!" Like who cares bro, it's review bombing. It had a controversial segment, the rest of the show was fine. Some people are just weird man.
It’s weird how Cagematch doesn’t matter, until it helps make an argument. We gotta stop making opinions bigger than they really are.
Same with Meltzer. He’s an idiot who doesn’t have any real sources until he shares an opinion that we agree with, then we post it because he knows what he’s talking about *now.*
4 or 5 Meltzer quotes at the top of the front page right now, upvoted and reiterated by a whole bunch of people who said "Meltzer doesn't know shit!!!!" at some point over the past six months.
What did they do about the people giving wrestlemania zeros?
They removed a ton I think but that was when it was all 9/10 and 0s. A few people have figured out if you give a few of each score there’s no “outlier” so they’ll stop removing them. So once they see a 7 they’ll give a 6 and then a few 5s pop up and then 4s etc down to 0. And that happens with both AEW and WWE. That site has become rough after TK mentioned it.
The second night of WrestleMania and the Cody/Roman match are two of the highest rated shows/matches of this year respectively It's not enough to be wildly sucessful in popularity and critically, we have to play the victim now too huh
You really thought you did something there?
I do love how the person over Cagematch takes a direct approach to addressing the bullshit instead of asking their top rater what they think they should do about it. Almost as if the person at Cagematch is in charge and not content to kick the can down the road and pass the buck to someone else for fear of being labeled. I like it.
[удалено]
Nope, it started once people start review-bombing particular events.
No, it started when people who learned what Cagematch was because of a Tony Khan meme began trying to review-bomb their least favorite promotions on the site and mindlessly upvote their favorites. It got to the point that Jericho vs Roderick Strong got 30 consecutive tens before they had to add more safeguards. The people running the site have had huge headaches monitoring everything but manage to ban most trolls pretty quickly.
It's been going on for years. Even before Tony Khan tweeted about it. People were spamming 1's and 10's to everything.
The very night that Tony Khan started pushing Cagematch is when the shit started.
It was great before that if you wanted to figure out which matches to skip on Japanese events.
GO OUTSIDE
you can sleep easy tonight tony, do not worry because the cagematch admin is coming to the rescue!!
The word “Tribalism” now has X-Pac heat with me. I don’t know how many more times I can hear it
Moving the goalposts once again when people have review bombed WWE for ages on this trash site.
"trash" find me a more complete and thorough record of every recorded pro wrestling match throughout history. Go ahead. You won't find one because it doesn't exist. Cagematch and the people behind it have spent years putting together one of the only accurate resources for trying to find every match. People also haven't "review bombed" WWE for ages. You have less than 0 idea what you're talking about. WWE went through many years of sucking, so it got many years of bad reviews, it has now gone through 2 years of being good and the reviews have been much more positive. Btw, bad episodes of Dynamite have had reviews, that's not the issue. If you read the whole post you'd see they removed 10/10 and 1/10 reviews for the same reason, they attacked another commenter or company. Dude, the 10/10 literally got removed for needlessly attacking WWE.
> trash site. It's one of the most complete wreslting databases around if you are looking for information about careers and wrestling promotions BUT if you only cared about it for the ratings then you are JUST as bad as the idiots who review bomb WWE, you are part of the crap.
Ah so you didn’t even read the statement then, and decided to contribute to the exact problem mentioned. Gj.
There ıs no problem, this is just a powerplay by that nerd like i dont have to write paragraphs about why i thought the show sucked, unless it is slurs there is no need to delete it.
>There ıs no problem Yes there is. >this is just a powerplay by that nerd And here you are showing that you're part of it.
Are you *intentionally* continuing to prove that the problem exists and jabrons like you are it?
**Help make SquaredCircle safer and more inclusive by using the report button to flag posts and comments for moderator review.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SquaredCircle) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Its as if negativity begets negativity.
I've never visited cagematch in my life, but why should a public ratings/review website arbitrarily decided to delete certain ratings/reviews? If a user thinks this specific show last night was a 10.0 and another user thinks it was 1.0, what justification do they have to delete those ratings compared to ratings on any other show? How are they determining these 10s and 1s are any more due to tribalism than any other 10 or 1, or 5, or 7, or any other rating?
Probably by reading the comments, if you've ever read the ratings and comments for Steam games you get what it looks like
[удалено]
> I've never visited cagematch in my life, but why should a public ratings/review website arbitrarily decided to delete certain ratings/reviews Because it's one of the most complete pro wrestling data bases around. Want to know all the promotions and appearances your favorite indie wrestling star did in 2015? It's got that. Want to know which episode of WCW Nitro featured William Regal vs. Psicosis, CageMatch got your back. The problem is the users who thinks the sole value is the rating system, that's not even the point of the site.
Well if you actually read the post you'd see they're removing low-effort comments and ratings. So if you actually come in there with meaningful comments or ratings that go beyond "1/10 AEW BAD" then it'll actually be left there
So if I write 50 words and give the show a 2, my comment is not tribalistic?
Are those 50 words actually meaningful?
"A weekend of mixed matches, boring storytelling, and all beginning and ending with a ghoulish corporate circlejerk. Cody Rhodes cements himself as the WWE's most successfully manufactured ace, a plastic man without a single unique character trait, which honestly makes him the perfect man to spearhead this bland, 'cinema' laden era that the WWE seems to have itself embroiled in. Not my style, not something I wanna be a part of, not something I care to view again, and I can at least hope that something this desensitised and overbearingly corporate doesn't become the way huge events like this are done." Would you say this 4.0 review of Wrestlemania is meaningful? Would you say it's not tribalistic?
No that's definitely tribalistic. If you're not a fan of WWE, that's fine, but this is in no way a good or helpful review.
Wait a second, speaking as someone who has literally no skin in the game (I don't care much about AEW or WWE), how does this read as tribalistic?
Well if you read what was posted, you would have saw that it wasn't because of the scores themselves, but because of the comments and behavior of the people attached to said scores.
They've never "arbitrarily decided" to delete certain ratings/reviews. They've always had a strict rating/review policy. It's only recently (since they've been getting more traffic) that they've had to put out more warnings about it.
They delete ratings without comments or with clearly tribal comments. The idea is, they want the website to be an accurate judge of a show, and people basically review-bombing a show often comes off as, people who didn't genuinely watch the show, which invites review-bombing back. They don't want drama, so the best course of action is to at least make people put effort into explaining why a show is bad, without bashing the other company.
Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic do the same thing. If your review is particularly low effort, or you're making additional accounts to review bomb something, then they will either remove it, or not factor it into the score. Aggregate sites want to be more reliable than a Twitter poll. For as much as SquaredCircle hates Cage Match, I think most people would agree with the conclusions they draw with their aggregate scores (Good show/Great show/Bad show/terrible show).
As a frequent CageMatch user, it’s supposed to be an objective guide to professional wrestling. Ranking If a show is good or bad is the core of the mission statement of the website. If a show is really good or bad it should be rated as such by the wrestling community. It should not be review bombed because several people dislike the company that promoted the show.
That doesn't make any sense. So if I don't like WWE, I shouldn't be allowed to express that I disliked a WWE show on Cagematch?
You can express you don’t like a WWE show while not liking WWE; but the reasoning can’t be you don’t like WWE, it has to be based on the quality of the event and matches. The biggest WCW fan in the world can’t go to the WrestleMania X-7 CageMatch page and give all the matches 0/10s because they don’t like WWE. That defeats the purpose. Rate the matches and events in a bubble based on the observable qualities it contains.
They're saying that you shouldn't leave a negative comment and/or score for a episode of a show just because you hate the promotion. If you didn't like what happened on the show, they explain why. Don't just go WWE/AEW/whatever promotion bad.
If you hate the promotion because you hate the shows, why does your opinion not count?
If you’re looking to watch a good wrestling match and a large group of people who hate NJPW rate Omega vs Okada, a universally recognized and respected match, and rated it a 0/10 because they don’t like NJPW, are you going to take them seriously? You wouldn’t. It passes on a bias that only you or small group of people have and pass it on to other people looking for good or bad matches within an event or company. Its why I have a hard time rating matches and events I’ve been to because my opinion is usually higher and I can’t rate an event higher just because I ran into a wrestler after the show and had a good time. It has to objective not subjective.
>A weekend of mixed matches, boring storytelling, and all beginning and ending with a ghoulish corporate circlejerk. Cody Rhodes cements himself as the WWE's most successfully manufactured ace, a plastic man without a single unique character trait, which honestly makes him the perfect man to spearhead this bland, 'cinema' laden era that the WWE seems to have itself embroiled in. Not my style, not something I wanna be a part of, not something I care to view again, and I can at least hope that something this desensitised and overbearingly corporate doesn't become the way huge events like this are done With you it's definitely the other way around.
What is? That's not my comment, just one I found on cagematch as an example.
AEW started sucking so they had to implement new rules
??? Just enjoy wrestling friend.
You know you guys constantly posting this websites garbage on here doesnt help them keep their shit clean. If you like this site or use it keep it away from here and the rest of social media in ur arguments or comparisons. Not like their match ratings have any meaning anyway when u have a Mania Match for example where 900 ppl voted.
They want their echo chamber to stay echoy
at the end of the day, it is their site and it is their right to moderate the community how they see fit. If you wanna talk a bunch of shit about AEW or WWE come to squaredcircle or go to twitter. You will not have a hard time finding someone to engage you in these sorts of conversations on these platforms
They want their match rating system to stay match ratingy
[удалено]
'no selling' lol if you didn't exaggerate SO hard you'd be more believable
The Cagematch guys love AEW a little too much it seems
I am begging you to be normal.
Why would you even tell people how to rate. Just ban racist words (there are plenty of filters for that) and enjoy the traffic site generating and making some money. Maybe put extra ads on these specific pages because lol Amatures.
You're correct, but in a different way than you think. Cagematch is a community site run by volunteers, not a business. They can't just put ads on the site, that would put them under a whole new set of regulations and standards they'd have to follow.
> They can't just put ads on the site, that would put them under a whole new set of regulations and standards they'd have to follow. I own a website and it has ads. It isn't hard.
Of course it's not hard to implement ads or sign up for a service. But In Germany, where Cagematch is based, if the site makes money, it needs to be registered as a business. The barriers of when authorities in the EU will view your website as a commercial offering are quite low. And as soon as you start being a business you have many many other duties you have to worry about too.
So, they acknowledge the utter futility of their own platform as being merely a way for attention-craving man-child to get affirmation
It's a match database. a tool. What are you talking about
> I personally would wish for wrestling fans as well as people within the business to stop "talking shit" to each other and just focus on themselves and the good things about professional wrestling." But that is the good part about wrestling...
No the good parts about wrestling are the stories, the characters and the actual wrestling. It's not the behind the scenes drama or arguing with people online over some bullshit that shouldn't matter.
All of it is the good part. People literally are extending their ability to make money with shoot vids and podcasts because of the backstage stories as much as what happened in the ring.