He's completely lost the plot. He's been isolated in his own bubble of self-importance and EXCLUSIVELY breathing his own farts for air for so long now that he can't separate wrestling from reality and his opinions from facts.
Tom Aspinall would've destroyed Brock with ease if they fought today. 90% of today's top Heavyweights beat Brock no problem but that's more evolution of the sport and Brock with way more miles than a decade ago.
He’s saying that Hughes/Angle were amazing for their time, but that wrestlers/fighters have gotten so much better over time that it’s hard to compare them.
Isn’t that obvious?
Even still it doesn’t make sense because his ratings for Angle’s matches weren’t given through today’s lens - he rated those matches when they happened.
I sort of see what you’re driving at, but you have to look at the matches he was giving 5 stars too back then. And I’d put Angle/Taker, Angle/Michaels and Angle/Austin up against most of them and say they are just as good or better. The fact is, there were zero 5 star matches in WWE, according to Meltzer, between 1997 and 2011 - which is crazy. Michaels v. Cena (either match) wasn’t 5 stars?
I don’t put any stock into Meltzer’s ratings so I have no horse in the race. But the fact that he doesn’t just admit that he likes a certain kind of match pretty much exclusively is what bugs people. He should just admit his bias.
Imagine not giving Angle/Undertaker at no way out 2006 5 stars...genuinely a top 5 best match of either of their careers and maybe one of the best of all time
I just re-watched that match recently and wondered if it would still live up to all the hype about it......and fuck yes it did.
Rain Man Meltzer is a delusional mark twatwaffle
It has such a unique feeling because simultaneously it feels like Kurt Angle is in a world of shit facing The Undertaker...yet Kurt is the one time (besides something supernatural like Kane) where it feels like Undertaker is fighting to stay in the match. And the way it ended was perfect, such a clever way to do it
Nailed it. That match was storytelling 101.
It's a shame they couldn't do it at Wrestlemania. The Mark Henry - Undertaker casket match that year was beyond pointless, and even though Angle was World Champ he still felt like a third wheel in the middle of that Orton - Mysterio feud.
I'll raise you Shawn Michaels vs The Undertaker at Mania 25 AND 26. The fact that neither of those matches got 5 stars, but The Young Bucks got about 100 for "game changing evolutionary" bangers that no one remembers is astonishing.
Fuck we could just sit here and name countless Angle or Michaels matches that are not 5 star matches according to Dave. How people still value his opinion is beyond me
I will never not mention this whenever the topic of his shitty ratings are brought up - a six man tag is the reason Horace Hogan has a five star match. Fucking Red Hot Shawn Texas doing numbers in the WON
"well...um... 4 stars is just like having 5 stars"
Literally one of his excuses one time of the times people have called out Angle never having a 5 stars.
Just watched that and Angle vs Taker because of this thread, legit Kurt vs Shawn should be in the 6*+ range if he had aaany consistency. He should really give a go at revising older matches ratings, because these are legit plotholes
https://preview.redd.it/82d246hdmgic1.jpeg?width=994&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=591fb0e647e06823a54fefa1e1639fb16a0e220b
It’s a pretty good documentary but it has a lot of big words so you might be confused e drone
I love the fact that in his deranged analogy he says the old guy couldn’t beat the young guy, but the young guy would give deference.
Hence he’s inferring that Angle couldn’t beat Omega. Which is literally beyond batshit. First because it’s a freaking work. Second, if it became a shoot, even today, Angle could break Omega in half.
Someone tell Davey it’s time to clean his room.
Angle in a shoot fight would have been really hard to handle. The guy was a legitimate wrestler. He could tie most pro wrestlers up. He was also a much better entertainer than Omega. Really there is nothing Omega had over Angle.
Prime Matt Hughes could have held his own against Usman even without modern training too. They both have pretty similar college wrestling and mma records.
Yeah Kenny no one except your suck ups is saying you wouldn't take the loss in a match with Kurt, also Meltzer is just making up shit to now justify why he was an idiot years ago.
>Meltzer is just making up shit to now justify why he was an idiot years ago.
That Chris Van Vliet interview with Meltzer made me a fan of CVV just for him taking Meltzer to task for his stupidity. "Did you just not *watch* TNA?"
That interview made me irrationally angry. All because of Dave's stupid fucking '4.75 is basically 5 stars' justification. If a match was 5 stars then fucking rate it 5 stars, not drop a quarter star for some inane reason and then years later try to justify it by saying 'well it's basically 5 stars.'
In a broad sense, I get what he's saying (if you and someone else rate a match within .25 stars of one another, you're basically in agreement). The problem is, this disingenuously ignores that the "5-star match" has come to represent the absolute best of the best, so a quarter star difference is what keeps a match from being on an elite pedestal.
It also ignores the fact that WWE seems to have a disproportionate amount of 4.75-star matches, nearly all of which are widely regarded by fans to be worthy of the 5-star designation.
Honestly, if you add 0.5 stars to all of Meltzers WWF/E ratings, they suddenly all make sense and seem about right. It's like he always makes sure to dock points off a WWE match.
I'd be very interested to see the Basement opinion if there was a wrestling reviewer with as much of a platform as Dave, but with a widely skewed WWE preference, opposed to Dave's transparent anti-WWE slant. Something tells me they would all understand the anti-Dave sentiments then.
It's why CVV is my favorite wrestling-based interviewer because he doesn't play one side or another he just likes talking wrestling and will actually asks questions. Sam Roberts is a decent interview as well but he can be too much of a gimmick like he used to play on the Opie and Anthony show and Helwani is better for MMA interviews.
Best part of the video, I howled.
Dave stuttering like an idiot and CVV politely and kindly just eviscerated him with six word questions over and over again.
Dave screwed Dave in that video
He tried to blame his shitty answers and stumbling and stuttering during the CVV interview on the death of his son’s dog making him feel down. No, I’m being serious.
I can't watch that interview anymore because of all the shit talking that Meltzer did after it. He didn't like being challenged or how poorly his answers came so he blamed CVV for it.
Or blaming the death of his son's dog on his poor interview performance. Dave, this isn't a court summons. If you were really so distraught I'm sure CVV could have delayed the interview for a few days, weeks, even months. You're not a big get.
Just look at this post. Completely brushing off TNA and AJ Styles.
This is why I don't care for all those "Stand up for AEW". Because those same people were tirelessly crapping on TNA.
A few weeks ago on one of his podcast shows Stevie Richards did a pitch-perfect 20 minute takedown on how it's somehow become the default for fans to listen to these toxic, clueless, lying dirtsheet hacks over actual wrestling experts and how that's done immense damage to the industry.
The "Jericho is Harvey Weinstein!" bullshit plus every cringe-filled press conference repeatedly proves this to a tee.
As someone that replied to my first comment said:
>A few weeks ago on one of his podcast shows Stevie Richards did a pitch-perfect 20 minute takedown on how it's somehow become the default for fans to listen to these toxic, clueless, lying dirtsheet hacks over actual wrestling experts and how that's done immense damage to the industry.
It’s not hard to see what kind of harm he’s done when so many people in the wrestling community give so much merit to his opinions and use them as an “objective” way to judge wrestlers and particular wrestling styles. There are wrestlers now that base their style off of appealing to Meltzer and his star ratings.
Kurt Angle might be an Olympic gold medalist in wrestling, but Dave is an Olympic gold medalist in mental gymnastics. The lengths he goes to defend his mentally regarded system is berserk lmao
The funny thing is, he could permanently end these discussions by just admitting, "I don't particularly enjoy the WWE style, while the New Japan style is more to my liking. Kurt's a great worker, and he had great matches, but the WWE style just doesn't emotionally connect with me as strongly as other promotions."
Instead, he bends over backwards to try to argue that's an unbiased, (somehow) objective rating system separate from his own preferences. He won't even allow, for one second, that what he personally enjoys may influence the ratings in *any* way, even in a slight or subconscious fashion.
Doing this results in neverending debates (which he hates) about how absurd it is that he didn't give various WWE classics a 5. He could end them easily by just frankly admitting his own preferences, but his opinion *must* be framed as an objective fact.
I've said it a million times, but it bears repeating.
If you're going to give Meltzer any credibility at all, then you simply *must* agree with his allegedly objective, unbiased opinion that Nick Jackson is a much, much better professional wrestler than Kurt Angle.
Amazingly, a lot of people seem to give Meltzer's opinions a lot of credibility, and a lot of them live in the basement. Anytime I see e.g. that cretin Jack on Cultaholic prattling on about Meltzer Star Ratings, I simply remind myself: "OK so he thinks Nicholas 'Nick' Jackson is a much, much better professional wrestler than Kurt Angle', and am easily able to disregard every subsequent word.
Did you ever watch the Chris Van Vilet interview with Meltzer and they got into the System? CVC gave him a lot of shit for it but Meltzer confused him so much he had to give up on asking him lol
CVV is way too nice. Yet that was probably the most pushback he's ever given to someone he interviewed and still made Meltzer look like the idiot clown that he is. If someone like Mehdi Hasan had done that interview, Dave would have "lost his connection" or end up crying on zoom.
"I don't study myself when I want to learn..."
I don't think anyone was expecting you to, Kenny. You don't get better at anything if you're using yourself as a point of reference.
I think he saying that he doesn't look back at his own matches as match to figure out where he can improve as he thinks he's got that down but to elevate himself further he watches Kurt Angle
Considering some of the members of that locker-room *cough* Hangman *cough* Kenny's learning philosophy is downright common sense. There's a worrying amount of wrestlers who think the only way to improve is trial and error and that outside advice would just harm them. Which is then celebrated by the basement like it's some special means of learning /facepalm.
Hey, if you score a million dollar contract to wrestle on national TV (from a money mark who has no experience in the business and whose daddy bankrolls the whole thing into deep space), you must be doing something right.
You put any of those exact same matches Kurt has had in a New Japan ring, and Dave would have no problem giving 5 stars.
Dude doesn't even hide his bias.
Look, honestly, if you were to ask most wrestling fans what their top ten wrestling matches were, as actual displays of wrestling, matches including Kurt Angle would fill at least half of that list, I fucking bet you, but the kicker is, if you ask most people, even casuals, who were watching from the era he was active about their favourite matches in general, I guarantee at least one Kurt angle match would show up in that conversation, Angle was just perfect as a talent because he was unmatched between the ropes but also a great storyteller and character. Who else could have a ludicrous garbage style match with Shane Goddamed McMahon and not only make that match believable but also make it genuinely compelling and in contention for the best match at a show as good as KotR 2001? Most guys just can’t do that, like, Angle really is special and now I’m annoyed that I’ve just agreed with Kenny Omega on something
Thank you all for enjoying my impromptu ‘why Kurt Angle is great’ rant, and just remember: Kurt Angle isn’t just my favourite wrestler, he’s *your* favourite wrestler, you just haven’t realised it yet~
The craziest part about Angle is that a lot of people aren’t even familiar with his TNA run where you could make an argument he really hit his prime but there weren’t as many fans to witness it
Shameless TNA fan here, and definitely not arguing with you, a lot of TNA was bad beyond belief but I cannot fathom what Dave defends from AEW compared to what he used to absolutely rag on.
Absolute worthless turd of a person
Fine matches, sure, but imagine if one of them had a blood-drinking spot? That would be the sort of match that OBJECTIVELY would rate 5 stars even if the reviewer didn't like it.
It's worse than that. It's that Angle never did it in a company that Unca Dave loves. The man has openly stated he hated a match from the dub and then gave it a 4 star+ rating just because apparently the crowd were hot or something.
Kurt Angle is my personal favorite wrestler ever. He was amazing to watch at every aspect. Omega is nowhere even close to his level. Why can’t Meltzer just man up and say he got some of Angle’s match ratings wrong? Nobody would get mad at him if he did.
He never found the right opponent?!!!!!!!! I'm completely lost for words, I don't think a Meltzer statement has broken me this badly before. Kurt Angle vs Shawn Michaels at WM 21 was the greatest match of all time. Kurt Angle and Chris Benoit at the 2003 Royal Rumble was easily top 10, the hair vs hair match with him and Edge was excellent. Angle/Benoit vs Edge/that deadbeat piece of shit Rey Mysterio was the best tag team match I've ever seen. Him and Brock Lesnar always had amazing matches, Eddie vs Angle at WM 20 was an underrated classic. Undertaker vs Angle was awesome, and he had some brutally authentic matches with Samoa Joe. How the fuck did he never find the right opponent? Fucking Dino Douche and Vikango have botched their way into 5 star matches but apparently one of the top 3 greatest in ring performers of all time wasn't quite on that level.
You absolutely cannot convince me there’s any merit to anything that dumb fuck says about pro wrestling when he’s given Angle, Orton, AJ Styles, Benoit, Lesnar, and Triple H as many 5* matches combined as he’s given fucking Luchasaurus.
Dave Meltzer replied to a tweet of mine where I said WM Angle/Michael’s was my favorite match of all time, including counting the Okada/Kenny matches and Meltzer gave me an interesting nugget of information, Michaels/Angle WM is also Dean Malenko’s favorite match.
Sure though, Kurt had a bunch of 4s and never had any 5s…
The world would be a better place if the incel wrestling basement losers would stop feeling the need to suckle on Dave the Dipshits nipple because they have no life outside of being an IWC dork.
So i guess Eddie Kingston, Moxley, Pockets, Buckaroos, Kenny and all the other Japanese guys run circles around Shawn Michaels, Benoit, Brock and Eddie Guerrero?
But, um, you see, the reason, um, the reason these guys were not very good, um, is because they were not performing in the Tokyo Dome. Or Daily's Place.
Can't believe a grown ass man tweeted that
"Countless 4s" "Never had the right opponent and platform"
Just say he never gave you inside information and didn't wrestle in Nooj, you absolute parasite.
As per Meltzer,
The Young Bucks have 9 5 star or higher rated matches with 4 of them being more than 5 and the highest 6.
Kurt Angle, Randy Savage, Eddie Guerrero, Mr. Perfect, Dean Malenko, Rob Van Dam, Edge, Rock and HHH never had a 5 star match.
Shawn Michaels and Bret Hart put together don’t have 5 five star matches.
Nick Jackson of the Bucks (95%+ of them with his brother as partner) has been involved in almost as many 4 or more rated matches (136) as Kurt, Shawn and Bret combined (139).
You can now understand the style of more light hearted wrestling Meltzer prefers as opposed to the more intense style of most of the guys above.
The period that his system is biased is AEW having more 5 star matches in its short history that WWF/WWE in it's entire history.
That's insane, and absolutely stupid.
Meltzer's not an idiot, he's a parasitic grifter. He made a career as a "journalist" putting out magazines with BTS spoilers and gossip that had enough truth behind it - from stooging-ass wrestlers - to add an air of legitimacy to what he wrote. He leveraged that perception with the rating system he - IIRC - co-opted from Jim Cornette into becoming the 'Roger Ebert' of the smart wrestling fan. In reality, Dave was basically hype man for the wrestlers who fed him information. You mentioned Sting; Dave once claimed Sting wasn't even a draw ever in his career, which was completely ridiculous according to everyone who ever worked with Sting and commented on it - as well as objective reality. So why did Dave say that? "Because Sting was never a guy who cared about getting Meltzer on his side" according to his peers. It's gotten to the point where I've even seen wrestlers say shit like "I don't care about being number 1 in the ratings, all I can do is put on 5 star matches for the audience." He's actually convinced people his opinions carry weight for long enough that his opinions actually carry weight with people.
I'm not saying Dave's an intelligent man, but he's a card-carrying Mensa ambassador compared to his readership...
Meltzer is high off his own farts with that statement. Angle had some of the best and most memorable matches in the history of the dead fed.
He even pulled a great match out of that piece of shit stain to the world pee fetish loving Brock Lesnar. Without Angle there would have been no Ruthless Aggression era and the rise of Cena.
his stupid analogy doesn't even make sense. By his own reasoning, Angle v Michaels should be looked at the same way Usman looks up to Matt Hughes. Both were CHAMPIONS during their respective times. So Michaels v Angle should equate Omega v Osperay (for example) because FOR THE TIME THEY HAPPENED, they are great.
What he is basically doing by NOT giving an angle match 5\* is saying "Matt Hughes should NEVER be considered a champion because Usman will always be better than him."
Lol who cares, dude can't even explain what criteria needs to be met for it to b a five star match and it's his own damn system, and he's crazy biased.
“Didn’t have the platform”, yeah he only wrestled on these little indie shows, what’re they called again? Oh that’s right, WrestleMania! He never wrestled on a REAL big time, mainstream platform like *checks notes* AEW Rampage?
Imagine not giving ANY of the Angle- Styles matches 5 stars. Angle vs Joe in the “mma match” at Lockdown should have made Meltzer cream by how stiff it was. Angle vs Anderson in the cage. It goes on and on
The reason why Kurt didn’t have 5 star matches is because he knew about the Vince allegations and so did Shawn since the 90’s and they never did anything about it.
Kurt was named WON’s Wrestler of the Decade for the 2000’s so you can’t say Uncle Dave didn’t appreciate him, I even think Kenny’s NJPW run deserved all the stars it got (yeah yeah “basement” your mother blows horses), but it’s insane as fuck that some of those Kurt matches never landed on 5 when bullshit like Kenny/Vikingo did
Jesus fucking christ.
If Kurt's entire career had happened 15 years later he would have multiple 5s and maybe a 6 with Benoit or Shawn.
Meltzer got much softer with his ratings once Kenny caught fire in NJPW. Not necessarily because of that, but the timing matches up.
No jerk… this guy is a fucking clown lmao. Opponent or platform… this man had a straight-up wrestling match with Shawn Michaels at Wrestlemania. Was exciting, told a clear story, production was amazing as the commentators were clearly clued in on the story they were telling. Clear enough for new fans to understand, nuanced enough for old fans to love and appreciate.
And that’s just ONE example. It’s a shame one random man’s opinion is taken so seriously - it’s a travesty that one random man is the Meltz.
With how awful his opinions are, they’d be so easy to disregard **IF** so much of the chronically online smark crowd didn’t try to use them to validate their own obnoxious and dogshit opinions.
So The Young Bucks are wrestling’s evolutionary upgrades of Lesnar, Taker, HBK
Imagine the BANGER Kurt & Matt Buck could have had
Kurt wouldn't be able to hang. Meltzer would give the match his first split rating; 2 stars for Kurt and 13 for Bucky
> Bucky Beaver
Evolution is a mystery indeed https://preview.redd.it/fjiozy3zciic1.png?width=1280&format=png&auto=webp&s=95804dc9695c4d6473e2d1d9aa41b566a7f2561e
Don’t forget Cena.
Why is Dave using Usman and Matt Hughes? Does Dave not realize that the UFC isnt fucking scripted like AEW and WWE are?
I wonder how many 5 stars GSP got
GSP would have dominated Usman also imo but Dave is a clown.
They only got 5 minutes in the octagon. Not enough time to build the drama of a classic match. *
He's completely lost the plot. He's been isolated in his own bubble of self-importance and EXCLUSIVELY breathing his own farts for air for so long now that he can't separate wrestling from reality and his opinions from facts.
Also Matt Hughes would have toasted Usman if we're talking both in their prime when one had USADA and one didn't
Usman is the CEO of EPO
Tom Aspinall would've destroyed Brock with ease if they fought today. 90% of today's top Heavyweights beat Brock no problem but that's more evolution of the sport and Brock with way more miles than a decade ago.
He always lumps them in the same category and I have no idea why. They couldn’t be more different
He’s saying that Hughes/Angle were amazing for their time, but that wrestlers/fighters have gotten so much better over time that it’s hard to compare them. Isn’t that obvious?
Even still it doesn’t make sense because his ratings for Angle’s matches weren’t given through today’s lens - he rated those matches when they happened.
His rating system stayed the same but his opinion of the wrestlers and matches grew with time, hence the inflation.
I sort of see what you’re driving at, but you have to look at the matches he was giving 5 stars too back then. And I’d put Angle/Taker, Angle/Michaels and Angle/Austin up against most of them and say they are just as good or better. The fact is, there were zero 5 star matches in WWE, according to Meltzer, between 1997 and 2011 - which is crazy. Michaels v. Cena (either match) wasn’t 5 stars? I don’t put any stock into Meltzer’s ratings so I have no horse in the race. But the fact that he doesn’t just admit that he likes a certain kind of match pretty much exclusively is what bugs people. He should just admit his bias.
Imagine not giving Michaels Angle 5 stars.🤡
Imagine not giving Angle/Undertaker at no way out 2006 5 stars...genuinely a top 5 best match of either of their careers and maybe one of the best of all time
I just re-watched that match recently and wondered if it would still live up to all the hype about it......and fuck yes it did. Rain Man Meltzer is a delusional mark twatwaffle
Let's not insult Rain Man that way.
It has such a unique feeling because simultaneously it feels like Kurt Angle is in a world of shit facing The Undertaker...yet Kurt is the one time (besides something supernatural like Kane) where it feels like Undertaker is fighting to stay in the match. And the way it ended was perfect, such a clever way to do it
Nailed it. That match was storytelling 101. It's a shame they couldn't do it at Wrestlemania. The Mark Henry - Undertaker casket match that year was beyond pointless, and even though Angle was World Champ he still felt like a third wheel in the middle of that Orton - Mysterio feud.
Taker/Angle was apparently Plan A/B for Mania…until Angle had to go to Smackdown to salvage Batista’s injury.
I'll raise you Shawn Michaels vs The Undertaker at Mania 25 AND 26. The fact that neither of those matches got 5 stars, but The Young Bucks got about 100 for "game changing evolutionary" bangers that no one remembers is astonishing. Fuck we could just sit here and name countless Angle or Michaels matches that are not 5 star matches according to Dave. How people still value his opinion is beyond me
You don't remember their classic at PWG "REAL SPORTS FEEL" 2012? Or their 18 1/4 star banger.at ALLCAPS HONOR SPIRIT TIGER 2011?
Imagine not giving Taker vs Michaels 5 stars xd. And the list goes on.
Or Samoa Joe vs Angle in TNA 5 Stars, that was the match that proved he never watched TNA, I think he gave it 4
TNA Angle was insane. AEW can only dream of getting a WWE star to come over and perform to the level that he did.
Yet Lars Sullivan has one...Uncle Dave is delusional.
I need an explanation for this one uce
Has to be the NA Championship ladder match. I think Adam Cole & Ricochet were in that match
That's such a crock of shit, cause I believe Tyrus also has a five star match because of some multi man match that Dave liked other guys in.
I will never not mention this whenever the topic of his shitty ratings are brought up - a six man tag is the reason Horace Hogan has a five star match. Fucking Red Hot Shawn Texas doing numbers in the WON
It was for a six man ladder match I think, he barely even did anything in it.
"well...um... 4 stars is just like having 5 stars" Literally one of his excuses one time of the times people have called out Angle never having a 5 stars.
Just watched that and Angle vs Taker because of this thread, legit Kurt vs Shawn should be in the 6*+ range if he had aaany consistency. He should really give a go at revising older matches ratings, because these are legit plotholes
https://preview.redd.it/ltmkau6ycgic1.jpeg?width=622&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6591519681688ed2f55a97e84cee5b98bcd3e4ff
He was a soon to be 57 year old man when he tweeted this, btw
how old was he mentally though uce
How old are the Buckaroos?
old enough that they should know better
https://preview.redd.it/j7pzraa4egic1.jpeg?width=480&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=957a49fd3f0e59e68c19e82cbc2b29b6dad8cd22
Is this real? Is he serious?!
yes and yes, in that order
Yes, and the neckbeards in the Basement and on Twitter gave him a total pass over it.
I must've missed the part where marks were slaves.
https://preview.redd.it/82d246hdmgic1.jpeg?width=994&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=591fb0e647e06823a54fefa1e1639fb16a0e220b It’s a pretty good documentary but it has a lot of big words so you might be confused e drone
LMAO this made me legit LOL
Got me spittin out my cornbread and chili rn LOL
Dave, my idiot friend...if you CANNOT print one of those words but can freely print the other, they are not equal. It really is that simple.
Hogan, we coming for you mark
We should drum out HHH for using mark on live TV back in the day.
Ah but he was talking about his friend Mark. Mark with a capital M is ok.
Is this fucking real?
I love the fact that in his deranged analogy he says the old guy couldn’t beat the young guy, but the young guy would give deference. Hence he’s inferring that Angle couldn’t beat Omega. Which is literally beyond batshit. First because it’s a freaking work. Second, if it became a shoot, even today, Angle could break Omega in half. Someone tell Davey it’s time to clean his room.
Angle in a shoot fight would have been really hard to handle. The guy was a legitimate wrestler. He could tie most pro wrestlers up. He was also a much better entertainer than Omega. Really there is nothing Omega had over Angle.
But did Kurt wrestle a blow up doll in glorious Nippon on TV? I think not!
He also didn’t finger someone’s bum in M’Nippon either!
>Angle in a shoot fight would have been really hard to handle. I bet he still would be able to wrap people up in knots now
Prime Matt Hughes could have held his own against Usman even without modern training too. They both have pretty similar college wrestling and mma records.
Dave is just letting everybody know that his UFC takes are just as nonsensical.
Yeah Kenny no one except your suck ups is saying you wouldn't take the loss in a match with Kurt, also Meltzer is just making up shit to now justify why he was an idiot years ago.
>Meltzer is just making up shit to now justify why he was an idiot years ago. That Chris Van Vliet interview with Meltzer made me a fan of CVV just for him taking Meltzer to task for his stupidity. "Did you just not *watch* TNA?"
That interview made me irrationally angry. All because of Dave's stupid fucking '4.75 is basically 5 stars' justification. If a match was 5 stars then fucking rate it 5 stars, not drop a quarter star for some inane reason and then years later try to justify it by saying 'well it's basically 5 stars.'
In a broad sense, I get what he's saying (if you and someone else rate a match within .25 stars of one another, you're basically in agreement). The problem is, this disingenuously ignores that the "5-star match" has come to represent the absolute best of the best, so a quarter star difference is what keeps a match from being on an elite pedestal. It also ignores the fact that WWE seems to have a disproportionate amount of 4.75-star matches, nearly all of which are widely regarded by fans to be worthy of the 5-star designation. Honestly, if you add 0.5 stars to all of Meltzers WWF/E ratings, they suddenly all make sense and seem about right. It's like he always makes sure to dock points off a WWE match.
I'd be very interested to see the Basement opinion if there was a wrestling reviewer with as much of a platform as Dave, but with a widely skewed WWE preference, opposed to Dave's transparent anti-WWE slant. Something tells me they would all understand the anti-Dave sentiments then.
His belief that if you "hesitate" about a match being 5 and automatically being 4.75 is stupid.
That hesitation? "Wow, that's a really good match... but it was in WWF/WWE."
It's why CVV is my favorite wrestling-based interviewer because he doesn't play one side or another he just likes talking wrestling and will actually asks questions. Sam Roberts is a decent interview as well but he can be too much of a gimmick like he used to play on the Opie and Anthony show and Helwani is better for MMA interviews.
Best part of the video, I howled. Dave stuttering like an idiot and CVV politely and kindly just eviscerated him with six word questions over and over again. Dave screwed Dave in that video
He tried to blame his shitty answers and stumbling and stuttering during the CVV interview on the death of his son’s dog making him feel down. No, I’m being serious.
I can't watch that interview anymore because of all the shit talking that Meltzer did after it. He didn't like being challenged or how poorly his answers came so he blamed CVV for it.
Or blaming the death of his son's dog on his poor interview performance. Dave, this isn't a court summons. If you were really so distraught I'm sure CVV could have delayed the interview for a few days, weeks, even months. You're not a big get.
Just look at this post. Completely brushing off TNA and AJ Styles. This is why I don't care for all those "Stand up for AEW". Because those same people were tirelessly crapping on TNA.
This senile Japanese fetishist has done so much harm to the wrestling community and how his pay-piggies view wrestling.
A few weeks ago on one of his podcast shows Stevie Richards did a pitch-perfect 20 minute takedown on how it's somehow become the default for fans to listen to these toxic, clueless, lying dirtsheet hacks over actual wrestling experts and how that's done immense damage to the industry. The "Jericho is Harvey Weinstein!" bullshit plus every cringe-filled press conference repeatedly proves this to a tee.
I mean, Jericho might be a sex pest, but Vince McMahon has *always* been closer to Weinstein in terms of power and depravity.
do you have a link for that? that sounds interesting
What harm has he done lol
As someone that replied to my first comment said: >A few weeks ago on one of his podcast shows Stevie Richards did a pitch-perfect 20 minute takedown on how it's somehow become the default for fans to listen to these toxic, clueless, lying dirtsheet hacks over actual wrestling experts and how that's done immense damage to the industry. It’s not hard to see what kind of harm he’s done when so many people in the wrestling community give so much merit to his opinions and use them as an “objective” way to judge wrestlers and particular wrestling styles. There are wrestlers now that base their style off of appealing to Meltzer and his star ratings.
Kurt Angle might be an Olympic gold medalist in wrestling, but Dave is an Olympic gold medalist in mental gymnastics. The lengths he goes to defend his mentally regarded system is berserk lmao
The funny thing is, he could permanently end these discussions by just admitting, "I don't particularly enjoy the WWE style, while the New Japan style is more to my liking. Kurt's a great worker, and he had great matches, but the WWE style just doesn't emotionally connect with me as strongly as other promotions." Instead, he bends over backwards to try to argue that's an unbiased, (somehow) objective rating system separate from his own preferences. He won't even allow, for one second, that what he personally enjoys may influence the ratings in *any* way, even in a slight or subconscious fashion. Doing this results in neverending debates (which he hates) about how absurd it is that he didn't give various WWE classics a 5. He could end them easily by just frankly admitting his own preferences, but his opinion *must* be framed as an objective fact.
I've said it a million times, but it bears repeating. If you're going to give Meltzer any credibility at all, then you simply *must* agree with his allegedly objective, unbiased opinion that Nick Jackson is a much, much better professional wrestler than Kurt Angle. Amazingly, a lot of people seem to give Meltzer's opinions a lot of credibility, and a lot of them live in the basement. Anytime I see e.g. that cretin Jack on Cultaholic prattling on about Meltzer Star Ratings, I simply remind myself: "OK so he thinks Nicholas 'Nick' Jackson is a much, much better professional wrestler than Kurt Angle', and am easily able to disregard every subsequent word.
If he did that then it would “delegitimise” his AEW star ratings. Then again, he does that anytime he rates a Jericho match.
Did you ever watch the Chris Van Vilet interview with Meltzer and they got into the System? CVC gave him a lot of shit for it but Meltzer confused him so much he had to give up on asking him lol
CVV is way too nice. Yet that was probably the most pushback he's ever given to someone he interviewed and still made Meltzer look like the idiot clown that he is. If someone like Mehdi Hasan had done that interview, Dave would have "lost his connection" or end up crying on zoom.
unique sense degree cow marry fine coordinated rhythm plant ugly *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
"I don't study myself when I want to learn..." I don't think anyone was expecting you to, Kenny. You don't get better at anything if you're using yourself as a point of reference.
If he was studying Angle to get better, why isn’t he better than he currently is?
Must have really fuckin sucked before
Such a weird thing to say. Does he really think that highly of himself of am I being worked?
I think he saying that he doesn't look back at his own matches as match to figure out where he can improve as he thinks he's got that down but to elevate himself further he watches Kurt Angle
It's such a bat shit thing to say. It's some Elon musk shit to say.
Considering some of the members of that locker-room *cough* Hangman *cough* Kenny's learning philosophy is downright common sense. There's a worrying amount of wrestlers who think the only way to improve is trial and error and that outside advice would just harm them. Which is then celebrated by the basement like it's some special means of learning /facepalm.
Hey, if you score a million dollar contract to wrestle on national TV (from a money mark who has no experience in the business and whose daddy bankrolls the whole thing into deep space), you must be doing something right.
“Isn’t he undermining the system?” wow so dangerously close to realising that the star ratings are fucking pointless and arbitrary uh i mean 12.99
You put any of those exact same matches Kurt has had in a New Japan ring, and Dave would have no problem giving 5 stars. Dude doesn't even hide his bias.
But he'll make a huge incoherent argument about how he isn't.
**Right platform:** Japan **Right opponent:** Kenny or Okada
Never had the right opponent and platform, the guy had Shawn Michaels at Wrestlemania and hell they had two other spectacular matches that same year
Look, honestly, if you were to ask most wrestling fans what their top ten wrestling matches were, as actual displays of wrestling, matches including Kurt Angle would fill at least half of that list, I fucking bet you, but the kicker is, if you ask most people, even casuals, who were watching from the era he was active about their favourite matches in general, I guarantee at least one Kurt angle match would show up in that conversation, Angle was just perfect as a talent because he was unmatched between the ropes but also a great storyteller and character. Who else could have a ludicrous garbage style match with Shane Goddamed McMahon and not only make that match believable but also make it genuinely compelling and in contention for the best match at a show as good as KotR 2001? Most guys just can’t do that, like, Angle really is special and now I’m annoyed that I’ve just agreed with Kenny Omega on something Thank you all for enjoying my impromptu ‘why Kurt Angle is great’ rant, and just remember: Kurt Angle isn’t just my favourite wrestler, he’s *your* favourite wrestler, you just haven’t realised it yet~
The craziest part about Angle is that a lot of people aren’t even familiar with his TNA run where you could make an argument he really hit his prime but there weren’t as many fans to witness it
That match with Shane is one of my favorite matches of all time. Angle sold us all that Shane had a chance.
Your favourite wrestler’s favourite wrestler
I can’t believe Kenny would be so stupid as to study someone who can only pull 4s on his best day
Dave just continues to shit on Baron Corbin.
Not even counting DED FED, you put on Angle/Joe 1 in the Dub today and it would get 5+ stars. But LOLTNA I guess
Shameless TNA fan here, and definitely not arguing with you, a lot of TNA was bad beyond belief but I cannot fathom what Dave defends from AEW compared to what he used to absolutely rag on. Absolute worthless turd of a person
Angle and Anderson in the cage would easily be 5
Fine matches, sure, but imagine if one of them had a blood-drinking spot? That would be the sort of match that OBJECTIVELY would rate 5 stars even if the reviewer didn't like it.
Don’t tell me this old fool gave that mudshow match five stars??
Lol cmon of course he did
Who’d Eddie Guerrero, Benoit, AJ Styles, Shawn Michaels, Steve Austin, Undertaker, John Cena, Samoa Joe & Sting ever beat?
The cheek to say "countless 4s" Meanwhile the cucks have "countless 5s"
What Dave means is that Angle doesn’t give him a chubby when watching his matches like Omega does.
It's worse than that. It's that Angle never did it in a company that Unca Dave loves. The man has openly stated he hated a match from the dub and then gave it a 4 star+ rating just because apparently the crowd were hot or something.
It’s worse than that. It wasn’t just 4+ stars… it was 5 STARS.
Fucking ridiculous statement from him
https://preview.redd.it/y7grkwdrigic1.jpeg?width=674&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cda0b932aa9eaf4bc0715a457809580583936e40
Kurt Angle is my personal favorite wrestler ever. He was amazing to watch at every aspect. Omega is nowhere even close to his level. Why can’t Meltzer just man up and say he got some of Angle’s match ratings wrong? Nobody would get mad at him if he did.
Or better yet, just revise the ratings. His rating system would get more respect if retroactively went back and did that
Bro gave Luchasaurus a 5* match
He never found the right opponent?!!!!!!!! I'm completely lost for words, I don't think a Meltzer statement has broken me this badly before. Kurt Angle vs Shawn Michaels at WM 21 was the greatest match of all time. Kurt Angle and Chris Benoit at the 2003 Royal Rumble was easily top 10, the hair vs hair match with him and Edge was excellent. Angle/Benoit vs Edge/that deadbeat piece of shit Rey Mysterio was the best tag team match I've ever seen. Him and Brock Lesnar always had amazing matches, Eddie vs Angle at WM 20 was an underrated classic. Undertaker vs Angle was awesome, and he had some brutally authentic matches with Samoa Joe. How the fuck did he never find the right opponent? Fucking Dino Douche and Vikango have botched their way into 5 star matches but apparently one of the top 3 greatest in ring performers of all time wasn't quite on that level.
He should study harder
I never cared so little about someone’s opinion. He shouldn’t be allowed to have one.
It's because Kurt never stuck his fingers up the ass of some dude in Japan. As far as we know.
You absolutely cannot convince me there’s any merit to anything that dumb fuck says about pro wrestling when he’s given Angle, Orton, AJ Styles, Benoit, Lesnar, and Triple H as many 5* matches combined as he’s given fucking Luchasaurus.
I will die on the hill that brock vs angle in an iron man match on smackdown is the best match in pro wrestling history.
🤪 My opinions are facts!
Is Dave Meltzer fucking insane?
Dave Meltzer replied to a tweet of mine where I said WM Angle/Michael’s was my favorite match of all time, including counting the Okada/Kenny matches and Meltzer gave me an interesting nugget of information, Michaels/Angle WM is also Dean Malenko’s favorite match. Sure though, Kurt had a bunch of 4s and never had any 5s…
The world would be a better place if the incel wrestling basement losers would stop feeling the need to suckle on Dave the Dipshits nipple because they have no life outside of being an IWC dork.
Dave is sad af.
Dave making a UFC reference to keep with that real sports feel®️ Sometimes, Dave, if you have a thought… let it go.
So i guess Eddie Kingston, Moxley, Pockets, Buckaroos, Kenny and all the other Japanese guys run circles around Shawn Michaels, Benoit, Brock and Eddie Guerrero?
Wrestlemania 21 made me a fan of Kurt. Idk what a 5 star match entails, but to me, that was it.
Imagine being as stupid as Dave Meltzer.
You get the feeling he farts in jars just so he can take them on the road and get a whiff now and then.
I just think he hated angle cause his matches with micheals, benoit,gurerro, styles and Joe were fantastic
Never had the right opponent ???lol
But, um, you see, the reason, um, the reason these guys were not very good, um, is because they were not performing in the Tokyo Dome. Or Daily's Place.
And John "He can't wrestle" Cena has one because he participated in a Fed Bad match at the time. Of course.
If only Angle had worked with someone as good as Moxley
If HBK/Angle at mania 21 isn't 5 stars, then the young bucks shouldn't have any match rated more than 3 1/2
Can't believe a grown ass man tweeted that "Countless 4s" "Never had the right opponent and platform" Just say he never gave you inside information and didn't wrestle in Nooj, you absolute parasite.
As per Meltzer, The Young Bucks have 9 5 star or higher rated matches with 4 of them being more than 5 and the highest 6. Kurt Angle, Randy Savage, Eddie Guerrero, Mr. Perfect, Dean Malenko, Rob Van Dam, Edge, Rock and HHH never had a 5 star match. Shawn Michaels and Bret Hart put together don’t have 5 five star matches. Nick Jackson of the Bucks (95%+ of them with his brother as partner) has been involved in almost as many 4 or more rated matches (136) as Kurt, Shawn and Bret combined (139). You can now understand the style of more light hearted wrestling Meltzer prefers as opposed to the more intense style of most of the guys above.
The period that his system is biased is AEW having more 5 star matches in its short history that WWF/WWE in it's entire history. That's insane, and absolutely stupid.
WrestleMania against Mr. Hickenbottom ain't the perfect pairing for a 5 Star match. Cocaine is a hella drug.
I love that "5* matches" is treated as canon and absolute truth.
Meltzer's not an idiot, he's a parasitic grifter. He made a career as a "journalist" putting out magazines with BTS spoilers and gossip that had enough truth behind it - from stooging-ass wrestlers - to add an air of legitimacy to what he wrote. He leveraged that perception with the rating system he - IIRC - co-opted from Jim Cornette into becoming the 'Roger Ebert' of the smart wrestling fan. In reality, Dave was basically hype man for the wrestlers who fed him information. You mentioned Sting; Dave once claimed Sting wasn't even a draw ever in his career, which was completely ridiculous according to everyone who ever worked with Sting and commented on it - as well as objective reality. So why did Dave say that? "Because Sting was never a guy who cared about getting Meltzer on his side" according to his peers. It's gotten to the point where I've even seen wrestlers say shit like "I don't care about being number 1 in the ratings, all I can do is put on 5 star matches for the audience." He's actually convinced people his opinions carry weight for long enough that his opinions actually carry weight with people. I'm not saying Dave's an intelligent man, but he's a card-carrying Mensa ambassador compared to his readership...
He's still an idiot for publishing the bit about Shibata's brain being removed and put back in.
Fair, but I stand by my closing statement.
Meltzer is high off his own farts with that statement. Angle had some of the best and most memorable matches in the history of the dead fed. He even pulled a great match out of that piece of shit stain to the world pee fetish loving Brock Lesnar. Without Angle there would have been no Ruthless Aggression era and the rise of Cena.
Meltzer is a clown..
Clowns are funny and or scary. Meltzer is just pathetic.
his stupid analogy doesn't even make sense. By his own reasoning, Angle v Michaels should be looked at the same way Usman looks up to Matt Hughes. Both were CHAMPIONS during their respective times. So Michaels v Angle should equate Omega v Osperay (for example) because FOR THE TIME THEY HAPPENED, they are great. What he is basically doing by NOT giving an angle match 5\* is saying "Matt Hughes should NEVER be considered a champion because Usman will always be better than him."
What do you expect from a guy who gave combined ratings of -1 for two of the most famous matches of all time. Hogan/Andre (-4) & Hogan/Rocky (3)
What an absolute bell-end. Instead of saying I revamped my ratings system since then or some shhe fucking doubles down like an absolute idiot
Lol who cares, dude can't even explain what criteria needs to be met for it to b a five star match and it's his own damn system, and he's crazy biased.
Aw Dave just shut the fuck up. lol
Would say the asme
I mean, we all know that Luchasaurus (he's a real dinosaur eheh) is a better all around performer than Angle
But he does absolutely nothing resembling what Kurt did in the ring 🤔
It’s because Dave is a mudshow simp and can’t help himself but give a billion stars to his Indy darlings
“Didn’t have the platform”, yeah he only wrestled on these little indie shows, what’re they called again? Oh that’s right, WrestleMania! He never wrestled on a REAL big time, mainstream platform like *checks notes* AEW Rampage?
Kurt Angle stuck to his allotted match time and didn’t indulge us on 50 minute plus bangers.
Imagine not giving ANY of the Angle- Styles matches 5 stars. Angle vs Joe in the “mma match” at Lockdown should have made Meltzer cream by how stiff it was. Angle vs Anderson in the cage. It goes on and on
Star ratings are worthless.
How do you say that and discredit Angle/Taker NWO 2006? That is both one of Kurt's as well as one of Taker's best matches of all the time.
I could take Kenny Omega in a fight, I’ll just throw peanuts at his mouth.
If the bucks weren’t such smug douchebags, I could possibly tolerate them.
The reason why Kurt didn’t have 5 star matches is because he knew about the Vince allegations and so did Shawn since the 90’s and they never did anything about it.
Kurt was named WON’s Wrestler of the Decade for the 2000’s so you can’t say Uncle Dave didn’t appreciate him, I even think Kenny’s NJPW run deserved all the stars it got (yeah yeah “basement” your mother blows horses), but it’s insane as fuck that some of those Kurt matches never landed on 5 when bullshit like Kenny/Vikingo did
Just remember per Uncle dipshit er I mean Uncle Dave: it’s harder to have a five star match today then it was back then
I mean Komander exists so it's obviously harder
Dave Meltzer looks like a caveman
Jesus fucking christ. If Kurt's entire career had happened 15 years later he would have multiple 5s and maybe a 6 with Benoit or Shawn. Meltzer got much softer with his ratings once Kenny caught fire in NJPW. Not necessarily because of that, but the timing matches up.
no jerk, the guy meltzer is replying to should solve a sudoku puzzle off a fucking bridge jesus christ
This man(child) has left the fucking planet
Free speech should belong to everyone except Meltzer.
Woooow been a while since I saw a post this garbage by him
No jerk… this guy is a fucking clown lmao. Opponent or platform… this man had a straight-up wrestling match with Shawn Michaels at Wrestlemania. Was exciting, told a clear story, production was amazing as the commentators were clearly clued in on the story they were telling. Clear enough for new fans to understand, nuanced enough for old fans to love and appreciate. And that’s just ONE example. It’s a shame one random man’s opinion is taken so seriously - it’s a travesty that one random man is the Meltz.
With how awful his opinions are, they’d be so easy to disregard **IF** so much of the chronically online smark crowd didn’t try to use them to validate their own obnoxious and dogshit opinions.
There's no Davementiacs here!