Scott vs Dave
By Scott Keith on May 22, 2013
I was sent this analysis from a fan of Scott’s who goes by the name Joesph, the other day. As he puts it:
“It’s a frequency analysis I did on all of his matches rated above 4
stars (****1/4 to *****). I took 12 wrestlers as I mention in the study
who put on great matches. I just completed a study for Dave Meltzer’s
ratings as well and compared the two”
It’s no surprise who’s at number 1, really. Also, keep in mind, this is strictly for a person’s WWE career. Other promotions need not apply. This was a great deal of work, and an interesting read. Especially that The Rock doesn’t get any 5 star love. I thought for sure most people considered WMX7 to be a 5 star main event, but I suppose the ending does sour it.
Anyone else want to use the Caliber Express Line: caliberw@hotmail.com
Scott Keith Ratings
*****
HBK-8 Austin-6 Jericho-1
Bret-6 Rock-0 Benoit-5
Undertaker-3 HHH-6 Angle-1
Foley-2 Edge-4 Flair-1
****3/4
HBK-6 Austin-2 Jericho-5
Bret-2 Rock-3 Benoit-5
Undertaker-0 HHH-4 Angle-2
Foley-1 Edge-1 Flair-0
****1/2
HBK-7 Austin-3 Jericho-5
Bret-6 Rock-8 Benoit-6
Undertaker-7 HHH-7 Angle-8
Foley-2 Edge-6 Flair-1
****1/4
HBK-9 Austin-4 Jericho-4
Bret-7 Rock-2 Benoit-13
Undertaker-3 HHH-3 Angle-13
Foley-3 Edge-9 Flair-4
Total Values (4.25-5* Matches) From Greatest to Least
HBK-30
Benoit-29
Angle-24
Bret-21
HHH-20
Edge-20
Austin-15
Jericho-15
Undertaker-13
Rock-13
Foley-8
Flair-6
NOTES:
I counted every Scott Keith match that was listed above 4* for 12 WWE
wrestlers who put on many matches above the 4 star level throughout
their careers, in order to evaluate what superstars had higher quality
matches over their careers than their fellow wrestlers. (This included
the updated Rock vs. John Cena match from WM28 at ****1/2). So from
4.25*-5*, every match was reviewed. I counted tag team matches and
survivor series matches as well. For example, The Rockers vs.
Brainbusters received a rating of ****1/2 and since it has Shawn in it;
therefore, Shawn received a tally mark. Another example: The tag team
match from Survivor Series ’87 (rated ****1/4) had Bret compete in it;
therefore, he received a tally mark for that match. Royal Rumble matches
were only tallied for wrestlers if they won that rumble e.g. Flair,
Benoit, and Edge each won a rumble rated *****; therefore, they each
received one tally mark. Other participants on this list who
participated in the rumble, but did not win it, received no tally mark.
As the results show, Shawn had the most ***** and ****3/4
matches at 8 and 6 respectively. Angle and The Rock tied for the most
****1/2 matches at 8. Benoit and Angle tied for the most ****1/4 matches
at 13. Overall, Shawn had the most matches rated above 4 stars on SK’s
list at 30 matches, barely beating out Benoit’s 29 matches. Variables
included when these wrestlers wrestled. For example, Flair had most of
his best matches in the ‘80s in NWA, and since this statistical study
only included WWF/WWE matches, he did not score as high. Longevity in a
wrestler’s career would statistically increase the amount of matches
over 4 stars a wrestler would have, as well as other variables such as:
the amount of PPV’s a wrestler wrestled in, lack of injuries, how many
TV matches on Superstars/Raw/Smackdown, etc. a wrestler competed in,
etc., – would all naturally be factors affecting the outcome of whether
a wrestler had a lot of high rated matches or not. Keep in mind that
these are the opinions of one man only-Scott Keith, and are in no way
determinate on what others may think; however, Scott Keith is one of the
most knowledgeable reviewers on the topic and has issued more wrestling
reviews than just about any other person I have ever seen (with maybe
the exception of Dave Meltzer). Even if very knowledgeable fans disagree
with a match by 0.25* or 0.5*, the list is still very accurate for many
criteria, such as the following example: If Wrestler “A” had 22 matches
rated in his career between 4.25* – 5*, and Wrestler “B” had 9 matches
rated in his career between 4.25* – 5*, and they both wrestled for about
the same amount of longevity, with just a few injuries throughout each
one’s career, etc. , then Wrestler “A” clearly had better matches over
the course of his career; hence, it can be argued, that Wrestler “A” was
the better wrestler and had the better career.
Dave Meltzer Ratings
*****
HBK-2 Austin-1 Jericho-0
Bret-2 Rock-0 Benoit-0
Undertaker-1 HHH-0 Angle-0
Foley-0 Edge-0 Flair-0
****3/4
HBK-7 Austin-2 Jericho-3
Bret-2 Rock-0 Benoit-6
Undertaker-3 HHH-4 Angle-3
Foley-0 Edge-3 Flair-0
****1/2
HBK-9 Austin-7 Jericho-6
Bret-2 Rock-5 Benoit-5
Undertaker-6 HHH-7 Angle-8
Foley-5 Edge-9 Flair-0
****1/4
HBK-13 Austin-5 Jericho-9
Bret-6 Rock-7 Benoit-13
Undertaker-4 HHH-10 Angle-15
Foley-1 Edge-16 Flair-2
Total Values (4.25-5* Matches) From Greatest to Least
HBK-31
Edge-28
Angle-26
Benoit-24
HHH-21
Jericho-18
Austin-15
Undertaker-14
Bret-12
Rock-12
Foley-6
Flair-2
NOTES:
I counted every Dave Meltzer match that was listed above 4* for 12 WWE
wrestlers who put on many matches above the 4 star level throughout
their careers, in order to evaluate what superstars had higher quality
matches over their careers than their fellow wrestlers. So from
4.25*-5*, every match was reviewed. I counted tag team matches and
survivor series matches as well. For example, The Rockers vs.
Brainbusters received a rating of ****1/4 and since it has Shawn in it;
therefore, Shawn received a tally mark. Another example: The tag team
match from Survivor Series ’01 (rated ****1/2) had Austin, Angle, The
Rock, and Jericho compete in it; therefore, they each received a tally
mark for that match. As the results show, Shawn and Bret had the most
***** matches at 2 apiece (though DM only has given a 5 star rating 5
times). Shawn had the most ****3/4 matches at 7. Shawn and Edge tied for
the most ****1/2 matches at 9 apiece. Edge had the most ****1/4 matches
at 16. Overall, Shawn had the most matches rated above 4 stars on DM’s
list at 31 matches, beating out Edge’s 28 matches. Variables included
when these wrestlers wrestled. For example, Flair had most of his best
matches in the ‘80s in NWA, and since this statistical study only
included
WWF/WWE matches, he did not score as high. Longevity in a
wrestler’s career would statistically increase the amount of matches
over 4 stars a wrestler would have, as well as other variables such as:
the amount of PPV’s a wrestler wrestled in, lack of injuries, how many
TV matches on Superstars/Raw/Smackdown, etc. a wrestler competed in,
etc., – would all naturally be factors affecting the outcome of whether
a wrestler had a lot of high rated matches or not. Keep in mind that
these are the opinions of one man only-Dave Meltzer and are in no way
determinate on what others may think; however, Dave Meltzer is one of
the most knowledgeable reviewers on the topic and has issued more
wrestling reviews than just about any other person I have ever seen
(with maybe the exception of Scott Keith). Even if very knowledgeable
fans disagree with a match by 0.25* or 0.5*, the list is still very
accurate for many criteria, such as the following example: If Wrestler
“A” had 22 matches rated in his career between 4.25* – 5*, and Wrestler
“B” had 9 matches rated in his career between 4.25* – 5*, and they both
wrestled for about the same amount of longevity, with just a few
injuries throughout each one’s career, etc. , then Wrestler “A” clearly
had better matches over the course of his career; hence, it can be
argued, that Wrestler “A” was the better wrestler and had the better
career.
***Comparing Dave Meltzer to Scott Keith’s ratings***
Scott
and Dave’s lists are interesting to compare for a number of reasons.
First off, once again Shawn Michaels tops the list with the highest
number of matches rated above **** at 30 and 31, respectively. Angle and
Benoit finished high on DM’s ratings, just like SK’s, only on DM’s,
Edge finished very high at #2 for highest number of matches rated above
****. HHH, Austin, Undertaker, and The Rock finished similar on both
frequency analyses. Jericho scored higher on DM’s list; whereas, Bret
surprisingly finished much lower on DM’s list, than he did on SK’s.
Foley and Flair, once again finished in the bottom two.
There
were naturally some matches that only Scott Keith reviewed and not Dave
Meltzer and vice versa, which would naturally be a factor scoring;
however, both guys had about the same amount of matches rated in each of
the four categories from ****1/4 to *****. Meltzer is very harsh on
giving out a 5 star rating with only 5; whereas, Keith (like most fans)
goes the full monty much more generously.
Comments are disable in preview.