Wrestling Forum banner

What makes a match a 5 star match to you?

5K views 33 replies 28 participants last post by  Ham and Egger 
#1 ·
Just wondering what in your mind makes a match a 5 star match.

I always find it funny when a match gets something like 4 and a half out of 5 stars, and I start question what separates the 5 star matches from the rest of the bunch. Obviously this question is subjective.

That's why I want various opinions on the matter.

Does the length of the match matters to you, the moves done in the match, the fan reaction, what factors goes into it for you.


Also if you can post an example of what's in your mind a 4 or 4.5 out of 5 star match, and explain what it needed for you to give it the full 5 star matches.

And if you want post some 5 star matches, and why do you see them as perfect. Maybe you see some matches as 5 stars while others don't agree with you on the matter.


For me, I don't think length necessarily matters in making a match 5 stars, as I believe Shibata Vs Ishii (G1 Climax) was kinda short, but it had the perfect amount of violence, hard hitting action, and the crowd reacted perfectly to the match.


I would like to think storytelling is a big part in making a 5 star match for me, but I've come to terms with the fact that may not be the case with me.

As Kenny Omega Vs Kota Ibushi is one of my favorite matches, from DDT. Not much storytelling but the moves they did in that match, where incredible, the length of the match was great, and I can say that I truly believe its a 5 star match.

Though its funny how I'll call that a 5 star match, because I enjoy the moves, and the lack of a story didn't bother me, but on the other-hand I didn't like Ricochet Vs Osprey as match though that match can also be considered as having a lack of story.


Though I do appreciate a good story, and I do appreciate when wrestlers sell, which is why I love Kenta Kobashi, Kawada, wrestlers who were amazing sellers.

And one of my favorite matches of all time was Tanahashi vs Suzuki in 2012, where there wasn't that many flashy moves, but the way they were selling their own injuries, and the way the whole match played out was just amazing to me.


I guess I really didn't even answer my own question, but a 5 star match to me, is when two wrestlers push each other to the very limit, I love hard hitting moves, and feeling the pain the wrestlers are going through, so I guess selling is important to me. Come to think of it I think the reason I enjoyed Kota Ibushi Vs Kenny Omega more than Ricochet and Will Osprey for example is I think the moves performed in Kota Vs Kenny just felt more impactful, and I enjoyed the pacing of the match.

That's also why I set Kota Ibushi a part from other High Flyers, as I love how his moves are just more devastating, and he's able to actually tell a story with the right opponent (Nakamura I'm looking at you.)
 
See less See more
#3 ·
Good storytelling, good selling, hot crowd, good, smooth ring work and emotion. I can enjoy a Ricochet/Ospreay match but I would never rate a match like that as 5 stars. When I think of 5 stars I think of Taker/Michaels, Okada/Tanahashi, Nakamura/Ibushi or Styles/Reigns for recent examples. And if you want to go back in time Steamboat/Flair, Misawa/Kobashi, Austin/Rock. All of these had everything you could want in a match.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Master Bate
#5 ·
And one of my favorite matches of all time was Tanahashi vs Suzuki in 2012, where there wasn't that many flashy moves, but the way they were selling their own injuries, and the way the whole match played out was just amazing to me.
IMO that is one of the most underrated matches ever. Even though it did get 5* from Meltzer I don't see it mentioned nearly as much as Okada/Tanahashi or Nakamura/Ibushi but that match was perfect. Perhaps the most amazing part is that there were ZERO near falls in the match. The only pin attempt was the one that won the match. The selling and the emotion were top notch. Definitely one of the all time great matches IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Master Bate
#6 · (Edited)
I don't rate matches in bell to bell isolation. Hell I don't rate matches at all. I rate programs in totality of which the matches are just a part. The paramount criteria for me are (in order of precedence) :

1) The star power/mic skills/charisma of the competitors.
2) The level of build up.
3) The crowd reception during the build up.
4) The crowd reception during the matches.
5) The actual match itself.

If the first 4 are bang on target, the 5th one takes care of itself because the entire match itself has been elevated from the status of being an ordinary match to a match of importance even before the first bell has rung, a match where every move even if it be as small as a punch or a stomp, matters and gets vociferously recognised by the crowd and that's the most important thing about any wrestling match taking place in any organisation throughout the world.

If you take out the first 3 components that I listed and tell me 10 minutes before a match that the competitors are going to deliver the match of the millennium, I still won't watch a minute of it simply because there is no background for me to invest myself in. The ring proficiency of the competitors is of nil importance to me as long as the match isn't preceded by a compelling build up. It's for this reason that I consider the Rock-Hogan WM X8 program as by far the best program I've ever seen and also the best match I've ever seen. There wasn't a single move in the match which was out of the ordinary, yet, the amalgamation of the perfect buildup, the compelling backstory of Hogan's return to Skydome, Icon Vs Icon, the fluctuating crowd allegiance, the tension, the drama, the Hogan face turn, Rock saving Hogan, Hogan momentarily returning to a persona which not only made him, but also elevated the entire wrestling business decades ago.. the mutual respect with Hogan raising The Rock's hand.. all in all just the perfect product that you can wish for as a wrestling fan. 5 star program.. 5 star match.

Another example would be of the Foley-Orton No Holds Barred at Backlash 2004, one of the greatest hardcore matches I've ever seen. Take out the first three components and the match becomes a standard CZW match. What made the match great was the absolutely insane amounts of pent up rage, tension and absolute detestation that had built up between Foley and Orton over the course of months upon months of build up. Everybody I met was talking about this match, the buzz surrounding it was far above the title match which had Benoit returning to his home town in his 1st PPV as champion. Foley's return to Cactus Jack, Orton's ballsy decision to accept the match in the first place and going all alone and the anticipation of the levels of hurt and pain Foley would subject Orton to and the months of skirmishes that had taken place between the two were the selling points of this match. Take out all of these and the match would have been of little interest, at least to me.

It's in this regard that I was absolutely flabbergasted when I heard that there were chants of "FIGHT FOREVER!" from the crowd in the Zayn-Nakamura match. For a wrestling fan who has grown up seeing compelling storylines and split up crowd loyalties.. the chant sounded as good as a death knell to me as far as many important factors on which the foundation of WWE is built, is concerned. That small chant itself is a sad indicator of the fact that story lines nowadays are in danger of not remaining the nucleus of the product. If I'm watching a wrestling match, never ever would I want to kill the entire basis of the match like that one chant did. The chant is basically telling the higher ups that - "we're not concerned about build ups, we don't care about loyalties, we want to have no favourites, just give us two competitors who even if have little to no history.. can perform great moves and wrestle at brisk pace for about 25-35 minutes.. and we're more than content!".

I just wish that the nucleus remains intact on the main roster and the emphasis remains on storylines and buildups rather than the match itself. If everything preceding the match has been great, the match would definitely take care of itself unless something extraordinary happens like the crowd hijacking the Brock-Goldberg match at WM XX, which illustrates the fourth component that I listed.

Hence, in conclusion, what makes a 5 star match for me is a perfect buildup with competitors possessing immense star power, a great crowd and serviceable-(good/great/outstanding/godly) wrestling skills.
 
#7 ·
Good build up+good story telling+emotionally invested crowd (not a snarky crowd that is putting themselves over instead of putting the match over like those fucking tools that go to NXT shows)+ ring psychology+stakes+plus good acting from the performers+respecting fucking kayfabe. Work rate is below all of those things in my list.

It's not that I don't care about work rate at all. It's great to see amazing feats of athleticism and crazy in ring spots, but there's so many guys who can do that in the world of wrestling today. That doesn't make a 5 star match. 5 star matches feel like "moments". Like holy crap, this is a match I will remember for years. I'm not a fan of people who think the work rate is everything when rating a match. A match between two work horses who can do great stunts, chain wrestling, technical wrestling, high spots, etc. may be entertaining but it won't be a match I'll remember if it has no build, no stakes, no story, basically it just doesn't feel important. Zayn/Nakamura at Takeover is not a 5 star match, because it was meaningless and had no build up to it. It was basically just a match to put over Nakamura in predictable fashion.

Sexy/Mariposa No Mas was a five star match. I've re-watched it multiple times and it's perfect in every way, even the camera work. By comparison, Puma vs Mysterio at Ultima Lucha Dos had more impressive moves and athleticism, but the build up wasn't there and there wasn't much of a real story to it. Puma/Mysterio is a good example of a four star match. 4 star matches can be match of the year contenders, but 5 star matches feel like historic moments.

HBK's matches against Undertaker at Wrestlemania were 5 star matches.

Punk/Cena at Money in the Bank 2011 - 5 star match
RVD/Cena at One Night Stand - 5 star match
The Shield vs The Wyatts Elimination Chamber - 5 star match (Fans waited forever for this, and when it happened it felt like a dream match and a match to determine who really ran things in WWE)
Fenix/Muertes Grave Consequences - 5 star match
Vampiro/Pentagon Ciero Miedo - 5 star match, and I fucking hate Pentagon Jr.


Bayley/Sasha at Takeover Brooklyn was ALMOST a 5 star match, until they fucked it all up with post match kayfabe breaking bullshit and pandering to smarks.
 
#33 ·
Bayley/Sasha at Takeover Brooklyn was ALMOST a 5 star match, until they fucked it all up with post match kayfabe breaking bullshit and pandering to smarks.
I think Bayley no selling the fuck out of her wrist injury through out the entire match was a bigger derailment than the four horsewomen breaking kayfabe.
 
#8 ·
All these posts have been great reads I must say. Surprised someone else enjoyed RVD/Cena at One Night Stand as well.
@Arkham258

I've fallen behind in LU, but I've heard so many good stuff about that Sexy Star match, but I feel I need to watch up to that match, to really enjoy it, so I haven't got to it. But I'm hyped to see it eventually.
 
#9 ·
It must take place in the Tokyo Dome.

 
#10 ·
The funny thing about this joke is that there have only been two 5* matches in the Dome in the last ~15 years. If anything it must take place in Sumo Hall.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DGenerationMC
#12 ·
The way I look at matches: a 3 star match is a base just "good" match, a four star match a great match, ****1/4 fantastic and the other non-fives we get into that classic, signature stuff. A five star match by my personal parameters needs to meet some criteria that comes together kind of like a perfect game eh?

I think two things chiefly: I think the match needs to be a perfect execution to the story going in (I see the argument of each base being an independent thing and sure you can have a hell of a match that is just a match but for just me, there has to be something establishing that blueprint early in for that FIVE STAR. Even Angle/Benoit RR 03's reversal clinic many have in the five: that match while also being one of the best execution displays of a wrestling coaster we have seen in the US, that match also ended up perfectly parlaying the ongoing story of Benoit being increasingly close to winning a world title but juuuust falling short this time warranting a standing O.). Crowd to me has to be lit because if the crowd isn't lit: the atmosphere is drained which leads into a point that for a match to be five stars to me: I won't go as far as knowledgeable poster @IT'S VADER TIME does when he says "I have to feel at some point this is one of the greatest things I have ever seen", but I do need the match to take me out of that "intelligent, analytical viewer" phase normally in and revert me to being a mark again lost in the performance. 98% of us came in to our love of wrestling as marks and I think at heart being a mark or striking a balance as a knowledgeable fan mark is where we wanna be and when those desires aren't being met: that is where the bitching and the disenchantment comes from. There is no match I have at five stars that doesn't match those two chief parameters and I think those two parameters are a huge essence in the art of physical storytelling. I wouldn't be a freak to clean wrestling for a five star match, but I do think unless you have a rare case where a five star match would for story sake call for a sloppier titanic struggle ala Hansen vs Carlos Calon in the bullrope match or the Wyatts/Shield war at EC which I have both at *****, I do think there needs to be a high enough level of clean/crisp move execution and selling that the performance is a great showcase for professional wrestling. My other two personal things would be A. A large level of organic happenings (for instance, RVD's athleticism particularly when he was young was/is amazing and all respect for that guy and he could go at a high level vs the right guy for sure: but by virtue of how he wrestles Im not gonna have a RVD match at *****.) and it goes without saying psychology needs to be there but that plays big into the first of my major keys.

As an fyi: compared to Im sure many of you, my five star match list is not that big. Again, kind of like pitching a perfect game albeit not that infrequent and sure, I have wreslers that have wrestled more than one ***** to me.
 
#13 ·
No set criteria I don't think. It just as to be of a certain level of quality. I think lack of flaws/faults doesn't mean a whole lot either. I called a Christian/Drew McIntyre match from 2010 "basically flawless" but it's nowhere near a 5 star match. I'm sure if I re-watched the best Misawa/Kobashi, I'd think the it has more faults than that Christian/McIntyre, but it's definitely a better match.

I haven't even given star ratings in over a half-decade though, so it's not like I put a ton of thought into this topic when it comes up. But I've always, always disagreed when somebody says "there's no difference between ****3/4 or *****" or the like.
 
#16 ·
I find myself rating matches more out of enjoyment than the actual degree of "perfection" in it. Cena/Punk MITB got the full 5* from me despite having quite a few sloppy moments, for example. Taker/Michaels WM25 has that DDT where Taker's head quite clearly doesn't nearly touch the ground, but it still didn't detract from my enjoyment of it because it was still such a great counter.

A 5-star match, either from the workrate, the believability, the way the story is told, the psychology, the build-up or whatever it is the rest of you guys said, sometimes all of them, is one that kept me entirely glued to the screen and left me in awe at seeing art being made. I've given the full 5 to the most different shit, from bloody, violent demonstrations of pure hatred (Lawler/Funk No DQ '81, Austin/Bret WM13), stuff that looked straight out of The 36th Chamber (Ki/Kenta Final Battle 2005), to stuff like my one of my all-time favourites acting like such a cunt that I wanted nothing more than to see him get the shit beaten out of him (Dragon/Roddy Vendetta) and absolute spectacles that told amazing stories in conjunction with the actual dimension of the events themselves (both Taker/Michaels 'Mania matches in this case specifically, though I gave the full 5 to HIAC as well). I don't have the patience to write too much shit because I wanna go to bed, so I'm not even gonna start on 90's All Japan.
 
#17 ·
IMO In-ring work 100%

The match should be fantastic to watch whether I have the sound on mute or not. Whether I know the angle and the wrestler or whether I have never seen either wrestler before.

Meltzer's 5-star ratings are often ridiculous as crowd reactions account for so much of his reviews.

For example he rated a match from TNA Unbreakable 2005 5/5 stars. What do I care what the stupid loudmouths at the Impact zone reacted to? I don't
 
#18 ·
I know it when i see it, there's no real criteria that makes or breaks it for me if it's a good enough to be considered in the first place.

Most of the things people have mentioned goes without saying though, you are not going to get a 5 star match without story telling so it's a prerequisite.
 
#19 ·
I've never seen what I would call a 5* match and I haven't thought that highly of the matches that I've seen that are widely considered 5*. That being said first and foremost their needs to be a backstory and some heat, exhibition matches like Zayn/Nak do significantly less for me.

Second, the match needs to turn into a fight at some point, smarks love all those technical or aerial displays of skill that do nothing to hurt the opponent but at the end of the day it's supposed to be a fight. There needs to be stiff looking strikes and not just superkicks and enziguiris.

In ring story, psychology and selling, the banes of almost every IWC darlings are the most important parts of the match to me. Seeing a guy get his leg worked on for 5 minutes, then superkick the opponent, without the entirety of their weight on their bad leg affecting them, only for the opponent to completely shrug off the superkick and then return with his signature strike. Shit like this happens in every supposed 5* match and it takes me out of the action way worse than a botch or a commercial ever could.

Moves and spots are important but they shouldn't be the meat of the match and they should make sense and be well timed. And a move or a spot should never look more damaging than your finisher unless you follow it up immediately with your finish. In the CWC Lince Dorado did a reverse hurricarana that spiked his opponents head in the mat, it looked devastating but the guy kicked out at 2 and kept fighting only to be put away by a weak looking SSP.

Lastly, finishes need to make sense within the context of the in ring and overall stories, I don't mind fuckery as long as it makes sense. For instance as a Sasha fan I was perfectly fine with the WM finish, it wasn't the result I wanted but it was setup well and made perfect sense.
 
#20 ·
To me its a combination of build up/story & the match itself. You need to have both parts for the match to get 5 stars.

You see more big matches at the major ppvs because they normally get the best stories. Lucha Underground is a big exception as they do great stories like Fenix vs Muertes & Sexy Star vs Mariposa which werent at their big show. WWE sometimes have a couple outside their big 4 ppvs like Wyatts vs Shield, Cena vs Punk and i reckon the ex-shield triple threat at Battleground has potential to be 5 stars.
 
#23 ·
It’s usually has a great combination of story, in ring action, and atmosphere.

Take Nakamura vs. Zayn for example. Had no story but the interaction and atmosphere was so great many people consider it 5 stars or near it.

The best example is Punk vs. Cena to me. The story going into the match was great. The atmosphere was great. And the ring action as great as well, despite one or two sloppy moments. It checked all 3 and as named a 5 star match.

Another good of example of something close to a 5 star match is Sexy Star vs. Mariposa in Lucha Underground. The match was a wild brawl with a great story going into it and a great atmosphere. The ring action was limited, but despite that they had one of the best matches of the year.

To me, you have to get an A+ in 2 of those 3 categories to be considered 5 stars.
 
#24 ·
I don't have one set of criteria. Misawa & Kobashi/Kawada & Taue from 6/9/95 is a 5-star match, as is Bret/Austin from WM13, as is Briscoes/Motor City Machineguns from ROH in '07. Clearly, none of them is a 5-star match for the same reasons as the others. For me, it's just one of those things where I know one when I see it. Reading previous posts in this thread, I kind of bristled at the idea that the overall program leading up to the match should play a role in evaluating it, because my hatred of wrestling promos and angles that amount to more than "two guys are gonna fight; who's gonna win?" is fairly well-established. But I can't really argue too strongly against it, since the deep long-term booking is what makes '90s All Japan so rightly revered, and so many of my favorite matches are part of a larger feud or a rematch that builds on the matches the participants have had before. I give the full 5 snowflakes to a number of matches built on pure action, or at least the self-contained performances of that one match (Can-Am Express/Kobashi & Kikuchi '92, Pegasus/Sasuke from the '94 J Cup, Angle & Benoit/Edge & Rey from No Mercy in '02, the aforementioned Briscoes/MCMGs), but most of my favorites don't fit that criteria, and some of them don't fit any criteria other than that they blew me away the first time I saw them and continue to do so every time I watch.

A 5-star match is a 5-star match because it's a 5-star match, and a ****3/4 match is a ****3/4 match because it's not. Not a terribly helpful explanation, I'm sure, but judging wrestling, like any art form or entertainment medium, is such a subjective thing anyway that it doesn't have to be. It's that magical alchemy when everything just comes together in a way that hits the viewer juuuust right.
 
#25 ·
*****

All that matters to me is that the match can get me invested in the story they are telling in the ring, the action, the crowd is invested as I am and the overall storyline.

For example, a match that a lot of people like but maybe not as much as I do:
Daniel Bryan vs John Cena (WWE Summerslam 2013)
To me, that match is a 5 stars match. The storyline between Cena and Bryan, 2 babyfaces, one on the top of the mountain, the other trying to grab the mountain by the balls (that doesn't make sense, but you get the idea). The entertainer vs The wrestler, 2 different sides of Wrestling/Sports entertainment. The subplot of Bryan's look (feat. Vince). I love this match as much as Bryan/Orton/Batista. To me, HHH/Bryan, Bryan/Cena & Bryan/Orton/Batista are *****, because the story they had, the characters, the crowd involvement, all of that was top notch. All of it.
 
#27 ·
For me it needs to be more than just a match. The outcome needs to matter as much or more than the road to the match. Zayn/Nakamura was amazing, I was there live and it was the best match I saw all weekend. That being said I wouldn't give it 5 stars because the outcome didn't matter. I didn't even care who won the match.

Give me Undertaker vs. Shawn Michaels at Wrestlemania 26, Bryan Danielson vs. Morishima at Final Battle, Steen vs. Generico Fight Without Honor from Final Battle, Punk vs. Cena, CZW vs. ROH Cage of Death. Those are some of my favorite matches ever and it was about than just having a great match. The outcome mattered and then the matches had their own stories that took you to that outcome.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top