Latest Comments

[] "I don't disagree with this sentiment but there's a comment, (as of right now), on CM Punk's page that has him rated 2.0 and the comment is phony repeated several times and then a sentence about only AJ Lee being the only interesting thing about him. That, to me, fits the criteria for low effort but it's still there. That means it's an oversight or there's no consistency in determining what is "low effort" Edit: That comment was removed which is good. What would be even better is a report feature and a description given. Clearing out queues is better than trying to find a specific needle in a stack of needles."

[] "Oversight. We are doing this in our free time, remember? I will take care of that comment. If you, or anyone else, see low effort comments, you can contact us and we will look into it."

[] "I agree with boymeetsworld, i would argue that burden of comment limits is too high for promotions outside WWE and AEW. 250 is fine for WWE and AEW then you have to justify why its not toxic rating where as a 100 limit for everyone else would improve engagement IMHO"

[] "Evidently even when you give good and bad ratings to AEW and WWE, if one moderator doesn't like it, your comments and ratings are deleted. Then you get an email from some smug dickhead without citing anything specific. "U did a bad mmkay""

[] "What Cagematch is though is an Internet pro-wrestling database with an option for users to contribute to it, in order to highlight as many of the most memorable, important and best pro-wrestlers, shows, matches, etc in the history of the business as possible - an everchanging collection of impressions (data) that can be looked at weeks, months, years after the fact. It says a lot about this new influx of users that tries to use this website as a social media platform when a few of those hellholes already exists and is already being used in ways they were designed to. I guess everyone wants to make their opinion the main character, which is an exercise in futility because shows and matches that they usually rate have hundreds of votes when dust settles down (so their individual votes make little to no difference to 'The Number' that everyone reacts to) and nobody gets a match 'rated' on their own, because you need at least 5 votes for a match to have that colorful Total Rating. There's hundreds of tremendous matches from many contextually different time-and-place periods in the CAGEMATCH matchguide that have 1/2/3/4 votes which were left forgotten/overlooked for different reasons. Everyone has their blind spots, so a singular quality review (and so many people on here are 100x better than me at writing/reviewing) sometimes becomes a reason to check out something that I didn't know about. The discourse doesn't dictate to rewatch cool 'hidden gems' from the past, it's all about fresh because 'fresh is king', but at the same time, what would happen if random Twitter hero of the day would rile up the impressionable youth to watch some cool matches from years gone and told them to rate them here? I'm afraid it would only create another shitstorm, which is a shame because number of votes matters more than the total rating, especially for matches outside of big promotions. In real time, there's only few promotions that makes at least few hundreds of fans see red and rate their stuff, so rating 'smaller' promotions is also all about number of votes - ever since it became possible for users to rate (almost) every match, there was enough examples of matches that 'caught fire' simply because enough hardcore fans of those wrestlers/promotions decided to vocalize their opinions just because they enjoyed what they saw so much (when they usually don't), which led to few more waves of voters after hearing all that buzz - it's natural that those hardcore fans would leave very high ratings (9/10) and noticeable portion of fans that would vote later think about those matches as 'good/very good, but not great' (7/8), my point is that nobody simply would've known about a 'hidden gem' if nobody would decide to talk about it. There's only so many hours in a day and everyone has their preferences, and because not everything in pro-wrestling is great far from it, imo there's also value in 'middle of the road' votes that get straight to the point and call it like it is, even if those matches don't end up being 'hidden gems' or something must-see - there is an option to leave rating without a comment, and vast majority of matches with rating from '4' to '6' imo fall into that category, there's just not much to point out in a nice little match. I've also seen few people in different discords and corners of Twitter about 'Which matches from Wrestlemania Weekend I should watch? ', only to see how vast majority of fans operates on hearsay instead of their own curiosity, because everyone talked about the same stuff and didn't mention certain shows at all, even in a 'I watched show ABC from top to bottom and there wasn't anything worth your time imo' way, which was a little disappointing because the impression I got is that 'hamster wheel'-type discourse is more popular these days than discovery of 'hidden gems' and watching pro-wrestling with intention to have a fun time and be entertained."

[] "Pro Wrestling communities on social media are some of the most toxic spaces I've ever seen. On Facebook you'll see the most low effort, intentionally frustrating negative comments (both from WWE fans and AEW fans) that seem like they're just there to start shit, not to mention that any AEW post that features Nyla Rose gets bombarded with transphobia. On Twitter, people are always just mud slinging and saying "you're an AEW mark! " or "you stupid E-drone" or whatever the hell. It's perfectly fine to like one company and dislike the other one, but why do people have to be so rude about it and hope that the other company fails, or they crap on fans of the other product. It's good that AEW is a thing and has become so successful. Pro Wrestling is doing great at the moment and has so much to offer nowadays, something for everyone. Let's celebrate that instead of attacking one another. Like Brian Zane says: "Like what you like, but don't be a dick.""

[] "I really can't tell you how much I can't stand this whole "CM Punk vs The Elite" tribalism that has been going on for 2 years now. It's even more annoying seeing people go at it on here and having people just giving dishonest ratings/comments. Hope you can find a way to put this to bed, but it's impossible (unfortunately...). It's so dumb people really are out here trying to start tribalism over anything, can't we all just like what we like and not feel the need to start imaginary wars? Honestly, AEW is the best and worst thing to happen in modern wrestling, whether it's their fault or not. Company can bring out the worst from both sides of the coin. Anyways, glad you addressed this and hope it gets solved."

[] "Quería empezar a puntuar y así guardar mis vistas de eventos de wrestling, pero ya veo que voy a tener que esperar. Una pena."

[] "Gotta start somewhere don't we? Shame it's a rule but 100% warranted given how the IWC is sometimes. Here's to enjoying matches with y'all"

[] "This seems like as good a place as any to leave a comment and start the clock on the 7-day introductory period. Cheers."

[] "I think the ratings are usually acurate at least in the AEW matches and events, usually the comments that downvote a match have good arguments, i can't comment on the WWE section since i don't care about it. And mentioning other promotions makes sense when comparing the works of wrestlers who were in both promotions like Adam Cole and Cody Rhodes."

[] "Good idea. Leaving my first comment now. And I'm even going to stretch it out to hit the minimum character limit."

[] "The longer I read this, the more I feel like this is the best possible move ever. I like seeing what other folks have to say about wrestlers or matches or events or whatever, and to see just nonstop "this company good" and "this company bad" with zero constructive criticism or anything I guess that's remotely "valid, " it felt frustrating. Now with the 500 character limit, people will HAVE to give proper ratings and will hopefully will be even more genuine. This site is the biggest wrestling database out there that allows people to rate things and put their own feelings into the world. why should the best aspect of it be ruined with bad faith takes and annoying tribalistic fans? I thank you, Mr. Cagematch for doing this. I'm on PC so imagine there's a saluting emoji right here."

[] "I thought Cagematch would have been somewhat inoculated against the trolling that plagues online wrestling communities because of the fact that you can't reply to comments, making it much harder to wind other people up. Its sad that people have still managed to find a way to try and do so anyway. This site is fantastic for finding matches and PPVs I've not seen before which are rated highly by a group of people, rather than just one reviewer. I hope you guys can weed out the people causing trouble so the rest of us can enjoy the site - personally I feel this is the best wrestling site on the web!"

[] "Bravo. Now waiting for everyone to comment saying that they are not tribal. Funny, because if people weren't tribal then Matt wouldn't have to do this. Let's hope this site gets back to its former glory soon..."

[] "Ok some of the comments below are pretty scary. I mean, making this site just "2D" database would actually mean killing it. That being said, I personally agree with these new rules if they 'll help to fight tribalism. Personally locking down AEW and WWE ratings to only a little part of the users is pretty too much, I would include also "mind opened" people or that simply rate WWE and AEW normally. ****1/4"

[] ""Just registered up for the first time, the regulations to keep initial trolls or other agenda pushers from attempting to be hostile or place personal biases on the database is very welcome. Looking forward to seeing the end results overall of the guidelines""

[] "I'm wondering how long it will be until y'all just do away with ratings and comments in general. I honestly am not opposed to it at all. Half the ratings and comments on here are in bad faith anyway."

[] "Here should be a place which people look for when they want to watch pure wrestling or sometimes understand others ideas but soon this happened to become more like a IMDB kind of website which some random trolls try to ruin the momentum and fun from the website"

[] "I agree with this. The tribalism really is ruining wrestling discourse for me. Why WWE fans can't just watch WWE and ignore AEW, and vice versa, is beyond me. This should be a fun place to come, and trawling through lots of troll posts and/or bad faith takes just saps the fun out of the whole process"

[] "Here's my honest two cents that probably won't be popular but compares cagematch to other user-bases in media rating websites I have a lot of experience with: I understand your intentions behind the many cagematch rules, but the internet is gradually becoming more and more toxic as a whole - there are no rules that will magically de-toxify your userbase, and the modern contemporary stuff will always show the worst of that. Pages for modern music and film in sites like rateyourmusic and letterboxd will always look more toxic and reactionary than what you'll find digging for obscurities - and it's the same here. I would say that cagematch's many fluctuating rules actually prevent people from being able to find those obscurities, which is where the real joy in such a massive database like this should lie - we can all give our disposable opinion on the current stuff on social media but sharing the more forgotten stuff is the best use of this place. In my opinion, the more hoops that you force people to jump through to log their rating, the worse the average standard of review is - let the raters rate, the reviewers should review because they WANT to. I'm aware this is how the site used to be and you wanted to move away from it, but I've seen first hand this authoritarian approach make zero difference to the standard of review here, and arguably made it much worse - genuinely some of the worst reviews I've seen on the internet are here, and I'd say a huge percentage of those are because of the rules forcing a review of them they didn't care to write - hell, I've even been guilty of this myself, though I am no reactionary or fan-boy, but I'll let my standards slip to log a rating. Arrancar spoke below about users with an unusually high amount of 0s and 10s - instead of banning these though I think you should nullify their ratings so they don't count towards the overall averages, which is what these other websites do. The more fair the curve, the more it should contribute to the overall averages. If I went over to imdb or letterboxd and rated The Godfather a 1, no forced "explanation" is going to make that opinion palatable to most movie fans not even with an 800 character limit, it's probably just going to make the space more toxic. If I went and rated the canon top 100 and all the latest blockbusters all 1s, rightfully my ratings would be dismissed by the algorithm. But if that's how I want to use the site, who cares? Who is it harming, really? These websites also have a "block" function, which would be awesome here. Only genuinely offensive language (racism, homophobia, misogyny etc.) and spam should be worthy of a ban - just my opinion though!"

[] "I just recently sign up to this website because I want to share my opinion about the matches I watched and rate on my own, as I am not specifically a WWE/AEW/NJPW fan but a pro-wrestling fan in general. I hated it when I see some rating, they don't have a fair and honest opinion nor didn't even justify the rating just because they hated/loved the product. These tribalists should not be allowed to use this platform. The reason Cagematch exists so that we can have our own fair views on the matches we saw, not to use as a tool to bash the product. People must understand that Cagematch is now being recognized thanks to Tony Khan and more people will dwell on the website for that matter. Maybe next time for new users, have a background check to the other websites they used like Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, their own vlogs, etc. When they sign-up, they need to wait for some certain days for background checking and if they confirmed that most of the content is just supporting for one product, hate the product, etc., they are not permitted to use the website. For the ratings, good job on the new ruling you imposed. I hope that would lessen the tribalists plaguing this website. But just a suggestion to improve the ratings, you can do that by getting the average overall rating exclusively for AEW and WWE to each inmate and if for example there is a deficit of 4 in-between the averages, their available rating would be limited. For example, one inmate's average AEW rating is like 8 and the average WWE rating is 4. That means the next time they will comment in a WWE match, they will only provide ratings like (5-10) or if they will comment in an AEW match, they will only provide the rating (0-5) and vice versa. But still, thank you for keeping and maintaining the ratings system fair and protected. This is only the review website for wrestling that I know so far so this website must be protected at all costs."

[] "Maybe there should be limits on how many of the 'extreme' ratings (0s, 1s, 2s, 9s, and 10s) new users can give out in a set period. I mean, what are the odds that EVERY week the promotion you love the most *just so happens* to have 10/10 classic matches, and EVERY week the promotion you hate *just so happens* to have irredeemable 1/10 matches? That's clearly indicative of immense bias. 90% of the time users like this don't even bother hiding that their ratings are disingenuous, since they'll directly expose themselves with their accompanying comments. "Okay match. I liked who won. 10/10", or "really good match but I don't like one of the wrestlers, plus everyone else is overrating it. 1/10". Users who say generic stuff like "it was good/bad/exciting/boring" without reasonably elaborating should also be banned, since they're adding absolutely nothing of value and most likely just trying -- as effortlessly as possible -- to inflate/deflate a particular match until it reaches whatever average rating they personally approve of. Or just go full-on with ratings being invite-only or requiring premium accounts. That's probably easiest, even if only implemented for brief periods, with trusted existing users then being grandfathered in. Whatever you guys do, thanks as always for all your efforts. I definitely appreciate you guys always doing your best to address the various issues that would've otherwise ruined the user-interactive side of the site a long time ago."

[] "I completely agree with everything that you have written here, and am in favour of either banning newer users from rating recent WWE/AEW shows and matches as you have suggested, or perhaps implementing some sort of application process or approval system where new members cannot rate until they have demonstrated that they aren't acting in bad faith (whether it's multiple sensible commented reviews without ratings before the team chooses to approve the account, or an application where they have to write a statement of intention so you can weed out people who are unintelligible... Just throwing out ideas off the top of my head here). Every single week there are people who give ratings of 10.0 to the most random matches. There are 7 people who gave this weeks RAW opener a 10.0... Even if you don't think a match needs to be perfect to receive a 10.0 (which I do not), that seems blatantly absurd to me, and it happens on every WWE/AEW show each week. Likewise, the idea that Jinder vs. Seth was a 0.0 also feels blatantly false. I didn't care for the match but it was far from a disaster and I struggle to believe anybody who has given it either a 10.0 or a 0.0 is using the rating system appropriately... There are also plenty of comments from people who do not in any way justify or explain their rating. They are either just dragging out their comment to meet the quota (how many different ways can you say 'this was good' in the same comment? ), talking about something either irrelevant or only tangentially related, or have written something that would barely even qualify as a coherent thought. It's unfortunate, because I love using the site to find or share hidden gems, to check people's opinions about older wrestling that isn't often discussed anymore, and even just to keep track of what I've watched and what I thought about it. It's really just the recent reviews that have become this ridiculous pissing contest where seemingly everything is either a 10.0 or a 0.0 to some people, and it damages what is otherwise a really great resource for wrestling fans."

[] "(Decided to fix up my comment from hours ago) I honestly can't tell you how annoying it is that ever since Tony Khan mentioned this site, you have tons of people who've made a mockery out of CAGEMATCH.net and ironically use the ratings on here as a "gotcha" point. I sincerely don't get it, and I wish people could just like what they like and leave it at that (I genuinely can't come up with a reason why people mocked TK for using this site as a reference, it would be like if people mocked the studio that repackaged the first Sonic movie after hearing the backlash or something, wouldn't one want execs to hear the fans? ). I'm all for this change, I feel it's justifiable and can work, best of luck to you with fighting off annoying tribalist. Also, I really hope the whole "lock down WWE and AEW ratings to long-term registered users" doesn't apply to me, that part has me a bit worried since I love this site and go on it regularly and use it to keep track of my opinions and to discover matches/shows/wrestlers/etc. that I've never watched and want to get into. Anyways, sorry this issue keeps coming up, this fanbase can really make life harder than it really is with the annoying antics."

[] "Thank you so much for the message The Tribalism ruined pro wrestling for me it's become more toxic then ever I love this website and it's a good way to discover different promotions and wrestlers. This community needs to do better."

[] "As a recently registered user, I'm writing this in the hope that you end up reading it. I discovered this website 6 months back and lurked here time to time to find matches and events that are worth watching after I stopped watching it a few years back. In those 6 months, this has become one of my most frequented websites that I visit almost daily for the exhaustive database it has. I ended up creating an account last month to document my journey of falling back in love with wrestling by rating and commenting on every match/event that I've watched. I used to keep a notes app to track all my ratings back when I didn't know of this website and the switch to cataloging matches on here instead has been so much better. As a fan of both the promotions, this tribalism war has made me sick and I understand your frustration completely. Banning any references to the other promotion on the respeCtive promotion's comments is a welcome move. But "The next step is to lock down WWE and AEW ratings to long-term registered users and I don't fucking care if half of you leave at that point." worries me as a new user who rates and comments matches here in good faith. Rating matches has by far become my favorite feature as it helps me quickly keep track of what matches I've watched and which ones I enjoyed to the extent that I will rewatch them years down the line. Removing this feature for new users will take that away from me, and as much as I get the sentiment behind wanting to do this, I ask you to please find a middle ground of sorts. I found out about this update from Reddit and a user there gave the idea that "the issue is how people rate 0-1-2 etc in some matches, those numbers are super low and shouldnt be used in the vast majority cases. If they disabled those scores for like 3 days for AEW/WWE shows, it would reduce so much of the incentive to go to the site to spread tribalism. The tribalism wouldn't have much reason to be, yeah people can come to rate 4 but it's probably not what they want to do and many idiots wont feel as vindicated in their hate and will think it's just a waste of time, and after some days people will be more calm down if they wanna go back and rate anything. I hate this solution personally, but I think it could work? " I request that you please give this idea a consideration as it would still curb down on all the troll/tribal accounts without punishing new users who are genuinely enjoy using this website in good faith. Cheers."

[] "Great choice. Can you crack down on the very obvious sockpuppet accounts next? The ones that publish the same reviews with only a minor word change here or there?"

[] "Tbh, just implement an invite registration system like XWT at this point. Without the transactions of course, but that's up to your own discretion."

[] "Actually I wouldn't mind if you just shut the site down. But as an alternative solution, you could just eliminate the ratings altogether and just function as a match database."

[] "I've always hated tribalism in wrestling. If both companies are doing great, then we shouldn't have to whine and moan about why this company is doing better in the key demo than this company. They are succeeding, that should be enough to support pro wrestling. Don't hatewatch, it just makes the community worse."

[] "Honestly, thank you so much for doing this. It's been getting so annoying with the constant twitter war going on between WWE fans and AEW fans, and you guys don't deserve to be lumped in as a tribalism gotcha. I just wanna look up events so I can sort my wrestling playlist."

[] "Honest comparison like saying something like "oh this WWE wrestler reminds me of this AEW wrestler/vice versa" is cool right? And yeah, as soon as Tony Khan brought up Cagematch I instantly said to myself "oh for fuck sake here we go". Kinda saw it coming from a mile away. People spamming 10s for their team and 0s for the enemy team, everybody join the wrestling equivalent of the culture war. Glad something is being done about it. This site isn't about the WWE vs AEW Twitter war. IT'S ABOUT LETTING ME SCROLL THROUGH THE MATCH LIST OF A MIDCARDER FROM 70'S ALL JAPAN, DAMN IT"

[] "Cagematch is a fantastic resource and I'm sure that the vast majority of people enthusiastically support whatever rules you need to put in place in order to keep it functioning as such."

[] "As someone who usually browses this site almost daily for over half a decade now its annoying to see Cagematch brought up as some sort of a gotcha as if it is a bad thing usually by people who probably havent even spent much time on this site and dont realize just how valuable this site is if you are a pro wrestling fan, up and coming wrestler, wrestler, wrestling historian, writer, editor or pro wrestling media. I dont hear Cagematch come up very often and when I do hear about it I like that new eyes will hopefully be drawn to this site. Although Im not innocent when it comes to having participated in pro wrestling tribalism in the past I try to not get wrapped up in it the same way some others do. I try to not hide my biases and be clear when I think I am being unfair or biased if I know I dont like something. I think that is fine. However using that bias to go over any sort of fairness in criticism or just to get some sort of self satisfaction by spamming the same shit that you think is the right opinion is cringe and childish and just makes wrestling fans, the industry and in this case, Cagematch, look bad. While this unfortunately has once again flared up I hope this update will help curb some of the issues. However I do have questions, with this update will this be an indefinite if not permanent update regarding AEW & WWE ratings or is it something that may change after some time? Im assuming this generally wont affect most ratings prior to this update unless clearly unconstructive/tribalistic. And finally what would be considered as a long term registered users given that this site has been around for over 2 decades?"

[] "*reads* the plural of Lego is simply Lego. Legos is not a proper word. Thank you for your time. *continues reading*"

[] "[10.0] AJ Styles is one of the best wrestlers of all-time. He has all-around great in-ring work and incredible mic skills. Undoubtedly a great 10/10"