MichaelZ

Yeah I really appreciated the social aspect of the watch party, and these were really fun to watch with a group. The chat made watching wrestling an even better experience.

Her versatility stood out to me. Working on top, working underneath, selling and struggling, mounting a big comeback, matwork, brawling, or big bombs, she did it all at a very high level in everything we watched. She also had just amazing innovative offense and kept delivering surprises. Top notch wrestling and a great start to the watch parties.

Great post Kadaveri, and a really useful lens to use for assessing wrestlers. As far as how much each should be weighted, I don't think there is a right or wrong answer. Part of it comes down to thinking about what you value most. When I think about where I am today I think I value individualistic input the most and some of the people that popped in my head while reading that portion (Dick Murdoch for example) are people that I think I rate more highly than others rate them. My own instinct is after 4, it a toss up between 1 and 3 as to what come next, and 2 coming in last. But if someone wants to build case around someone's volume of matches, or any combination of factors that isn't weighted the same way, that is certainly valid and interesting, and speaks to why yours is a great evaluation tool.