Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

August 2021 Wrestling Discussion


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, nofuture said:

According to Fightful, St Louis is the frontrunner for the Royal Rumble next year which might be scheduled for early February due to the NFL added an extra game to their schedule, pushing the Super Bowl back a week.

This is assuming the traditional Sunday PPV

If they run Saturday, Jan 29 there are no NFL playoff games that day

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, L_W_P said:

Ok so putting 2+2 together with all these rumors/suspicions -

We're through the looking glass here people...

2+2=15,793?

it's like you watched Scott Steiner's math promo, snorted more coke than Ultimate Warrior, and said "hold my beer..."

  • Like 1
  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, L_W_P said:

Ok so putting 2+2 together with all these rumors/suspicions -

Vince is looking to sell.

Triple H failed with NXT.

Cody might be 'going back' to WWE.

WWE are 'helping' AEW by letting them sign certain stars.

Ric Flair's release.

The Khans (Nick and Tony) are not related BUT they might be.

The Saudis have money.

John Cena is back for his record setting world title run.

Conclusion -

Vince McMahon, under the supervision of the Saudis, in conjunction with the extended Khan dynasty, is working with AEW to eliminate Ric Flair from the history books by setting up John Cena to dethrone Kenny Omega as AEW champion as part of a WWE sale to a Khan financed Cody Rhodes.

Vince realised that Dusty was the real star behind NXT and is going to leave his empire in the hands of Dusty's son.

In exchange, Vince gets paid, but he also gets to leave the legacy of his greatest WWE created star (Cena) eclipsing the WCW/NWA guy (Flair) by dominating Cody's new #1 rival (Omega/AEW).

We're through the looking glass here people...

Needs more Jimmy Golden.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, D.Z said:

Anyway more ratings newz from Adweek:

"The Media Rating Council, the third-party accreditation organization that checks Nielsen and other measurement firms’ methodology, is likely to reach a decision about the status of Nielsen’s national TV service early this week—and the industry is bracing for Nielsen’s longstanding National TV measurement service to lose its accreditation, opening another major fissure in its longstanding but increasingly threatened measurement backbone."

This is one of those things that's kind of nerdy but really interests me. We've been told for decades that the way Nielsen does it's ratings are insanely accurate. But in my mind there's no way that's possible. The average Nielsen viewer counts for 10,000 people. You're going to tell me they have enough data to be confident that customer number 242 watches the exact same TV shows as 10,000 other people from his demographic? There's absolutely no way it can be accurate.

Beyond that tho, we are in the year 2021. How have cable & satellite providers not baked in some kind of digital viewership counter?? I know there are parts of the country that still run old school cable without a digital set top box. But they have surely been eclipsed by now. Why doesn't DirecTV, Spetrum, Comcast ect just put digital technology into the boxes that are part of the user agreement that track viewing? That's the crazy part to me. It's certainly possible. And fairly easy to implement compared all the other technologies we have. Yet we still bank on good old customer 242 to have 10,000 friends that watch the same shit he does all day every day.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, kafkonia said:

If you want to pick nits, they billed it as a "coffin match", not a "casket match."

What's the functional difference?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Fire Russo match was actually really good, up until the overbooking kicked in. Sting vs Abyss in a TNA-ified version of a casket match where the bed went up in the air.

Sting got hardwayed by a candle holder.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Dog said:

What's the functional difference?

Functional? I dunno. But technically, a casket and a coffin are two different things. I will defer to the experts as to whether one is more correct than the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NoFistsJustFlips said:

This is one of those things that's kind of nerdy but really interests me. We've been told for decades that the way Nielsen does it's ratings are insanely accurate. But in my mind there's no way that's possible. The average Nielsen viewer counts for 10,000 people. You're going to tell me they have enough data to be confident that customer number 242 watches the exact same TV shows as 10,000 other people from his demographic? There's absolutely no way it can be accurate.

That's not how sampling works. Suppose, rather than trying to determine what percentage of people watch a specific TV show, you're trying to determine what percentage of rolls of a given die come up 1. (You're not sure whether the die is fair, in other words.) The number of times you could possibly roll a die is infinite. Does that mean, to draw any conclusions, you have to roll a reasonable fraction of infinite times? Of course not. Just roll that sucker a thousand times, and if it comes up 1, say, a hundred times, you can be reasonably confident the probability of it coming up 1 is close to 10%. Doesn't matter that you've in effect sampled exactly zero percent of the total population you're trying to study.

It's the same thing with literal sampling. If you can pick members at random from your population and do so a thousand times, then if you find a hundred people watched TV Show A then you can be reasonably confident that 10% of the population watched TV Show A. If you picked ten thousand people or a million people you could be even more confident, of course. But whether the population size is 100 times bigger than your sample or 10,000 times bigger or a million times bigger isn't really relevant.

It's that "if you can pick members at random" part that's the trick, incidentally, and the reason why polls are often inaccurate. Generating a truly random sample is hard. Almost any practical method will introduce biases of some sort.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Curt McGirt said:

I had a similar discussion via PM three years ago and here's what he said:

"Although caskets and coffins are used for the same purpose, they are two different things. A coffin is constructed with six sides, a top and a bottom, while a casket is constructed of FOUR sides, a top and a bottom. Coffins are what you have seen in old movies. They are still used in some foreign countries, however in the United States, we primarily use caskets."

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks @tbarrie, that was a great post. I was definitely a bit off in my assumptions. Although I was a bit off the mark, I still stand by there being better technology to go from reasonably confident to factually accurate. And I'd be very interested to see how much of a variance there is between accurate digital readings vs the Nielsen model.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In which case you could argue that Buried Alive matches, Stretcher Matches and Ambulance matches are all technically part of the "Put my opponent into a thing" stipulation match.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...