| 0 |
Subject: Week 2 - Smackdown Points
Posted by: mIST
- [5351150] Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 03:00
M. Cole: 2
Tazz: 2
Vince McMahon: 5 + 2 = 7
The Undertaker: 5
Rey Mysterio: 25
Chris Benoit: 25
Rhyno: 12
Tajiri: 12
Danny Basham: 5
Doug Basham: 5
Shaniqua: 30
Torrie: 12
Nidia: 12
Dawn Marie: 5
Stephanie McMahon: 2
Sable: 2
Big Show: 2
John Cena: 2
Eddie Guerrero: 2 + 25 + 25 = 52
Chavo Guerrero: 2 + 25 + 25 = 52
Charlie Haas: 12
Shelton Benjamin: 12
Kurt Angle: 15 + 10 = 25
Brock Lesnar: 30 + 10 + 50 = 90
|
| 1 | mIST
ID: 5351150
Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 08:59
|
+2 for Farooq and Bradshaw
|
| 2 | Great One
Donor
ID: 298341017
Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 11:23
|
I think half my roster was in those scenes where "the boys in the back" are awaiting the Ironman match.
so I know for a fact my team had back there -
Ultimo
Nunzio
Rey
anybody have a full list?
|
| 3 | Great One
Donor
ID: 298341017
Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 11:23
|
and Orlando too!
|
| 4 | Mattinglyinthehall
Sustainer
ID: 1629107
Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 11:30
|
remember, they need to be involved with the vignette, has to be more than simply 'being there' in the shot.
|
| 5 | Great One
Donor
ID: 298341017
Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 11:50
|
does playing cards with APA count as involved? this is a tough determination I would say.
|
| 6 | Mattinglyinthehall
Sustainer
ID: 1629107
Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 11:53
|
Agreed. Tough to say. In one scene, Palumbo and Stamboli seemed to be part of the focus for a moment, interacting with each other, in another, we just saw Ultimo sitting there, he could have been a manequin in a mask. Beyond that, I didn't pay very close attention.
|
| 7 | Great One
Donor
ID: 298341017
Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 11:58
|
Warner Wolf - "Lets go to the videotape!"
so who taped this thing anyway - its gonna be up to you.
|
| 8 | Tree
Donor
ID: 278211719
Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 14:58
|
i think playing cards makes it active part of a vignette. being backstage, even "watching a match" does not.
|
| 9 | Great One
Donor
ID: 298341017
Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 15:13
|
that being said, we need to watch it again somehow...
|
| 10 | Mattinglyinthehall
Sustainer
ID: 1629107
Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 15:20
|
Tree if you saw you might not agree. It was two seperate vignettes, one with a bunch of wrestlers standing there watchin a monitor (iirc) where at one point, Palumbo was sort of animated, and reached over and got Stamboli's attention and the two of them sort of interacted, gesturing toward each other and whatnot. In the card-playing one with APA, mopst of the people at the card table seemed to just be sitting there at a table loaded up with empty beer cans. Bradshaw and/or Simmons were talking and you could say the rest of them were playing cards and drinking, but some of them didn't seem to even move. Again, I only was paying cursory attention.
|
| 11 | Mattinglyinthehall
Sustainer
ID: 1629107
Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 15:27
|
Here is all PWScoops had:Separate shots were shown of the FBI, Basham Brothers, A-Train, O'Haire, Hardy & Moore in the heel locker room and the APA, Funaki, Ultimo Dragon and others in the APA office playing cards, discussing the iron man match.
|
| 12 | Species
Sustainer
ID: 569221717
Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 17:45
|
Are we splitting hairs too much here? Are we creating too many 'judgment calls' on behalf of mIST and other point calculators?
We should pin it down I guess. I always assumed that if they were shown on TV, they got the points - a simple, easy way that is basically inarguable. The spirit of our league has been, "who is getting pushed? Who is on TV?".....thus, even if you're in the background looking mean or playing cards, the bookers WANTED you there for some reason, and thus you deserve the points.
|
| 13 | Great One
Donor
ID: 298341017
Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 18:08
|
thats why I was psyched that Ultimo and Orlando were there - because - it shows that they are still involved in things even though they haven't been on TV in awhile.
They are keeping their faces and names fresh in your mind. So they WERE there for a reason.
But the other problem we have is that, we don't know who "the others" were anyway(using MITH's cut and paste recap)... and unless anyone has a tape - then I am not sure we will.
|
| 14 | Mattinglyinthehall
Sustainer
ID: 217351118
Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 18:16
|
In this thread from early last season, Tree wrote the following:d like to make an addendum. it requires voting.
this 2 point thing for being seen backstage - i think it's getting out of hand.
if the camera pans and a guy is in the scene - NO POINTS - if a guy is an interactive part of the show, then they get the 2 points...
thoughts?
peace,
Tree Wiggs, Blue Hen, Goatlocker and Mike D chimed in in agreement, but I think that's how we've been handling it.
One the one hand it's only two points so I don't know that it makes that much difference, but on the other hand it would seem unfair that a 90 second interview is only worth as much as being seen siting silent and motionless at a table for 4 seconds, on the other hand there will always be disagreements regarding exactly where that line is, so maybe we should just make it easy, on the other hand as you say we want to weigh the scoring in favor of people who are getting a push, something that is often not the case when they are using you as an extra in a backstage vignette where you are there just to make it look like a crowd, on the other hand I think this is my fifth hand now, so I'll just shut up.
|
| 15 | Mike D
Donor
ID: 23715270
Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 18:19
|
Still sounds good to me.
|
| 16 | Mattinglyinthehall
Sustainer
ID: 217351118
Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 18:51
|
I tend to agree. If for no other reason, than because it seems pointless to change it. I definitely see why some would want to be more liberal with backstage points, but the arguments for that are imo no stronger than the ones for the current way.
|
| 17 | Species
Sustainer
ID: 569221717
Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 19:49
|
LOL.....did anything that was said in the last 3 posts actually clarify anything?
My point is that the gray area leaves it to the point-totaller's discretion as to what consititutes *actively* being in the vignette.
If the point is "screw it, we can't make the distinctions so let's give everyone the 2 points", then cool.
If the point is "they have to be active in the vignette", we still have an issue with how it's decided who is active and deserves the points. Do you have to speak to be "active"? Snort? Fart? Grab your crotch? What if you just grunt? Etc.
For the record, when I tabulated points, and a Rajah recap said (something like) "APA are shown getting ready for their match......cut to commercial" - I would give them 2 points. If it said something like "Hardy and Shannon Moore look on as APA smack each other upside the head in preparation for their match" - I gave all 4 the 2 points.
BTW - I'm not trying to be a smartass....and maybe I just didn't read it correctly, but I can't tell whether a conclusion has been made here.
|
| 18 | Mattinglyinthehall
Sustainer
ID: 217351118
Fri, Sep 19, 2003, 20:05
|
The thing is, there are infinite ways a video production can be presented. If they cut to Spanky lacing up his boots backstage as he awaits his match for 5 seconds, I think that everyone agrees he deserves 2 points. But if two other wrestlers are involved in a vignette with Spanky in the background doing the exact same thing with 4 other wrestlers there in the background with him, he doesn't deserve any points. Disagreements over these things are going to come up no matter what. I'm for leaving the rules to be interpreted as Tree described last January unless we vote to change it.
In this particular case, I'm fine with leaving it to Tree's discretion based on what I or anyone else remembers and posts about what they saw and whatever he reads in the recaps. No one has come foward to say they have a copy of the vignettes and can accurately describe what happened, so what else can we do?
|
| 19 | Tree
Donor
ID: 448441914
Sat, Sep 20, 2003, 08:22
|
my discretion? heh...
i'm just the tabulator. I tally what other people post.
i don't get to watch the shows as much as i like, so i often don't see what happens - especially on Smackdown - with my girl watching Survivor and Will & Grace, Rusty Brooks has a better chance of coming back and winning the World Title than i do of watching Smackdown.
however, my position on scoring hasn't changed from the above post that MITH linked to last year. we started giving people 2 points for scratching their ass in the background of a segment featuring two other wrestlers - several times last year, Jim Ross or some wrestler happened to be "in the wrong place at the wrong time", as a brawl or something went backstage - they had nothing to do with the scene whatsoever, and we were giving them points.
that had to stop. which is why i think we're where we are at today.
|
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|
|