When your best match isn't your main feud?

[FWPD]

What do you normally do in this scenario? I have James justice feuding with Champange Lover which will most likely be the best match of the night. My "main" feud for the title is Nicky Champion vs El Fuerza, which, while both guys have A* pop, will not match the in-ring work. That could throw the show rating off.

 

In this situation, do you guys normally put the best match last of the biggest match last?

[Greg McNeish]

I've gotten into "heated discussions" previously, regarding this, so I'll be brief. I've never been married to the idea that the World title (or equivelent) must always go on last. It hasn't been the case throughout the history of wrestling, and I see no reason why that should be any different in TEW. Whatever you think will send your fans home happiest, is what you should close out the show with.

[LoganRodzen]

What do you normally do in this scenario? I have James justice feuding with Champange Lover which will most likely be the best match of the night. My "main" feud for the title is Nicky Champion vs El Fuerza, which, while both guys have A* pop, will not match the in-ring work. That could throw the show rating off.

 

In this situation, do you guys normally put the best match last of the biggest match last?

 

Whatever match is going to be the best is what I put at the end. I'm with Greg on this one because if you look at just on example - WWF In Your House: Ground Zero in 1997 had Undertaker and HBK as the main event with Bret Hart vs The Patriot for the WWF Title as the pre-main event.

[sheepy]

As long as you build Lover / Justice up as though it is the main attraction then there's no reason you can't have it as the top match. If the Fueza / Champion feud is getting all the air time though then that should really go on as the main event.

[ampulator]

There's another way to go about this, but I'm not sure if this is a good idea.

 

Basically, you put your second worst or even worst match before Justice/Lover match, in hopes it lowers the grade of that match. It's dastardly way to do it,

[Linsolv]

In general, put your best match last. I made the mistake of booking a tournament title for an event once, and had mostly midcarders working it. Gave the finals the ME, with the WHC match getting the semi-main event. Semi-main got a 40, ME got an 18. Don't make mistakes like me.

[Bigpapa42]

Even having the Justice/Lover match "work the crowd" would bring that grade down...

 

I can understand both sides of the "world title match goes last" arguement. To my mind, it depends on the promotion, how the world title is treated, and the nature of the feuds. A SE promotion where the belt is more of a prop that "the best worker in the promotion", then I have less issue with. As well, if the secondary feud that is a major blood feud then it could make to have it on the event last, especially if the title match is a fairly straight-forward defense.

[LoganRodzen]

Even having the Justice/Lover match "work the crowd" would bring that grade down...

 

I can understand both sides of the "world title match goes last" arguement. To my mind, it depends on the promotion, how the world title is treated, and the nature of the feuds. A SE promotion where the belt is more of a prop that "the best worker in the promotion", then I have less issue with. As well, if the secondary feud that is a major blood feud then it could make to have it on the event last, especially if the title match is a fairly straight-forward defense.

 

That's how I look at it. Sometimes I have a main event feud for the World title that's really a "filler title defense" and a primary feud that has more heat for whatever reason. In a situation like that I would have the World title be the pre-main event.

[Remianen]

The best match goes on last for me, period, end of story.

 

However, I tend to put my top title on....a top worker so more often than not, the world title match IS the best match.

[Comradebot]

Unless there's major story implications, I tend to put a world title match last. If the guys feuding with it aren't good enough to put on a good main event, then clearly I'm doing something wrong to begin with. I'm not gonna min/max for the sake of min/maxing... with the case presented in this thread in USPW, both of those are worth Main Events... why bother putting on a SLIGHTLY better show (likely) with a match that, without major storyline implications, wouldn't likely be the main event over a title match in a real life USPW.

 

And by "other implications" I mean like... The Rock vs. Hulk Hogan SHOULD'VE been the Main Event. If Sam Strong were to come out of retirement for ONE NIGHT ONLY to face off against a now Main Eventing Nicky Champion... well... that might trump a world title match.

 

But earlier my two top matches for the PPV were going to be Mac'y Swoops (Swoop McCarthy) vs. Captain Wrestling II in a number one contender's match, and a RAW TV title match between Rahmel Goode and Kerry Wayne. Goode isn't all that, well, good really, so I thought the Swoops/CWII match would likely end up being better. That said, I still made the title match the main event. The result? Both matches actually netted a B, but the co-main event for contendership was actually better, and close to being a B+. Still gained popularity from the show, however, and even if I knew it'd likely be the better match it just didn't make sense from a story perspective to make it the main event.

[Remianen]

If the guys feuding with it aren't good enough to put on a good main event, then clearly I'm doing something wrong to begin with.

 

This is my view also. I don't tend to have too many Rocky Golden-esque champions.

[ampulator]

I think as some of us said before, the idea that promoters ALWAYS put the main title match last is bogus. They USUALLY do, but not ALWAYS. Even in the old-school promotions, they do the matches that get them the MONEY.

 

The reason why they usually had the titles matches last was because, most of the time, their best performers WERE in the title matches. But this isn't always the case (they have to keep fresh sometimes and test new performers), so they have to change it around.

[LoganRodzen]

This is my view also. I don't tend to have too many Rocky Golden-esque champions.

 

I do whatever I gotta do to get a guy over.

 

Spencer Spade held the WCW World title from June 2018 until April 2019 and probably half of his title defenses were pre-main event matches while Jay Chord was tearing it up in the main event with pretty much anybody. He was our top babyface but I couldn't have Chord vs Spade every single week. I ended up finding out they have great tag team chemistry by turning Spade heel and putting the belt back on Chord. Seems so long ago when this happened.

[Remianen]

I think as some of us said before, the idea that promoters ALWAYS put the main title match last is bogus. They USUALLY do, but not ALWAYS. Even in the old-school promotions, they do the matches that get them the MONEY.

 

Please show me where in this thread the assertion is made that the above is not the case. All I see is people stating how THEY do things, not how it 'should' be or 'how it is in reality'. I don't honestly care how it's done in reality (why play TEW if all I'm going to do is re-enact crap? That's what DVDs are for!).

 

To me, since I concern myself with title prestige, it's easier for me to maintain titles at their max with the strongest possible person holding them. Midcard and low level titles don't matter much to me (though tag team titles do) but my top title(s) are always going to be held by the types of workers who can drag a bag of dry mortar to a good to great match.

[Bigpapa42]

This is my view also. I don't tend to have too many Rocky Golden-esque champions.

 

Actually, TCW is a great example. You've basically got 3-4 workers at the start who are "good" enough and over to really make a great champion and put on great matches - Cornell, Vessey, Keith, and Minnesota. Tornado, Peak, The Machines, and Bach are skilled enough but don't really have the starting overness. RDJ, Hawkins, and Law aren't really skilled enough. They aren't bad, but they are a step below those top few guys. So that if you put the world title on them and aren't careful with who their challengers are, you can still end up with a mediocre match. Whereas the likes of Cornell, Vessey, etc can be putting on very good matches on the undercard against mediocre opponents, or great matches against better opponents. So you have only a few options of having a champion who isn't likely to be outshined.

 

Most promotions aren't lucky to even have 4 top caliber guys. So you may only only 2-3 and if you limit the title to those workers, you really limit what you can do.

[LoganRodzen]

Just to add about the Spade/Chord thing so it doesn't just seem random. I was booking Jay as the owner and having him put himself in better positions than anybody else. The fact he was main eventing was "his doing" because he believed he deserved to be in it whether he had a title or not. In the end he was able to buy Spade out after beating him for the World title. It concluded with Jay giving him The Million Dollar Championship (credit to ReapeR who made three different awesome belts) and forming an alliance. They've been the dominant power for the past year now.

 

I think Spade needs to get an "injury" soon and take a paid vacation. Spade vs Chord needs to happen again because while they were tagging Spencer learned a hell of a lot from Jay. I was lucky enough to have them bond over something and now they have a strong friendship. I guess it's karma finally paying off because the first thing I had to do when Jay Chord took over as owner back in 2014 - when Rip retired - was job Mean Jean Cattley (who is the oldest and best worker in the locker room from the beginning, a major asset lost) to the point where I had to fire him or let his contract run up. It was a goal and it sucked.

[ampulator]

Please show me where in this thread the assertion is made that the above is not the case. All I see is people stating how THEY do things, not how it 'should' be or 'how it is in reality'. I don't honestly care how it's done in reality (why play TEW if all I'm going to do is re-enact crap? That's what DVDs are for!).

 

To me, since I concern myself with title prestige, it's easier for me to maintain titles at their max with the strongest possible person holding them. Midcard and low level titles don't matter much to me (though tag team titles do) but my top title(s) are always going to be held by the types of workers who can drag a bag of dry mortar to a good to great match.

Well, some people in this forum have made this assertion before, that the title match goes least NO MATTER WHAT. Yeah... in promotions that want to end up broke.

 

Since TEW2010 is a simulator, it pretty much shows you what happens you don't put your matches on last.

[Guest codey]

For the most part, my title matches go on last. However, when the title isn't the main focus of the show, that's not the case. If I have another feud that I've built up more, or has more than world title implications, then that goes on last. I also run two smaller shows a month in addition to my big show, and those shows usually feature smaller storylines taking center stage, and those matches get put on last in that event.

[Comradebot]

Well, some people in this forum have made this assertion before, that the title match goes least NO MATTER WHAT. Yeah... in promotions that want to end up broke.

 

Since TEW2010 is a simulator, it pretty much shows you what happens you don't put your matches on last.

 

Yeah, in promotions that have a head booker that doesn't realize your champion needs to either be someone capable of carrying anyone to your better matches OR has an ample supply of challengers who can carry them to your better matches. This only becomes an issue when you give someone the belt who isn't talented enough to put on good matches on their own, and then not give him anyone to feud with who can also help carry him to awesome matches.

 

I aborted my original one year plan with RAW because of this. Originally, I planned for Montgomery Croft to be my champion on the final show of 2010. However, as entertaining and over as he is, his psychology probably needs to develop for a couple more years first.

 

Really, theres only a handful of workers (having got to know the company pretty well) that I truly trust to potentially have a run with the belt. And, really, if Kerry Wayne or Mac'y Swoops isn't champion for the next year or so, I'm doing a poor job of booking. Guess Molokai Milk, Harry Simonson, or even Echo OR, super outside chance, New Zealand Pit Bull and Mark Misery, might be able to pull it off... if they every got over enough. CWII almost has enough Psychology that I'd feel OK that he wouldn't get the "not enough psychology between both competitors" penalties.

 

NZPB, RAW champion someday??? I like the sound of pushing the 40 year old for no reason other than I like the guy and his Performance stats are great (in Australia.)

[Remianen]

Actually, TCW is a great example. You've basically got 3-4 workers at the start who are "good" enough and over to really make a great champion and put on great matches - Cornell, Vessey, Keith, and Minnesota. Tornado, Peak, The Machines, and Bach are skilled enough but don't really have the starting overness. RDJ, Hawkins, and Law aren't really skilled enough. They aren't bad, but they are a step below those top few guys. So that if you put the world title on them and aren't careful with who their challengers are, you can still end up with a mediocre match. Whereas the likes of Cornell, Vessey, etc can be putting on very good matches on the undercard against mediocre opponents, or great matches against better opponents. So you have only a few options of having a champion who isn't likely to be outshined.

 

Most promotions aren't lucky to even have 4 top caliber guys. So you may only only 2-3 and if you limit the title to those workers, you really limit what you can do.

 

Ah, but that's the key. Overness can be created out of thin air, just about. In-ring skill most certainly cannot (not counting the editor). So to me, it's always best to have workers who can go anchor the top tier while I build overness for those I want to join them.

 

When I built QAW for my mod, I used that exact formula. You have four workers who can 'go' (Grace, J.Ro, Suz, and Vixxen), one developmental type (Golden Delicious), one 'stepping stone into the main event' (Nina), and a main event level tag team (Michelle & Jaime). The upper midcard level is teeming with workers who are skilled but not really that over (Principessa, the Canadiennes, Tayla Martin, etc) with several others in development. That was the exact template I wanted to follow because it suits my typical booking style. It also creates the opportunity for a very fluid roster that is literally stacked, from top to bottom. If any of the 'big four' retires early, there are at least 4 people who can replace them within that month's notice.

 

I guess I look at things very much like a depth chart. If I have Peyton, Brady, Favre, and Brees on my roster, I'm not starting Alex Smith or David Garrard. I tend to prefer to throw the developmental worker(s) against the wall that is my champion rather than the other way around (throwing Tommy or Vessey or Keith at Rocky as champion).

[Bigpapa42]

Ah, but that's the key. Overness can be created out of thin air, just about. In-ring skill most certainly cannot (not counting the editor). So to me, it's always best to have workers who can go anchor the top tier while I build overness for those I want to join them.

 

Overness is easy to create, true. But using a performance-based product like TCW, it only helps so much. So even not considering overness, I would still only put Brent Hill and maybe Troy Tornado on that top level of talent. The rest are very good, but not quite on the same level of Cornell, Vessye, etc. So you basically have a group of 5-6 workers who can be "champions without reservation" in TCW, and a group of about 10 who could do it but need some degree of protection (less than Golden needs, but still some careful booking). Some of that second group may improve over time to that level, but its not a sure thing. So you end up with a small group you can choose from for a champion who will consistently deliver B+ to A* matches so you don't have to worry about undercard matches doing better than your title matches on a regular basis.

 

I'm not saying its wrong to focus your main title only on your most talented couple of guys. I just find that approach limiting. I like a more open approach. Not open to the point where I'm likely to put the belt on a less talented like Golden, but if I want to have the belt on RDJ, Hawkins, or Law, even though they won't pull down the grades like Cornell or Vessey will, I'll do it. It may require a bit of protection at times, but I like the flexibility.

[ampulator]

If you ask me, a performance=popularity promotion has the least limitations when it comes to who can be champion. If you entertainment or overness doesn't get you even more over, your in-ring skills will.

[Thomnipotent]

Psh. Merle O'Curle has been my ROF champion for nearly three years now, only losing the title every once in a while because he's asked for a low-level title run as part of his contract. As a result, I've been able to boost the title up to 100 prestige, which makes any title matches better. With that kind of bonus, why not put the match in the main event slot? It's the most important, so...

 

By doing this, I've been able to knock down 75-85 main events with frightening consistency. Worst case scenario, a match goes a little south and I net something between 65-75... still not bad for a regional company with 55-ish pop in the area.

[Sudo_Nym]

I see the belt as a tool. I like old-school type promotions; where I'm likely to have a combination of talented workers, and less-talented charismatic workers. Usually, the title goes to whoever can be trusted to carry the main event, so I can use him to build up the charismatic workers by having them in good matches. Occassionally, I get one that gets really popular, so I'll give him the belt to focus on building him more quickly. After some build, then the belt goes back to the talented guys, once the charismatic one has enough overness to cover his in-ring flaws.

 

I'm not sure how coherent that was, come to look over it...

[Master Gilmore]

I had a match in 05 between RDJ and Rick Law than actually won MOTY.