Can someone explain the logic behind the "Keep Strong" note hurting the match rating?

[RocheBag]

I just don't get it. To me the trade off should be if you use "Keep Strong" the winner gains less and the loser loses less.

 

If a midcarder is going to beat a main eventer, of course the main eventer is still going to look strong. It would be insane if the mindcarder just destroyed him. So why does the main eventer being kept strong hurt the match? In every memorable upset victory I remember the bigger star still looked very strong.

 

Clearly I must be missing something so I'll ask the people who know more than I. What's the logic here? Thanks for any help!

[KrisKatana]

Theres a lot of stuff in the game thats there for "balance" reasons and not strictly simulation reasons. A squash match in real life doesn't devalue a title, but it does in the game ect.

[JMaestro]

I would look at keep strong as the win coming across much more like a fluke with the winner getting a lot less offence.

[ampulator]

When you artificially enforce certain workers have to look better, this particular worker benefits, but often at the match itself.

 

You ever watch matches that were one-sided versus matches that were 50/50? All other things being equal, 50/50 matches were more enjoyable. However, one-sided matches are meant to boost a particular worker.

[pat666]

Simply book ur keep strong segment anywhere but in the main event. Went fantastic in my wwe 04 game. For example,

Mr. Kennedy was just starting on my SD roster. My us champ was eddy guerrero. I made guerrero loose to kennedy after less than a month that kennedy Was on the roster. Booked them midcard in summerslam. Gave me a shitty rating, guerrero didnt loose that much pop. Kennedy gained alot (like went from 32 to 44 or something)

 

Didnt really affect my show.

Imo thats how we should use the «*keep strong*» note.

[RocheBag]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="pat666" data-cite="pat666" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="51332" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>Simply book ur keep strong segment anywhere but in the main event. Went fantastic in my wwe 04 game. For example,<p> Mr. Kennedy was just starting on my SD roster. My us champ was eddy guerrero. I made guerrero loose to kennedy after less than a month that kennedy Was on the roster. Booked them midcard in summerslam. Gave me a shitty rating, guerrero didnt loose that much pop. Kennedy gained alot (like went from 32 to 44 or something) </p><p> </p><p> Didnt really affect my show. </p><p> Imo thats how we should use the «*keep strong*» note.</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Yeah there are ways to get around it, I'm just trying to figure out why it works that way.</p>

[Vinsmoker]

<p>Keep Strong means that in a 6-man Tag-Team match Roman Reigns wasn't able to prevent Dean Ambrose being pinned, because he was fighting two other people on the outside of the ring.</p><p> </p><p>

Or it means he got pinned after all three oppoents hit their finisher on him, he still kicked out and then they had to hit a Tag-Team finisher to get the job done</p><p> </p><p>

The penalty that comes with "Keep Strong" or "Protect" is hardly noticeable in a good match either way, but it is there and it's constantly used IRL for future title contenders</p>

[WynterWarm12]

<p>I guess in a way you can look at it through intent in booking? When you go out of your way to book someone strong even though they're losing. Your focus is building around that mindset. Instead of focusing on how to get the winner over. You're making sure your bigger star isn't looking too weak.</p><p> </p><p>

In a normal, "Get them over through a great match." scenario. Let's say you do a Roman vs Lee singles match. If the intent is to have a star making performance for Lee. You may book it to be this back and forth, hoss fight. </p><p> </p><p>

Roman is still getting his stuff in naturally. But Keith is right there with him giving it back just as good. Lee wins, Roman didn't look like a chump because it was hard fought until the end. And Lee just went at it with one of the biggest stars in the company. That's a great look for him.</p><p> </p><p>

If you do the same match up, but spend too much energy in making Roman look strong against Lee. You still have Lee win. But the struggle and, "everything and the kitchen sink." comes into play. Lee has to throw his entire soul into keeping Roman down lol And hardly looks like he's on equal playing field. He wins, but it doesn't have the same impact if it felt like he was closer to Roman's abilities. </p><p> </p><p>

Roman gains very little because he's an already made man versus a guy who is trying to prove himself, but barely clinched victory. </p><p> </p><p>

That's one example. But I make up scenarios that way lol</p>

[Self]

<p>TEW judges things based on the theoretical 'ideal' match, and gives penalties to things that aren't ideal. The perfect match would be 50/50, with both guys giving their all and having the fans not knowing who will win. Keep Strong is the match at 70/30, more one-sided, more obvious that one wrestler is better than the other. It's not 'ideal'. So there's a penalty. </p><p> </p><p>

Don't be afraid of penalties. A lot of good booking doesn't provide the ideal greatest match ever. You eat the penalties to reap the benefits.</p>

[Gypsumstack]

<p>I usually only ever use Keep Strong when I want someone to lose without being pissed off about it. In my current TNA 2004 save that means The Sandman losing to anyone below him. This is what I assume the game intends for this note, as I could give less than a shit about Sandman, but want lower card guys like CM Punk, Abyss, etc. to suck up as much pop from him as I can before he quits. </p><p> </p><p>

Reading through this thread, however, got me thinking about a real life example and how the game would handle it. I'm thinking about the Undertaker vs. Jeff Hardy Ladder match for the title years ago on RAW (I think?). In TEW I would think you would run this match and give Hardy the Keep Strong note so he comes out looking like a champ even in a loss, but that would ding the match rating. In real life, that match was a damn good PPV match, and the fact it happened on free TV makes it even better. If you would book this match in TEW, would it be as memorable in the game world as it is in the real world?</p>

[Vinsmoker]

^ What you're looking for is "Open Match". A match where both wrestlers seems to be on the same level. It inevitable means that Well Known Jeff Hardy looks better, even though he lost to Major Star The Undertaker. "Keep Strong" would actually make him look better than the Undertaker

[thadian]

The only time I use it is in a Tag Team situation where I want to protect one of the two losers. This guy gets knocked off the apron for most of the match. Now instead of the fair match, fans basically get a handicapped match if Ol' Gimp would ever get up.

 

Or in a triple threat to protect the third guy.

[Self]

I usually only ever use Keep Strong when I want someone to lose without being pissed off about it. In my current TNA 2004 save that means The Sandman losing to anyone below him. This is what I assume the game intends for this note, as I could give less than a shit about Sandman, but want lower card guys like CM Punk, Abyss, etc. to suck up as much pop from him as I can before he quits.

 

Reading through this thread, however, got me thinking about a real life example and how the game would handle it. I'm thinking about the Undertaker vs. Jeff Hardy Ladder match for the title years ago on RAW (I think?). In TEW I would think you would run this match and give Hardy the Keep Strong note so he comes out looking like a champ even in a loss, but that would ding the match rating. In real life, that match was a damn good PPV match, and the fact it happened on free TV makes it even better. If you would book this match in TEW, would it be as memorable in the game world as it is in the real world?

 

I'd be more tempted to give that match an Open Match note than Keep Strong. Undertaker was beating Jeff to a pulp in that match. Jeff didn't look strong... at all... but you could definitely argue he looked competitive, with an even chance of winning given his history and particular skill set.

 

If it was booked without notes, Major Star Undertaker would have beaten his ass, maybe given Recognisable Jeff Hardy one moment of hope, then beat him soundly.

 

If it was booked with Jeff Kept Strong, he would have had most of the offence, beaten Undertaker's ass, then slipped on a banana peel at the end.

 

You don't really need Keep Strong if the loser is already 'beneath' the winner.

[RocheBag]

Keep Strong means that in a 6-man Tag-Team match Roman Reigns wasn't able to prevent Dean Ambrose being pinned, because he was fighting two other people on the outside of the ring.

 

Or it means he got pinned after all three oppoents hit their finisher on him, he still kicked out and then they had to hit a Tag-Team finisher to get the job done

 

The penalty that comes with "Keep Strong" or "Protect" is hardly noticeable in a good match either way, but it is there and it's constantly used IRL for future title contenders

 

Right so using your two examples, why would either of those things happening make the match worse?

[RocheBag]

TEW judges things based on the theoretical 'ideal' match, and gives penalties to things that aren't ideal. The perfect match would be 50/50, with both guys giving their all and having the fans not knowing who will win. Keep Strong is the match at 70/30, more one-sided, more obvious that one wrestler is better than the other. It's not 'ideal'. So there's a penalty.

 

Don't be afraid of penalties. A lot of good booking doesn't provide the ideal greatest match ever. You eat the penalties to reap the benefits.

 

Never thought of it like that. So booking a midcarder to beat a main eventer while keeping the main eventer strong may look more like the main eventer totally dominating and the midcarder just fluking into a win.

 

I was thinking of it like if I don't keep the main eventer strong, he would just get dominated by the midcarder which would make no sense.

[Vinsmoker]

Right so using your two examples, why would either of those things happening make the match worse?

 

Worse than what? Obviously any match where not all the competitors are the greatest wrestlers on the planet is going to not be as good as a match could possibly get.

 

You usually add things like "Keep Strong" to a match, to have a better match in the future. Imagine Daniel Bryan vs. AJ Styles having three matches.

 

The first one ends via flash pinfall, after Styles hit Bryan with a low blow behind the referee's back. Daniel Bryan lost the match, but he was kepts strong. The storyline gets heat and people want to see Daniel Bryan getting his revenge.

 

The next match has Daniel Bryan lose via DQ, because the referee saw the low blow this time. It protects Daniel Bryan, but obviously it's still not the best the match can be. There was a none-clean finish and AJ Styles didn't seem to be able to beat Bryan without cheating.

 

Then there is the grudge match. The storyline is very hot, both wrestlers go into the match with good momentum, since Daniel Bryan never lost clean and AJ Styles never lost period. They now have a match with a clean finish and neither man being made extraordinarily stronger or more protected than their position+skill would suggest. This match is on PPV and the company gains more pop from it.

 

You sacrifice short term high match ratings, for long term benefits overall. "Penalties" don't make a match bad. Penalties explain that the match can be even better in the future. Kazuchika Okada defeating Hiroshi Tanahashi would rightfully be treated as a short term loss. Long-term, however it was one of the best decisions NJPW ever made

[RocheBag]

Worse than what? Obviously any match where not all the competitors are the greatest wrestlers on the planet is going to not be as good as a match could possibly get.

 

You usually add things like "Keep Strong" to a match, to have a better match in the future. Imagine Daniel Bryan vs. AJ Styles having three matches.

 

The first one ends via flash pinfall, after Styles hit Bryan with a low blow behind the referee's back. Daniel Bryan lost the match, but he was kepts strong. The storyline gets heat and people want to see Daniel Bryan getting his revenge.

 

The next match has Daniel Bryan lose via DQ, because the referee saw the low blow this time. It protects Daniel Bryan, but obviously it's still not the best the match can be. There was a none-clean finish and AJ Styles didn't seem to be able to beat Bryan without cheating.

 

Then there is the grudge match. The storyline is very hot, both wrestlers go into the match with good momentum, since Daniel Bryan never lost clean and AJ Styles never lost period. They now have a match with a clean finish and neither man being made extraordinarily stronger or more protected than their position+skill would suggest. This match is on PPV and the company gains more pop from it.

 

You sacrifice short term high match ratings, for long term benefits overall. "Penalties" don't make a match bad. Penalties explain that the match can be even better in the future. Kazuchika Okada defeating Hiroshi Tanahashi would rightfully be treated as a short term loss. Long-term, however it was one of the best decisions NJPW ever made

 

To answer your first question - worse than it would've been without using "keep strong"

 

Again, I'm not worried about the penalties, I'm simply trying to look at the logic behind it.

 

The issue with your examples is of course that all of them are tainted wins or cheap wins. I cannot think of an example of someone winning clean, where the loser being kept strong has hurt the match quality.

[Teh_Showtime]

I would say the overkill main event trope falls into that category. Matches might be better if someone didn’t need to expend a double digit number of finishers in a match, but it’s done so that it paints the loser in the best possible light.

 

That’s before you even get into the bad/dirty finishes as well (which are not separate from keep strong notes).

[RocheBag]

I would say the overkill main event trope falls into that category. Matches might be better if someone didn’t need to expend a double digit number of finishers in a match, but it’s done so that it paints the loser in the best possible light.

 

That’s before you even get into the bad/dirty finishes as well (which are not separate from keep strong notes).

 

Yeah that's the best explanation I've heard so far. I was thinking they just look good. But if they are ahead of their opponent I guess they would look good anyway. So keep strong probably makes them appear comically good to the point it hurts your enjoyment a bit.

[Teh_Showtime]

I think Roman Reigns vs Brock Lesnar comes to mind. Their last main event at wrestlemania was comically long and Roman got put through all kinds of hell and it just kinda fell flat. Compare to their first WM match where it was more even (prior to the cash in), it was a much better match despite Roman being much less experienced at the time and almost certainly a better wrestler in the later match.

[RocheBag]

I think Roman Reigns vs Brock Lesnar comes to mind. Their last main event at wrestlemania was comically long and Roman got put through all kinds of hell and it just kinda fell flat. Compare to their first WM match where it was more even (prior to the cash in), it was a much better match despite Roman being much less experienced at the time and almost certainly a better wrestler in the later match.

 

Right yeah, makes sense.

[BrokenCycle]

Keep Strong is basically like watching a hockey game where Team A leads in all metrics-- shots, scoring chances, hits, possession-- but the score is tied and Team B scores in double overtime off a fluke goal. Team B won... but everyone knows they shouldn't have. It's a big wet fart.

[Makhai]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="RocheBag" data-cite="RocheBag" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="51332" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>I just don't get it. To me the trade off should be if you use "Keep Strong" the winner gains less and the loser loses less.<p> </p><p> If a midcarder is going to beat a main eventer, of course the main eventer is still going to look strong. It would be insane if the mindcarder just destroyed him. So why does the main eventer being kept strong hurt the match? In every memorable upset victory I remember the bigger star still looked very strong.</p><p> </p><p> Clearly I must be missing something so I'll ask the people who know more than I. What's the logic here? Thanks for any help!</p></div></blockquote><p> </p><p> Keep Strong is a very dangerous note. Because if you balance it wrong you can use it in every match to create overness out of thin air. So for balance reasons it needs to limit the gains of a win basically just as much as the loser is helped OR it needs to ding the match grade.</p>

[Gypsumstack]

^ What you're looking for is "Open Match". A match where both wrestlers seems to be on the same level. It inevitable means that Well Known Jeff Hardy looks better, even though he lost to Major Star The Undertaker. "Keep Strong" would actually make him look better than the Undertaker

 

I use "Open Match" for every match unless it is specifically a squash match. Am I using that note wrong?

 

Worse than what? Obviously any match where not all the competitors are the greatest wrestlers on the planet is going to not be as good as a match could possibly get.

 

You usually add things like "Keep Strong" to a match, to have a better match in the future. Imagine Daniel Bryan vs. AJ Styles having three matches.

 

The first one ends via flash pinfall, after Styles hit Bryan with a low blow behind the referee's back. Daniel Bryan lost the match, but he was kepts strong. The storyline gets heat and people want to see Daniel Bryan getting his revenge.

 

The next match has Daniel Bryan lose via DQ, because the referee saw the low blow this time. It protects Daniel Bryan, but obviously it's still not the best the match can be. There was a none-clean finish and AJ Styles didn't seem to be able to beat Bryan without cheating.

 

Then there is the grudge match. The storyline is very hot, both wrestlers go into the match with good momentum, since Daniel Bryan never lost clean and AJ Styles never lost period. They now have a match with a clean finish and neither man being made extraordinarily stronger or more protected than their position+skill would suggest. This match is on PPV and the company gains more pop from it.

 

You sacrifice short term high match ratings, for long term benefits overall. "Penalties" don't make a match bad. Penalties explain that the match can be even better in the future. Kazuchika Okada defeating Hiroshi Tanahashi would rightfully be treated as a short term loss. Long-term, however it was one of the best decisions NJPW ever made

 

Wow. In all my years playing TEW, I never once thought about using a flash pinfall together with a tainted win. Actually, I've only ever used it for a face getting a win. In my mind, I've booked many nut shot/roll-up finishes, but I've always just put tainted win as the note.

[adhodges94]

<p>Loads of good points here.</p><p> </p><p>

The way I see it:</p><p> </p><p>

Keep strong:</p><p>

Should be given to a worker who is booked to lose against a lower perception worker but you don't want them to look bad from it or be pissed</p><p> </p><p>

Open match:</p><p>

Should be used when you want a lower guy to lose to a higher guy but still look good</p>