The star rating system has become the standardized method to critically assess professional wrestling matches for fans and pundits alike.
Popularized by the Wrestling Observer Newsletter founder and editor, Dave Meltzer, the system broadly evaluates matches based on the sum of their drama, action and storytelling.
Meltzer is a polarizing figure in his own right. Since 1982, the lifelong pro wrestling fan and historian has chronicled the business in the pages of his newsletter – doling out scores on a five-star scale. The idea being that an average match would receive two stars, establishing a baseline for further deviation.
It wasn’t until 1989, when a match between Ric Flair and Ricky Steamboat from a house show in Maryland, eclipsed Meltzer’s elusive five-star seal of approval. The occasion set a precedent for the boundless potential of the star rating system. It wasn’t until “Wrestle Kingdom 11” in 2017, when Kenny Omega and Kazuchika Okada replicated the feat.
Meltzer was enamored with their series of matches, awarding their three subsequent encounters six-and-a-quarter, six, and seven stars, respectively. The latter score became an intense source of debate amongst pro wrestling sycophants, questioning the veracity of Meltzer’s system.
Since then, Meltzer has awarded a staggering 78 matches with ratings exceeding five stars.
No one has been more deprecatory of Meltzer’s ratings than legendary manager Jim Cornette. Oddly enough, it was Cornette who helped devise the system, when he was still just a photographer. Cornette’s friend, Norman “Weasel” Dooley, similarly mused about professional wrestling in a newsletter of his own — based in Louisville — known as “Weasel’s World of Wrestling.”
Cornette suggested that Dooley use film critic Leonard Maltin’s four-star scale to similarly assess professional wrestling matches.
The ratings scale:
* “Wow, I couldn’t wait for that to be over.”
** “Well, that’s about what we’d expect.”
*** “That was pretty fu–in’ good.”
**** “Holy s—, they tore the fu–in’ house down.”
Two years later, their system was shattered when the two sat ringside for a no-disqualification match in the Mid-South Coliseum, between Jerry Lawler and Terry Funk. Both men were mesmerized by the sheer savagery of the affair, and Dooley turned to “Weasel’s World of Wrestling,” canonizing Lawler and Funk’s epic as the first five-star match.
One year later, Meltzer began publishing his own newsletter, restyling Dooley’s star-rating system as his own. Since then, star ratings are ubiquitous in professional wrestling —becoming the preferred qualitative metric to evaluate matches.
The practice has generated a whirlwind of conversation unto itself. Publications like TheSportster and WhatCulture are awash with articles dedicated to Meltzer’s star ratings, dissecting his evaluations at face value. Within the dressing rooms, pro-wrestlers and promoters alike have been reading his newsletter for decades.
In his first autobiography, Have a Nice Day: A Tale of Blood and Sweatsocks, Mick Foley revealed that WCW hired him, contrary to their better judgement, based on Meltzer’s musings of his work on the independent circuit.
For better or worse, the practice has irrevocably altered our perception of professional wrestling matches. The focus has shifted from who wins or loses, to the strength of the performance. Chris Jericho has famously proposed that professional wrestling should become an Olympic sport, where matches are scored by judges — akin to figure skating.
The blame doesn’t solely lie on Meltzer, though. He wasn’t the first pundit to rate matches, and he certainly won’t be the last. Like Meltzer, I, too, have appropriated the method, ascribing star ratings to every match that I review.
I’ve developed a philosophy of my own:
* Bad
** Average
**½ Mildly Entertaining
*** Good. Worth seeking out.
***½ Very Good.
**** Great. Worth rewatching.
****½ Match of the Year Contender.
****¾ Nearly Perfect.
***** Perfect. Arguably the greatest match of all time.
In my mind, the elusive five-star seal of approval is a sacred distinction that denotes utter perfection. It’s the upper limit of the scale, where the margins of separation are thin.
In 2025 alone, I’ve previously handed out four five-star reviews:
| DATE | MATCH | Promotion | EVENT | RATING |
| 3/9 | Will Ospreay vs. Kyle Fletcher | AEW | Revolution | ***** |
| 4/27 | Saya Kamitani vs. Tam Nakano | STARDOM | All-Star Grand Queendom 2025 | ***** |
| 5/25 | “Hangman” Adam Page vs. Will Ospreay | AEW | Double or Nothing | ***** |
| 7/12 | Jon Moxley vs. “Hangman” Adam Page | AEW | All In: Texas | ***** |
Over the past few months, I’ve embarked on a podcasting journey called “Rewind-Mania,” where I explore the history of professional wrestling, one match at a time. Naturally, my cohost and I have tackled some of the greatest matches in professional wrestling history, like Sting and Vader’s firefight at “Starrcade ‘92” or Ric Flair’s epic “I Quit” match with Terry Funk at “Clash of the Champions IX.”
The exercise has caused me to reexamine my scale and its methodology — in keeping with a broader perspective.
So, I’ve taken my best matches master list to task and revised some of the scores, adjusting for inflation. In the process, I’ve had to reassess those four aforementioned five-star matches.
Do they still stand up to the five-star seal of approval? Yes and no.
| DATE | MATCH | Promotion | EVENT | RATING |
| 3/9 | Will Ospreay vs. Kyle Fletcher | AEW | Revolution | ****¾ |
| 4/27 | Saya Kamitani vs. Tam Nakano | STARDOM | All-Star Grand Queendom 2025 | ***** |
| 5/25 | “Hangman” Adam Page vs. Will Ospreay | AEW | Double or Nothing | ****½ |
| 7/12 | Jon Moxley vs. “Hangman” Adam Page | AEW | All In: Texas | ***** |
Saya Kamitani and Tam Nakano’s match at “All Star Grand Queendom 2025” will stand the test of time, as arguably the greatest match in World Wonder Ring STARDOM history. Likewise, “Hangman” Adam Page’s triumph at “All In: Texas” was a magnificent end to Jon Moxley’s reign of terror, and a masterstroke for the Khan family’s adolescent promotion.
They are now the lone five-star matches of 2025.
Moving forward, expect more modest scores from this column. “Hangman” and MJF’s title match at “Forbidden Door” was tremendous, but it only received four-and-a-quarter stars.
That’s because, contrary to Meltzer’s belief, four-and-a-quarter is a high-water mark.
Professional wrestling is inherently subjective. Unfortunately, that means biases are equally as inherent. The marriage between the fan and their favorite performer, match, or promotion is unlike any other medium of entertainment. Meltzer’s star rating system opened Pandora’s Box, ascribing numerical value to something that’s impossible to uniformly qualify.
Maybe that’s why this corner of the internet has groaned under the combined weight of the conversation. Tumbling down the quagmire of debating star ratings is the professional wrestling’s fan equivalent the rabbit hole. Logical spirals out into the ether, twisted by the gravity of bias.
This is just my gravity.
Support AFP
Share
