>>13201726That's how averages work, you sillybily. cagematch show rating is the average rating of the rated matches, match rate is the average of the average rating for the said match. Whether you apply weight to amount of votes per match is statistically insignificant.
What the real issue is that forever online troglodytes, and Tony apparently,thinking the rating is any way significant or an actual measurement of how good a match really is, when it's only a indicator of a trend, median and mean. Worst of all, based on a minuscule part of the audience that even know how to find Cagematch.
Then have to you take into the account the diluting of peaks from averaging, where in actuality, it's close to impossible to get that perfect anything score in any rating system, in cagematch or movie review sites. The only information you get from cagematch ratings if the match was good based on the opinion of a few people pooling up the spew out their opinion on the things, but how valueable is that really?
Even in the most optimal and favorable situation: Let's say you got a whopping 1000 ratings and a statistical anomaly that everyone voted it a perfect 10/10, you still sampling a 1000 wannabe metlzers out of whatever show you get, around 400k watched Collision. Oh great, 0,0025 percent of the audience rated this shit the best thing since sliced bread. Big woof. How many shirts and tickets did they buy? About one each if even that. Following that logic there is basically no value in the wrestling business or any other entertainment to cater to workrate smark opinions because that is not what butters the bread long term. What you can infer is that if you constantly sell tickets like ass, but your matches ratings are top, then you are catering to a niche
That is not the same as saying people shouldn't ask for better quality in matches but the true voting happens by wallets in the grand scheme of things.
