All Elite Wrestling

[Mr. Nerfect]

Saw Meltzer or Alvarez trying to lie about AEW beating Raw again, then the numbers for this week came out and — no surprise — it turns out it definitely didn’t.

[Emperor Smeat]

You do realize how math and number comparisons when you don't have two equal values works right?

When they and everyone else who noticed what happened did that direct comparison, they took what was the most recent shows for both companies. In that case, it was this week's RAW and last week's Dynamite since this week's Dynamite hadn't aired yet.

Same would happen if you wanted to make a direct comparison with RAW and Smackdown since this week's SD hasn't aired yet.

Now that AEW had their show for the week, this week's AEW didn't beat this week's RAW but that doesn't mean the previous comparison was wrong.

[xrodmuc316]

Originally Posted by Emperor Smeat You do realize how math and number comparisons when you don't have two equal values works right? When they and everyone else who noticed what happened did that direct comparison, they took what was the most recent shows for both companies. In that case, it was this week's RAW and last week's Dynamite since this week's Dynamite hadn't aired yet. Same would happen if you wanted to make a direct comparison with RAW and Smackdown since this week's SD hasn't aired yet. Now that AEW had their show for the week, this week's AEW didn't beat this week's RAW but that doesn't mean the previous comparison was wrong.

That is not how week's work though. There is no configuration that charts the start of the week on Wednesday and the end of the week on Tuesday.

They cherry picked a number they did in the previous week, and bragged about beating Raw for 2 days, then proceeded to lose 19% of their viewers from the week before. It was the same week that Raw lost 12% of the viewers from the previous week.

So no, AEW did not beat Raw, AEW lost a bigger percent of their audience than the Raw show they were claiming they beat for 2 days.

Losing 12% from the week before vs losing 19% from the week before. That is what happened.

[Emperor Smeat]

If your going to compare RAW's show from Monday on a Tuesday like the Observer did and everyone else did, then you only have AEW's show from last week to do a direct comparison with. In that case, last week's AEW beat this week's RAW.

Now that AEW's show for the week aired, if you do a comparison on Thursday for most recent shows between the two, then both shows will be from this week. In that case, RAW beat AEW for this week.

Same if you do any comparisons with this week's Smackdown before Saturday since you have to use last week's numbers as a basis. That comparison then changes after Saturday's numbers come out.

[xrodmuc316]

Originally Posted by Emperor Smeat If your going to compare RAW's show from Monday on a Tuesday like the Observer did and everyone else did, then you only have AEW's show from last week to do a direct comparison with. In that case, last week's AEW beat this week's RAW. Now that AEW's show for the week aired, if you do a comparison on Thursday for most recent shows between the two, then both shows will be from this week. In that case, RAW beat AEW for this week. Same if you do any comparisons with this week's Smackdown before Saturday since you have to use last week's numbers as a basis. That comparison then changes after Saturday's numbers come out.

Last week's Raw beat last week's AEW.
This week's Raw beat this week's AEW.

They can spin that bullshit all they want, but it doesn't change the fact that they didn't beat Raw in the weekly ratings.

Bragging otherwise is everything that is wrong with AEW. They aren't anywhere near as good as they think they are.

[Emperor Smeat]

In the key demo, last week's AEW show beat this week's RAW which was the whole purpose of the comparisons to begin with at the time.

AEW had a 0.45 while RAW had a 0.41 for their most recent shows at the time.

Your percentages stuff falls apart as a claim to prove they were spinning BS since your comparing this week's RAW with this week's AEW which they were not doing because they didn't have the numbers for AEW's show at the time since it was Tuesday.

[xrodmuc316]

Originally Posted by Emperor Smeat In the key demo, last week's AEW show beat this week's RAW which was the whole purpose of the comparisons to begin with at the time. AEW had a 0.45 while RAW had a 0.41 for their most recent shows at the time.

But it didn't.

On Monday the Browns scored 42 points. The week before the Ravens scored 34 points.

Did the Browns beat the Ravens on Monday? No you say, the scores have to be in the same week you say?!?!? That's how it works you say?!?!? SHOCKING!

Maybe a 24 hour ban coming my way again for being mean to everybody's favorite AEW by not going along with their bullshit

[xrodmuc316]

Originally Posted by Emperor Smeat Your percentages stuff falls apart as a claim to prove they were spinning BS since your comparing this week's RAW with this week's AEW which they were not doing because they didn't have the numbers for AEW's show at the time since it was Tuesday.

I'm pretty sure that's what I said, they cherry picked the previous week's rating when they lost to the previous week's Raw, then said they beat the current week's Raw, even though their current week's show ALSO lost to the current week's Raw...

[Damian Rey 2.0]

Smeat, please save yourself the trouble and don't argue in circles.

[Emperor Smeat]

Originally Posted by xrodmuc316 But it didn't. On Monday the Browns scored 42 points. The week before the Ravens scored 34 points. Did the Browns beat the Ravens on Monday? No you say, the scores have to be in the same week you say?!?!? That's how it works you say?!?!? SHOCKING! Maybe a 24 hour ban coming my way again for being mean to everybody's favorite AEW by not going along with their bullshit

That football comparison makes no sense at all since Browns went directly head-to-head against the Ravens which would be more like AEW vs. NXT and not AEW vs. RAW for that week's game.

What the Ravens or Browns did the previous week has no bearing on that head-to-head game.

[Bad News Gertner]

Wait, people get banned here besides Heyman?

[#1-norm-fan]

I love when xrod attempts an analogy. It shines a brighter light on just how badly he’s missing the point being made to him. It’s hilarious.

[screech]

Originally Posted by #1-wwf-fan I love when xrod attempts an analogy. It shines a brighter light on just how badly he’s missing the point being made to him. It’s hilarious.

He does such a great job exposing himself as a fucking idiot lol

[#1-norm-fan]

The smug vibe that came with that clearly ridiculous football analogy...

I’m picturing him kicking his feet up and thinking “CHECKMATE!” after hitting “post” and it just makes it better.

[xrodmuc316]

Originally Posted by Emperor Smeat What the Ravens or Browns did the previous week has no bearing on that head-to-head game.

Exactly, the week before has no bearing on this week.

Raw beat AEW last week.
Raw beat AEW this week.

Fantasy comparing different week's does not mean AEW beat Raw for 2 days until they lost 19% of their viewers.

It means AEW lost to Raw.

[#1-norm-fan]

Holy fuck, he’s doubling down on it.

[xrodmuc316]

This dude knows I don't read his posts, but I still see a blocked post from him after every post I make. Somebody tell him to get off my nuts already smh

[#1-norm-fan]

Lol dipshit’s still trying to pretend he can’t see my posts even after getting caught.

The lack of awareness and logic is insane.

[xrodmuc316]

LOL AGAIN?!?!?

This dudes post count would be like 5 if he didn't reply to everything I post!

[#1-norm-fan]

It’s not going away. It stings. Every time you read my post and have to pretend you didn’t because the other option is admitting you’re wrong... you die a little inside. Do the right thing. You don’t have to keep embarrassing yourself. It’s not too late.

If you can read this, mention your nuts.

[#1-norm-fan]

Now that you’ve confirmed you can see my posts...

xrodmuc316... I am officially challenging you to a real fight.

[#1-norm-fan]

xrod seems to have gotten cold feet after my challenge and deleted his post acknowledging that he was reading my posts.

I’d like to request that post be un-deleted.

[xrodmuc316]

Originally Posted by #1-wwf-fan Now that you’ve confirmed you can see my posts... xrodmuc316... I am officially challenging you to a real fight.

Yes, I do click "View Post" to see what you have wrote most of the time. Mostly when there is more than one post, but usually it is the same stuff. You swear, you call me names, but I never see the point.

Disagree with me, argue with me, great. Am I sarcastic and smug, guilty. What I don't do is insult other posters directly because it does not accomplish anything. It's why I have your posts ignored. It's not because you are a bad poster, but if there is no chance of discussion without getting cussed out, again what is the point?

As for a real fight, I'll concede. I'm not much of a fighter, more of a pacifist. Maybe it's why I don't throw personal insults around, I'm mostly trying to not get punched in the face.

[Tonya Harding]

My Pussy is All Elite

[#1-norm-fan]

Originally Posted by xrodmuc316 Yes, I do click "View Post" to see what you have wrote most of the time.

[#1-norm-fan]

Also, 2-0

[xrodmuc316]

Originally Posted by #1-wwf-fan

[Tonya Harding]

I would let Cody Rhodes fuck me with a crowbar

[#1-norm-fan]

But seriously, xrod. If you’d like to discuss why your football analogy was bad, I promise not to call you names. You gotta actually read what’s being said to you and be open to acknowledging flaws in your points though.

And if you’d like to discuss Cody Rhodes fucking you with a crowbar, I know a lady.

[xrodmuc316]

Originally Posted by #1-wwf-fan But seriously, xrod. If you’d like to discuss why your football analogy was bad, I promise not to call you names. You gotta actually read what’s being said to you and be open to acknowledging flaws in your points though. And if you’d like to discuss Cody Rhodes fucking you with a crowbar, I know a lady.

It was purposefully supposed to be bad, to illustrate that comparing one week to another didn't make sense other than as a way to brag about something falsely.

Dynamite is a better show then Raw, more good and less bad. They should just take that Win.

But they just can't help themselves. If ratings are down for Raw 12% from the previous week, AEW shouldn't use that to brag, because when they themselves lose 19% of their viewers in the same week, they come across badly.

[#1-norm-fan]

No. You think the analogy is bad in a different way than how the analogy is ACTUALLY bad. It’s bad because you’re comparing two things that aren’t comparable. Smeat already brought this up.

You’re saying “You can’t compare one week’s show with another week’s show because that’s like comparing a football team’s score one week to their opponent’s score in another week.” But it’s not. There’s a direct competition there. If you want to make that analogy with AEW vs NXT, go ahead. It KINDA works there because they are actually directly battling each other for viewers head-to-head in the same time slot. Just like two football teams are actually directly battling each other for points. There’s a direct effect being imposed by one side onto the other. That’s why your “The Ravens scored less points the week before so does that mean they lost?” argument was nonsensical.

The days between two shows is trivial. It’s possible for the latest episode of Raw to have lost to the latest episode of AEW. It’s also possible for the latest episode of AEW to then lose to the latest episode of Raw. Who cares how we designate what TECHNICALLY begins and ends a “week” by definition? It has no baring on the discussion.

And on a personal note, I think the main point should be that whether you wanna count Sunday as the beginning if the week, Wednesday as the beginning of the week, Friday as the beginning of the week, etc... The fact that there’s any week-long span where you can find any non-WWE wrestling show beating any WWE wrestling show in any demo is nuts. WWE should have such an insurmountable lead at this point that discussing technicalities based on when a week ACTUALLY begins and ends shouldn’t even be happening.

[xrodmuc316]

Originally Posted by #1-wwf-fan No. You think the analogy is bad in a different way than how the analogy is ACTUALLY bad. It’s bad because you’re comparing two things that aren’t comparable. Smeat already brought this up. You’re saying “You can’t compare one week’s show with another week’s show because that’s like comparing a football team’s score one week to their opponent’s score in another week.” But it’s not. There’s a direct competition there. If you want to make that analogy with AEW vs NXT, go ahead. It KINDA works there because they are actually directly battling each other for viewers head-to-head in the same time slot. Just like two football teams are actually directly battling each other for points. There’s a direct effect being imposed by one side onto the other. That’s why your “The Ravens scored less points the week before so does that mean they lost?” argument was nonsensical. The days between two shows is trivial. It’s possible for the latest episode of Raw to have lost to the latest episode of AEW. It’s also possible for the latest episode of AEW to then lose to the latest episode of Raw. Who cares how we designate what TECHNICALLY begins and ends a “week” by definition? It has no baring on the discussion. And on a personal note, I think the main point should be that whether you wanna count Sunday as the beginning if the week, Wednesday as the beginning of the week, Friday as the beginning of the week, etc... The fact that there’s any week-long span where you can find any non-WWE wrestling show beating any WWE wrestling show in any demo is nuts. WWE should have such an insurmountable lead at this point that discussing technicalities based on when a week ACTUALLY begins and ends shouldn’t even be happening.

Fair points, it was an exaggerated comparison. If comparing shows that aired different weeks is apples to oranges, the NFL comparison is more apples to something far different than another fruit.

Calendars almost universally go from Sunday to Saturday. The argument can also be made that the week starts on Mondays, because the weekend ends with Sundays. This is how Nielsen defines their weekly ratings, Monday to Sunday.

When you say who cares how "we" designate a week, I take that as we here, posters on TPWW. That is not my issue with the situation. My issue is AEW personal, and writers like Alvarez and Meltzer who clearly have an agenda, for the first time ever hyping up a previous week rating in comparison to a current week rating just because it is a more favorable outcome.

I made another ridiculous comparison in the actual ratings thread how WCW Thunder in 2000 outdrew Dynamite. Of course comparing a show 20 years ago isn't a fair comparison, but if the parameters are set that we can pick a show from another week to use as a victory, then it suggest any previous week is fair game.

Last week's Raw beat last week's Dynamite. This week's Raw beat this week's Dynamite. An episode of Dynamite had a higher demo rating than an episode of Raw. All of that is 100% the truth.

What is false is for them to use Nielsen Ratings to say they beat Raw in the demos this week, because they aren't following the guidelines of what the week is composed of (Monday-Sunday) set by the company who's weekly ratings they are referring to.

They know what the weekly ratings report is. They know there is no Wedsesday to Tuesday weekly rankings. It is a false narrative they are pushing because they can't help but to schill and make themselves feel important at every turn.

[rez]

Originally Posted by xrodmuc316 Fair points, it was an exaggerated comparison. If comparing shows that aired different weeks is apples to oranges, the NFL comparison is more apples to something far different than another fruit. Calendars almost universally go from Sunday to Saturday. The argument can also be made that the week starts on Mondays, because the weekend ends with Sundays. This is how Nielsen defines their weekly ratings, Monday to Sunday. When you say who cares how "we" designate a week, I take that as we here, posters on TPWW. That is not my issue with the situation. My issue is AEW personal, and writers like Alvarez and Meltzer who clearly have an agenda, for the first time ever hyping up a previous week rating in comparison to a current week rating just because it is a more favorable outcome. I made another ridiculous comparison in the actual ratings thread how WCW Thunder in 2000 outdrew Dynamite. Of course comparing a show 20 years ago isn't a fair comparison, but if the parameters are set that we can pick a show from another week to use as a victory, then it suggest any previous week is fair game. Last week's Raw beat last week's Dynamite. This week's Raw beat this week's Dynamite. An episode of Dynamite had a higher demo rating than an episode of Raw. All of that is 100% the truth. What is false is for them to use Nielsen Ratings to say they beat Raw in the demos this week, because they aren't following the guidelines of what the week is composed of (Monday-Sunday) set by the company who's weekly ratings they are referring to. They know what the weekly ratings report is. They know there is no Wedsesday to Tuesday weekly rankings. It is a false narrative they are pushing because they can't help but to schill and make themselves feel important at every turn.

that's a lot of words for no one who gives a fuck

[#1-norm-fan]

Originally Posted by xrodmuc316 I made another ridiculous comparison in the actual ratings thread how WCW Thunder in 2000 outdrew Dynamite. Of course comparing a show 20 years ago isn't a fair comparison, but if the parameters are set that we can pick a show from another week to use as a victory, then it suggest any previous week is fair game.

It doesn’t suggest that. It suggests that it’s fair to compare two shows that aired within 5 days of another. Not just “another week”. There wasn’t a huge, massive change to the medium of television in that 5 days. There was in that 20 years since Thunder though.

You’re admitting it’s ridiculous to compare the two situations but then your conclusion is basically “Might as well pick ANY previous week...” The reason the comparison is ridiculous is the same reason your conclusion is ridiculous.

[xrodmuc316]

Originally Posted by #1-wwf-fan It doesn’t suggest that. It suggests that it’s fair to compare two shows that aired within 5 days of another. Not just “another week”. There wasn’t a huge, massive change to the medium of television in that 5 days. There was in that 20 years since Thunder though. You’re admitting it’s ridiculous to compare the two situations but then your conclusion is basically “Might as well pick ANY previous week...” The reason the comparison is ridiculous is the same reason your conclusion is ridiculous.

It is not that I think using Thunder is a legitimate comparison, it is that I do not think claiming a weekly ratings victory and celebrating when the shows were in separate weeks means what they are portraying it to be.

Comparing weekly ratings from different years and claiming a Thunder win is an exaggerated ridiculous comparison. It is more ridiculous than comparing weekly ratings from different weeks. The point was to maximize the absurdity to demonstrate that I do not believe AEW should be claiming they beat Raw in the weekly ratings based on shows that did not air during the same Nielsen week. They are bending the data to fit the narrative they want to tell.

It is factually incorrect that they beat Raw in the weekly demo ratings because the shows aired in different weeks. Not how I define weeks, how Nielsen defines weeks. Using Nielsen ratings but ignoring Nielsen parameters is illogical unless they are cherry picking the data to portray the end result they want.

[#1-norm-fan]

This is an odd thing to harp on. They’re using Nielsen’ ratings because it’s the only method of gauging TV ratings. They’re “ignoring” Nielsen’s week parameters because why the hell should they care about the week parameters? Nielsen uses it for their own organization purposes. That’s it. It’s not done to lay down the law lest someone dare compare a show to another show days later that fell under a different week.

Is it really just the wording that you’re bothered by? If they just said “Last Wednesday’s Dynamite out-performed last night’s Raw in the key demo.” would you be fine with that?

[Emperor Smeat]

Nielsen doesn't really use a weekly system for their ratings outside of social media activity and even that was a very recent addition.

Nielsen only tracks individual days for TV ratings so to them, it doesn't really matter when a TV week starts.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Television ratings are compared to the same week’s content. AEW has never beaten Raw. Stop being disingenuous.

As soon as I saw Raw’s record low number I knew AEW would be doing worse. As Raw goes, so does the industry.

[Emperor Smeat]

If that was the case then nobody would be talking about ratings until after Saturday since that's the end of a regular week.

If your going to talk about ratings after a show ends and you want to compare it with a different show that hasn't aired yet for that particular week, then you take what was their most recent show for the comparison. That comparison is also valid since its still comparing shows that have aired within a 7-day week period.

Once that different show airs their new show for the week, then you make a new comparison since the data is now different.

On Tuesday, AEW's most recent show at the time beat WWE RAW's most recent show in the key demo. On Thursday, RAW's most recent show beat AEW's most recent show in the key demo.

[screech]

Smeat doing a great job laying this out very plainly for simple-minded xrod.