How do you define "main event"?

[The 1-2-3 Killam]

Main: chief in size, extent, or importance; principal; leading

Event: something that happens or is regarded as happening; an occurrence, especially one of some importance.

Not that we really needed to define the words "main" and "event", but there you have it. The main event is the most important match on the card. Being in the final spot on the show dictates importance. Therefor, the final match of the night is the main event.

The problem we all run into is, we all see difference matches as the most important. There are people that think the WWE Championship is super prestigious, and should be the "main event" in every card its defended at. There are others that would say, obviously, John Cena vs. Brock Lesnar is a more important, higher drawing encounter.

Point is, the last match is the main event. And despite heavy criticism, I happen to think WWE does a solid job choosing which of their matches should be the main, main event, the majority of the time. In fact, it should speak to their success that they have so many matches - usually a Cena match, the WWE title match, and the World title match - that people argue over. You'll find a lot of people that complain about CM Punk's lack of main event exposure in 2012, but I personally think WWE made the right call almost every single time.

 

[lil bitch Kid]

The main event is suppose to be the main reason people are there watching the show, and everything else before hand is more like bonus entertainment that can still be selling points for the show.

Now what makes the main event the main event? Well it has to have multiple criteria to make it that. It can't be something random thrown together, it has to have meaning to it, and by meaning it has to have some sort of significance and/or back story that will intrigue the crowd and audience to build anticipation for the match. It also has to have legit superstars that have made a name for themselves, and aren't mid to low card workers. Why would we wait 3 hours to see a main event of Brodus Clay vs Drew McIntyre? Now if we have a championship in there, that will add for even more hype for the match. With that being said I truly believe that the WWE Championship should be the main story of PPVs with the exception of matches like Cena vs Rock or The Royal Rumble. Lastly I believe that it should have that big time feel to it. It shouldn't just be any old match, it should be equivalent to the Sunday/Monday Night Football Games that is presented at prime time and is the big match up. Now everyone will probably say why aren't you comparing it to the Superbowl? Well, I was thinking the main events for Raw's and secondary PPVs. The bigger PPVs such as The Royal Rumble, SummerSlam, Survivor Series, and Wrestlemania should be even bigger then that much like the Superbowl, much more hype and anticipation compared to the other PPVs. It should also leave the audience to want more at the end or end a rivalry or storyline that has been going on for awhile.

And I would like to end this to say that WWE has been quite lackluster with this whole main event feel since Extreme Rules, and hopefully the Road to Wrestlemania will be much better programming.

I agree with most of what you're saying, however, the probolem is that what draws you to a show might not be what draws others. I know that you mean that the show is centered to the majority and that's where the E needs to make their decisions, and look closely at their targets. I'll give you an example from myself: At Mania 20, most pure wrestling fans would pine for Angle vs Eddie. I was a huge Angle mark, but really, I was never a big Eddie fan. Now, there was NO WAY HBK and HHH take a back seat even with Benoit in the match, and really, they shouldn't have. But if I look at other PPVs during Eddie's run with the title, I wouldn't have refered to any as THE main event. I would want to watch RVD's matches over Eddie's on virtually any show. It's about personal tastes in the end, really.

 

[thebarber]

The main event is the LAST MATCH on the card. Just because the match gets outshone by somebody earlier on the card doesn't make that match the main event. Savage vs Steamboat at Mania 3 was the best match on the card, but it wasnt the main event.

Traditionally the main event is the final match, plain and simple

 

[ThePrawnCurry]

Whichever match goes on last has more to do with ego's and the weight of merchandise sales.

when bothe Eddie and Benoit captured titles at Mania, they were imo both main events.

hell, when Andre was on the card, a significant draw would have been just to see him walking to the ring.


the same nowadays with Rocky and Bret.

 

[GameOver]

Main Event is simply the match in the case of fighting sports/entertainment that they marketed the most for a given night and assumedly is what the majority of people pay to see.

ie as above Andre vs Hogan was the main event of a generation. 93000+ people turned up and millions tuned in globally to witness that match so for that night it was the Main Event, wasn't necessarily the best "match" but it was the Main Attraction. and really any PPV match involving Hogan was always gonna be the Main Event at that time since he was biggest draw of the 80's-mid 90's

ofcourse in the current era there wasn't room for just 1 main event since there was a split brand and twice the opportunities for crowd drawing matches, however what WWE or TNA management declare as there Main Events for the night don't necessarily reflect what the people are really paying to see, ie Undertakers streak matches are the main event of Mania not any other match IMO and yet invariably one of the world titles will go on last as the Main Event.

 

[FlairFan2003]

On a big show/PPV there are usually two or three matches that have similair high stakes and great build. I would still say that the last match is the one percieved by WWE as the biggest, although if it is close between the matches in terms of importance then the last match is the one with either the most fan friendly ending or an ending that is significant to storylines moving forward.

At WM 18 everyone talks about how Hogan-Rock stole the show, fact is that match in terms of pre bout hype and build was about even with Taker-Flair & HHH-Jericho, this is when we had a unified WWE/WCW Champion and Trips was making his dramatic return after his quad injury. Actually, the build for Taker-Flair may have been the best of the three. I doubt WWE saw the potential for the crowd reaction to Hogan, especially since he was coming in as a heel, and definately in terms of match quality one would think HHH-Jericho would trump anything involving Hogan, therefore it made sense to book the World Title Match last. The fact that Hogan-Rock made such an impact on the event is really a credit to the two of them but the match placement made sense.

At WM 24 there were reports Flair turned down the last spot, saying it should go to someone who will still be wrestling. Due to the emotional nature of his bout however you couldnt book anything big directly after it, the crowd would potentially get drained and not pay proper attention. Likewise, since this was WrestleMania, the most watched show of the year, they opted to go with the major match that would have a fan friendly ending (Taker over Edge) rather than the heavily promoted Three Way Dance for the title pitting the company's biggest star of today (Cena) against one of it's most popular legends (HHH) and one of the most over villains in the company (Orton).

More often than not picking match slots this way, rather than just arbitrarily going from least to most important, helps the flow and audience participation for the event. Typically at big shows like WM non wrestlers may get a significant spot but they dont get the main event spot (McMahon did not take the last match in his appearances vs HBK or Hogan, nor did he take it at Royal Rumble 02 vs Flair, although in each case there was significant hype and build going into the match and it was marketed as one of the biggest draws on the card).

Essentially it's the same way singers and bands put together song lists for concerts. You dont just start out with random songs people are not familair with, move into minor hits, then close in succession with your biggest sellers. Typically a singer starts out the early portion of the show mixing lesser known songs and a few hits together, often up tempo to build on the pre show enthusiasm of the crowd. They may segue into newer material or more diverse song selections in the middle, mixing in a few well known numbers to keep the audience attention, then close with more uptempo material to get the audience adrenaline up, setting up for a couple of big hits the crowd will enjoy in the close. The concert itself is an entertainment experience and is booked that way to keep you entertained and engaged through out. Otherwise you would probably tune out the first half of a show that starts with all less successful, unknown, new, etc material, only to tune in for the last portion when only the biggest hits are performed.

Still, in most cases, while a big show like WrestleMania needs two or three "main event quality" matches to draw fans in, the final match is the one that either significantly impacts storyline moving forward and/or has the most fan friendly ending. Other matches are then placed around the rest of the card in a way that atempts to keep viewers entertained through out but may not be indicative of their importance to the show.

 

[TheTruNoLimit]

At a gig you don't bring out support acts after the main show. The main event is the one people want to see and is the one that closes the event.

I voted for any match that receives significant hype, simply to play devils advocate here... take a look at the "Main Events" in 2012. Wrestlemania 28 was a crap shoot, going on your philosophy HHH and Undertaker weren't a main event, they were the supporting acts. CM Punk and Chris Jericho for the WWE Championship at a Wrestlemania? Damned if I don't consider that a main event either.

Look at Over The Limit... I know John Cena is the most popular superstar and biggest draw BUT really, the people who order a PPV such as Over the Limit are truly the hardcore fans.... am I to believe that John Cena and John Laurinitis was a bigger PPV draw than CM Punk vs. Daniel Bryan or for that matter a Fatal 4 Way For the World Title involving marketable stars like Sheamus, Orton, Jericho (and Del Rio to a lesser extent).

At No Way Out, was I to believe that John Cena vs. Big Show for the 500th time was really what people "wanted" to see over the Punk/Bryan/Kane/AJ angle which was easily the best thing WWE had going at the time.

At Summerslam HHH and Lesnar main evented sure, but how can you consider a triple threat match featuring Punk and Cena (and Big Show) for the WWE Championship as a match that is not a main event?

Hell, look at TLC just a few weeks back. Ryback and Team Hell No vs. The Shield was billed as the main event the entire time, yet it didn't go on last. Am I to believe that this wasn't a main event even though it was announced as THE main event? Ziggler and Cena as well as Sheamus and Show ALL were given main event builds.

I think in this day and age, especially with 2 titles, every PPV is considered to have at minimum 2 main events and on top of that, every now and then a 3rd main event that is hugely hyped.

I don't think the days of "THE" One Main Event exist anymore and those are all very recent reasons as to why.

 

[TheTruNoLimit]

Mainevent always goes last on the card. Thats why they say at the end of the show: "And now, mainevent of the evening...". When they say "I want to mainevent Mania" they dont just mean to be in high profile match but mean that they want to close the show with last match. It's that simple.

Or, look at how the Royal Rumble winner moves on to main event Wrestlemania but the last few years they were involved in the first match. The term main event is not what it once was. There can be more than one main event on the show.

 

[Kodo Sawaki]

Or, look at how the Royal Rumble winner moves on to main event Wrestlemania but the last few years they were involved in the first match. The term main event is not what it once was. There can be more than one main event on the show.

Thats because Royal Rumble winner doesnt mean that you will mainevent anything, just means that you will get championship match at Mania. There could be several matches that would draw peoples attention, but only one mainevent and thats last match on the card.

 

[Ruthless-RKO]

For me, the best match is the main event. Jericho vs Punk was the main event for me at WM; beacase Cena vs Rock sucked.

That's stupid.. So you would have to wait until the end of the show to find out who was your main event.. Clearly Cena/Rock was the main event..

 

[LoudClearVoice]

The main event is the match which receives the most hype, and which the main WWE storyline is built around. What match do they spend the most time building up? Typically, this match involves at least one of the very top superstars on the roster.

This match doesn't necessarily have to be the last match on the card but usually is. The main event is NOT determined by the match you're most interested in. What I mean by that is that, if you're most interested in Kofi against some bozo, that doesn't make it the main event, just because that's the match you most want to see. WWE determines the Main Event based on how much they hype it, the story, etc. You may not agree with it being the main event but that's what it is.

 

[lil bitch Kid]

Thats because Royal Rumble winner doesnt mean that you will mainevent anything, just means that you will get championship match at Mania. There could be several matches that would draw peoples attention, but only one mainevent and thats last match on the card.

But the claim every year is that the person that wins will go on to 'main event' Mania. The last two, at least, years, the Rumble winner has jerked the curtain. Was it still A main event, YES, YES, YES.

You need to remember that as a worked sports entertainment spectacle, the main event, or events, are whatever they say they are at the time. In the UFC, there is a set formula, because the outcomes are not pre-determined, and if you've ever looked, the 'main event' or final match isn't always what should be the best fight nor the one that the fighters get the most money for, necessarily. UFC title fights always go on last, and if there is more than one title fight, then it goes from lowest to highest weightclass. It's been that way, at least, since Zuffa took the reigns. BUT, that is a legit competition.

 

[HBsam31]

The main event is the last match. No exceptions. It should be the match with the most hype, and the match that the fans came to see. I would prefer that the WWE title is on the line as well, but lately we have seen a lot of exceptions to that. Sometimes a match like Lesner and HHH, or Taker/HBK takes precedent over even the title. Should it be that way? That is a topic for another thread. Everything else on the card should build to the last match. The main event.

 

[pipebomber]

I don't know which section to post this thread, move it if you like.. Honestly, I think that some people, both in WWE and the fandom, put too much stock into the "lasting impression" and what the last image is when the copyright bug comes on screen and we fade into ~ENTERTAINMENT~. It feels like those people are ignoring any of the good stuff that came before it because "If they didn't put it last, it doesn't matter". However I agree that the last thing you see on a ppv is what is remembered the most.

See its not about if its not last it doesnt matter. It's not about leaving a lasting impression. you can do that in the middle of the show. it comes down to business. The End of the show IS the main event, whether it be a match or a promo segment. When you go to a rock concert the band saves their most popular best song for last. Why? because you always want to leave the audience wanting more. That's how you keep people coming back. The close of the Show is the main event, simply because you save the best part of the progam for last so that people watch the entire show to get to the most anticipated part of the show.

The close of the show isnt the remembered best simply because its the close of the show. Its best remembered because it is what has been hyped up the whole time. If the close of the show sucks, you hate it because you felt like you were hyped up for nothing. if the end of a show is great you are satisfied because you felt the main event lived up to the hype.

 

[InsomniaMusic]

The only logical way to determine Main event is who goes last on the PPV It might have some Co main events but the last match up is definatly a main event no argument

 

[King Patrick Star]

Out of the choices listed above:

The last match on the card, no exceptions
This is the correct answer in my opinion, although it absolutely never started that way.

Last match on the card + WWE Championship match
Having the WWE Championship is a bonus, but this is the formula I love the most. It just feels right in every aspect you can think of traditionally and looking ahead to the future. If you change this formula, you’re fixing something that’s not broken. The last match belongs to the richest prize. If it doesn’t, then it might give off the impression that it’s not as important as a grudge between “friends”, or a grudge between apples and oranges, or the 2nd place medal, or a winning streak vs. a career, or college sophomores coming back to their old high school to beat up the high school juniors. It’s doesn’t happen in Boxing, right??

The WWE Championship match, no exceptions
I really want to feel this way. I really do. I was even in denial during WM VIII when the WWE Championship match didn’t close the show. I was angry that the WWE Championship match didn’t close the show at WM XI. I finally accepted it at WM XX. I said out loud, “Fine, let the Big Gold have ONE.” One turned into two immediately the year after. At WM XXIV, I justified my own argument with the formula (WWE Title = World Title + Undertaker’s WM Streak). By XXVI, I stopped caring about placement altogether and accepted that “Anything can happen in the WWE”.

Any match on a card that receives significant hype
Using my favorite Mania as an example, Triple H / Booker T got hype. McMahon / Hogan got hype. Austin / Rock got hype, but the Main Event was Angle / Lesnar.

The match I'm most interested in, ignoring hype
If this were the case, then Jericho Main Evented WM X8 and every other Mania he’s been on, which it’s not the case.

The match that has Cena/HHH/Taker/Brock/Rock in it
If WrestleMania opened with John Cena defending the World Championship against Triple H, Undertaker, Brock Lesnar, and The Rock in a Championship Scramble, would you consider that the Main Event of the evening?? Granted, there aren’t many matches that can top that, but let’s say, for argument sake, that the other Main Event, which is the last match on the card, is CM Punk vs. Stone Cold Steve Austin…for the WWE Title. If the Scramble went on last and Punk / Austin went first, would you still feel the same?? To me, it’s whatever the last thing you see on the TV.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

the match people paid to see. In music, the main event is the last act and the same with wrestling. However, at some shows, like lolapalooza, there are many huge draws and so who is on last doesn't really matter. It's like an all star show. So there are exceptions.

 

[The Life Of Pablo Ren]

The main-event SHOULD be the last match on the card... but should also be for one of the World Championship's... no matter what PPV it is, no matter what other matches are on the card, the WWE Championship or the World Heavyweight Championship always should be the last match on the card. I remember watching a DVD once, I think it was the History of WrestleMania DVD, and I believe it was Triple H who said "I didn't want to go on after Hogan/Rock, but they said we had to, it was the title"... that was WrestleMania 18. Hogan/Rock was Icon vs. Icon, the leader of the previous generation, versus the leader of the new generation... but the Undisputed Championship Match between Triple H and Chris Jericho still main-evented, and it should've.

In the past 10 years, we've seen things drastically changed, we've seen the WWE and The WHC be placed on the back-burner and other feuds get more attention to the Championship feuds... THAT CANNOT HAPPEN! This is the reason why the prestige in the Championships has dropped so much, because they get placed on the back-burner and other non-title feuds get more of the spotlight... which isn't the problem, it's the match order that's the problem. World Championship matches deserve to be in the main event.