PRO WRESTLING / A LIVING REFERENCETake the library offline
← Match study

Match studyAll levels

Shinsuke Nakamura vs. AJ Styles

A strong match can still teach through its inconsistencies.

Also called: Wrestle Kingdom 10

CRITIC’S RATING★ 4.75Alex Podgorski
EVENTWrestle Kingdom 104 January 2016
Read the rating source ↗

Match synopsis

Spoilers follow. Nakamura defends the IWGP Intercontinental title against Styles at the Tokyo Dome and retains. The match combines character exchanges, targeted offense, counters, and an escalating finish.

The reviewer’s perspective

Podgorski awards 4.75 stars. He admires the overall performance but questions whether Nakamura’s leg and Styles’ back selling remain consistent with the earlier attacks.

The rating is a named critic’s judgment. It is not a consensus score, and the study notes do not claim to be a new review based on a complete viewing.

Watch with a question

These prompts are editorial. Watch once for the complete story, then use a second viewing to investigate:

  • Track the targeted body part in two columns: attack and later response.
  • When does character work make an exchange more memorable?
  • Where do you agree or disagree with the reviewer about selling continuity?

A useful takeaway

A high rating does not remove the value of criticism. Look for cause and effect throughout the match, not only during the finish.

Access notes

The link opens the Wrestle Kingdom 10 event on NJPW World. Select the Nakamura–Styles Intercontinental title match; an account and subscription may be required. The article and these questions remain available in the offline edition; the video does not.

WATCH THE REFERENCE

Wrestle Kingdom 10 on NJPW World · subscription required

If playback is unavailable in your region, open the original source ↗.

THE PAPER TRAIL

Sources & context

Named critic’s review

Shinsuke Nakamura vs. AJ Styles — Wrestle Kingdom 10 review ↗

Alex Podgorski · TJR Wrestling

The 4.75-star rating is Alex Podgorski’s own assessment. Synopsis and critical perspective are short paraphrases; study questions are our editorial prompts.