Some people take the perfectly understandable stance - "Why do we need to rank stuff? Just enjoy the music, man!". I'm not one of those people.

I love reading these lists. I think the short, but to the point, narratives are a critical part of these. Especially when the author is such a good writer. A simple list is not nearly as much fun. I was lucky enough to attend 6 of the 10 and they were all great of course.

I'm not sure once you get to the top 10, that the order matters quite as much. My top 5 sets are all included in the final 10. But it is interesting to me that #s 10, 9 and 8 would all be in my top 5 - in some order - (along with 7/31/15 and 10/20/13). When you get to the elite of the elite (and all 10 sets qualify), I think I hold flawless sets with no soft spots (12/29/13, 7/31/15) in slightly higher esteem than those which have highlight segments that are so overwhelmingly spectacular that they render the "weaker" parts of the set completely irrelevant (8/22/15, 7/13/14).

As far as the list in its entirety, I have no real beef. I haven't even listened to all of them . I'd probably shove 7/14/13 II somewhere in there, though not too high, even with its meh 1st quarter.

OP - How much did the so-so Hood affect the absence of 1/2/16? I'd have to imagine if the Hood was even an A- version it would be in there?

Well done, sir.