Still, a trend has emerged: Night 1 was invariably better and hotter than Night 2.
The razzmatazz on Night 1 - Logan Paul and KSI, that phenomenal Dominick Mysterio entrance - might have made Night 2 slightly less than the slog it was in the middle phase.
By Night 2, you've already seen the stage, You've already seen that awesome vista of fans.
You've already felt the WrestleMania magic, and the magic is that it used to feel that bit more elusive.
LA Knight working a singles match on Night 2 threatened to bring about that three-year pattern.
Extending WrestleMania across two nights was a badly needed and well overdue development - when WWE was actually afraid of the growing wider wrestling world, in the mid-to-late 2010s, and set about warehousing as much talent as possible.
It's still probably the best way to go about it, even if the scope of the roster is the same size as it was when WWE promoted four-hour one-night stadium shows years earlier. That approach yielded its own issues, in that WWE sometimes struggled to sequence the card properly - more than one match died when it shouldn't have - and, moreover, a lot of emerging midcard acts never got (sorry) their 'Moment'. The two night split is the best compromise.
Still, a trend has emerged: Night 1 was invariably better and hotter than Night 2.
The line-ups last year were probably ill-advised. The razzmatazz on Night 1 - Logan Paul and KSI, that phenomenal Dominick Mysterio entrance - might have made Night 2 slightly less than the slog it was in the middle phase. By Night 2, you've already seen the stage, You've already seen that awesome vista of fans. You've already felt the WrestleMania magic, and the magic is that it used to feel that bit more elusive.
LA Knight working a singles match on Night 2 threatened to bring about that three-year pattern.
Then again, Night 2 was only about one thing. really.
WWE didn't do it again, did they?!
