It's pretty common to hear people complaining about jobbing when we see a fight that theoretically should be a stomp end up as a competitive affair. But is this always a bad thing? Should fights be written in a logically rigorous fashion or is it better that writers flex the rules a bit, or even a lot, so as to make for a good fight?Â
For myself I think I was a bit more of a "purist" back in the day but nowadays I think I see the merits of being a bit more laid back about such things.
According to wrestling vernacular (where the term originated), it simply means "to lose". To "job" is to "lose". When a wrestler agrees to lose the match, he is only doing his "job", hence the term.
But in this message board, it means, "not fighting the way one character is supposed to fight". It's like saying, "oh, the Hulk should have toasted that guy in 3 seconds instead of 5 minutes, to my eyes he jobbed, because he should have done it more easily".... That is just plain wrong.
So, goingback to your question, "is jobbing always a bad thing?".... according to your premise, "it shouldn't be, in order to make the fight more enjoyable...a good fight"....well, then, this is already wrong. Any loss is a "job", regardless whether the fight is good or bad.