What is harder: becoming double champ or multiple title defenses?

[Jorge Luis Borges]

I'd say the one with the fewest successes would be the hardest.

Plenty of guys with multiple title defenses, matt hughes, chuck liddell, Anderson Silva, mighty mouse etc.

How many guys have won titles in two divisions?

4

Not just about winning but also being successful in a different weight class

Interesting and compelling argument.

 

[Xuh]

Ppl who talk about being 2 division champ only do it when there is a favourable matchup for them holding the 2nd belt. As soon as that changes they usually change their mind about getting the other belt and say 'the time isn't right, I'm focused on my next defence' or some shit.
But with defenses, you have to take the best challengers even if they're a nightmare matchup for you. So, defenses.

 

[YoudBeSurprised]

Sure did

View attachment 437715

Lmfao who the fuck even makes these gifs.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

Both are pretty fucking hard and impressive.

This.

You could become double champ with just two favourable matchups though. Multiple defenses without running into a bad stylistic matchups is much more unlikely

Interesting point. But is it really more likely to face a bad stylistic matchup in two title fights at different divisions than it is to face one in two defenses? Why? But to clean out a division for sure you'll face bad match ups.

 

[Croton]

Depends who the champ in the next weight class is. Whittaker moving to LHW and beating DC/Jones would be a lot harder than defending.
Conor moving up and fighting Alvarez instead of cutting massive weight to defend was probably in hindsight easier.

 

[Jackonfire]

I'd say the one with the fewest successes would be the hardest.

Plenty of guys with multiple title defenses, matt hughes, chuck liddell, Anderson Silva, mighty mouse etc.

How many guys have won titles in two divisions?

4

Not just about winning but also being successful in a different weight class

Except not all fighters are allowed to attempt the 2 belt thing. Ultimately the UFC has the say in who gets to do it.

 

[JayJayMMA]

To me I think being a reigning champ is much harder. You have a list of contenders who are studying your game and you have a target on your back for years. At the same time, I feel like DC’s path to double champ is pretty difficult considering the consequences of one mistake at LHW and HW. What say you?

Always tougher to defend especially if it is a rematch.

Most fighters visualise winning a championship, their motivation to win that belt and the prestige with it is stronger than defending it and staying on top. It's why all fighters say that it is tougher to defend a belt as now that you have achieved what you set out to then it takes a whole mental reset to change that life long ambition to one where you are defending it now. It's also why many people in all careers and sports sometimes struggle once they reach the top, it's only the truly great ones that can then stay at the top.

As for the difference with DC, fighting is the only sport that allows people to be a champ if they have a height and weight disadvantage. I respect and love watching all skilled fighters including FLW and WMMA however when it comes down to it the HW champ is always the best in my mind. In every other sport you either compete with the best no matter what shape you are or you play in a lower league. For me it's why the GOAT would favour someone that did more in the heavier classes than someone in the lighter classes - In MMA it's a Fedor, DC, Cain, Jones over a GSP, MM, Silva if their accomplishments were the same.

 

[TapMachine]

What is harder: becoming double champ or multiple title defenses?

Defending your belt in a division that is not a joke. HW is the most shallow division in the UFC, holding the HW belt is like winning gold in the special olympics.

 

[Dirge]

Except not all fighters are allowed to attempt the 2 belt thing. Ultimately the UFC has the say in who gets to do it.

What do you mean allowed? A fighter can vacate and move to another weight class if he chooses.

If Whittaker decides to go back to 170 how exactly will the UFC stop him?

You are referring to the shit thst Conor pulled (or DC for thst matter). Where a fighter doesn't relinquish a belt before moving up.

 

[YoudBeSurprised]

Defending your belt in a division that is not a joke. HW is the most shallow division in the UFC, holding the HW belt is like winning gold in the special olympics.

But by that same token, it is the least defended which could make it the hardest belt to hold.

 

[xP]

There is no real answer to this question because it's very contextual. I would say moving up and winning the belt is harder than defending twice, but once you start talking about four and five fights then obviously it's defending. But how strong are your contenders? Some divisions at certain times have title challengers who are not "championship material" and beating them doesn't mean more than a normal top 10 win. If you move up and become double champ, who did you beat? A reigning champ or a guy who just won the belt himself?

Being the double champ is very special but again it's contextual. McGregor's win over Aldo is legendary, and Eddie Alvarez is a great LW but he had just became champ himself zero defenses and was a favorable style for McGregor. Sort of the same with GSP beating a fortunate late career Bisping (though he wasn't a true double champ because he didn't have the belts at the same time)

DC was really both, he has multiple LHW title defenses and he moved up and beat a the HW with the longest title streak in UFC History. That is incredibly special. If Jon Jones didn't exist we would be talking about DC as the undisputed GOAT. It's still very much arguable.

Let's use Woodley for example. He has a nice string of defenses right now. If he moved up and beat Bisping then that wouldn't trump what he's done at WW. But what if he beat Whittaker? hmm. Or what if McGregor had stayed at FW and managed to defend a few times. Would he be considered better? Maybe.

 

[SteepMiotich]

depends entirely on the quality of opponent and by definition champions are usually of higher quality than challengers

Maybe 4/5 title defences = 1 double champing

 

[GODZILLA213]

4 people have been given the chance to become a double champion in a major organization, 3 of them succeeded.

Henderson, BJ Penn, McGregor, and DC.

 

[Jackonfire]

What do you mean allowed? A fighter can vacate and move to another weight class if he chooses.

If Whittaker decides to go back to 170 how exactly will the UFC stop him?

You are referring to the shit thst Conor pulled (or DC for thst matter). Where a fighter doesn't relinquish a belt before moving up.

Actually I was referring to Dana telling Aldo he would have to give up his FW belt before he could fight Pettis for the LW belt.

If Whittaker were to go back down to 170 and it was a move the UFC didn't want to happen, then no way would he be given an immediate title shot.

 

[Diogenes of Sinope]

multiple defenses. winning 2 belts is just a matter o cherrypicking and waiting for when a guy who's skillset is easy for you to beat becomes champ

 

[JosephTessaro]

I would say title defenses. A fighter can be in the right place at the right time and get a belt. Defending that sucker against the best in the division on multiple occasions seems like it would be a lot more difficult.

 

[felmmando]

It really depends on who said champion has to fight to accomplish each.

 

[Y2Khaos]

You have to beat 1 person to win the belt. You have to beat them all to keep it.

 

[Arrrrgh]

What's harder winning 2 fights or winning 3+ fights?

 

[TheRuthlessOne]

I'd say the one with the fewest successes would be the hardest.

Plenty of guys with multiple title defenses, matt hughes, chuck liddell, Anderson Silva, mighty mouse etc.

How many guys have won titles in two divisions?

4

Not just about winning but also being successful in a different weight class

Dumb logic

How many guys have even tried to win belts in 2 weight classes?

Compare that to how many have succeeded.