Interim Titles

Sean Ryan

Blue Belt
@Blue
Joined
Jul 29, 2020
Messages
768
Reaction score
772
My first thread.

Interim titles. This bothers me. An interim title isn't considered being a world champion in the UFC. Officially it is but do fans consider an interim champion a real champion?

In other sports if you are injured they move on. Even tennis doesn't have an interim Wimdeldon champ because the champ got injured and gets the right to a match later to decide.

I'm an old school boxing fan. If someone was an interim world champ they are considered a world champion. In the UFC I've seen guys throw it away as they say they want the real thing. I think that was Gaejthe . Then he lost to Khabib.

Can I get a poll on here Mods?

Should an interim title in the UFC be considered a legitimate world title?
 
I think it depends who you fight for the interim.

Examples:
-When Dustin beat Max, he beat a real champ on a 13 fight win streak.
-Gaethje when he beat Tony, he technically beat a "champ" he never lost his belt who was on a 12 fight win streak.

Lesser meaningful title win example:
-Izzy when he beat Gastelum. Kelvin was riding a 2 fight win streak that wasn't too impressive, they really didn't need a belt for that fight and many didn't consider Izzy "champ" material. He did prove everyone wrong by running through Whittaker though.
 
Last edited:
In other sports there isn't such a thing as a title defense. It's an entirely new championship each time.
 
All just semantics here. Titles are marketing tools. Champion is champion. Interim champion is interim champion. The best fighter may be neither of those things.
 
In other sports there isn't such a thing as a title defense. It's an entirely new championship each time.

It was a terrible analogy in hindsight. My point is really how an interim champ in the UFC should be considered a world champion. There can always be a unifying fight down the line. No one is stripped.
As I stated I've heard Gaejthe say he didn't want it and Ferguson never won gold. He was interim champ for a while before he injured himself. He carried the whole division.
 
In other sports if you are injured they move on. Even tennis doesn't have an interim Wimdeldon champ because the champ got injured and gets the right to a match later to decide.
This is a terrible comparison because Wimbledon is a tournament that happens once a year to crown a champ. It isn’t a title to be defended. If you beat the Wimbledon champ you don’t become the new champ.
 
It was a terrible analogy in hindsight. My point is really how an interim champ in the UFC should be considered a world champion. There can always be a unifying fight down the line. No one is stripped.
As I stated I've heard Gaejthe say he didn't want it and Ferguson never won gold. He was interim champ for a while before he injured himself. He carried the whole division.

The UFC does treat it as a real championship. You can't force fighters or fans to do the same.
 
Well, for my is a very good option when the champion can not defend his belt (for injury or whatever other excuse) and the correct way is than the interim champ and the champ fight eachother for the unifiction belt, obviously there are a lot of mistakes with this sistem, but is not to bad
 
An interim champ is considered a champ. What you don’t take into account is that MMA fans who talk about championships and interim championships are mainly shit heads who like to shot on the sport they like.

Technically yes, an interim champ is considered a full champ. They are even payed as so. It’s in the eyes and words of the fans who talk it down because “we’ll interim champion didn’t beat the real champion so he’s not a real champion!”

It also depends on if the interim and actually championship is unified.
 
I have no issue with Interim titles. I do take issue with fighters that win Interim belts, and proceed to sit out for 12 months waiting for their next fight. I think Carlos Condit did this back in the day waiting for GSP. What's the point of an interim belt if both champs are on the shelf.
 
An interim title is nothing because when an interim champ beats the champ, he becomes "the" champ but if the champ wins what makes his title different to what it was before his lay off? Nothing.
 
An interim title is nothing because when an interim champ beats the champ, he becomes "the" champ but if the champ wins what makes his title different to what it was before his lay off? Nothing.
Has there been interim vs interim for the real belt?
 
I think it depends who you fight for the interim.

Examples:
-When Dustin beat Max, he beat a real champ on a 13 fight win streak.
-Gaethje when he beat Tony, he technically beat a "champ" he never lost his belt who was on a 12 fight win streak.

Lesser meaningful title win example:
-Izzy when he beat Gastelum. Kelvin was riding a 2 fight win streak that wasn't too impressive, they really didn't need a belt for that fight and many didn't consider Izzy "champ" material. He did prove everyone wrong by running through Whittaker though.

This 100%. Depending on the circumstances, it may be worth as much as the undisputed or it may just be a marketing trick to hype up a fight.

Same goes for undisputed belt sometimes though, for instance, Bisping's reign at 185 and McGregor's at 155 are completely born out of circumstances. As they say in boxing it's the fighter makes the belt (interim or not) at the end of the day.
 
If you think about titles too seriously, it all just doesn't make sense. Conor's shot at 155, Rousey's free belt and Lesnar's shot - all this screams "bullshit", interim or not.
 
An interim title is nothing because when an interim champ beats the champ, he becomes "the" champ but if the champ wins what makes his title different to what it was before his lay off? Nothing.

This is wrong, strictly speaking. The champ is no longer "undisputed" if there is an interim belt. He needs to unify the belts to become undisputed again.
 
If you think about titles too seriously, it all just doesn't make sense. Conor's shot at 155, Rousey's free belt and Lesnar's shot - all this screams "bullshit", interim or not.

Yes that is bullshit. Bisping giving Henderson a shot was egregious. However I do find that the UFC is a bizarre company.
Dana regularly berates his own fighters. Devalues titles with this nonsense. Yes boxing has 4 champs per division but it has a much larger talent pool stretching further across the globe.
Someone getting their shot at any version of a world title is enough to market a fight. Devaluing the titles in the UFC has led to complete apathy for interim championships. Fighters are now swerving title fights for money fights and the UFC created the BMF belt. Sad shit seeing fighters not bothered about actual titles never mind interim ones too.
 
The determining factors are whether there is really a need for an interim title, and how the promotion handles it afterward.
When Cruz was injured for the 500th time, and Barao became interim champ, I don’t think anyone had a problem with that. There was an actual need to crown an interim champ, and Barao defended the belt a couple of times. The plan was for him to unify against Cruz, which is how it should be. In this case Cruz got injured yet again, so Barao was promoted to undisputed champ, and I don’t recall anyone having a problem with that either.
The Interim HW belt that was crowned when Couture was having contract disputes is another example of an interim title done right.

What the UFC does today is crown an interim champ every time they need a title fight to headline and all the champs are booked. Tony Ferguson’s interim title is an example of the absolute wrong way to book these types of fights. Ferguson was crowned interim champ when we didn’t really need one— and then later he was stripped of it without ever actually losing, when it suited the UFC’s wishes. That does damage to the title itself. The more a promotion spams unnecessary interim titles, the more it devalues the real belt.
 
Back
Top