Are you for or against interim title fights?

[Takes Two To Tango]

I guess it depends on the context and what's going on with other fighters and what not.

But are you for it or against it?

My opinion is I believe the interim belts adds to the fight more excitement. Just because you feel like these are the two best of their division going to fight.

The #1 contender and interim champion against the actual champion.

Thoughts?

 

[L0ki]

Depends.

There have been times when the interim has more perceived value than the actual belt (Cruz and Barao).

A big part is what the holder of the interim belt does.

They can outpace the title holder and make it mean more, so it depends on what they do with it and if there's a good reason the actual champion can't defend.

 

[Bobby Boulders]

There are times when they are warranted, and usually when the UFC makes them, they're not.

 

[sdpdude9]

I personally feel like they should be used rarely. Only when you have a champion that will be out for an extended period of time to be the acting champion in their absence. That does mean defending it. If the champion will be back before a defense would materialize then an interim belt is unnecessary. A perfect example of an interim title being used correctly was Renan Barao when Cruz was out for an extended period. That made sense to keep the division moving.

I don’t agree with using them for glorified #1 contender. It makes the belts have less value in my eyes. I don’t think it makes things more exciting, nobody sees them as a real belt vast majority of the time.

 

[JBJ was here]

There is no situation in which an interim title fight is not objectively inferior to stripping the title and guaranteeing the former title-holder a title shot in their return fight if they want it. If that isn't warranted, a simple #1 contender fight will be fine.

 

[Gamer2k4]

If a champion can't fight for reasons outside his control (such as an injury, being drafted into his country's military like with Korean Zombie, and so on), an interim belt is the right call. The champion never lost the title, but it's not fair to hold up the division either. Get an interim champion, get him defending, but still understand he's not the real champion and will have to earn the real belt when the champion returns.

 

[CasualBot]

Not a fan of interim titles,
But a huge fan of stripped titles.

The average champ goes from 3 fights a year into 2 fights a year for contention, into 1 fight a year as champion. It's a payscale & health decision.

Strip these guys.

Furthermore,
Create Legend belts instead of "bad mom fucks" belt (which truly never made sense)
A Legend belt should be OG's only,
no title contenders, no young guys.
Title contenders need to be current and/or new blood.

Interims are brunch meals, like going for a smoke break at work. Some of us simply don't smoke.

 

[13Seconds]

I don't mind interim titles

 

[muaythaibeast]

There is no situation in which an interim title fight is not objectively inferior to stripping the title and guaranteeing the former title-holder a title shot in their return fight if they want it. If that isn't warranted, a simple #1 contender fight will be fine.

Agree with this 100%. It sucks to see a guy win the belt without beating the active champ, but if you've got a situation where another guy is defending the interim belt, then your champ needs to relinquish and come back when they're ready to go.
Right now it's just another marketing tool, and meaningless most of the time.

 

[Danespina]

In this case, Belal will be back soon, so no interim needed.
In a few instances, where the champ will be out for a year-plus, then I'm okay with one.

 

[Pancake Sprawl]

If a champion can't fight for reasons outside his control (such as an injury, being drafted into his country's military like with Korean Zombie, and so on), an interim belt is the right call. The champion never lost the title, but it's not fair to hold up the division either. Get an interim champion, get him defending, but still understand he's not the real champion and will have to earn the real belt when the champion returns.

but who wants to be an Interim champion for +2 years? if it's the mandatory military commitment that's how long you'll be waiting minimum. that entire time you're not the real champ but yet defending this "fake" belt vs real contenders and fighting the next contender. you're basically the champion without ever being able to gain the title, all which would be out of your hands to control. i rather them do like another poster said and strip the title holder and guarantee him a title shot on his reentry into the talent pool.

 

[HHJ]

It depends.

 

[laleggenda27]

Against. If there's an actual need for an interim title (i.e., the champion is out for more than a year), then just vacate the belt and have a new champion. The old champion can get the next shot when/if they come back.

 

[tornado362]

There is no situation in which an interim title fight is not objectively inferior to stripping the title and guaranteeing the former title-holder a title shot in their return fight if they want it. If that isn't warranted, a simple #1 contender fight will be fine.

I would even say reversing it, give the champion who has to sit out the interim belt.

Get a new legitimate belt holder, and then the champ has a free pass to a title shot when he returns by holding the interim belt, if he is successful, he can continue his defenses. Almost like freezing his membership to the belt

 

[World eater]

I would prefer an inactive champion to be stripped, regardless of reasons. Title shot upon returning.

 

[usernamee]

They have zero meaning to me so I don't care anymore if there is an interim or not. If throwing an interim on the line will make a fight happen that wasn't otherwise, throw an interim on it.

Example: Shavkat and Garry. They fight without an interimnow but if they would've said interim or no fight then give them an interim. Just make the fucking fights we wanna see happen.

 

[Zanmato]

Terrible idea that breeds fake champions and dilutes the prestige of winning a proper belt. If they removed interim belts overnight it would have no impact at all

 

[Koala]

Most interim titles are here to have a title fight on a PPV as it's (I think) compulsory in the ESPN contract to get almost always a title fight in a PPV, maybe even as a main event (not sure about that)
For example, Lewis vs Gane headlined a PPV, Poirier vs Holloway headlined a PPV, etc.
On the other hand, as soon as a fighter is interim champ, he gets PPV points for his next fight. So, the UFC doesn't match interim titles outside their PPV obligations, inactive champions (Ferguson vs Lee when McGregor was boxing, for example), or fighters who will not fight for anything else (Ferguson vs Gaethje)

 

[Tweak896]

Champs are so fucking inactive in UFC. I want divisions to move and see 3 title fights a year. As much as sherdog cries about interim champs, it's not frequent. And also recently it may be the only way for champs to accept the toughest matches in the division. People forget every fighter can refuse a fight and the public will rarely hear about it. So if it helps the divisions, yes I want them.

 

[C0NCH3TO]

Horse shit right behind the bmf belt.