As opposed to a long reigning champion in which the outcome is less of a mystery?
This. People.buy them to see if they will win again or if they will finally lose. If the win then more people will buy the next one for the IF factor. If a title changed hands the next fight to me is less appealing than someone whiz defended 2 or more times.I know you're asking individual sherdoggers... but as a general rule, long reigning champions sell many more PPVs.
Are you more inclined to buy a PPV headlined by a very long-reigning champion or a PPV headlined by a champion in a division where the title changes hands frequently.I dont really get the question.
Are you asking whether me thinking the champ has a greater chance of losing makes me wanna see the fight more?
I feel long reigning champions creates future upset possibilities and we all love a good upset over a hot potato WWE title change deal.As opposed to a long reigning champion in which the outcome is less of a mystery?
Thats when Tyron fought someone who could strike and wrestle. Since then hes fought all one dimensional fighters. Fights are much easier when you only have to worry about 1 threat (one art) as opposed to multiple threats...(wrestler, BJJ black belt and KO artist)The only title change that might make me buy ppv for the 1st time
![]()
I stream every fight in HD regardless if it has a title fight or not lol. Wont give a scumbag like Dana a penny.As opposed to a long reigning champion in which the outcome is less of a mystery?