Should it be mandatory for new champions to defend their belt at least 3 or 4x before moving up and challenging for the belt?

Should it be mandatory for new champions to defend their belt at least 3 or 4x before moving up?

  • I believe defending it once is good enough.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    49
Maybe even 5. This BS of weight jumping isn't cool anymore. You have to EARN a second title shot.
 
Letting champs move around wt classes does nothing but constipate the division. They're the same guys who complained about champs taking money fights when attempting to move up the ranks into title contention.

Your obligation is to your weight class where you're top dog. Give the best guys the chance to get over like they did you. Defend or vacate.
 
It just depends on the situation. If there are a bunch of contenders waiting, then onviously not. If there aren't, then I'm generally fine with it. Also, will the champ likely defend against the rightful challengers if they managed to obtain the belt above, or do we have a Jon or GSP situation?
 
This is prize fighting
This isn't 1995 anymore. There's no tournament claiming a "$500,000 winner!!!!!" in the UFC. This is a full blown sport. Is football called prize football because they get paid? I just think this is an antiquated mindset. Of course they want to get paid for doing it but they aren't there solely for the money.
 
Is the division cleared out? that's the question.. rather than 4 boring rematches let them move up or down to stay active...
but if there are viable contenders those need to be dealt with first....
 
This isn't 1995 anymore. There's no tournament claiming a "$500,000 winner!!!!!" in the UFC. This is a full blown sport. Is football called prize football because they get paid? I just think this is an antiquated mindset. Of course they want to get paid for doing it but they aren't there solely for the money.
Football and cage fighting is not the same. It is still prize fighting. Aren't there for the money?? Sure they are
 
I didn't have a problem with it when Volkanovski tried it. Didn't have a problem with Amanda Nunes doing it. Didn't have a problem with Adesanya trying it. All of them EARNED their claim at another belt, by working their asses off and winning in their weight class.

My problem with it lies with people like Topuria or Leon Edwards, who barely won the title and are already thinking about another one.

I get that they're trying to make as much money as they can, because they literally get punched in their faces for a living. But it's gotten ridiculous in recent years.

Regardless, most of them fail at it. Say whatever you want about women's Bantamweight and Featherweight, but Amanda Nunes is the only TRUE double champion. The only one who defended both belts successfully against the best opposition available at the time, and for fucks sake: She moved up and knocked out THE Cris Cyborg in less than a minute.

Shout-out to Cormier and Cejudo for not holding a belt hostage and vacating it, before successfully defending the second one.
 
No.

Nothing is mandatory or will ever be mandatory.
 
i'm good with that. guys want to do it way too fast, it should be the exception rather than the rule.
 
If a fighter, any fighter, your fav, your most hated... whatever champ it is... just give up the belt and do whatever the fuck you want to. If DDP thinks he can make 265lbs and wants to dry hump Jones, all the fucking power to you. Just don't hold up the MW division from moving forward.
 
I've been saying for a while if Dana just came out and proclaimed it to be a rule. You need 3 title defenses before moving up without vacating it would deter fighters from that consideration.

And if it's a rule, there's always a way to justify an exception to the rule if Dana wanted to. So no big deal.
 
Inspired by this thread.


I find this popular trend nowadays of new champions moving up weight and challenging for the belt rather tedious.

Should they make it mandatory for champions to defend their belt at least 3 or 4x before doing anything else?

What's your take on this?
His division is nothing but the same faces and same fights he's already won nothing but rematches . So I think it's be smart to move up while he's in his prime I mean look at volk and max .

Those guys stayed and did rematches and their not very out there volk did test Islam but couldn't win.

If illia can win vs islam people would lose their minds after he finished max and volk
 
No, as some fighters(I.E: Merab/Pantoja) went through almost everyone in the top 10 BEFORE becoming champion.

It's case-by-case.
 
Football and cage fighting is not the same. It is still prize fighting. Aren't there for the money?? Sure they are
Would a football player play for free? Probably not. Plenty of fighters are also there to compete. It becomes their identity. Training martial arts for some of them since they were kids, wrestling in high school or college, then finding themselves in MMA. We've also seen fighters not show up in big title fights or other high profile fights. Vera didn't hardly do anything in the O'Malley rematch when the title and more money and fame were on the line. Cerrone admitted the bright lights got to him and gave up against Conor - the highest profile fighter in the business. If it were all about money that was there chance and they didn't pour everything into it when it mattered. There's more to fighting than just the money.
 
UFC probably won't be too keen on making that some sort of rule. Should it happen, probably yes. Will it happen, not very likely UFC is going to put chains on the matches they can make.
 
Inspired by this thread.


I find this popular trend nowadays of new champions moving up weight and challenging for the belt rather tedious.

Should they make it mandatory for champions to defend their belt at least 3 or 4x before doing anything else?

What's your take on this?

If they relinquish the lower belt they can do as they please.

Otherwise no.
 
Back
Top