Champions declining fights. Should they lose their belt?

[BigJoeSullivan]

Recently a manager was very unhappy with me when I told him "champions must take on all comers". Do you think it is unreasonable for an org to expect a champion to fight every opponent that is presented to them?

 

Let me make it clear that I don't expect anyone to accept every fight. Only if they wish to remain the champion. It isn't fair to everyone else in the division especially the person who has earned a shot and then denied.

 

Is it unreasonable to expect a champion to take on all comers?

[Guest]

Depending on the circumstance. Yes. Example, 100 p4p fighter, fighting a 3000 p4p guy.

 

If it's however, a reasonable matchup. They should, and most would, take the fight.

[Guest]

I would suggest from experience to let the guy go and be careful who you bring in to your org as far as rank and skills. 100 p4p guys shouldnt be facing 3000 p4p guys. That usually either means a guy is too skilled and has surpassed your level of org or he is cherry picking. This will cause you problems either way as people want to win belts.

 

If the ranks are close then the champion should accept any opponent unless he has a REALLY GOOD REASON NOT TO. I never minded them taking a bit more time, but flat out refusing #1 contenders is BS in my opinion.

[kupsman2]

Yes, I agree with that champs shouldn't be declining #1 contender fights and shouldn't be fighting someone who is 3000 ranks below him and it's also hard for the owners to have such a pussy champ if the champ is just plainly ducking the fights if it is fair enough.

[BigJoeSullivan]

He didn't want the fight because they guy was too far below him in rank but everyone who was close or better in ranking didn't have the skills and didn't want the title fight. It's hard to be too selective when there are so few choices to have. I already narrow scouting down to 165+ VIP needing a contract very active and 100+ hype. If you reject people because their P4P is low it just eliminates that many more. I'm lucky to get 2 or 3 people that qualify as is. In the world, not just local.

[Guest]

I would suggest from experience to let the guy go and be careful who you bring in to your org as far as rank and skills. 100 p4p guys shouldnt be facing 3000 p4p guys. That usually either means a guy is too skilled and has surpassed your level of org or he is cherry picking. This will cause you problems either way as people want to win belts.

 

If the ranks are close then the champion should accept any opponent unless he has a REALLY GOOD REASON NOT TO. I never minded them taking a bit more time, but flat out refusing #1 contenders is BS in my opinion.

Sounds like right up gsp alley. Jhonny should have get the next shot but gsp has other plans. To fight someone with no knock out power. Now that is stairght bs to the lowest level which is what the ufc is at now. Sad.

[Grasman]

I don't accept title fights against opponents with more than 5 x lower p4p rank.

 

Try offering the manager a superfight against someone similarly ranked.

If your champ loses, his p4p rank should be closer to the divisions p4p rank.

If he wins, get him another superfight or try to get higher ranked opponents to your div.

 

Either way, your org benefits.

[Guest]

Champs should accept all title fights unless they're injured, or else they aren't champions. They're just primadonna pussies with terrible belts. The championship title exists to show who is the best fighter in that class in that organisation, if they aren't prepared to defend their claim to be that person then there is no proof they are (still) the best fighter in that class in that organisation and they should call their mum and buy some kleenex.

[embalmer]

I expect the champ to accept any challenge. If they wont fight every contender they should not have fought for the belt in the first place.

[Guest]

Sounds like right up gsp alley. Jhonny should have get the next shot but gsp has other plans. To fight someone with no knock out power. Now that is stairght bs to the lowest level which is what the ufc is at now. Sad.

 

Totally agree. The UFC match making has hit an all time low IMHO.

[Guest]

He didn't want the fight because they guy was too far below him in rank but everyone who was close or better in ranking didn't have the skills and didn't want the title fight. It's hard to be too selective when there are so few choices to have. I already narrow scouting down to 165+ VIP needing a contract very active and 100+ hype. If you reject people because their P4P is low it just eliminates that many more. I'm lucky to get 2 or 3 people that qualify as is. In the world, not just local.

 

 

Im not saying reject people because of their hype. Im talking about skills. USUALLY if a guy has surpassed the rest of the weight class in skills or is brought in with too much skill that is where you see major gaps in hype from the champ to #1 contender. Thats what I meant by a guy out growing your org or cherry picking.

 

 

If the skills are fairly equal then its a different story. How much was this p4p gap anyways?

 

 

BTW Ive raninto all kinds of different issue with champions over the time I have ran or worked on 3 different big orgs. Ive always been advised by others to just cut bait and move on. After years of experience in this area I would suggest you do the same. A guy who is going to be picky and annoying as champ isnt worth wasting your time over TBH.

[BigJoeSullivan]

Im not saying reject people because of their hype. Im talking about skills. USUALLY if a guy has surpassed the rest of the weight class in skills or is brought in with too much skill that is where you see major gaps in hype from the champ to #1 contender. Thats what I meant by a guy out growing your org or cherry picking.

 

 

If the skills are fairly equal then its a different story. How much was this p4p gap anyways?

 

 

BTW Ive raninto all kinds of different issue with champions over the time I have ran or worked on 3 different big orgs. Ive always been advised by others to just cut bait and move on. After years of experience in this area I would suggest you do the same. A guy who is going to be picky and annoying as champ isnt worth wasting your time over TBH.

 

it was a large gap i think 3000k. There was a legit issue there but the thing is the people who were much higher then him(the champ) would have fought him they just wanted a few fights first before going to for the belt. So basically this was a "in the mean time" match up.

[Guest]

 

 

Totally agree. The UFC match making has hit an all time low IMHO.

At least the wwe their champ faces any and everyone. What a joke the ufc has turned out to be. You no longer fight to get a title shot. But if you can talk lots of trash in the ufc yoh get title right away. You don't need to win any fights just be the best trash talker their is. Ask sonnen who never won a fight at lhw but has a title shot.

[Grasman]

Champs should accept all title fights unless they're injured, or else they aren't champions. They're just primadonna pussies with terrible belts. The championship title exists to show who is the best fighter in that class in that organisation, if they aren't prepared to defend their claim to be that person then there is no proof they are (still) the best fighter in that class in that organisation and they should call their mum and buy some kleenex.

Bullshit like this is exactly what some org owners take advantage off.

 

The way this game is built up, hype wise, it makes no sense what so ever to accept a fight like that.

Losing any title fight, even against someone higher ranked, causes a massive drop in "value" of the fighter and a massive frop in rankings for the managers, something i find extremely stupid. Losing a title fight against someone a little bit lower ranked, means an even bigger value drop + manager rankings.

 

For me to accept a fight for my sub p4p 100 fighter against someone ranked very low, like above p4p 1000, would be ignorance way beyond bravery,,,, basically only an moron would do that imo. On the other hand, there are many morons on Tycoon.

 

If my fighter gets ranked beyond his division, i ask for superfights.

 

Where that is an issue, i have no interest in staying there and wont sign any further fighters with that org owner.

 

I'm not really interested in title belts, as they mean very little and come with a baggage like what this thread is about,

hence some experienced managers arent interested in belts.

 

It's a well known practice within Tycoon, to build a fighter up only to sacrifice him to a low hyped project with massive stats managed by an alliance member.

 

The logic used to pull that off, is exactly the same as is seen in this thread.

[Grasman]

At least the wwe their champ faces any and everyone. What a joke the ufc has turned out to be. You no longer fight to get a title shot. But if you can talk lots of trash in the ufc yoh get title right away. You don't need to win any fights just be the best trash talker their is. Ask sonnen who never won a fight at lhw but has a title shot.

Wow, a champ fighter faces anyone in a choreographed fight.... Wow, what a champ!

[Grasman]

At least the wwe their champ faces any and everyone. What a joke the ufc has turned out to be. You no longer fight to get a title shot. But if you can talk lots of trash in the ufc yoh get title right away. You don't need to win any fights just be the best trash talker their is. Ask sonnen who never won a fight at lhw but has a title shot.

Are you really compairing the UFC's REAL fighting to WWE's fake fighting AND coming to the conclusion that the UFC sucks?

 

Common man,,,, Seriously????

[Guest]

In my org, the rules are simple. You have every right to request more training time or decline fights that you aren't interested in...unless you are the champ. Title belts need to stay active, so they need to be defended every 3-4 weeks. The challenger will be whoever the org deems to be the #1 contender. If you want to be a hype whore and not risk your precious hype against any and all comers, then you shouldn't have accepted a title fight in the first place. If you want to build a project and not actively fight, then you shouldn't have accepted a title shot either. I've learned the hard way to make these requirements clear BEFORE offering title fights. If guys don't like it, that is fine. I'll offer them non-title fights to run out their contract and not re-sign them.

 

With that being said, it is very rare that I will offer the champ a fight with a lowly hyped guy. It just doesn't make sense from the org perspective. I want highly hyped main and co-main events. My event rating suffers if I pair the champ with a low hyped opponent.

 

I've been fortunate enough to never have to strip a champion, but I would do it if a champion wasn't being a fighting champion. If you aren't willing to fight the best, regardless of hype or P4P ranking, you aren't truly the champ.

[Grasman]

In my org, the rules are simple. You have every right to request more training time or decline fights that you aren't interested in...unless you are the champ. Title belts need to stay active, so they need to be defended every 3-4 weeks. The challenger will be whoever the org deems to be the #1 contender. If you want to be a hype whore and not risk your precious hype against any and all comers, then you shouldn't have accepted a title fight in the first place. If you want to build a project and not actively fight, then you shouldn't have accepted a title shot either. I've learned the hard way to make these requirements clear BEFORE offering title fights. If guys don't like it, that is fine. I'll offer them non-title fights to run out their contract and not re-sign them.

 

With that being said, it is very rare that I will offer the champ a fight with a lowly hyped guy. It just doesn't make sense from the org perspective. I want highly hyped main and co-main events. My event rating suffers if I pair the champ with a low hyped opponent.

 

I've been fortunate enough to never have to strip a champion, but I would do it if a champion wasn't being a fighting champion. If you aren't willing to fight the best, regardless of hype or P4P ranking, you aren't truly the champ.

I'm happy not to have any fighters in your org then.

 

What benefits the Org, isn't the same as what benefits the fighter/manager.

You represent your org, I represent my fighters.

 

It would be very good to get it out in the open, which Org owners feel that way and act on it and which don't,

as it isn't the "norm" for the owners of the big Orgs i've fought in.

They strive to get you a fair matchup, signing you up for superfights if their division can't accomondate fair ranked fights.

Some of the big org owners are actually very very good when it comes to this aspect.

 

Maybe one of the reasons their Orgs became big and stay big, is they don't shit on their champs by offering them rubbish fights, causing the managers to actually WANT to stay there!

[potter09]

I would nt offer my champ a much lower ranked fight. If I can't find a opp to come to my org to fight my champ in a Superfight. I would then send my champ to another org to fight a opp with similar hype/rank. You usually build a good relationship with other org owners then. And they will do favours for you in the future.

[Grasman]

I would nt offer my champ a much lower ranked fight. If I can't find a opp to come to my org to fight my champ in a Superfight. I would then send my champ to another org to fight a opp with similar hype/rank. You usually build a good relationship with other org owners then. And they will do favours for you in the future.

^ This ^ is an example of a good Org owner.

 

There is a reason why I only hear good things about Geezers from my alliance mates.

Geezers is an Org i plan to put some fighters in, soon.

[762x39]

The champ should only turn down a fight if he is hurt, or cant get to 100 energy. If he turns one down then he is not the champ, and should be stripped. I dont care about ID, or skills, or P4P rank. But then again, I have never turned down a fight, and wont champ or not.

[coton81]

I would nt offer my champ a much lower ranked fight. If I can't find a opp to come to my org to fight my champ in a Super-fight I would then send my champ to another org to fight a opp with similar hype/rank. You usually build a good relationship with other org owners then. And they will do favors for you in the future.

 

 

i have been known to do this but not on purpose

 

what i mean is ive offered match ups that where not that could but now ive got the hang of the org business

 

and i have been known to release fighters to help out as i have released to guys to fight on syns nye card one was a champ and the other a number 1 contender

[billybumnut]

Recently a manager was very unhappy with me when I told him "champions must take on all comers". Do you think it is unreasonable for an org to expect a champion to fight every opponent that is presented to them?

 

Let me make it clear that I don't expect anyone to accept every fight. Only if they wish to remain the champion. It isn't fair to everyone else in the division especially the person who has earned a shot and then denied.

 

Is it unreasonable to expect a champion to take on all comers?

 

 

 

it was a large gap i think 3000k. There was a legit issue there but the thing is the people who were much higher then him(the champ) would have fought him they just wanted a few fights first before going to for the belt. So basically this was a "in the mean time" match up.

 

I'll hold my hands up as the manager who had the audacity to ask why I was being offered the 7th hyped guy to defend my title against. The guy was at least 3k below my P4P rating and and I asked why I wasn't being offered one of the guys in my hype range, one of which had greater striking than me and equal wrestling and ground game. I'd have took that fight as champ and had never rejected any fights in this org before.

 

I was then told by this guy that they were protecting their hype and didnt want to fight me yet I was expected to take a fight that didn't make any sense for the org or my fighter. I had one fight on my deal, it was obvious my fighter was too good for the org, I paid back the full signing bonus for the contract so I can find an org that is more aligned to my fighter's ability.

 

The selective nature of the information disclosed here by this guy just reinforces why it was right for the org and my fighter to break ties. Incidentally, the org owner and the manager of the fighter I was offered are both good guys and this should not reflect badly on either of them.

 

[Rollins]

this is gonna get worse before it gets better ...

[JLP]

I'll hold my hands up as the manager who had the audacity to ask why I was being offered the 7th hyped guy to defend my title against. The guy was at least 3k below my P4P rating and and I asked why I wasn't being offered one of the guys in my hype range, one of which had greater striking than me and equal wrestling and ground game. I'd have took that fight as champ and had never rejected any fights in this org before.

 

I was then told by this guy that they were protecting their hype and didnt want to fight me yet I was expected to take a fight that didn't make any sense for the org or my fighter. I had one fight on my deal, it was obvious my fighter was too good for the org, I paid back the full signing bonus for the contract so I can find an org that is more aligned to my fighter's ability.

 

The selective nature of the information disclosed here by this guy just reinforces why it was right for the org and my fighter to break ties. Incidentally, the org owner and the manager of the fighter I was offered are both good guys and this should not reflect badly on either of them.

 

That makes much more sense. It is just as much the responsibility of the org owner to offer good match-ups for the champ as it is for the champ to fight all challengers. The ranking system would punish billy's fighter very severely for a loss and offer almost no reward for the win in this case. If the offered fight was the highest ranked contender billy should have accepted, but if there were all these guys in the same hype range its the matchmakers fault for holding them back.

 

Many org owners have to really look at how they build contenders more closely. I have seen in many orgs, from high to low hype, a lack of forethought in how to generate a steady stream of legitimate, decently hyped #1 contenders.