King Titles

[RULE]

Originally Posted by EtH

Except literally every GC in history?

Alright no shows dont count at all. So whos Esso battling in the second round of the GC guys?

to be fair theres a CLEAR difference in a knock out tournament.

On a battle card? 0 reason to credit a win for a no show.

[RULE]

Originally Posted by EtH

Except literally every GC in history?

Alright no shows dont count at all. So whos Esso battling in the second round of the GC guys?

to be fair theres a CLEAR difference in a knock out tournament.

On a battle card? 0 reason to credit a win for a no show.

Originally Posted by EtH

Except literally every GC in history?

We don't give people credit for those wins. We don't put those no shows down as people you've actually beat in a battle. It lessens the prestige of a title run in pretty much everyone's eyes. In this king scenario, we're acting like these people actually beat the folks that no showed and rewarding them for it.

Originally Posted by EtH

Except literally every GC in history?

We don't give people credit for those wins. We don't put those no shows down as people you've actually beat in a battle. It lessens the prestige of a title run in pretty much everyone's eyes. In this king scenario, we're acting like these people actually beat the folks that no showed and rewarding them for it.

RULE vs @Sagat for RULE's LBA King title since we wanna do this dumb shit on multi accounts where the title in question wasn't earned.

RULE vs @Sagat for RULE's LBA King title since we wanna do this dumb shit on multi accounts where the title in question wasn't earned.

[RULE]

Originally Posted by Edgeworth

Just playing devils advocate here. If we wanna get technical like this, flako was a no show. Not to mention Seuls, no shows were against people who signed up and made it to the LBA title match. Your defences are in an audio scheme tournament.

Again this is all detracting from the point though that I think it’s only fair. If everyone disagrees with me? That’s fine. But the thread had to be made

The thread HAS been made.

And honestly if you look at the 5 battles he had and the 8 i had its clear who had the more impressive run.

I beat Phil Banks. Thats game-set-match right there.

1/

[RULE]

Originally Posted by Edgeworth

Just playing devils advocate here. If we wanna get technical like this, flako was a no show. Not to mention Seuls, no shows were against people who signed up and made it to the LBA title match. Your defences are in an audio scheme tournament.

Again this is all detracting from the point though that I think it’s only fair. If everyone disagrees with me? That’s fine. But the thread had to be made

The thread HAS been made.

And honestly if you look at the 5 battles he had and the 8 i had its clear who had the more impressive run.

I beat Phil Banks. Thats game-set-match right there.

1/

[EtH]

If you write a verse and your opponent doesn't, youre not waiting a month to earn what they took away from you. Thats bullshit. You showed up and they forfeited. Battling 8 times in LBT is almost a year. Cunts shouldn't have to wait 2 years becuase all their opponents act like faggots.

[EtH]

If you write a verse and your opponent doesn't, youre not waiting a month to earn what they took away from you. Thats bullshit. You showed up and they forfeited. Battling 8 times in LBT is almost a year. Cunts shouldn't have to wait 2 years becuase all their opponents act like faggots.

[RULE]

Originally Posted by Rieper

RULE vs @Sagat for RULE's LBA King title since we wanna do this dumb shit on multi accounts where the title in question wasn't earned.

I'd battle Seul no problem but to be honest it wouldnt make either of us more deserving than we are now.

Neither of us are the LBA champ.

Strip both, keep both, i honestly dont care either way.

[RULE]

Originally Posted by Rieper

RULE vs @Sagat for RULE's LBA King title since we wanna do this dumb shit on multi accounts where the title in question wasn't earned.

I'd battle Seul no problem but to be honest it wouldnt make either of us more deserving than we are now.

Neither of us are the LBA champ.

Strip both, keep both, i honestly dont care either way.

[Edgeworth]

Originally Posted by RULE

The thread HAS been made.

And honestly if you look at the 5 battles he had and the 8 i had its clear who had the more impressive run.

I beat Phil Banks. Thats game-set-match right there.

1/

See this is part of the problem man. We STILL have no clear criteria for the shit. Rai’s gotta earn it with another defence but because you’ve beat Phil
Banks (which is a great win, that’s not my point) you just get it off that alone? Shits too inconsistent to be taken seriously

[Edgeworth]

Originally Posted by RULE

The thread HAS been made.

And honestly if you look at the 5 battles he had and the 8 i had its clear who had the more impressive run.

I beat Phil Banks. Thats game-set-match right there.

1/

See this is part of the problem man. We STILL have no clear criteria for the shit. Rai’s gotta earn it with another defence but because you’ve beat Phil
Banks (which is a great win, that’s not my point) you just get it off that alone? Shits too inconsistent to be taken seriously

Only person who deserves it is ILLo and even then, his hardest competition no showed.

That's facts

Only person who deserves it is ILLo and even then, his hardest competition no showed.

That's facts

[RULE]

Originally Posted by EtH

If you write a verse and your opponent doesn't, youre not waiting a month to earn what they took away from you. Thats bullshit. You showed up and they forfeited. Battling 8 times in LBT is almost a year. Cunts shouldn't have to wait 2 years becuase all their opponents act like faggots.

A king title SHOULD be a 2+ year achievement.

Should of never been changed from the original stipulation in the first place.

[RULE]

Originally Posted by EtH

If you write a verse and your opponent doesn't, youre not waiting a month to earn what they took away from you. Thats bullshit. You showed up and they forfeited. Battling 8 times in LBT is almost a year. Cunts shouldn't have to wait 2 years becuase all their opponents act like faggots.

A king title SHOULD be a 2+ year achievement.

Should of never been changed from the original stipulation in the first place.

Originally Posted by RULE

I'd battle Seul no problem but to be honest it wouldnt make either of us more deserving than we are now.

Neither of us are the LBA champ.

Strip both, keep both, i honestly dont care either way.

That's not my point at all with this. I just find it incredibly weird how the challenge was made in the first place where he won't battle on his "retired" account. Is that serious? Is Esso gonna make a multi account and challenge the next guy who gets LBT King all of a sudden because he retired Esso? Shit's corny, imo.

Originally Posted by RULE

I'd battle Seul no problem but to be honest it wouldnt make either of us more deserving than we are now.

Neither of us are the LBA champ.

Strip both, keep both, i honestly dont care either way.

That's not my point at all with this. I just find it incredibly weird how the challenge was made in the first place where he won't battle on his "retired" account. Is that serious? Is Esso gonna make a multi account and challenge the next guy who gets LBT King all of a sudden because he retired Esso? Shit's corny, imo.