LB King Poll

[EtH]

I want to preface this that no champions would ever be stripped of a title without opting in to a new scheme.



Option 1 -

Because the rules have been unclear which led to RULE and Rai being given titles without having 7 defences, we allow them to pick up from their current state. Rai would battle ILLoKWENT in what would count as his 7th defence, where as RULE would battle Bizzy in what would count as his 6th defence (but he’d then be the LBA champion and be defending next anyways). Rai and RULE would both need to agree to this.


Option 2 -

The LBA / LBT King titles are completely scrapped. The convoluded system and changes along the way may have ruined the legacy in some people’s minds and there have been suggestoons that we do without them.

Option 3 -

Only one LBA / LBT King remains at any one time. This is decided based on who has the longest streak of defences. So, for example, Rai and Esso would lose their LBT King titles and ILLoKWENT would hold onto his.

Option 4 -

The rules are reverted to 10 defences minimum, meaning every King other than ILLoKWENT are stripped of their title.

Option 5 -

Only one LBA / LBT King remains at any one time. This is decided based on who has the most victories in title matches ONLY.

Option 6 -

Yearly public poll to determine the kings.

[EtH]

I want to preface this that no champions would ever be stripped of a title without opting in to a new scheme.



Option 1 -

Because the rules have been unclear which led to RULE and Rai being given titles without having 7 defences, we allow them to pick up from their current state. Rai would battle ILLoKWENT in what would count as his 7th defence, where as RULE would battle Bizzy in what would count as his 6th defence (but he’d then be the LBA champion and be defending next anyways). Rai and RULE would both need to agree to this.


Option 2 -

The LBA / LBT King titles are completely scrapped. The convoluded system and changes along the way may have ruined the legacy in some people’s minds and there have been suggestoons that we do without them.

Option 3 -

Only one LBA / LBT King remains at any one time. This is decided based on who has the longest streak of defences. So, for example, Rai and Esso would lose their LBT King titles and ILLoKWENT would hold onto his.

Option 4 -

The rules are reverted to 10 defences minimum, meaning every King other than ILLoKWENT are stripped of their title.

Option 5 -

Only one LBA / LBT King remains at any one time. This is decided based on who has the most victories in title matches ONLY.

Option 6 -

Yearly public poll to determine the kings.

[Óðinn]

Option 4 or Option 1.

[Óðinn]

Option 4 or Option 1.

[RULE]

Voted option 5.

[RULE]

Voted option 5.

voted option 6

voted option 6

Option 3.

Option 3.

[RULE]

This is going well lol

1 vote apeice lol

[RULE]

This is going well lol

1 vote apeice lol

Option 3 with the possibility of facing the current king and battling for the title. (Once their streak is matched)

Option 3 with the possibility of facing the current king and battling for the title. (Once their streak is matched)

Originally Posted by Noir

Option 3 with the possibility of facing the current king and battling for the title. (Once their streak is matched)

Just had this same idea with Edgeworth in IM's. Treat it as if you're overthrowing the King or something. Makes the title that much more prestigious.

Originally Posted by Noir

Option 3 with the possibility of facing the current king and battling for the title. (Once their streak is matched)

Just had this same idea with Edgeworth in IM's. Treat it as if you're overthrowing the King or something. Makes the title that much more prestigious.

Originally Posted by Rieper

Just had this same idea with Edgeworth in IM's. Treat it as if you're overthrowing the King or something. Makes the title that much more prestigious.

than what's the freaking difference between an lbt title match and an lbt king title match. seems pointless by then.

Originally Posted by Rieper

Just had this same idea with Edgeworth in IM's. Treat it as if you're overthrowing the King or something. Makes the title that much more prestigious.

than what's the freaking difference between an lbt title match and an lbt king title match. seems pointless by then.

Originally Posted by Guts

than what's the freaking difference between an lbt title match and an lbt king title match. seems pointless by then.

Huge difference. Say the challenger loses to the current sitting King, they keep their title, but they start back at square one in terms of consecutive defenses to work their way back up. It's harsh, but it separates the men from the boys.

Originally Posted by Guts

than what's the freaking difference between an lbt title match and an lbt king title match. seems pointless by then.

Huge difference. Say the challenger loses to the current sitting King, they keep their title, but they start back at square one in terms of consecutive defenses to work their way back up. It's harsh, but it separates the men from the boys.