![]() |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Me too. They dont pay enough :D
|
Just reading this.
I held that LBA Champion title for 230 days+ or some shit a long those lines, if none of you could come take it off me, then i'm the LBA King. To be honest, I was and should be the ONLY LBA King. RULE got his title by counting his scheme tournament battles as LBA Title defences, so he fast tracked the 230 days+ I put in, by doubling up via Scheme Tourney. I'm not cool with this at all. To be honest, half the shit I am reading here is disrespectful as fuck, I don't know what you want me to do when I hold onto the title for that long, get wins, some no shows, and don't get the title afterwards, I actually vacated the title after King was appointed so ya'll could have a chance. ---------- Post added at 01:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:41 PM ---------- Also, for an addition. I did WRITE for those 2 min audio battles that were no-shows, i still put in time and effort into those verses. Oh well. |
230 days ... 5 battles ... 0 audio heavyweights.
I'm not cool with that at all. lol |
I get that 7 (consecutive) title defenses are more impressive then 7 total title defenses BUT what's the point in keeping track of everybody's record if ultimately it's not going to matter?
If the LBA/LBT is a monthly event why not incentivize battlers with the promise of earning a permanent title if they're able to earn and defend their LBA/LBT Champion title 7 times, more then half a year? Also I reread that thread @RULE originally made and the majority agreed that nobody should have their title stripped so that shouldn't even be in question, this should only be regarding future LBA/LBT Champions. I think it's stupid @Celsius & @Shodan aren't qualified to, first of all, beat enough opponents to win the LBT Champion title back and defend it until they have 7 total defenses to win the LBT King title. Also in history there's already's been multiple kings, i.e. King of England, Scotland, Ireland, France, etc. so I don't get y'alls aversions to having multiple ones. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Would make more sense grammatically i guess? |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:16 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.