LBA & LBT King Titles, lets discuss!
 

Since the topic is hot lets discuss and make a determination on it once and for all.

so lets preface a little.

I created the LBT & LBA.

I ran them both for two years i think?

So when i created them, i didnt want ANY addition titles other than the one you hold as long as your champ. I was adamant on that point.

However... lol

ILLoKWENT went on a fuckin disgusting run of 10 wins in a row. And basically everyone felt he HAD to get something for such a great achievement.

So i decided he would get an addition title for the 10 win round.

He had 8 wins and 2 no shows. 32 lines against absolute killers. even though there was the 2 no shows he THROUGHLY deserves it.

And then i left the site (2014 ish?) until summer 2019.

When i returned i realised both Esso and Rai had recieved the title, as well as an audio one for Seul.

I was told the limit was changed to 7 victories, instead of 10, and that no shows had been high. Esso won the LBT on a no show but won 7 on the bounce and got the king title. Rai notched up 10 wins, 6 losses with 2 of the wins via no show.

And then theres Seul from the audio LBA who won 10 battles, 5 via no show and 1 loss. He got the LBA title and then finally me, with 9 wins, 2 losses and one win via no show.

So at first i though the rule was it had to be 7 wins in a row, then i asked if my reign was strong enough for the title and was told yes and recieved it.

so...


The simple question is, what should consitute a King title?

10 wins in a row? 10 wins period? 7? 5?

No shows count? they dont? How important is winning an actual battle?


as one of the 5 "kings" im happy to abide by any ruling on this.


As EtH now runs the LBT, i'd have no problem with him having the power of that section.

And with the LBA defunct (for now) perhaps the people should decide.


Discuss!

1/

no-shows shouldn't count imo

Yeah. If I win 7 times with 6 no shows I get a title? Seems weird as hell

In the brackets if I win via no show each round for a GC maybe then you have to give up a title but even that seems like bullshit. Right? What if I win I round one and the rest are no shows. If that is even a debate weather it should count then no way should it in the lbt/a

I've always hated the idea of "LBT king" and "LBA king." 1.) The name is stupid. 2.) It totally defeats the purpose of an interchangeable title.

I think the rule should be decided and enforced. I'm not in favour of taking titles away from guys who won under established rulesets. I think if Rai for example was given the LBT King title that could effect his motivation next time out and cost a loss, so retroactively removing that title has an effect. That's why I tried to arrange Rai Vs ILLoKWENT for Rai's title but I couldn't work out the optics.

Askari almost had that same scenario a few years ago, I believe.

I agree with this guy @RULE - No Shows shouldn't count as a win in any tourney. there should be a contender waiting in case of a no show. Like, hold a "#1Contender tourney" Winner takes the place IF there is a no show.

Just an idea

Definitely can't take away peoples titles who fairly earned them when the rules were already established.

Going forward though...

10 wins in a row should give you an LBA or LBT King title.

Also, you can't really discredit anyone for getting no-show wins. I get why one might argue that they shouldn't count. Seems lame to get wins for not battling. However, it's not their fault that they got no-showed. If someone wins a GC and gets a no-show or two...you don't take that into account when giving them their title.

i don't think there CAN be a king since there's so much to debate. what if illok had the best streak, but rai had tripple his wins. what if seuls battles were considered the hardest to win. so many factors. i'd reckon it's best as a title that changes hands, and maybe there should be an annual vote for whoever holds the lba/lbt king title.

Got mine after 7 not including no shows. It was announced as a thing during my reign and tbh wasn’t really pumped about getting the interchangeable title stripped and replaced with a permanent one...but I don’t think I had much of a say at the time so whatever. If y’all wanna do away with it, cool....I’ve got no problem with it. If you keep it, make it consistent to its original definition. 7 wins, no no-shows counted.

Agree.

I never liked the idea of that title.

And it can't be compared to GC's because you get a whole month to write a verse for one opponent while we get 3 days in GC's

It’s definitely different than a GC....but try winning 8 32s in a row....one to get it, 7 to defend it. There’s wack GCs....but not a wack LBT King. Jussaying....

The issue with no-shows is, the title holder waste's all their time writing these verses. How do they get compensated for their time & effort.

I think the name of the title could be changed to "LBT/A Great" or "Legend" or something, I think it's definitely a good idea to have a permanent title to acknowledge people who have been successful at the highest level for a long period of time as well as the interchangeable title but the word "King" doesn't really make sense. I don't think anything should be changed or stripped retroactively, but I think going forward no-shows shouldn't count, and my personal suggestion would be that the title is awarded to those that achieve 7 consecutive defences or 10 non-consecutive defences.

Most LBT title matches are underwhelming. Even ILLo's run wasn't all that great from what I remember and his was supposed to be the best

---------- Post added at 09:07 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:06 PM ----------

Don't tailor the whole verse to one opponent nbd

So write generic bars just in case your opponent no shows?
@Seul....wish I thought of this....don’t you?

Or just in general.

First of all I don't think anyone should get their title stripped, they all deserved it, as @RULE & @Esso pointed out, writing and winning 7-10 32's isn't an easy task, plus why is their fault their opponents no-showed?


I think going forth it should remain at 7 wins, no-shows counting and they don't have to be in order. If you're able to hold the title for 7 months, more then half a year, then you deserve a permanent title. This would also make it more competitive for past LBT Champions to try and reclaim their title and win the King title, people like Celcius & Shodan who are still around and could still battle for it.

Looking back at the history of the LBT championship....the LBT King was supposed to have 7 consecutive defenses of the title. Both @ILLoKWENT and I had 7 consecutive defenses straight AFTER winning the title... @Rai didn’t.

https://www.letsbeef.com/forums/show...hlight=History

King is a weird title too. Implies one.

The others are phonies

Couldn't say it better. I think if you already have a title you shouldn't be stripped. But I don't think that No-Shows should count as a win. There should always be a "Next in line contender" otherwise its a free ass title that - a person is bragging about but really has no idea if he would have even won it if the other person didn't no-show. Just my Opinions. But hey, I just work here lol

@Esso - Vote ™ 1st LB President. I'll aggravate the shit out of @RULE until he gives me my presidency lol :D

Way too many inconsistencies in the awarding of these titles. I don’t really have an opinion on what the criteria should be since I think it’s kind of a stupid title anyway. But, it should probably just be whatever it was to start with.

They should just say fuck the LBT King title and call it the (™ Title) :D:high:

What it was to start with is 6 consecutive defenses after winning. Not including no shows....considering this, there’s only two. Any inconsistencies have happened since me and Illo. Again....I don’t care if y’all get rid of the damn thing. Just be consistent with the original intent if you plan to keep it

https://www.letsbeef.com/forums/show...highlight=King

This wasnt the orginal one, the orginal was 10 wins which i made in 2013 i think?

Keep the feedback coming.

How is everyone with this;

As Rais title, none of which is his own fault, is the one in question and he was called out initially about it by Illok, Rai Vs ILLoKWENT decides the fate of the title and ruleset. However, Rai only wants to battle ILLoKWENT, not Malishus, and if Ill wasn't down we would go with the event that Rai theoretically had won and keeps his title.

What's everyone's thoughts?

---------- Post added at 02:41 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:41 AM ----------

Ps. You in next LBT Ess? Haha

To help, these are the details of the 5 "kings".

Seul
2x LBA Champion
5 Wins
& 5 Wins Via No Show
1 Loss Via No Show

Battle Record:
Vs Nicholas (No Show) - Won the LBA Title
Vs Rai (83%) - Defended LBA Title
Vs Lockhart (No Show) - Lost the LBA Title
Vs Lockhart (No Show) - Won the LBA Title
Vs Mech (71%) - Defended LBA Title
Vs SPACE_DABREE (84%) - Defended LBA Title
Vs Alzie (100%) - Defended LBA Title
Vs Student (No Show) - Defended LBA Title
Vs Mech (No Show) - Defended LBA Title
Vs JR3DDY (No Show) - Defended LBA Title
Vs Guts (90%) - Defended LBA Title

------------------------------

RULE
2x LBA Champion
8 Wins
& 1 Win Via No Show
2 Losses

Battle Record:
Vs Phil Banks (52%) - Won the LBA Title
Vs UNKNOWN ARTIST (70%) - Lost the LBA Title
Vs 2FUEL (No Show) - LBA Title Eliminator
Vs God The Reptillian (87%) - Won the LBA Title
Vs Rican (86%) - Defended LBA Title
Vs 2FUEL (87%) - Defended LBA Title
Vs Mister Jon Flako (100%) - Defended LBA Title
Vs GRizzEAT (71%) - Defended LBA Title
Vs Guts (89%) - Defended LBA Title
Vs BizzyOne (56%) - Lost the LBA Title

ILLoKWENT
1x LBT Champion
8 Wins
& 2 Via No Show
0 Losses

Battle Record:
Vs Black Book (94%) - Won the LBT Title
Vs Rant (100%) - Defended LBT Title
Vs Phroxen (52%) - Defended LBT Title
Vs Obey (94%) - Defended LBT Title
Vs Dissizit (91%) - Defended LBT Title
Vs Erupt (No Show) - Defended LBT Title
Vs ELOH STACKz (81%) - Defended LBT Title
Vs MAN DOWN (No Show) - Defended LBT Title
Vs Rican (83%) - Defended LBT Title
Vs GRizzEAT (76%) - Defended LBT Title


------------------------------

Esso
1x LBT Champion
7 Wins
& 1 Via No Show
0 Losses

Battle Record:
Vs Obey (Via No Show) - Won the LBT Title
Vs Rieper (52%) - Defended LBT Title
Vs Wonderbred (67%) - Defended LBT Title
Vs CakedOut (86%) - Defended LBT Title
Vs Celsius (62%) - Defended LBT Title
Vs Shodan (86%) - Defended LBT Title
Vs HomeSkool (67%) - Defended LBT Title
Vs Celsius (62%) - Defended LBT Title

------------------------------

Rai
2x LBT Champion
8 Wins
& 2 Via No Show
6 Losses

Battle Record:
Vs Celsius (79%) - LBT Title Challenge
Vs Rieper (76%) - LBT Title Challenge
Vs Shodan (75%) - LBT Title Challenge
Vs Rieper (61%) - Won the LBT Title
Vs Alzie (90%) - Defended LBT Title
Vs Rant (Via No Show) - Defended LBT Title
Vs Sabu (54%) - Defended LBT Title
Vs KG (100%) - Defended LBT Title
Vs SPACE_DABREE (100%) - Defended LBT Title
Vs Alzie (92%) - Defended LBT Title
Vs Row (80%) - Lost the LBT Title
Vs Rieper (Via No Show) - Won the LBT Title
Vs MC KG (94%) - Defended LBT Title
Vs MadVerbs (68%) - Defended LBT Title
Vs Rieper (71%) - Lost the LBT Title
Vs Rieper (62%) - LBT Title Challenge


I also agree with whoever said the title itself is poorly worded. LBT King. LBA King.

Perhaps something to just signify a being a great champion, cannot think of a good example tho. LBT Legend? LBA Super Champion? I dunno.

LBT/LBA Legend is the way to go imo. Can't have multiple kings in all honestly, but you can have multiple legends.

if we move to lba/lbt legends than the standards have to raise some. how about people can be nominated for the title LBA/LBT LEGEND?

this way we can take into account the strengths of their runs from all angles. to qualify you'd have to have at least a 7 win streak, and ten wins overall (not including no shows)

You guys need to stop getting hung up on no shows. I quit THC because I out time and effort into a verse and got literally nothing out of it. As it my verse just never happened. I legit may as well have no showed too.

If you write a verse and your opponent doesn't, you win. I know RULE hates no shows but how you enforcing that in the GC? If a no show equals a win there, it also has to equal a win in LBT

false.

if no shows count then winning legit doesn't matter. i don't care if you're sad that you wasted bars. you didn't beat anybody. so it's not a win.

You can only win legit if your opponent turns up. When it's literally impossible to win legit due 100% to factors you cant control, how is it fair to achieve nothing? If your opponent quits when you both step in the ring, you get a win. The second you sign up to a tournament battle, you've stepped in the ring.

Legit you guys see how much no showing battles there is. If my verse is wasted because my opponent no shows then fuck your tournament why would I waste my time if odds on I'm getting no showed?

So my feeling on a couple of points based off of the feedback here

People seem unwilling to strip people who have already won the title, if thats the case then the strongest way to do that while having as difficult a goal for future people to achieve the title is: You must win seven LBA / LBT title matches. All 5 current holders have done that. You would have to allow for no show victories tho, as Seul only has 5 non-no show wins. The other 4 have seven wins without no shows.

Its seems like the title change from LBA King to LBA Legend is prefered too. I'd agree the termanology for multiple "kings" is weird. Altho Illo might be the one person to deserve the King title.


As for EtH's point on no-shows yeah your right i do strongly dislike them counting as wins. But my opinion is only mine, and if the majority thinks otherwise i'll go with them. Only you and i seem to have posted strong opinions on the matter so would be nice to hear more.

Hosts need to do more in the PPV style. I have suspensions on the THC, i know EtH has only just taken the LBT so i dunno what ur plan is.

Ive never seen a tournament winner have a massive amount of no shows, so i dont think this issue is as prevelant in GC's etc. While the LBT has had probably 40% of there champs crowned on battles they didnt win (through no fault of there own admittedly).

1/

For the record that "fuck your tournament" part wasn't aimed at THC haha.

Yeah anyone no showing is catching at least a 2 month suspension. Not sure if I want to increase based on continuous no shows.

Edit: Also, blind battles have added a fix to previous no show issues in that its not left send to right. You HAVE to drop a verse to win by no show, even if its an empty space.

Yeah thats a great point.

There's guys with wins in LBT history that were never going to show, they just lucked out on the draw of being the receiver. Now, everyone can give and receive. It's like a ClassicK xmas party.

Ive never understood why you cap the K. We've never capped the K. MY GOD WHY.

Really? FreeK fucking with my typing skills.

Can’t verify that cuz this was the thread I knew how to find. I remember the user title didn’t exist until this point though so I can say I never looked further into the past. You very well may have and if I’m bored enough later I’ll try to see if I can find the 2013 version