King Titles
 

@EtH @RULE @Rai @Malishus @Seul @Esso

I think we need some more clarity around this King shit, and I don’t wanna see Rai get done dirty like it’s shaping up to be. There was recently a thread where the Kings discussed the king titles. All the kings records were laid out. I’m not sure if clear cut new rules were ever even established BUT It was a pretty general consensus that no current king would have their title revoked.

However, now we’ve got some bullshit going down in the LBT. Since Rai doesn’t have 7 consecutive DEFENCES of the LBT title, he’s gotta “earn” his title with a win over Illo and if he loses he loses the LBT king title. This goes against what was discussed before with current kings keeping their title. Now, if we’ve changed our minds and want to enforce the 7 consecutive defences as a hard criteria? Cool. But then it’s only fair to Rai, and all other LBT and LBA kings that RULE finishes off his run.

RULE
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

There’s only 5 successful consecutive defences there. If we’re making Rai put his title on the line against Illo, we’ve gotta atleast make RULE put it on the line against Seul, plus another defence. Then, we can dead the controversy once and for all around this topic and there doesn’t need to be any more of these bullshit threads (like this one).

The thing that throws a monkey wrench in to all of this is Rai actually agreeing to this, which idk why on Earth he would with the stipulations that were put in to place.

Been there

https://www.letsbeef.com/forums/showthread.php?t=169149

Lets not forget i stated ages ago i was down to follow whatever the masses deemed fair.


And yeah i only have 5 successful defences in a row. Seul has only 3 unless you count no shows.

1/

The rule was always consecutive so rule shouldn't even have the title off of that. Same with Rai and Seul

First, Rai had the complete decision. He wouldn't lose anything by saying no. He signed up to shut everyone up. He's sick of being called out and is confident he can out ILL in his place

I mentioned this potential battle in that thread. Rai was already down at that point but the only sticking point was ILLs account. Rai later said fuck it and accepted. Rai has completely not been forced into the defence, he's just being a gangster and wants to dead these threads.

As for RULEs point, no shows have always counted.

Wasn't aware that i No Showed vs RULE in the LBA...?

Anyway, yeah, i agree. If Rai has to go through this then so should others. It's only right.

No shows shouldn't count. We don't credit people for no show wins anywhere else on the site, why do it with this?

Exactly they shouldnt.

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?

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

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.

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.

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/

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.

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.

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

A king title SHOULD be a 2+ year achievement.

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

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.

You've seen the thread. I asked for peoples feedback, for clarity.

They didnt want anyone stripped so we changed it to 7 successful LBA title matches, including no shows. As thats the only criteria that allows me and Seul to keep the title.

What we need really is a new LBA host, and let them pick the achievement.

Agree with Lock here. :high:

Oh i agree its weird as fuck. Does the Illo account have 3 blue flames? Seems to be the only reason i could imagine him not wanting to use it.

Yeah, this shits a joke.

Theres an event once a month. You want it to be 10 defences....that equals 2 years?

I think its bullshit to try and bring in Seul. You dont like those rules, cool, thats still the rules and always has been. Pretty sure some people no showed ILLoKWENT too. ITs alright if for some reason you want to punish the guys who show, not sure why you would, but okay, you have an opinion on the currently in place rules and perhaps that could be looked at separately.

But if you want a solution for RULE, just do what we're doing for Rai. Have RULE battle Biz, if he wins, count it as his 6th def with one more to go. If he loses, it counts as 5 defences.

Perfect solution for me but who knows if people would go for it.

Yes it does. Like c'mon it looks like a complete joke, imo.

I disagree with this. Me and Kiwi are probably going forward with this but youre talking about putting the legacy of something pretty dope in the hands of a non democratic decision

Illo is the only person to have 7 defenses excluding no shows I'm pretty sure and should be the only one with the title.

Everyone else's title is a participation trophy at this point.

But that still wouldnt be an consecutive win lol

I have 7 LBA title matches that ive won. Whether people think defending it in the scheme tourney should count or not, the LBA host gave me the green light.

And beating someone in a scheme tournament is much MUCH better than winning via no show.

Here's an idea: One LBA & LBT king ONLY.

Title goes to the person with the most LBA / LBT title victories.

Simple & easy.

Lmfao @ all of this.

When it comes to the LBA, Everyone's got a false title at this point haha

@BizzyOne you see what he just said bruhhhh

And they do count. They would also have counted if someone no showed him, like they have for every other LB_ champion ever.

But that's a separate issue. If you dont like no show wins, cool, make a thread. As it stands they count and Seuls title isnt in question what so ever.

This a good idea

Still should be 7 consecutive ACTUAL wins minimum and then I agree.

the lba and lbt king should be voted for. an annual event where we decide who's had the most impressive run in the lba/lbt as of the current year.

how this would work? we'll start with a vote since it's january. let's say rule gets lba king and esso gets lbt king. then next year in jan we'll vote again. let's say kiwi wins over shodan this jan and defends his title all year against some big names. well then next year it wouldn't be a shocker for him to be voted lbt king.

I dont see why the number 7 so important lol

Surely the if someone has 3x 6 win streaks they are more a "King" than one person with a 7 streak.

I'd be waiving the consecutive win requirement due to every other guy running this shit being a dumbass and I believe its unfair to strip titles based on people being dumbasses.

the number 7 is random and meaningless. we need new criteria. i propose an annual vote.

Put this into place as the rule, if in case of a No Show occurring, have a 'stand in' ready in line to step in and take the match up. Would mean a few new lines would have to be wrote or some re-wrote but a title defence would still take place.

7 wins in a row, you're the King. (though OCD kicking in, 8 looks & sounds better imo)