King Titles

[Student]

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Also I reread that thread @RULE originally made and the majority agreed that nobody should have their title stripped so that shouldn't even be in question, this should only be regarding future LBA/LBT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.

[Student]

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Also I reread that thread @RULE originally made and the majority agreed that nobody should have their title stripped so that shouldn't even be in question, this should only be regarding future LBA/LBT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.