Tune-up Fights and Mandatory Defenses: when/how often should a champ face good comp?

[fan johnny]

I for one thing you are looking at this from the wrong perspective.

There should be no such thing as a tuneup fight for any fighter holding a belt. All legitimate challengers have the "right" to fight for the championship.

The holder of the belt should have to face a challenger within 180 days of his last match. If he champion is unable to fight, then he doesn't deserve to hold the title does he? or lay out your reasoning for why you think he does.

If you want to give him some symbolic title, if he fails to face a mandated challenger then might be the right thing to do, but he should have to face the legitimate challenger.

Tuneup fights are for those fighters that have the image and draw, or for a fighter waiting for his payday to arrive.

Perhaps a term like exhibition match would be more appropriate use for a tuneup fight?

[Drago]

I for one thing you are looking at this from the wrong perspective.

There should be no such thing as a tuneup fight for any fighter holding a belt. All legitimate challengers have the "right" to fight for the championship.

The holder of the belt should have to face a challenger within 180 days of his last match. If he champion is unable to fight, then he doesn't deserve to hold the title does he? or lay out your reasoning for why you think he does.

If you want to give him some symbolic title, if he fails to face a mandated challenger then might be the right thing to do, but he should have to face the legitimate challenger.

Tuneup fights are for those fighters that have the image and draw, or for a fighter waiting for his payday to arrive.

Perhaps a term like exhibition match would be more appropriate use for a tuneup fight?

good post, its a world title at the end of the day, not a pick & choose u can do that before u win the title.

[Drago]

oh wait i forgot abt MONEY thats all that matters for some champs