Should the former champ get an automatic rematch?

When a champion loses his belt should he get an automatic rematch or should he have to earn it like everyone else? I think the champ should get the rematch.

No. I think once you lose, you should have to fight at least once more in order to get that rematch. There are exceptions of course, such as the BJ Penn controversy.

Only if it's a thin tight decision, not when they get knocked out

It all depends on the situation.

BJ Penn's situation? Yeah.

Machida after getting ROFLstomped like that? Hell no. Get in line like the rest of the contenders in the division.

Agree on the close decisions.

I might also give a quick rematch if the champ has been champ for a loooong time. So if Sonnen beats Silva then Silva can get a rematch ASAP.

freakzilla316ftw wrote:

When a champion loses his belt should he get an automatic rematch or should he have to earn it like everyone else? I think the champ should get the rematch.

No, if the champ loses and gets an immediate rematch you technically could have the same 2 guys fighting for the belt every time with no one else getting a chance.

Not here. Three fights in a row for these two is not warranted and very few fights are ever instant rematch worthy in my opinion.

Everyone summed it right up.

IMO we just saw Rua beat Machida twice in a row

let Machida jump back in line

Birdofthad wrote:

IMO we just saw Rua beat Machida twice in a row

let Machida jump back in line

+1 on this Bird. I thought Shogun won the 1st fight and clearly last night he ended the Machida hype train! No immediate rematch when u get KOed the way he did. Close decision yes, KO I dont think so!

When a fight is controversial I don't have a problem with an immediate rematch, however, when a finish is as decisive as the one last night an immediate rematch isn't warranted.

Agreed Bigs there is no question about who won that fight last night.

or say it was something like Cung Le vs. Scott Smitch where the champion dominated for 4 and a half rounds without the challenger even landing a punch and then they get caught and lose the belt. I say something like that would be grounds for a rematch but it rarely happens like that in big title fights.

Yeah then in a case like that u would have to at least think about it.

KingsOwn19 wrote:

or say it was something like Cung Le vs. Scott Smitch where the champion dominated for 4 and a half rounds without the challenger even landing a punch and then they get caught and lose the belt. I say something like that would be grounds for a rematch but it rarely happens like that in big title fights.

I wouldn't give Cung a rematch because it was his own fault that he lost. He gassed, it wasn't that he got screwed by the judges or anything, he just gassed. He wants to have a movie career instead of stay in top shape. The Penn vs. Edgar decision or Machida vs. Shogun I are completely different IMO.

KingsOwn19 wrote:

Only if it's a thin tight decision, not when they get knocked out

+1

Anytime a Champ loses a split dec fight it should be a no brainer rematch that is announced that same night. Now if you lose 50-45 on all 3 cards then no way you deserve a rematch.