Title Eliminators: Should they be extended?
Title Eliminators: Should they be extended?
During season's past in Week 6, the "Big Four" boxing bodies each select a quartet of contenders to fight in an elimination tournament for their title(s).
The suggestion put forward is: Should the "Big Four" this season each select eight fighters to compete in the eliminators?
WHAT WOULD THAT MEAN?
Well for starters, there would be a total of 32 fighters involved, which spreads the interest around (in the spirit of comradeship). The Title Eliminators would start in Week 5 and finish in Week 7. Each body would be assigned 8 boxers and the Quarters would take place in Week 5. It would be a straight knockout format.
So gentlmen and Hall Of Famers would you support expansion?
The suggestion put forward is: Should the "Big Four" this season each select eight fighters to compete in the eliminators?
WHAT WOULD THAT MEAN?
Well for starters, there would be a total of 32 fighters involved, which spreads the interest around (in the spirit of comradeship). The Title Eliminators would start in Week 5 and finish in Week 7. Each body would be assigned 8 boxers and the Quarters would take place in Week 5. It would be a straight knockout format.
So gentlmen and Hall Of Famers would you support expansion?
Re: Title Eliminators: Should they be extended?
Personally as a Manager I would be keen on it. As a bit of early-season excitement. Something to really fight for.

Re: Title Eliminators: Should they be extended?
We'll keep this poll open until Week 5 starts.

-
BigJuicyHog
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 749
- Joined: 11 Oct 2005, 22:24
Re: Title Eliminators: Should they be extended?
Yes. It would make it feel like the managers taking tough fights are less penalized than if ones fight the Eric Crumbles of the world got a shot.
Re: Title Eliminators: Should they be extended?
Utter bollocks.
32 fighters in eliminators, wtfs that all about?
32 fighters in eliminators, wtfs that all about?
Re: Title Eliminators: Should they be extended?
There would be only SIX fighters who don't make the cut. What's the point of the first 6 weeks?
-
BigJuicyHog
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 749
- Joined: 11 Oct 2005, 22:24
Re: Title Eliminators: Should they be extended?
Dont get mad because you will actually have to face some decent competitionJDC wrote:Utter bollocks.
32 fighters in eliminators, wtfs that all about?
Re: Title Eliminators: Should they be extended?
It's the government subsidy program...."Everybody is a champ".
New Health and Human Services initiative.
New Health and Human Services initiative.
Re: Title Eliminators: Should they be extended?
BigJuicyHog wrote:Dont get mad because you will actually have to face some decent competitionJDC wrote:Utter bollocks.
32 fighters in eliminators, wtfs that all about?
The rules I made my decision on were in place for YEARS before this thread.
Re: Title Eliminators: Should they be extended?
Leave alone.
-
Deadendgeneration
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 1906
- Joined: 21 Feb 2009, 19:01
Re: Title Eliminators: Should they be extended?
If this makes all the Butterbean and Crumble fights pointless then I'm all for it.
Re: Title Eliminators: Should they be extended?
32 of 38 managed fighters 
Re: Title Eliminators: Should they be extended?
There are Managers who haven't commented, have your say. At the moment, the vote is leaning toward YES.
Re: Title Eliminators: Should they be extended?
It's 4-3 in favour of YES but I strongly suggest you veto this.
Maybe if everyone was in agreement, but we're not.
The relics of the Sim have all said no. Their votes should count twice.
Maybe if everyone was in agreement, but we're not.
The relics of the Sim have all said no. Their votes should count twice.
Re: Title Eliminators: Should they be extended?
Voting polls will be left open until the eleventh hour.
There have been reports of goons with bats acting in an intimidating fashion, scaring off the electorate.
There have been reports of goons with bats acting in an intimidating fashion, scaring off the electorate.
Re: Title Eliminators: Should they be extended?
The first half-dozen fights make upwhere fighters are in the rankings. The higher ranked guys will fight lower ranked guys and vice versa. These weeks were necessary to place fighters in the standings for the Title Eliminators to happen.JDC wrote:There would be only SIX fighters who don't make the cut. What's the point of the first 6 weeks?
Re: Title Eliminators: Should they be extended?
I am NOT trying to change anything, as always the Sim Public will decide this matter. And this is not a matter of change, this is a matter of expansion.DetroitHxC wrote:Leave it alone. Stop trying to change EVERYTHING FFS!
Certain Managers thise season have complained about others taking easy fights to ensure their place in the top 16, which guarantees them a spot in the Title Eliminators... This expansion would combat that issue.
Re: Title Eliminators: Should they be extended?
Indeed. It means that practically every Manager will have an interest in the tournaments. If this should come into effect, it will be somewhat reminiscent of the Heavyweight Tournament that the WBA organised back in the 1960s (ultimately won by Jimmy Ellis).JDC wrote:32 of 38 managed fighters
Re: Title Eliminators: Should they be extended?
DetroitHxC wrote:Four people have said no, but only three have voted.
Vote you fvcking queers!
Sorry
Re: Title Eliminators: Should they be extended?
The vote is now 5-4 in the favour of NO! As always the wisdom of the crowd will decide this.
Re: Title Eliminators: Should they be extended?
Though I am not keen on fighters fighting Zelenoff and the others, having so many fighters (32 out of 38) included does, in my opinion, dilute this a little. No a bad idea but one that kind of thrusts the excitement level upon us, rather than allow it to build and grow. Some may lose interest.
An easier solution would be to remove the likes of Zelenoff, Crumble, Esch etc completely. That said, I will go with what the majority say.
An easier solution would be to remove the likes of Zelenoff, Crumble, Esch etc completely. That said, I will go with what the majority say.
Re: Title Eliminators: Should they be extended?
The vote is NO then. And the Title Eliminators shall remain as they are (16 man affairs).
Re: Title Eliminators: Should they be extended?
With the ranking issues, will we be having eliminators to determine mandatories?