Should the length of time you don't defend your title be decreased?

[M Bison]

By this I mean guys for example last nights Russell Jr and Adonis Stevenson who have got world titles in their possession who seemingly only fight once a year.

Should the limit of time you don't defend your title be decreased from a year to say maybe something realistic 6 months before the possibility of having your title stripped?
There obviously could be variables to defend guys who have picked up an injury those guys being an exception thus extending the limit by another 6 months so they can adequately recover.

This would prevent older guys and less active guys from somewhat holding titles "hostage" and allow for more action in the division, what do you think?

[pacmanis1]

By this I mean guys for example last nights Russell Jr and Adonis Stevenson who have got world titles in their possession who seemingly only fight once a year.

Should the limit of time you don't defend your title be decreased from a year to say maybe something realistic 6 months before the possibility of having your title stripped?
There obviously could be variables to defend guys who have picked up an injury those guys being an exception thus extending the limit by another 6 months so they can adequately recover.

This would prevent older guys and less active guys from somewhat holding titles "hostage" and allow for more action in the division, what do you think?

I think a year is realistic. Say Fighter A fights in January and has an injury. He can't train for a few months after. Then fighter B, which is the fighter everyone wants to see fight fighter A does't fight until June. Well then thats 6 months until negotiations can begin. I see where you're coming from and like it in theory but the reality would probably end up being more mismatch title fights.

[boliodogs]

I think barring injury it should be every 6 months. If a champion is injured he should be required to prove the injury and then get a year to defend the title. If he needs more than a year to defend the title he should lose the title and get a chance to win it back later. Also only top 10 contenders should get title shots and the number 1 contender should get a title shot once a year. The way things are now with some champions fighting less than once a year and fighting a guy ranked 15th or lower when they do fight, the best challengers can be avoided for ever. Hagler used to defend his title about 4 times a year and always against a top 5 or higher rated contender.

[D4thincarnation]

Yeah, 6 months for a defence 1 year for a mandatory defence.

Don't do them get stripped.

But you get the chance to fight for that title on your return if it is in a year of getting stripped.

[Boksfan]

Absolutely yes, no excuse for world champion to fight less than twice a year! No real boxing fan will say otherwise.

[Phenom]

there will just be more vacant champions running around that never beat a champion, and the sanctioning bodies will just sell the vacated belt to the highest bidder

Great idea for the abc belts though

[Eff Pandas]

I think with just the logistics of putting on a fight a year makes sense. I would say I think injuries should have a certain threshold to be able to use as a means to extend that 1 year period if need be. But if you got some bs-ish type injury I'd like to see guys stripped, I'd like to see guys stripped after a certain period (maybe 18mos) even if a legit injury & and if you repeatedly injured back to back I don't think you get an extension at all you meet the deadline on a defense or are stripped.