Seriously, this is gay. When a fight is controversial (i.e.- randy v. rizzo, randy v. vitor), I see why a match-maker would want to put together a rematch.

But when there is a decisive win, there is no reason for it (unless the fighters have earned another shot or improved a lot, etc.)

I don't want to see ken v. tito again. I want to see tito v. vernon...I want to see Ken v. Mir.

I don't want to see Silva v. Sak beatdown for the 4th time. I want to see Sak v. Henderson...I want to see Silva v. Busta...I want to see Nino v. Henderson, etc. etc. etc.

What do you all think?

i think people want to see a healthy Ken vs Tito, and if Ken wins its great for the HW division, and if Tito wins it helps him get back on track after 2 losses in a row

I also think that Jake Lamotta fought Sugar Ray Robinson 6 times, and all 6 were good fights

But at the loss other other great fights that will become less likely to happen.

i'm sorry, i have no idea what you're trying to say

I don't know why but I cracked up at "i'm sorry, i have no idea what you're trying to say" :)

For stepping up and fighting severely injured, Ken deserves a rematch.

Ken vs Frank Mir. Yes.

Many other great matches will not happen when they give rematches to fights where the fans are very likely to already know the result.

This thread is not just about Tito v. Ken. But on that note, they both were getting over injuries. I don't think even Ken really makes excuses for his loss to Tito.

Amazingly, I actually agree 100% with omaplata... :)

to be more accurate, Ken was injured and Tito was overcoming his injury...

but yeah, I only like rematches when there is a contraversial decision/circumstance or if the losing fighter has greatly improved