The Measure of a Championship
Photo: WWE
In this week’s edition of The Wrestling Estate Roundtable, the staff discusses what makes a great championship title belt, as well as other pertinent questions related to one of wrestling’s key components.
What makes a good-looking title belt from a physical standpoint?
Steven Jackson
It’s such an interesting question – what makes a good-looking title belt? It’s very subjective but for me, it comes down to two things: the overall design and how it looks in the hands of a champion. Take for example the WWE Championship design of 2002 to 2005.
I love that title belt because the design came through the screen and everyone who held it, it immediately stood out in photos. The original ROH World Championship from 2002 to 2010 follows the same route.
Curt Lemon
The fit of the belt is important, not too big and not too small, which can be difficult in the world of Pro Wrestling where body types range from every end of the spectrum. I always think the main plate being curved is important. I was never a fan of the WCW title when it was flat, it just looked awkward around peoples waist. It was improved when WWE brought it back with a curve. Same for the original flat NWA title when Flair held it, the new version is larger and curved and in my opinion, an improvement. Many of the Reggie Parks designs are my favorites.
A lot of title designs were reused like the old ECW TV (winged eagle variation) and even the ECW Tag Team (IC title variations). A lot of companies in the territory days used the same design, the Memphis Mid-South title was also used in Florida and other companies (including most recently on the Wrestling Estate branded Territory title in ECWA).
Harvey Garcia
A championship belt needs three things: a regal centerpiece, a good pop of color, and the feeling of texture and weight from a glance. All three of these influence one another, but in my opinion, the order of priority favors the intangible beauty of the center plate, followed by the color work, then the appearance of texture and weight.
Tajiri finds the MWF Pinoy Wrestling Championship — a uniquely-shaped entity, lovingly known as the “Jeepney Belt” — to be “the coolest in the world,” and I feel the same. But my favorite belts in wrestling are the TJPW Princess titles. They’re attractive and adorable pastel belts, and they fit the promotion’s aesthetic so well.
Jack Goodwillie
I think it’s going to depend on scope in most cases. For example, I believe the World Heavyweight Championship (aka The Big Gold Belt) and the WWE United States Championship belt of that same era to both have exceptional designs, though one is much flashier looking than the other. I think having a gold/silver/bronze type of alloy color as a primary part of the package is a must. I think it’s also where a lot of the brand-themed belts of modern WWE fail. A belt, after all, is essentially a trophy wrestlers carry with them and defend when necessary. It only makes sense to make it look like something to aspire for as opposed to a child’s play thing.
From there, I think both white and black straps work. The TNT title having a red strap makes some sense, but I think it would look every bit as good with a black strap. I guess red would be the one exception, as I wasn’t too much of a fan of the Intercontinental Championship with the green strap. I also like the use of jewels on title belts as a complement to the centerpiece. The more expensive you can make it look, the more prestige it should have upon its inception.
John Corrigan
Every championship belt should have at least a hint of gold. After all, that’s what we associate with in sports as the “best.” Case in point, Ric Flair is viewed as the gold standard in pro wrestling because the big gold belt never left his waist for most of the ’80s. And, I won’t be the first to mention this, but WWE’s current crop of belts with the giant dumb logo in the center are awful.
To quote fashion guru Billy from School of Rock, “they’re tacky and I hate them.”
What is the best way to build prestige for a title?
Steven Jackson
The best way for titles to build prestige is frequent defences, the length of champions reigns and the quality of the matches. Along with this, the champion NEEDS to carry the belt like it’s his life. Take Triple H as World Heavyweight Champion between 2003 to 2005. His attitude and promos all revolved around how the title meant more to him than life itself. Follow that formula and any title will build prestige.
Curt Lemon
I think the frequency you see the title being defended is important. I know WWE likes to use the example that back in the day the champion only defended on the big shows, and that’s true…but all the shows were big shows, except TV. Now TV is their big shows. When I think of a guy who made the title and not the other way around, my immediate thought was Rob Van Dam and the ECW TV title. That title was defended often and the caliber of matches were like nothing else, plus the title reign went on for quite awhile, especially in that era when title reigns lasted days or weeks, not months.
Harvey Garcia
Even from an aesthetic standpoint, I think committing to a core design helps develop that attachment with fans to help create that prestige. Changing designs too soon can cause some people to dissociate with a title for a bit.
Apart from that, it’s just the Tony Stark quote: “If you’re nothing without this suit, then you shouldn’t have it.” A championship represents the best wrestler in the top spot, in that division, at that particular time. Now, the prestige is part-status, part-emotional connection. Which means it’s partly the memorable stories, the valiant fights for the title, and a genuine effort to promote title matches as a bigger deal than other parts of the card. But also partly building trust with the audience organically, with time.
Jack Goodwillie
I think this could be chalked up to a number of things, but I think the most important thing a wrestling championship has is its title history. The higher the quality of names that are holding a belt, the more prestigious the belt becomes. Granted, I do think it’s important that good matches are prioritized, if for no other reason than to not create a negative stigma around a belt.
However, one of the best things AEW ever did was make Chris Jericho its first world champion. Was he over the hill? Maybe. He certainly is now, no question about it. But a wrestler with Jericho’s popularity and longevity carrying around the AEW World Championship gave the title instant credibility, and for as hit or miss as AEW tends to be, its world championship is one of wrestling’s more prestigious titles at the moment. I don’t think long reigns necessarily equate to prestige either. I feel like the two most common schools of thought are that great matches (IE the WWE Intercontinental Championship) and long title reigns (IE the WWE Championship) are what gives belts the most prestige. However, the Intercontinental Championship feels more like the exception than the rule, and anybody other than Roman Reigns holding the WWE Championship as long as he has would probably be getting go-away heat right now – further evidence to the point that the champion makes the championship.
John Corrigan
How many champions are too many?
Steven Jackson
More than six titles is too many for me. So I go with (dependent on the size of the promotion): one world title, one midcard title, one lower card/stipulation title, a set of tag titles, a women’s title and a set of women’s tag team championships.
Having too many titles just dilutes a lot of other championships on your roster. We complain WWE has too many belts, take a look at NJPW!? Why they’ve so many championships I’ve no idea?!
Curt Lemon
I think you have your main champion, semi main champion and tag champions. If you are a show with any degree of frequency having a third title that can pop around and maybe have a different set of rules can also be an advantage. I would say right now both WWE and AEW have too many belts.
Harvey Garcia
The ideal promotion in my head has a champion for each of the main divisions. The top singles belt, the top tag belt, and the second singles belt with unique traditions; in that order of priority, for men and women each. If the rosters expand further, there may be room for a trios belt or, perish the thought, a third singles belt with unique traditions once again.
There are too many belts if there is no uniqueness or delineation between champions in the same division. Three singles belts aren’t necessary no matter what part of the globe they represent. Depth over variety.
Jack Goodwillie
Like many thing in wrestling, it depends. A small enough promotion with a small enough roster may only need justification for one or belts depending on if they have enough tag teams to make a division (which is probably three or four at minimum). For a show the size of Monday Night Raw or AEW Dynamite, I think the way to go is this: World Championship, Intercontinental Championship, Women’s Championship, Tag Team Championship. If this were another time where champions could float, I’d keep all of these titles and add a Cruiserweight/X-Division Championship under the condition that they aren’t booked as completely inferior to other champions on the roster.
I am definitely NOT looking to include a trios championship. I feel as though tag team wrestling, as much as I like it, is pretty niche as is, and the rule of thumb is that more belts = lessened prestige. With trios titles, you’re crowning three champions every time the belt is defended, which is basically half the amount of maximum titles I would permit on a show anyway. The oversaturation of champions is one of AEW’s biggest problems. Between the trios titles, the multiple midcard titles and wrestlers wearing belts from other companies, it feels like there is a champion competing in almost every match on a typical Dynamite card.
To quote the great philosopher, “Syndrome” from “The Incredibles,” “and when everyone’s super, no one will be!”
John Corrigan
There are currently too many belts in wrestling. I prefer the old WWWF/WWF allotment of world champion, tag team champions, midcard champion and women’s champion. That covers all the bases, and you could even argue that the midcard belt is unnecessary because everybody should be gunning for their division’s top prize.
Has the importance of title belts diminished with time?
Steven Jackson
I don’t think it’s diminished during modern times (look at Roman Reigns WWE title reign for example). But building back that legitimacy which was built in the 1940s onwards is hard. I feel that’s a trait in all sports though. We want to look back retrospectively at certain achievements rather than suddenly have them broken. The place of championships in modern times should be the same as it’s always been. Create a talent to be the face of the company, build up prestige and, in turn, the legitimacy of a promotion.
Curt Lemon
I think they have, but it can be fixed. Consolidating titles and making sure you aren’t creating belts to avoid hurt-feelings (looking at you, Tony Khan) would be a start.
Harvey Garcia
Title matches are more frequent nowadays. In the USA, matches for the top belts don’t necessarily close TV or some PPVs anymore. Attention has shifted more toward performance over pure star power, usually a position belonging to the champions. So, I get the perception that championships in wrestling today have diminished in importance, but I disagree.
I think the world and the contexts just change. There’s so much more content to deal with. Watch habits skew toward earlier segments of visual media. And championships aren’t the draw anymore. For better or worse, consistency is the draw now.
Jack Goodwillie
I think they have, but to connect this to a previous answer of mine, the value of titles and the star power of the champion are correlative. When wrestlers who aren’t over hold titles, the prestige begins to erode, though in WWE’s case, this plays right into their business model. WWE’s model under Vincent J. McMahon has always been to build the product around one superstar, ride them into the ground and find a replacement only when the previous cash cow is on their last legs. Things were different in the ’80s because Hulk Hogan‘s footprint in entertainment rubbed off onto basically any wrestler who appeared on WWE television with any sort of consistency. This ripple effect stayed with the company for years, and I’d say it dissipated right around the time Du-Rag Vince won the ECW World Championship.
John Cena and Batista, for all their great qualities were not the period heroes Hogan was and TV ratings crashed. All of a sudden, WWE would have to get wrestlers over organically as individuals, and with less-over wrestlers came less-over titles. I do think the arrow is pointing up, however, thanks to the epic reigns Roman Reigns and Gunther have had in recent years, and for as popular as both have become, it seems as though the best is still yet to come.
John Corrigan
For 20 years or so, championships were missing prestige. But in recent years, thanks to the booking of Roman Reigns, Bianca Belair and Gunther, WWE’s titles are slowly regaining their value. In contrast to Vince Russo‘s belief that championships are merely props, belts should be the focus of a wrestling show. It’s perhaps the best way to make pro wrestling feel like any other professional sport. While personal issues and dramatic storylines are also vital, wrestling is at its most captivating when those issues and storylines are wrapped around championship matches.
What marriage of wrestler and title belt do you think complemented one another the best?
Steven Jackson
So many wrestlers and championships to choose from!? But for me one combination is the epitome of wrestling champion. Harley Race and the NWA World Heavyweight Championship. Now although Lou Thesz came before Mr. Race and Ric Flair came after, Race will always have the “perfect” marriage of championship belt and champion to me.
Curt Lemon
I cited RVD and the ECW TV title earlier, but recently you couldn’t think of the NWA without thinking of Nick Aldis (now no one thinks about the NWA, at all).
Harvey Garcia
Cody Rhodes and the NWA Worlds Heavyweight Championship in 2018. For entire generations, the Ten Pounds of Gold represented the champion of the territories. But for decades, it had also gone away into small-scale obscurity. Cody, along with The Elite, championed the visibility and credibility of promotions big and small, leading to the creation of the historic All In. And for him to hold the title synonymous with his legendary father at said event — even for a fleeting few months — I can’t think of a more complementary pair.
Jack Goodwillie
Du-Rag Vince and the ECW Championship. Just kidding. There are a ton of great answers that come to mind. For a long time, it felt like the Big Gold Belt was surgically attached around the waist of Triple H. The same could be said for Jeff Jarrett and the NWA World Heavyweight Championship. How about Trish Stratus and the WWE Women’s Championship pre-Women’s Revolution? What about the longest-running Intercontinental Champion of all time? I feel like these are all great answers, but my final answer is actually going to be JBL and the Undisputed WWE Championship. He was the champion when I started watching wrestling, and for a while it was extremely difficult to picture that belt on the shoulder of anybody else. On top of that, that title run completely changed the way we think of JBL. Doesn’t happen without that belt.
John Corrigan
This should be its own roundtable or list because I’ve got a dozen off the top of my head. For example, has a title ever done more for someone than the Hardcore Championship did for Crash Holly? If the “Hardcore Houdini” didn’t escape treacherous situations with the belt on a weekly basis, he’d be totally forgotten today.
You can follow The Wrestling Estate on Twitter @thewrestlingest
About Author
