Talk:Triple Crown (professional wrestling)/Archive 5

Archive

 * For all your US title questions please read this first.
 * For all your ECW related questions please read this first.

The OVW Triple Crown
SilentRage decided to blank the OVW section, stating "OVW is irrellivant". I applaud him for being bold but I do't feel that blanking a section without discussion is constructive and if there is one thing the TCC talk page is renowned for it's long discussions. I would rather not have to keep reverting so I will state what I think. I have never seen any OVW wrestling, but I know that it breeds a good deal of the current WWE roster, so if OVW by itself is notable and we have pages for all three titles then a table to inform those who have an interest of who has won the three titles should be kept. Maybe it should be moved from the TCC page to the OVW page. But if SilentRage feels that OVW is "irrellivant" then maybe he should find some sources to improve its "rellivance". I slapped an OR tag on it before the AfD debate but that was a flag for others to find sources, not an invite to blank the section. Darrenhusted 14:21, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Simply put, OVW isn't a major promotion. If we put OVW, then we'll have to put DSW, and a bunch of other mid-level federations. The list would be way too long. I actually would like to question you on why you would actually think that OVW is on the level of national promotions like WWE or TNA and why you think it is greater than, let's say, DSW or ROH. In fact, I think there was already a discussion and consensus on leaving-out the non-major promotions off the list. Check the archives. --- Silent RAGE!  17:16, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I watch OVW every week they give the triple crown championship status out and they regularly mention if someone is a triple crown champion so maybe have one page for the major promotions and one for the rest but don't get rid of it. Browndog91

The page says Triple Crown, but is it really.

 * Hi! everyone. Okay I have a question why does the page say Triple Crown when we only accept WWE and TNA triple Crown records? Why not ECW, WCW, or OVW? What about indy promotions? We need to change the page to include everything. Not just TNA and WWE. If we don't change the page then change the name. It says Triple Crown and it should say TNA and WWE Triple Crown Championship. Or Triple Crown Championship in Major Professional Wrestling.-- Will C  07:05, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

It did have OVW and WCW listed, but they were unreferenced. I moved the OVW to the OVW page. Darrenhusted (talk) 08:06, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I was just at the OVW page. Where did it go?-- Will C  08:10, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't know, check the history. It was there, but as it has no refs it could have been removed, it has been a year or so since I moved it. Darrenhusted (talk) 08:45, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I believe you but I just don't understand how come certain stuff gets taken down but I've seen other stuff with no source at all be kept than something that is easier to believe.-- Will C  19:30, 17 June 2008 (UTC)


 * The problem with your logic is that it is, well, logic :P. When dealing with human beings, the logical course of action is usually the course that isn't taken. Don't try to understand it; if something seems stupid at first glance it probably is. Cheers,  The Hybrid   03:20, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay. I didn't even understand what you meant. Whatever. But why don't we add the OVW and ECW Triple Crowns to ��e page as well. It is the Triple Crown Championship page and there is more Triple Crowns than the WWE and TNA Crowns.-- Will C  06:57, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Because there are no sources. Just because other stuff without sources is kept doesn't mean we have to keep this. Other mistakes don't justify more. Cheers,  The Hybrid   07:43, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay if I can find a source for the OVW and ECW Triple Crowns can I add them then?-- Will C  07:56, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
 * If it's reliable, yes. Cheers,  The Hybrid   17:21, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay.-- Will C  19:12, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Multiple Triple Crowns
The lead states that there is a Multiple Triple Crown. If so, why aren't the multiple triple crown winners in WWE listed? Chris Jericho, The Rock, Steve Austin and Bret Hart are each 2-time Triple Crown winners, Shawn Michaels is a 3-time Triple Crown winner and Edge is an astounding 5-time Triple Crown winner. I think they should be listed. Feed back  ☎ 14:51, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * That only applies to TNA. Tenay and West often make reference to Styles being a "three time Triple Crown Champion." WWE never makes any such mention. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 14:54, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeah, but WWE never makes any mention that the Triple Crown even exists. So, I think that argument isn't really consistent with the rest of the article. Because, apparently, I thought that the Triple Crown championship was something invented by the fans. But, if it's something WWE invented, and they don't mention it anymore, then I think that the last Triple Crown champion mentioned on TV is in fact the last triple crown champion. Who was this? Feed  back  ☎ 19:52, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * WWE.com occasionally mentions the Triple Crown. It's sourced in the article, check the links. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 00:10, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The only source from WWE is that Pedro Morales is a Triple Crown Champion. Basically, there is absoulutely no other source. I challenge this as WP:OR. Feed  back  ☎ 19:44, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Revisiting this. I know TNA has caled Styles a 3 time Triple Crown champion, but I don't see the need to list him multiple times. There have only been 3 triple crown champions, and Styles is already one so he is not a potential triple crown champ. Maybe we could make a note below the table, but that's it. I think (this is my theory only) that TNA started calling Styles that because for a long time he was the only triple crown champ.  TJ   Spyke   23:54, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe it is Final Resolution (2005) before the amazing Ultimate X match for the X title between Chris Sabin, A.J. Styles, and Petey Williams, where Tenay and West agree by saying that he has won all the titles in TNA three times apiece and is a three time Triple Crown champion as a result. I believe we should list each time it has happened and not be selective.-- Will C  00:00, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

How about adding a summary table similar to the one in the snooker article - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_Crown_(snooker) so show how many of each titles the wrestler has won, then you can work out how many times they have won a company triple crown? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.74.244 (talk) 12:52, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

US Championship title?
Isn't the US Championship equal in level to the Intercontinental Championship? By extension couldn't it be held as a proxy for the Intercontinental Championship, much like the WHC and the WWE titles?
 * Long answer: This has been discussed before. It assumed that they are of equal level, but doing so is original research which is not permitted on Wikipedia. WWE.com has pages that confirm WWE tag titles and WHC as proxies for the World tag and WWE titles, but so for the US title. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 18:35, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Short answer: No. Gavyn Sykes (talk) 18:35, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Isn't matt hardy close to a triple crown or is he a triple crown because he was the tag team champion ( world and wwe) The Usa title and the Ecw championship

signed turtle —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.72.38.16 (talk) 03:13, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Nope, a former Tag champion needs an IC and World/WWE title reign. Matt has neither. Darrenhusted (talk) 14:05, 22 October 2008 (UTC)


 * I definitely don't consider the ECW Title a surrogate for the World Heavyweight or the WWE championships, especially since PWI and other organizations don't recognize it as a world title anymore. The US Championship SHOULD substitute the Intercontinental Title, but until we get clear confirmation, we can't say that it does. So Matt with the PRESENT state of the Triple Crown must have an Intercontinental Title and WWE/World Heavyweight title reign. So in short, I agree with Darren. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.151.84.17 (talk) 16:22, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I think i understand why the US title and ECW title are not included. This is because the ECW title of course was from ECW and brought over by the WWE, the same with the US title from WCW. All the other titles are founded and the history began with WWE. -- Sion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.202.209.101 (talk) 11:47, 25 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I still don't see why. Gavyn Sykes seems to think that although there is reason to believe that including the US title would be "original research" but isn't this whole article more or less original research? It's never been officially acknowledged by WWE. There is no official answer. Dahumorist (talk) 06:06, 15 December 2008 (UTC)


 * WWE did on Raw, Edge stated it on tv that it is real. Plus WWE says Grandslam and Triple Crown in their articles all the time. Will C  06:24, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

The ECW World Title is considered a World Title by the WWE and by Sections of the NWA so should it not be considered a World Title. Further more it is defended around the World on house shows and TV Tapings around the World so without doubt it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rawisrob2 (talk • contribs) 01:23, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The ECW Title has no world status. Because a championship is called a world title does not mean it is a world title. WWE nor the NWA give World status. You can call the OVW Championship a world title but it is not.-- Will C  01:59, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

If the ECW Title is not on the same level as the WWE Championship or the World Heavyweight Championship, then why do the winners of the Royal Rumble get to choose between the three titles? Prior to WrestleMania 23, all 3 champions stood in the ring on RAW and Undertaker had to make his decision as to who to challenge at WrestleMania. On WWE.com, you can find this exact paragraph in the Royal Rumble 2008 results page (www.wwe.com/shows/royalrumble/history/2008/matches/5267610321112/results/) "Cena will be looking to capture some gold in the Sunshine State at WrestleMania XXIV … but which champion will he choose to face? Will he go after the WWE Championship – currently held by Randy Orton – and look to regain the title he never lost in the ring from a man who never beat him for it? Or will Cena look to conquer a different mountain and challenge an old foe, World Heavyweight Champion Edge, or a new kingpin, ECW Champion Chavo Guerrero, for a title he has never worn?" Based on both, it is clear that the WWE now recognizes the ECW Title as an equal belt along the lines of the WWE Championship and World Heavyweight Championship, and thus, it should be on this page as part of the Triple Crown Championship. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jvibe222 (talk • contribs) 23:12, 4 February 2009 (UTC)


 * It isn't about the equality of the ECW Championship though. While it is true that the winner of the Royal Rumble and Money in the Bank ladder match are awarded a world title match, which includes the ECW Championship, WWE has yet to declare that the ECW Championship or the United States Championship also compose part of the Triple Crown or Grand Slam Champion status. -- Unquestionable Truth -- 04:19, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

And where is it sourced on here that the WWE specifically came out and stated that the World Heavyweight Championship and the WWE Tag Team Championships can compose part of the Triple Crown? Since those aren't sourced, someone obviously assumed they were equal to the WWE Championship and World Tag Team Championships, and decided to put them on here as part of the Triple Crown. Jvibe222 (talk) 04:25, 5 February 2009 (UTC)


 * He (Shawn Michaels) would also become the first-ever WWE “Grand Slam” Champion, winning the WWE, World Heavyweight, European, Intercontinental and World Tag Team Title gold. - World Heavyweight Championship composes part of Triple Crown and Grand Slam as an alternate world title. While most fans of this (Kurt Angle) former Grand Slam Champion... - Angle never won the World Tag Team Championship, only the WWE Tag Team Championship. Thus, the WWE Tag Team Championship is an alternative tag team title.-- Unquestionable Truth -- 04:39, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

But what would make it a world title. Title defences in Japan or Mexico would wouldn't it?-Rawisrob2 December 28, 2008 1159 a.m. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rawisrob2 (talk • contribs) 17:59, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Don't worry about it, whenever WWE recognizes that the United States Championship or the ECW Championship are or were eligible for a triple crown championship, then it will be known.Speculation on what makes it a world title or any kind will not be inserted into the article. — M o e   ε  20:33, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Potential Champions?
What is the point of the Potential Champions section? And if it actually has one [which I doubt], why shouldn't the non-contracted talent be placed? Owen Hart [who's dead], BG James, Val Venis, Ken Shamrock, Test, Lance Storm, Kip James, Rikishi, The Godfather, Roddy Piper, The Mountie, Jeff Jarrett, Marty Jannetty, Davey Boy Smith [also dead], Greg Valentine, Tito Santana and Christian [likely contracted to WWE] also fit the requirements of being "Potential Triple Crowns" even if they aren't contracted. Feed back  ☎  21:05, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Potentiality is relative. You're not entitled to "potentially" do something if you just can't do it. (You can't win a title if you don't work for the company.) As to the point of the section: no clue. --- Silent RAGE!  22:05, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
 * My opinion is that anybody still alive should be included, even if they aren't with the company (i.e. we would list Hulk Hogan as needing a IC Title reign).  TJ   Spyke   00:44, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * That's... Not happening. K P McZiggy  (they talk 2 me) 00:28, 17 February 2009 (UTC)


 * And Andre The Giant was a Potential Champion, he never won this title.

-201.207.245.14 (talk) 21:40, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Legends Championship
If say, Booker T. were to hold the TNA World Title and The Tag Team Titles, would he still be considered a Triple Crown Champion? Even if he didn't win the X-Division Title, he has the Legends belt... K P McZiggy (they talk 2 me) 00:28, 17 February 2009 (UTC)


 * But that is original research considering that TNA has made no mention or attempt to even consider the Legends Belt has anything to do with the Triple Crown championship.-- Will C  01:05, 17 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I’m sure this question will come up again, because AJ Styles is scheduled to challenge for the TNA Legends’ Championship at Destination X. Should AJ Styles win the Legends’ Champion, will he become TNA Wrestling’s first “Grand Slam” champion? (Will this be like Shawn Michaels winning the WWE, Intercontinental, European, and Tag Team Titles?) TNAFan09 (talk) 19:46, 25 February 2009 CLTC)


 * Doubtful it will go with the crown since the title `s not a TNA title. It was made by Booker in the storyline, so since it isn't an original title under the title management, it probably will not belong.-- Will C  20:28, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * It is a recognised title by TNA Management —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.46.197.126 (talk) 10:31, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

US & ECW Different Arguement
I read in a section above that the US & ECW championship were brought over from WCW & ECW. In the same section, someone made the arguement that assuming that the US championship is at the same level as the intercontinental championship is orginal research. Orginal Research is most certainly described as assuming that this ECW championship is the same as the previous one. The ECW championship should be recognized as a world championship, and the US championship should be recognized as a secondary. We don't call the WHC the WCW championship, now then do we? K P McZiggy (they talk 2 me) 00:32, 17 February 2009 (UTC)


 * The problem with that theory is this, the US Title was once the WCW US Title but WWE places it as a secondary title yes, but states that it isn't part of the Triple Crown. They have always considered the Triple Crown holding either one of the tag and either one of the world titles and the IC title. The ECW Title has also been used the same way and WWE even states it is the same title that was once in ECW, though they don't have the original belt since Rhino has it at the moment. WWE have made no mention of them being apart of the Triple Crown. So unless they state it, we can't go by that speculation or OR.-- Will C  01:09, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Please site where the WWE does state that the US Title and the ECW Title is not part of the Triple Crown.03:59, 20 March 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ldstryfe (talk • contribs)
 * We don't need references for things that are unsaid, you need references for unverified statements. The United States Championship and ECW Championship have never been acknowledged as something the Triple Crown can be completed with, so it won't be added without references. — Moe   ε  00:57, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Not Possible?
I really think the "not possible" designation needs to be removed. It is not "not possible" for Rob Van Dam or Kurt Angle or Booker T to win additional titles in WWE. Just because they aren't currently employed by WWE doesn't mean it's impossible. I can understand keeping people out of the "potential champions" section if they aren't currently with the company, since there's so many of them... but saying that it's "not possible" for any living person to win another title is factually incorrect. VWG (talk) 02:23, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "Just because they aren't currently employed by WWE doesn't mean it's impossible", is just logically incorrect. Unless they are rehired, that designation stays. — Moe   ε  15:52, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

I have to agree with VWG, it should say currently ineligible or something similar, No future reign possible makes it sound like there's no chance they could ever get hired again. Doesn't that violate the whole crystal ball thing? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.93.29.82 (talk) 20:48, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * No future reign possible, is fine. Being employed to WWE again would add them back as potential superstars who could accomplish it, however, saying they could just because they are active wrestlers is just, like you said, going against WP:CRYSTAL. Anyone could be hired or fired from WWE any given day, then again, that day may never come. — Moe   ε  16:49, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I have to agree with VWG and 24.93.29.82 - "1 ^ The wrestler is no longer employed by World Wrestling Entertainment or retired from professional wrestling, so future reigns are not possible." is very badly worded, and surely breaks WP:Crystal Ball. For example, there is no reason why Kurt Angle, or Ric Flair, can't return to the WWE, so a future reign is possible. I would suggest, and will be WP:Bold that "at this time" is added to that note. 81.156.230.98 (talk) 22:44, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * This `s ۋat I was coming to comment on... These guys aren't dead, sf it's not "impossible" that they could have those titles.  By definition, "not possible" is wrong here.  Flair left for quite some time between his world title reign and tag and IC reigns...  when he left in 92 or 94 or whatever, it didn't become "impossible" for him to get the other belts, obviously, as he DID.  It should say "not currently elligible." 71.171.103.194 (talk) 19:56, 25 September 2010 (UTC)Steve

The implication in the page is "at this time" as the page would be edited if Angle returned full time. Darrenhusted (talk) 23:45, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I have changed "possible" to "probable" (except where defunct titles and dead wrestlers are concerned). This just makes sense. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:11, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

AJ Styles
why is aj under triple crown champions and then underneath it states that he is a potential champion. he already is one.82.2.58.174 (talk) 19:51, 24 March 2009 (UTC)Black6989
 * He is acknowledged as a multi-TCC, therefore he still has the potential to be a quad-TCC. Darrenhusted (talk) 20:12, 24 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, AJ still has the ability to become a five time champion. He held the X Title 6 times and the NWA and TNA World tag titles 5 times in total. If he was to win the TNA World Title two times, he would become a five Triple Crown champion. Then if he won the tag belts again, he would be eligible once again to be a Triple Crown champion after he won the world title two times.-- Will C ---  Joe's gonna kill you!!! ) 20:17, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * A.J. should be removed from the potential champions list, he is not a potential champion anymore as he has already done it. Just because TNA goes through this BS (which I suspect they only did because he was the only one to do it), doesn't mean we should. Besides, if he meets the requirements again he can be added. My support goes to removing him.  TJ   Spyke   22:26, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * He is a potential 4 time Triple Crown Champion. So either way he has the potential to be another Triple Crown champion.-- Will C  23:10, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

If I'm correct, AJ has become a quad-TCC this sunday at No Surrender. He is a 4 time Triple Crown Champion. He also can become a 5 time if he wins the TNA World Heavyweight Championship again. Since he has a TNA Tag reign and 2 more TNA X Division reigns.-- Will C  03:36, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * AJ Styles won the TNA World Heavyweight championship. Shouldn't he be removed from the potential list NOW? I read this entire schpeel and I am convinced it's time to remove his name. It's not like there's 2 columns for the X title, NWA & TNA like there is for the WHC coulmns. 65.43.96.3 (talk) 19:02, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
 * So you read the entire "schpeel"? And yet you miss that TNA recognised multiple TCC, and so they also recognise multiple potential. So he will almost always be in a state of winning, or about to win a TNA TCC, so he stays. Darrenhusted (talk) 20:18, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Definative WWE reference
For those seeking to improve the article with better references, the May 2009 issue of WWE Magazine (an official publication) includes a feature on those who have achieved a WWE Triple Crown. In addition to the definitive list of wrestlers, it also answers the question if which titles count towards it. In short, the US title is not currently considered, unlike the IC, WWE, World Heavyweight and both tag titles. However, there is a question for readers as to whether it should be included. So future revision may be neccessary depending on the results of that. Notably, there is absolutely no mention of the ECW title, so it seems to be out if the running completely. Just so everyone knows, and I think the magazine article would make a good reference, as it is verifiable, reliable (by pro wrestling standards) and citable (and print sources are typically considered superior to web ones for their permanance and editorial standards). oknazevad (talk) 01:46, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Just to help your point here is a web link to the statement. http://www.wwe.com/magazine/magazinefeatures/featureoftheweek20090423a/

I checked this link and noticed that it had been updated by WWE to include Rey Mysterio, whereas the print article did not. However, the printed article mentioned Rey as needing only the IC belt which he then won at WM25. I point this out to show that this is a reference that can be checked on periodically to see if the WWE at some point does update the Triple Crown to have the US (and maybe one day the ECW) title to the to list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wraith Wolf (talk • contribs) 16:11, 11 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Page doesn't exist anymore, so its up for debate all over again24.168.27.158 (talk) 23:21, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Thats not technically true, the article still exists in the May 2009 issue of WWE magazine. Until WWE puts out a new article either in print or their website to update, that issue is still the WWE's definition of the Triple Crown. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.90.136.129 (talk) 22:53, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

The link above still works. So I don't see the problem.

So... the WCW/"World Championship" is not included in the definition? Is WWE not considering previous title history of the NWA/WCW/"World Championship" a part of the World Heavyweight Championship history? Or has it been retconned again? - Lex —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.233.55.232 (talk) 04:59, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Guys, on the gaming section of WWE.com, there is a game where we must name all Triple Crown Champions. The Criteria according to this game is the WWE, Intercontinental and the WWE/World Tag Team Championships. I named Christian (who has won the WHC only, not the WWE title) & Dolph Ziggler, they are not counted. Just like Booker T and Chris Benoit, although the latter is known why. Here is the link. http://www.wwe.com/play/games/type-or-tap

Does this mean that we have to approve this as a genuine source of WWE's qualfication of a Triple Crown Champion, therefore altering the table? Lucha-Method (talk) 17:04, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Proposed move
Triple Crown Championship -> Triple Crown (wrestling)

The current title strikes me as too generic, and ambiguous about which triple crown the article discusses. Concerns over confusion with the AJPW Triple Crown would be covered by the already existing link on the top of the page, and by the fact that the AJPW title has just that in it's title.

Thoughts?<-Oops, forgot to sign.oknazevad (talk) 02:07, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Potential champion?
Hi. This discussion started in Nick Nemeth's article, but now i asked this here. HHH won the IC title under the gimmick of Hunter Heart Hemsley but he change his gimmick in TV to HHH and he is a Triple Crown Champion. But, if the gimmick wasn¡t changed in TV. For example, imagine thah Glen Jacobs won the WWF title under the Dentist Isaaac gimmick, norunder the Kanes gimmick. He changed his gimmick behind TV and won the TTC and IC. If Jacobs win the title with a gimmick without relation with the gimmick who win the other titles, he is a Triple Crown? Is similar, if Nick Nemeth win the IC Championship, he will we a Potential triple crown champion (IC & Tag Team with Spirit Squad) or no, because his gimmicks are different.?--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 21:25, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Gimmicks have nothing to do with anything, it is the wrestler that wins the titles. But as Nemeth has only won the tag title then he is only a potential potential champion. Darrenhusted (talk) 14:56, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

If the wrestler has won one of the two tag titles, they shouldn't need the other set, is this correct?74.136.5.234 (talk) 19:29, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Eric Young and Kaz?
Should they be included on the potential triple crown championships, when their tag title reign, and Young's X Division title reign, are heavily disputed and not even officially recognized?
 * TNA recognized the reigns while they were all champions for a short time. All that has to be done is the company recognize them for a second to be official. TNA no longer recognizing them isn't a big deal. TNA however do recognizing stripping them of the titles.-- Will C  03:16, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

US TITLE INCLUSION
I think it's about time we included it as a secoundary championship —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.107.19.28 (talk) 17:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Where is your source it is apart of the accomplishment?-- Will C  05:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

US Title Exclusion
The WWE have officially defined the criteria here. The United States Championship is excluded, of course. Remember that the US title is the continuation of a WCW title and therefore not part of the "WWE' Triple Crown. Feed  back  ☎ 20:40, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Triple Crown champions/key Table Order
In the article for Grand Slam Champions, the champions table is followed by the key table, whereas in this article the key table comes first - I assume they should be the same, but I'm unsure as to which is correct (or even preferred). Anyody who does know fancy sorting it out? BulbaThor (talk) 21:51, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Abyss - TNA Triple Crown
Time to add Abyss? He just won the television title Sunday night and has already held the heavyweight (NWA) and tag team belts (NWA) before. Not sure if holding the NWA belts counts against him, though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snorii (talk • contribs) 22:25, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
 * According to TNA, the Legends/Global/Television title is a tertiary championship not part of their triple crown but part of their grand slam. The X Division title is a secondary title that does make up part of the triple crown. -- Unquestionable Truth -- 22:35, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Dolph Ziggler
I don't like the guy, mostly because I'm an admitted MARK, but he is a triple crowner now. 65.43.96.3 (talk) 13:48, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Thats what I am wondering. Will WWE count him seeing as one reign was under a different name


 * Bottom line---Ziggler has won all of the proper titles to be a TC winner, regardless of the gimmick.


 * In other words, the man behind the gimmick is what counts. He won the belts, thus he's a TC winner, period.

Vjmlhds 16:35, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

i dont think so as wwe does indeed count his world title reign and intercontinental reigns but on his wwe page they do not list a tag team title reign and as he did not officialy win it as kenny and mikey did. and just because he defended under the freebird rule it doesnt mean it counts so i dont think wwe offically recognizes him as a triple crown champion so unless you find a source from wwe.com i say take it down — Preceding unsigned comment added by Black60dragon (talk • contribs) 03:06, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

The Freebird Rule specifically states that all members are recognized as Champions, and any two can defend the titles.

WWE did this themselves years ago with Demolition once Crush came on board. Same thing with the Spirit Squad.

All 5 guys were recognized as Champions, and any 2 could defend the belts. Therefore, Ziggler counts.

Vjmlhds 16:03, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

ROH triple crown
Being that ROH is the 3rd largest US wrestling promotion behind WWE & TNA I think they deserve a section for triple crowns. They currently only have one, Eddie Edwards, who has won the tag title, tv title, and world title.76.84.241.161 (talk) 03:31, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * A Triple Crown or even a Grand Slam championship isnt a atandard accomplishment that all promotions recognize. The only reason WWE and TNA have sections here is because they do recognize such accomplishments. ROH has as of date made no indication that they recognize a Triple Crown championship.-- Unquestionable Truth -- 04:18, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

ecw and wcw did aswell so we should add them i have links below and the list i have the tables in my sandbox i also think we should list that wwe does not count completing it twice as far as we know but i think we should list those you have. (for example)Even though WWE does not count completing it more than once Edge has completed it a record five times. Same for grand slam as well as .Jeff hardy has completed the Grand Slam a record three times in a row. i also have ovw and roh if they accept it and those are the titles but anyway i really think we should do those three. list the wcw and ecw and list in the description those who have completed more than once --Black60dragon (talk) 22:24, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Here's your source about the ROH Triple Crown:

ROH Triple Crown

It's straight from the ROH website, so there should be no problems.

Eddie Edwards is in fact an ROH TC winner.

Thank You.

Vjmlhds 15:37, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Here is an article that states ROH would recognize the (now defunct) Pure Championship as a substitute for the TV Title as part of the ROH Triple Crown:

Pure Title = TV Title for Triple Crown

Vjmlhds 17:35, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
 * good find-- Unquestionable Truth -- 20:28, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

ECW WCW and others
i think we need to list that wcw had a triple crown and ecw had a triple crown http://www.wwe.com/inside/news/archive/cardonahired its on here its says Mikey Whipwreck the ecw triple crown


 * ECW
 * Name______________ ECW World_________ECW Tag ECW_______________________________World Television
 * Johnny Hotbody______April 26, 1992_______April 3, 1993 (with Chris Candido and Chris Michaels)	 August 12, 1992
 * Sabu ______________October 2, 1993______February 4, 1995 (with The Tazmaniac)____________November 13, 1993
 * Mikey Whipwreck____October 28, 1995_____August 27, 1994 (with Cactus Jack)_______________March 6, 1994
 * Taz________________January 10, 1999_____December 4, 1993 (with Kevin Sullivan)_____________March 6, 1994
 * OVW
 * Name___________OVW Heavyweight__OVW Southern Tag Team__________________OVW Television
 * Brent Albright____April 25, 2005______March 31, 2004 (with Chris Masters)__________January 5, 2005
 * CM Punk________May 3, 2006______July 28, 2006 (with Seth Skyfire)______________November 9, 2005
 * Idol Stevens______March 14, 2007___October 10, 2003 (with Nova)_________________January 4, 2006
 * WCW
 * WCW Triple Crown
 * NWA World Title (1975-1991)/WCW World Title (1991-2001)
 * U.S. Title (1975-Mar. 26, 2001)
 * NWA/WCW World Tag Team Title (1975-Mar. 26, 2001)
 * Dusty Rhodes
 * Ric Flair
 * Ricky Steamboat
 * Sting
 * Lex Luger
 * DDP
 * Bret Hart
 * Goldberg
 * Chris Benoit
 * Booker T
 * Scott Steiner
 * All except Goldberg and Hart are also Grand Slam winners, as they held the TV Title as well.
 * ROH
 * ROH World Title (2002-present)
 * TV Title (2010-present)
 * ROH Tag Team Title (2002-present)
 * Eddie Edwards
 * ROH World Title (2002-present)
 * TV Title (2010-present)
 * ROH Tag Team Title (2002-present)
 * Eddie Edwards

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Black60dragon/Sandbox here is the tables its at the bottom of the page already made when you add it Black60dragon (talk) 04:21, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Issue being it only mentions him as an ECW Triple Crown Champion, not what it is. Also, there is no source for any of the others.-- Will C  09:46, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

http://www.onlineworldofwrestling.com/columns/misc/bgedgington01.html if its reliable a few things 1 i didnt put sources because i havent looked any up yet i will later but as for the ecw thing i mean really think about it here is the list of all the ecw championships 1.ECW World Heavyweight Championship 2.ECW World Tag Team Championship 3.ECW World Television Championship

so as there are only 3 titles in ecw and whipwreck as won only those three those are what count toward the triple crown as for roh well need to see if they accept triple crowns and ovw and wcw we can find links but the ovw is official for sure and wcw im pretty sure it is as heres the wcw titles 1.WCW World Heavyweight Championship 2.WCW World Tag Team Championship 3.WCW United States Championship 4.WCW World Television Championship Black60dragon (talk) 22:49, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

NWA

 * http://midwestwrestling.com/main/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=203%3Aannouncing-qthe-sheikq-nwa-triple-crown-champion-accepting-booking-now&catid=15%3Alatest-news&Itemid=116
 * http://www.luchaworld.com/?p=2248
 * http://angrymarks.com/?ArticleID=9469
 * He is the first man in the history of the NWA (National Wrestling Alliance) to hold a state, regional and continental title all at the same time making him the first NWA TRIPLE CROWN winner!
 * if these work — Preceding unsigned comment added by Black60dragon (talk • contribs) 15:34, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Ladies Triple Crown
If Mickie James wins the Knockouts title, should we make a Ladies Triple Crown? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.216.225.21 (talk) 01:11, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * See Original Research. Unless its recognize by the appropriate parties, we do not just simply make stuff up. There is currently no such thing as a "Ladies Triple Crown."-- Unquestionable Truth -- 07:20, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Charlotte Flair stated she was going for it in 2017. By 2018, she won the old Diva's Championship, then won both tyhe Raw and Smackdown women's championships, she is the first person to win the Ladies Triple Crown. Nbagigafreak (talk) 02:59, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Dohlph Zigler
Then why do we count Dolph Ziggler as one if WWE does not count him as one —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.216.225.21 (talk) 18:36, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Dohlph Zigler won the World Heavyweight Championship in February 2011, the Intercontinental Championship in June 2010, His World Tag Team Championship reign came as a result of being a member of the Spirit Squad in April 2006. (That's not making anything up since it actually happened)-- Unquestionable Truth -- 21:13, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Still, everyone says that if its not counted on WWE.com, its not official and Dolph Ziggler isn't in the Triple Crown section —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.216.225.21 (talk) 22:34, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * First of all, who says its not counted on WWE.com, and where is Ziggler not listed in a Triple Crown section? See WP:BURDEN. Prove it and it'll be changed accordingly.-- Unquestionable Truth -- 00:55, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Nick Nemeth (the man behind the Dolph Ziggler gimmick) has won an appropriate combination of championships to qualify for the TC (World-IC-World Tag Team).

There is no debate--he won the titles, therefore he counts.

Period.

Vjmlhds 04:59, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

WCW
Should there be a WCW Triple Crown if anybody won it there? Iml908 (talk) 13:13, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

i have the table and here is a link if its reliable and everyone else agrees ill add it http://www.angelfire.com/ny2/RayNRon/misc/interesting.html  Black60dragon (talk) 01:08, 14 April 2011 (UTC) it the 7th down

The Miz
Hi all, shouldn't The Miz be in this list?

I would add him but I don't know the dates which he won the titles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.159.110.93 (talk) 18:53, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

The US title is not counted as official and he has not held the Intercontinental title Iml908 (talk) 20:09, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Issues with the ECW Triple Crown
There are two issues I have found regarding the ECW TC. The first being that the lead section states that "National promotions that officially recognize Triple Crown winners include World Wrestling Entertainment, Total Nonstop Action Wrestling, Ring of Honor, and the defunct Extreme Championship Wrestling." I believe that ECW should be removed from this list, as the original company did not recognize any such accolade. It was not until years after the company shut down and filed bankruptcy, and WWE subsequently purchased all of it's assets, including the championships, that recognition came to an ECW TC (February 27, 2006 according to the source given). The ECW promotion no longer existed; WWE was the controlling promotion.

And the second issue is the source itself. The only reference to an ECW TC is from Matthew Cardona calling Mikey Whipwreck the ECW Triple Crown Champion. To me this does not seem like a very reliable source to be using as justification for creating an ECW TC. Granted WWE.com allowed the material to be published on their website, however it was not them directly saying so, they essentially just put up what Cardona stated. There have been several instances where a person saying they achieved something (Miz stating he is a Grand Slam Champion, JBL stating he was before he won the IC), and those have not been allowed into articles. So a person with no control over the matter saying that someone else is a TCC does not seem to have much credability to it. I think that, in this case, until WWE.com or one of the reliable third party sources, and not a tryout wrestler who had just received a developmental contract, states there was an ECW TC, this section should not be included. 76.29.164.90 (talk) 22:52, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

We agreed to add it so keep it. your an ip user which means you cant just take something off and a wikipedia user cant just take something big off without discussing it. it states there is and its on wwe.com doesnt matter who said it there are other sights that say that to. so stop vandalizing this page and leave it how it is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Black60dragon (talk • contribs) 00:01, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay, Let's discuss it. There is a section on WP:PW, which has support for removal of the ECW section. Also to point out, per Wikipedia's policy, Consensus can change HidyHoTim (talk) 02:20, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

i have the table and here is a link if its reliable and everyone else agrees ill add it http://www.angelfire.com/ny2/RayNRon/misc/interesting.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Black60dragon (talk • contribs) 01:37, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I would like to say that I did not intend for the page itself to be nominated for deletion, as I do not challenge the existence of a Triple Crown Championship accolade. As I stated on both this talk page and the Project Page, I am raising issue specifically in regards to the ECW section.
 * Dragon, you did not refute the claim that the ECW promotion did not recognize any TCC and that it was not until WWE took control that any such reference came into existence. The only source given is dated 2006, after the ECW promotion shut down. Unless there is presented a source stating that ECW did recognize such accolade while independent from the WWE, the reference to ECW in the lead should be removed. And for the section itself, as I do not feel like dragging this on and in line with my argument for removing ECW from the list of promotions that recognized a TCC, I move that the ECW and WWE sections on the page be merged together, not as one list but have ECW be a subsection of WWE, again as they were the controlling promotion when recognition came to both TCCs. HidyHoTim (talk) 09:11, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, I do not believe the link you gave would qualify as a reliable source. However, I would urge you check with the project page on that one. HidyHoTim (talk) 09:16, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

WCW Triple Crown
We have once source that tells us that WCW did indeed have a Triple Crown (the WCW encyclopedia that was referenced).

Make it 2--here's a little diddy from WWE - which considers the WCW TV title has a substitute for the tag straps.

Do with this what you will.

Vjmlhds 19:03, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Took a while for me to notice this, but what I will do with it is probably delete it. You're reading more into it than is really there. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:00, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

big show,wcw triple crown champion?
Since the WCW United States Heavyweight Championship and the WWE United States Championship are the same title by virtue of its title history, technically, Big Show would be considered a WCW Triple Crown Champion. It's just like when Rob Van Dam became ECW Triple Crown Champion when he was awarded the ECW World Title in 2006, despite it being under WWE ownership. Also, WWE considers Eddie Guerrero a TWO time United States Champion, as he has held one reign in WCW and the other in WWE when WWE revived the title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.33.28.107 (talk) 19:37, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

big show had won the wcw world and tag team titles in wcw,and won the united states title in 2003,and since it is the same tile,should big show be a wcw triple crown champion? Wwe95 (talk) 00:51, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

No because while it is referenced to the lineage it was renamed the WWE United States title and was no longer the WCW United States title. Also WCW was gone by then and The Alliance no longer existed as well at this time. Edshaft (talk) 13:53, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, the ECW as a promotion was gone with the Alliance, but RVD is a Triple Crwn Winner with the WWE version of the ECW Championship. --80.31.250.185 (talk) 19:23, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The US title won by Big Show is a direct continuation of the one worn by Sting, Austin etc. in WCW. RVD's inclusion here sets a precedent that companies are not important (an ECW TV show or pay-per-view in WWE is absolutely not the same as an event by the company ECW, which died in 2001). Show lifting the US strap in 2003 made him a WCW Triple Crown winner. Xlar7 (talk) 18:05, 8 October 2014 (UTC)


 * WCW was long defunct when Big Show won the U.S. Championship, thus it doesn't count towards him being a WCW Triple Crown winner. WWE's ECW brand was considered as a relaunch/continuation of the original ECW, thus RVD's ECW World title win does count towards him being an ECW Triple Crown winner.  Vjmlhds 04:36, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I figure it is Original Research. However, WWE publicly state the US Title is the WCW US Title.-- Will C  06:53, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

And also WWE considers there to be a WCW TC and since wwe owns WCW and all of its stuff and since it is the same title (WCW or WWE) wwe can consider him a WCW TC since they own it they can do as they wish so who says he is not a WCW Triple Crown Champ If Wwe united states title was included after 2003 john cena and the Miz would be added to the listRanul (talk) 06:10, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

There's actually no discussion to this. Big Show held the WCW title, the WCW tag title, and the WWE US title, which is the WCW US title. It's a direct continuation of the lineage, and if you have any doubt, WWE (which owns WCW including the US title trademark) definitely says so: "[T]he United States Championship did not start out as a recognized WWE Championship. Rather, the title first emerged in WCW." The existing US title is officially the one from WCW, just like the World Championship contested in the WWF in 2001 was a continuation of the world title from WCW. We deal in fact here, not opinion, and the facts indicate that Big Show is absolutely a WCW Triple Crown champion. Xlar7 (talk) 04:43, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * It's from WCW, but it's not a WCW title anymore. A WCW Triple Crown champion should logically be one who wins three WCW championships. If you want to play retroactively, it's not a WCW or WWE championship, but a Mid-Atlantic one. The claim that the title first emerged in WCW, which didn't exist till 13 years later, is a lie. WWE.com can rewrite history if they'd like, but Wikipedia works with actual facts. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:26, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Even if WWE's text is inaccurate, it doesn't change the fact that Big Show won the three belts required for the WCW Triple Crown. Xlar7 (talk) 05:35, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Those three titles are the WCW World Heavyweight, WCW Tag Team and WCW US. Note the common link. The Big Show (a character who never wrestled in WCW) won the WWE championship, in WWE, unlike everyone else listed here. For an exceptional claim like this, you'll need a source explicitly saying he's a WCW Triple Crown Champion. Otherwise, it's your own synthesis. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:40, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * No synthesis whatsoever. WWE (owner of WCW trademarks including the US belt) fully acknowledges Big Show and The Giant as the same wrestler, and Show held the WWE US title which is the exact same title as the one in WCW. Same history, same lineage. Xlar7 (talk) 05:46, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * You don't seem to know what synthesis is. You're taking one claim and combining it with another to reach a conclusion not stated anywhere. Even if the first claim came from a non-lying source, the combination is the problem. It's actually a three-way dance, combining the fact that the character who won the two WCW titles is played by the same person who later won a WWE title as another character. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:53, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I do, and nothing's being combined. Big Show and The Giant are the same character, and the WWE and WCW US belts are the same title. Xlar7 (talk) 06:03, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * And when you combine those two things, you get a new claim that he was a WCW Triple Crown Champion. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:16, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I see you're adamant about including your opinion, which is neither backed by a source or the sentence in the article describing what a WCW Triple Crown Champion is. I'll let it stand, simply because I know you'll immediately revert it again. You win, but Wikipedia loses. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:50, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * It's really nothing to do with opinion. Regardless of prefix, the US title is the US title with the same lineage since the 70s. We've established that the promotions in which titles are held are not important (RVD winning the ECW title in WWE), so Big Show is a WCW Triple Crown winner, having held all three required titles. Xlar7 (talk) 05:59, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * RVD won a title called the ECW Championship, in a promotion called ECW, which was clearly marketed as a resurrection of the first one. Regardless of how hard that promotion sucked, it was still officially the same one. So he won three titles in ECW. Even assuming The Big Show and The Giant are the same character, he won two in WCW and one in WWE. It doesn't matter how simply I explain it, you want to be right, and that will override everything. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:15, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * RVD did not win the ECW title in ECW. He won it on a WWE television show that shared its name with the long-deceased Philly promotion. Xlar7 (talk) 06:37, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, the promotion/brand/whatever had a TV show. But RVD won the title at a PPV from the ECW Arena Hammerstein Ballroom, where ECW fans paid crazy money to see ECW wrestlers and chant ECW chants. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:41, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Sure, it was at a PPV rather than the TV show. But the Philadelphia-based private company ECW ceased to be in 2001. All things ECW after that were merely WWE shows. Xlar7 (talk) 06:49, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Yet that somehow doesn't apply to SmackDown's No Mercy (2003), where WCW (probably) wasn't even mentioned in passing? InedibleHulk (talk) 06:59, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * That was a WWE show too. Championships comprise the Triple Crown, not the promotions in which they're won. The titles RVD and Big Show lifted were the exact same ones from 2001 and before. Xlar7 (talk) 07:11, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Except that Big Show's championship came with a new, different, unsimilar, contrasting, disparate, divergent, altered, changed, contrary, discrepant, contradistinctive and incommensurable variant on the title. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:27, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Glad you're having fun. Same title, hence why I added Big Show in the first place. Xlar7 (talk) 07:30, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Title. Big Show was "WWE United States Champion". Harley Race was "NWA United States Heavyweight Champion". One Man Gang was "WCW United States Heavyweight Champion". Difference. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:57, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Lol, very good. "Title" also happens to mean "championship". This is about the United States one, traceable to 1975. Xlar7 (talk) 08:13, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * No shit. Title + belt + benefits + obligations = championship. I knew this confusion sounded familiar. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:29, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * And the constant in the championship's name since 1975 has been "United States". The changing company prefix ain't so important, especially when the lineage goes all the way back. Xlar7 (talk) 08:44, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * What?!? The changing company initials are the only important thing here. This isn't about whether Show was a United States champ, it's whether he was a WCW champ. Going back before "all the way back", Red Bastien won the same United States Tag Team Championship three times that Spiros Arion did, but only one can be called a three-time WWWF champ, because WWWF didn't exist in Red's day. And in 2003, WCW didn't. InedibleHulk (talk) 09:16, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * If the non-existence of a company is a factor, then that takes us back to RVD, and we've already talked about that. This is about triple crowns rather than US tag titles, and RVD's inclusion here sets a precedent that the company in which titles are won is irrelevant. And since the title Big Show won is the same one that was in WCW... well, you know the rest. Xlar7 (talk) 17:53, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

I think we should put Show and RVD in the text, not in the table. RVD winning the title, ECW was closed but revived... we don't have sources about RVD as ECW TCC or Show as WCW TCC. We can put them in the text, talking about they won the titles but is unknown if they are TCC. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 20:07, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Fine by me. Both men completed a triple crown over two promotions. They should either both be in, or both be out. Xlar7 (talk) 21:15, 11 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Yeah, noting the disuted circumstances in prose could work. RVD won the title in ECW like Mary Magdalene met zombie Jesus, and God only knows how many different interpretations people have of that. Big Show is like the new Thor picking up the old Thor's hammer, after Marvel put their own spin on the classic Norse. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:59, 11 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I see we're now also debating/reverting the prose. We need to mention the new ECW, or the reason why we're even mentioning RVD isn't clear. Same as why we note the WWE US Title is the resurrected WCW one. Can't expect general readers to know those things. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:07, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
 * It was mentioned that RVD won the ECW title at WWE's ECW One Night Stand. I suppose there's no harm in mentioning WWE's ECW brand if you're adamant about it. Xlar7 (talk) 04:25, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Alone, that's not even true. He won the WWE Championship at the PPV, and Heyman later awarded him the ECW Championship for it. But then he got high, which was apparently too extreme for 2006 ECW. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:27, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

RVD won a title. RVD won the ECW Title in a WWE event under the ECW banner... too complicated. I understand and both of you have a point. I think it's too OR, because we don't know if the titles under WWE banner counts. Also, Wikipedia is the only website where we say RVD is an ECW TCC. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 11:30, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
 * But we don't say that anymore. Unless it's in RVD's article.InedibleHulk (talk) 13:39, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Conflicting statements
As I recall, the inclusion of the World Heavyweight Championship as part of the Triple Crown and Grand Slam was based on an article on WWE.com which stated Shawn Michaels was a Grand Slam winner, having won the WWE, World Heavyweight, Intercontinental, Tag Team, and European. However, as it stands today, the article seems to no longer be on the WWE website (that I could find) and the reference link on the Grand Slam page gives you a redirect to the main WWE.com page. Now I'm not sure how this affects the 'credibility' of the inclusion of the WHC, now that the main source seems to no longer be able to be 'proved.'

Regardless, the most recent Triple Crown article put forth on their website states "WWE has it's own Triple Crown Championship that only an elite group of Superstars have achieved, capturing the WWE, Intercontinental and World Tag Team Titles throughout their careers." Furthermore, included in the article is CM Punk, who "won the WWE Title for the first time at Money in the Bank 2011, making him a WWE Triple Crown winner." Given Punk already had three WHC reigns by this point, stating that he was not a Triple Crown winner until after his WWE Championship victory seems to indicate a revision, by WWE, of the Triple Crown definition (it is, after all, their accolade and they are at liberty to change it, just as they did to include the WHC). I know that WWE says a lot of things on their site, however there has been much, much debate, and consensus is, that the U.S. Title cannot be included because WWE hasn't officially declared it so (there are paragraphs on both the TCC and GSC wiki pages declaring this). Since the community here decided that WWE has to say 'Yes,' we also have to allow it when they to say 'No,' and with this most recent article they appear to be now saying "No" to the WHC.

This is not deliberately meant to be stirring up old debates or causing problems, however I feel that, in the interest of making sure things are as current and accurate as possible, it is important to pose this opinion of what has been "officially" stated by WWE and to get input by as many as possible. 67.181.76.194 (talk) 04:37, 7 June 2012 (UTC)


 * It is very strange. Of course, USA Title never appear in the description of the TC Winners Club. But I read this page and I don't see Booker T, Angle or Christian. But, the aricle says the Three original belts', I think that the article only shows the TCW that have won the Original Triple Crown (Booker and Christian won the WHC and Angle, the Tag Team Championship) Also, a question. Do we have the soucre of Angle's coronation as TCC?--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 15:52, 8 June 2012 (UTC)


 * A wrinkle is thrown in when you consider the even newer |greatest world champs of the 2000s. It names Orton the 17th Triple Crown Champ.  Only way he can be #17 is if you go by the definitions currently used in the article.  71.229.53.21 (talk) 01:24, 9 June 2012 (UTC)


 * There is another "wrinkle," though, when they post this . As can be clearly seen, they include the World Tag team or WWE Tag Team, yet no mention of the World Heavyweight Championship. Now, personally, it seems a bit silly to be referencing a trivia game as an argument, however when putting thought into it, a sentence in an article can be seen as maybe an off-handed comment at times. Yet this was designing the game to include an alternate for the tag team requirement and an exclusion of the World Heavyweight Championship.


 * And they set the number of "all" the superstars who won the "Triple Crown - the WWE Championship, the Intercontinental Championship and the World or WWE Tag Team Championship," it is 20. This list contains 24 names. Excluded from the 20, according to WWE and cross referenced with this list, are: Benoit, Booker T, Christian, Ziggler. The one thing these four have in common, to be included on this page list and excluded by WWE as Triple Crown Winners, is they did not win the WWE Championship. Much like when Major League Baseball redefined no-hitters and perfect games in 1991 and took away once-recognized accomplishments by ptchers as being official, I believe this should be reflected in this page that WWE does not consider the WHC as a substitute for the primary championship requirement. 67.181.76.194 (talk) 05:34, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Coming to the conclusion this way violates WP:SYNTH. If you want to say WWE does not consider the WHC appropriate, you must find a source explicitly saying so. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:54, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

WWE has defined the criteria and officially included the World Heavyweight Championship over 2 years ago. Not only that, but I posted this same reference on this very same page in an above section titled "US title exclusion". If only you guys did a little more research, you would avoid this silly argument. Feed back  ☎ 17:10, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * This article, as well as his profile page, list Miz as the 21st (specifically) Triple Crown Champion, "a distinction given to a Superstar who captures the WWE Championship, the Intercontinental Championship and the World or WWE Tag Team Championship in his career." While not saying the words "We don't count the WHC anymore," this shows WWE has re-defined their Triple Crown accolade. Otherwise, both Rey Mysterio and the Miz can be listed as the 21st TCC. 67.181.76.194 (talk) 06:21, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Steiner update
Now that Steiner is in the WWE, they defined the WCW Triple Crown. here says that the USA and TV titles are part of the Triple Crown (Like the WWE and WHC Championships, or Hardcore and European in the Grand Slam). Also, the article says that only exist 9 WCW TC, so Big Show isn't a WCW Triple Crown Champion.--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 23:48, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Maybe I'm an idiot, but where does this linked page even mention a WCW Triple Crown, let alone define it? InedibleHulk (talk) 19:20, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not calling you an idiot, but I just want to say that if you scroll through the pictures, you'll find it. Feed  back  ☎ 22:51, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I see no scrollable pictures. Guessing this is one of those things I need to run Javascript to see, but can't without crashing my PS3. Such a clunky site. I'm not calling anyone a liar, but if someone could transcribe the claim into plain text here for everyone to see, that'd be cool. Also, is Steiner (the person) back in WWE, or just his profile? Kind of shocking, in 2012. Nevermind that. Easy Google. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:03, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
 * http://www.wwe.com/widget/superstar_avatar_903/nojs/milestone/25057144/26031993 --Khajidha (talk) 05:40, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't think he was listed as one.--174.93.167.177 (talk) 01:07, 28 June 2012 (UTC)


 * There are articles referenced on the main page that show that there was indeed a WCW Triple Crown, and that WWE recognizes it. Vjmlhds 19:39, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Also, here WWE says that Booker T is a WCW Triple Crown Winner because he won the four titles. I think that, both articles defined the WCW triple Crown championship. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 21:11, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

"Gold" Standards
I added gold to the Triple Crown charts to point out wrestlers who "ran the table" as it were and won every single title that would qualify for a TC.

This is especially in regards to WWE and TNA, since they have multiple titles that can substitute for one another.

Vjmlhds 19:39, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

ROH Triple Crown II
Per paragraph 4 here, the Pure Title is not an alternative to the TV Title, but can be counted in addition to it. Tag Titles are apparently not necessary and Jay Lethal is a World Title away (explicitly stated). I have changed the article accordingly. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:35, 8 July 2012 (UTC)


 * OK, but for future reference, An ROH World, TV/Pure, and Tag Title combo will be the original definition of the ROH TC, as when Eddie Edwards first won it, that was how it was defined. (and will be colored in yellow on the chart). Anybody who does the World, TV, and Pure combo will go down as an alternate definition (and be colored in green) as that was a new definition after the original was established.  And if somebody runs the table, they'll be colored in gold.  I'd like to get some consensus just to make sure we're all on the same page.  Vjmlhds 03:40, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I couldn't care less about colour coding. So I'm not not on the same page. Everyone loves gold! InedibleHulk (talk) 08:59, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I added Eddie Edwards' ROH bio as a reference to show that the original definition of the ROH TC was World/TV/Tag. It was after the fact that they included the Pure Title in the mix. Vjmlhds 14:05, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I think that it is strange. The article says that Lethal can be the 2nd man to hold a Triple Crown, but Strong is the 2nd, lethal will be the 3rd.--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 20:23, 13 July 2012 (UTC) Sorry, I thought that it was a current article. In that case, I think that a ROH Triple Crown is a wrestler that won 3 of the 4 titles at ROH.--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 20:31, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

q?
john cena has won the world heavyweight title at least twice. he is a mulltiple wwe champ and he's a former wwe tag champ.

why hasnt he designated as a triple crown champ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.26.74.60 (talk) 19:59, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No Intercontinental title. It's all explained in the article. But now that he's found that magical red briefcase, look out Christian! InedibleHulk (talk) 22:35, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Just a comment but
 * 1) you cant cash in the MITB for the intercontinental title
 * 2) he has the RAW case meaning he can only cash in on raw and the title is on SD
 * But it doesnt matter now cuz he disgraced MITB by losing Black Dragon  01:31, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

The Miz
The Miz has just won the Intercontinental Championship. Please add him to the list of Triple Crown Champions. Source http://www.wwe.com/superstars/champions - Not updated yet since he only won it ten minutes ago. Also, Michael Cole stated on air that Miz is a Triple Crown Champion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1717ABC1717 (talk • contribs) 01:53, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

US Title
On the 1000th episode of Raw when Miz won the IC title, Michael Cole stated that the US Title was an acceptable alternative to IC Title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1717ABC1717 (talk • contribs) 13:30, 24 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but those kind of offhand comments like Cole made don't count (just like JBL and Miz in years past making claims to the Grand Slam). WWE has long defined a TC as winning the WWE/World, I-C, and Tag Team Titles. Vjmlhds 17:04, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Triple Crown Winners
http://www.wwe.com/magazine/magazinefeatures/featureoftheweek20090423a/ this pages confirms that everyone from pedro to rey mysterio is a TC Winner

http://www.wwe.com/classics/wwe-triple-crown this link confirms that big show is a triple crown champ

and on raw 1000 Cole stated the the after winning the IC title the miz is now considered a TC champ

and Christian is a grand slam champion so WWE considers of all these as a champion except for Ziggler which they dont count him as one and since the wwe does not consider him as one i think we should remove him as his world title is counted even though he never actually won it they dont consider him a tag champ at all and they dont consider him a triple crown. I mean im sure he will win the tag titles in the future and then he will probably be recognized but he isnt right now. Black Dragon 18:34, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Update the TC page just updated and it also list the miz as one so theres another link Black Dragon  18:36, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Ziggler most certainly is a Triple Crown champion. We know better than to consider two different on-screen characters as two different people when they aren't. It's obvious that Bradshaw, servant of The Undertaker's Ministry of Darkness, isn't the same character as John Bradshaw Layfield, business mogul. — Moe   ε  22:01, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Right on, Moe. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:31, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * It's different. WWE says that Bradshaw is the same person that JBL, like Hunter Heart Hemsley is Triple H or The Ringmaster is Steve Austin. but, WWE says that Dolph Ziggler and Nicky are different persons, like Dr. Isaac isn't Kane. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 22:28, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * WWE also says Isaac Yankem is a licensed dentist, and that Kane's dad is Bearer. Wikipedia shouldn't follow their lead exactly. If we have their definition of Triple Crown cited as a verifiable fact, we can add any wrestler who verifiably meets the criteria. It's not synthesis. If this was an official WWE Wiki, we'd follow their story. But this is the "real world" and we relay actual facts here, when possible. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:11, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

yes but wwe doesnt consider him as ever having the tag titles even under his old gimmick so his isnt a triple crown and im sure if he every wins the tag titles they will announce him then as a TC winner and until then he isnt one and unless you can find proof on wwe.com or a reliable source i say remove it per wikipedia standards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.120.187.72 (talk) 02:27, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
 * We have a reliable source defining what a Triple Crown winner is. We have reliable sources saying Ziggler won the IC and World Heavyweight titles. We have reliable sources saying Nicky held the Tag Team title. We have reliable sources saying Nicky and Ziggler are the same wrestler. We don't need to rely exclusively on WWE.com as a source. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:32, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Ziggler (as Nicky) was "Freebirded" into the Tag Team titles when he was with the Spirit Squad, thus he counts. Vjmlhds 22:37, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
 * No offense meant, but a tag team title is a singular object. Two belts, one championship. I'm not saying that to scold you, just to remind you if you're ever adding it to an article. It's a pretty common mistake, and if I have to be a Grammar Nazi to help stop it, it's worth it. You're right about Nicky, though. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:38, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Uh-Oh...Grammar Nazi! No mistaken terminology for you! ;) Vjmlhds 14:29, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Adjustments
I made some adjustments to the tables to make it easier to read, and easier to explain why certain wrestlers can't win certain titles. Vjmlhds 22:37, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Does anyone else see the pictures of Bret Hart and RVD covering a large section of the tables, or is it just me (or, hopefully, just my browser)? InedibleHulk (talk) 23:03, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

WWE, not World Wrestling Entertainment
This official announcement, LA Times article and dirtsheet report citing the Observer are pretty clear about the new(ish) name. Keep this in mind for this article. InedibleHulk (talk) 12:33, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Again just let it be World Wrestling Entertainment because
 * 1 It looks nicer
 * 2 WWE formerly WWE makes no sense
 * 3 World Wrestling Entertainment Inc is doing business as WWE inc because of the more convenient name
 * 4 Just because the company name is WWE it doesnt mean that the promotion is called that for example when the company was Titan Sports or World Wrestling Federation Entertainment Inc it was still called the World Wrestling Federation
 * 5 There are multiple references to it such as CM Punk, Its spelled across the announce table, When the WWE apologized for the Capital Punishment promos as well as when they announce major things, Michael Cole has said it many times on commentary.
 * This is all the proof you need so stop changing it back any further reverts are considered vandalism Black Dragon  15:46, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

First, do not edit a section header to change its meaning and the meaning of my comment.


 * 1. It's wordy and inaccurate.
 * 2. The article says "formerly World Wrestling Entertainment", not "formerly WWE".
 * 3. Exactly. Though you apparently disagree with yourself.
 * 4. The company's legal name is World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. This is strictly to be used in legal documents. Its trade name and WP:COMMONNAME are WWE (that's why the WWE Wiki article is titled "WWE, and WWE advertises itself as such.)
 * 5. CM Punk and a table are not reliable sources.
 * 6. This article has used "WWE" properly for months (since April 2011) until you changed it. You offer no sources, and have been shown several. You have received a final warning on your talk page for your disruptive deletions at Grand Slam Championship, and further disruption to this article (including changing the section header) will only strengthen the case that you should be blocked. So stop, before you regret it. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:55, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Ziggler or Nemeth?
I think that we must change the name in the infobox. According to WWE, Dolph Ziggler isn't a TCC, because Ziggler and Nicky are two different people. But IndelibleHulk said that this isn't an official WWE Wiki. We have soucres sasying Ziggler and Nicky won the titles and Nicky and Ziggler are the same person, but I think that is better, in the infobox, to say that Nick Nemeth won the triple crown and, with notes, explain that Nemeth won the TCC with two different Gimmicks without relation, Ziggler and Nicky. What do you say? --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 17:42, 11 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Way too confusing. It is much easier to use the wrestler's current ring name.  All of the details about when and where and under what name he won his titles can be found in his own article.  For this article, all that matters is that he won all of the appropriate titles to qualify.  Not only that, you open the door to people putting in Phil Brooks for CM Punk, Paul Levesque for Triple H, and so on...let sleeping dogs lie as far as that goes.  Vjmlhds 16:03, 12 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Please leave Dolph Ziggler's name alone in the WWE Triple Crown chart...yes, he won (or more accurately was "Freebirded" into) the Tag Team Championship as "Nicky" during the Spirit Squad days, but that doesn't matter. Ziggler is the name he is best known as, and whatever gimmick he used to win the titles is irrelevant...all that matters is that he won them.   This would be like not counting JBL as a TC winner because he won the tag straps as the beer drinking, cigar smoking, APA @$$ kicker for hire "Bradshaw" and not the rich, limo riding, Wall Street tycoon, businessman "JBL".   Vjmlhds 14:25, 18 November 2012 (UTC)


 * And Taz was The Tasmaniac when he won the tag title. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:10, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
 * But it's different. The Tazmaniac and the Taz Gimmicks are the same. Like Rocky Maivia and the Rock or Hunter Heart Helmsey and Triple H, but the point is that Nicky and Ziggler are two different gimmicks. I think that is important to say that he won the TTC under two different gimmicks without connection.--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 15:25, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I dunno. Tasmaniac was more of a beast (with hair), and Taz was more of a man (without). The Rock was a smart-mouthed, sharp-dressed guy, and Rocky Maivia was basically Barry Horowitz. Triple H didn't have a British accent, ponytail or classy escorts. Hunter Hearst Helmsley didn't make dick jokes or bash people with a sledgehammer. The wrestler is the only important thing here, not their character. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:18, 25 November 2012 (UTC)
 * im talking about a direct connection between two gimmick, no about the differences. one day, rocky maivia appeared and he said that he is now the rock. One day, hunter changed his name to triple h. But nicky never said that he is now dolph ziggler. i think that is important to explain that he won the TTC under two gimmicks without a direct connection, like a name change.--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 20:27, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

OVW
I saw that someone added this to the page so I decided to try and find something and I saw that on episode 631 Adam Revolver said "being a dual champion wasn't good enough and im going to make real history and be the first OVW simultaneous triple crown champion." So if he stated that on OVW TV then the promotion recognizes it. Confirmed http://www.ovwrestling.com/search/node/triple%20crown it has the description of episode 631 talking about triple crown and heres the episode for refs http://www.ovwrestling.com/tv/631 Black Dragon  22:00, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

But the question is should we add an indie because we already have 5 national promotions and the list is fairly long already. And if we add this then people will try and add FIP, FCW and others and maybe some japan indies. Maybe make a Grand Slam in Independent Wrestling page or something for the ton of indie that have it.
 * But either way dont re add this until there is an agreement here in the talk page to add it back - Black Dragon
 * If you have a realible soucre, you can add it. Also, this is the TCC for professional wrestling, nor national promotion. Also, ECW was an indie promotion, like ROH. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 22:28, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

ECW never moved but it was a large promotion and it was big enough for vince to be worried and by it out and ROH is considered a national promotion now and so was ECW and in the past people said not to add an indie so i thought i would make the table and then make a discussion with others to see if we should. I know I could add it with a source since I added ECW, ROH and would of added WCW if I found the source first but I just thought id have one first before adding it. Black Dragon 22:49, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
 * The source is a bit sketchy here, since it's a quote from a wrestler, in character. An objective secondary source (or at least a more "official" primary) would be better. Any promotion should be listed here, if it's notable and verifiably has a TCC. There's no rule against indies. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:26, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

yes theres no rule against anything but in the past it was booted off and I wanted to if others (not counting youbut others as well) to see if we should since the page is really long since sources were found for the ECW, WCW and ROH ones Black Dragon  00:14, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

New article up on WWE.com
WWE.com has just posted an article that makes it seem like only the original titles now count as a triple crown. Here is a link It reads: "The Triple Crown - the winning of three major championships - is the most elusive and prestigious title in horse racing. Throughout WWE history, there have been a number of Superstars who captured the three original titles, WWE, Intercontinental and World Tag Team, on their way to becoming WWE's Triple Crown winners."

Does this now mean that people who won it under the "alternate" rules no longer count? ~staple_gun — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.119.153.227 (talk) 21:26, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

My guess is that they're doing this to avoid having to mention Benoit in his and Kurt Angle's respective TCC completions and are quietly in the process of phasing out the alternate titles out of recognition. Of course, this isn't fair on Rey Mysterio for example, but considering the other lengths they've gone to, to steer away from Benoit mentions, yes, I can see the WWE eventually going as far as to strip the WHC of it's TCC staus, as ironic as that sounds. Pure speculation on my part, I'm just agreeing that the WWE has otherwise inexplicably put less and less emphasis on what being WHC attributes for since 2007 and can't think of any other rational explanation. 176.248.53.185 (talk) 17:55, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Multiple Crown Removal
Why was the Multiple wins in the TNA Triple Crown ever removed. It clearly states that there is a multiple time winner in AJ but its not listed anymore and it should be added back. Black Dragon

U.S. Title
To put this to bed (hopefully) once and for all.

I have found a source that states that the U.S. Ttile is part of the Grand Slam.

But nowhere does it say that it can substitute for the I-C title. You need both (along with a WWE/World and Tag Team Championshp) to get the Slam.

Long story short, this makes it apparent (especially now in the "Supershow" era where everybody can be on any show) that WWE views the U.S. title as a tertiary title, a notch under the I-C title.

So the U.S. title is not a substitue for the I-C title for the Slam (and by extension the Triple Crown...since the Slam is basically a TC + 1).

Thank you.

Vjmlhds 18:08, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Austin aries.
At Last nights TNA show in Manchester, Aries won the TNA Tag Team Title. He is now a Triple Crown holder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.20.127.185 (talk) 02:23, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
 * He's also the first mustachioed TNA Triple Crown Champion. Truly a historic moment. InedibleHulk (talk) 09:30, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

TV Title not (shown to be) part of WCW TC.
I deleted the seemingly pointless part about WWE saying Booker T is a Triple Crown champ. After all, he's won the belts. But then I noticed this is being used to support the claim that the TV title counts. This is clearly (to me, anyway) a misreading of what is said in the article:

Following a falling out with his brother, Booker began building his own legacy and became a WCW Triple Crown Champion, winning the World Television, United States and World Heavyweight Championship.

It seems someone has replaced the comma between "Champion" and "winning" in their own mind by the word "by". This says he won the Triple Crown and won these three titles, but not that the TV title had anything to do with the Triple Crown. He had already been a tag champ. Add these three, he's a Triple Crown Champion. But the same would have been true if it had only been the US and World (or the US and World and Cruiserweight, or US and World and Hardcore). The TV title is mentioned because the paragraph is about how decorated he is. It would be strange to leave it out.

In light of this, the WCW section needs work. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:56, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi. It was me. When I saw this, I think "champion, winning the TV, USA and WHC titles". I think that it is a definition of the triple crown. Doesn't say "Winning the WHC and USA. Also, he won the TV..." The TV is in the middle of the sentence, so I think that it is the definiton about a WCW Triple crown. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 13:28, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I understand how you (or someone else) could naturally assume that by the way it's written, but if you take it literally, it doesn't define anything. Even if they had written it in two sentences, like your example, it still wouldn't mean the US and World titles are required, but it would be safe to assume that at least one of those titles is. In fact, we don't have any sources that say exactly which titles count. We have a source saying Bret Hart was the first WWF and WCW TCC, so we can reasonably assume the only three WCW titles he won count (according to this source, anyway). But the TV title claim can't be proven or disproven by what we have. If there's a clearer source out there, we'll need it. On the bright side, nobody loses their Triple Crown status by not acknowledging the TV. Booker T just gets his a bit later. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:13, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

The Miz's Triple crown qualification.
I just wanted to clear this up since it's being reverted constantly. He hadn't completed the TC before he held the IC title (as anyone else wouldn't either, including *gasp* Pedro Morales himself), but had already held the WWE title and world tag team titles beforehand (y'know the other two championships in the original definition?), thus completing the original definition when he did win the IC title. So why is he indicated as having held an alternative definition previously? Just my .02. 176.248.53.185 (talk) 17:55, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * "Won the Triple Crown with an alternate title, but then went on to win all the titles under the original definition." So, Miz won the WWE Tag Team before the World Tag Team. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 12:10, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * He didn't win the Triple Crown with the WWE tag title, though. That only happened once he got the IC, and by then, he already had the World Tag on his checklist. No "but then went on". Italics should go, or what it means to be italicized should be changed. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:48, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Just replace everything I said about italics with stuff about changing colours. I confused myself about what's what there. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:53, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't think ao. I think that he won the alternative definition because he won the wwe tag team before the world tag team. Any case, I think that it's stupid to difference the original definition and the alternative, I think that it isn't important. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 18:27, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree it seems like a silly distinction, and wouldn't mind seeing it gone. But as long as we've got a box explaining what the colours mean, champions with that colour must meet the criteria (whatever it is). In Miz's case, he already had both tag titles and the WWE title when he won the IC. At that moment, he became a Triple Crown champion under both definitions. If he had won the World Tag title after he had won the IC (and therefore after he had already become a "new" TCC), he would have "then went on to win all the titles under the original definition", like Orton and Punk did. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:16, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The safest way to explain it would be this - a wrestler who wins the TC under the original definition gets colored in yellow. If an alternate title is what put somebody over the top to win the TC, the wrestler gets colored in green.  If he already has the TC thanks to an alternate title, but then wins an "original title" to complete the old fashioned TC, he goes pink.  And if he runs the table and wins everything, he goes gold.  In the case of the Miz, he already had 2/3 of the original TC in the bank before winning the I-C title, so coloring him in yellow is correct.  In the cases of Randy Orton or CM Punk, they became TC winners because of their World Title wins, thus they acheived it under an "alternate definition"...they both then went on to become WWE Champions, thus giving them the original TC after the fact, so they're pink.  Long story short - the title that puts somebody over the top should be the one that decides an original or alternate TC as far as coloring goes.  Vjmlhds 20:13, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * That logic doesn't necessarily defeat one or the other argument though, what if Tyson Kidd (just for example's sake) goes on to win the WWE title, never wins the WHC, and completes the triple crown with the IC title, where does he fall considering he won the WWE/World Tag titles simultaneously? Perhaps a new color should be introduced for superstars that

win both the original definition and an alternate definition of a triple crown at the same time? Purple? 2.218.151.177 (talk) 11:20, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

I think that we can remove the colours. The only important colours are the brand extension when the wrestler won the title. I don't think that the people need to know who won the original definition, alternative definition, alternative but he won other titles, all the titles... It's a kind of trivia.--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 11:59, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree that the current amount of colors are already overkill and we don't need anymore, but under the current guidelines I don't think there's going to be any other way to resolve the issue. That being said, I'm changing The Miz's color to indicate he won the TCC under the original definition for the time being, only because it's the only listed definition that's absolutely true about his TCC until a consensus is agreed upon. 2.218.151.177 (talk) 12:59, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Check this out
Before I make any changes, I want to bring this to your attention:

Here's Dolph Ziggler's WWE.com bio When you see the little milestones bar, click on the second to last one. It is labled "Triple Crown #Heel", and is specifically about his U.S. title win. It mentions that this was his third singles title win.

Would this be enough to say that WWE considers the U.S. title as an alternative to the tag straps in winning the TC? In other words, can a WWE/World-IC-US combo qualify?

Vjmlhds 18:44, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello again. Still synthesis. You'll need something that outright makes the claim, like "The US title is part of the Triple Crown", or even "Ziggler became a Triple Crown champion by winning the US title." Can't combine his Twitter name in the headline with "third" in the body to come to a conclusion. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:40, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Meh...the only reason I saw that was because I wanted to see how they updated his bio after his MITB cash-in/World Title win. I didn't bother editing the article because I didn't know if it would pass the proverbial "smell test", but I figured it wouldn't hurt to cast a line and see if I could get a bite.  No harm, no foul. Vjmlhds 03:35, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Ziggler's the champ? Sweet. Del Rio just doesn't work as a face. That is a fact. Anyway, glad you're not taking offense. I seem to shoot down your suggestions a lot, but it's nothing personal. Just rules. A flawed idea is better than no idea. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:59, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

The Triple Crown is only the three original titles
According to WWE's official "WWE Triple Crown" page, the Triple Crown Champions are those "who captured the three original titles, WWE, Intercontinental and World Tag Team" championships. Now the wording there is kinda odd, but it makes it clear when it says that CM Punk became a Triple Crown Champion in 2011, 3 years after he won the Tag Team, Intercontinental, and World Heavyweight Championships in 2008. Obviously, WWE has changed the definition of Triple Crown once again... (Probably to avoid including Benoit I suppose, but that's pure speculation). Feed back  ☎ 07:00, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello again, again. The full quote is "Throughout WWE history, there have been a number of Superstars who captured the three original titles, WWE, Intercontinental and World Tag Team, on their way to becoming WWE's Triple Crown winners." Doesn't say those titles are required and doesn't preclude any other titles, only says that a number of wrestlers have won the Triple Crown with those titles. I don't see anything about Punk there. A little help? OK, had to enable Javascript. "CM Punk won the WWE Title for the first time at Money in the Bank 2011, making him a WWE Triple Crown winner." That does seem to suggest the World Heavyweight Title doesn't count, but not sure if a suggestion can trump a straightforward claim. I'll have to recheck the claim we have for the WHC counting. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:04, 10 April 2013 (UTC)


 * What do you know? It seems we don't have a source for the World Heavyweight or WWE Tag title counting. Did we before? Seems a pretty big oversight. In light of that, I'm inclined to agree with you. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:17, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * But wait, here it is. Not sure why this is on the Talk Page (Conflicting Statements), but not in the article. Given this, I have to say it's more of a clear and straightforward claim, and trumps the Punk caption suggestion. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:22, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm the one who brought that source to the talk page. But be that as it may, I think the link I just provided shows that WWE has changed the definition of the Triple Crown (just like they changed it when they added the alternate titles). Like I said, I'm guessing they changed it so they can avoid adding Chris Benoit's name. How do we reflect WWE's new definition in the article? Feed  back  ☎ 21:47, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * My bad. I thought I was talking to Vjmlhds. Not sure how I missed your big signature, but I did. I was going to attribute that link to you, but glad I didn't. That would have looked even stupider. Anyway, when we have conflicting statements from the same source, the one that explicitly says something should trump the one that only hints at it, even if the hint is newer. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:30, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Just leave it as it is. Just because WWE wants to pretend "he who must not be named" didn't exist, doesn't mean we have to, nor should we.  They have laid out a clear criteria for the TC, and so those who won said titles are TC winners.  Vjmlhds 22:05, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I think I agree with Vjmlhds. I don't think that that one line about CM Punk getting the crown in 2011 is enough to change everything about how the article is currently set up.  Conflicting statements to say the least considering we have articles from WWE stating otherwise.  Here's a WWE Triple Crown Game where Kurt Angle is included with the triple crown winners.  He never won the World Tag so by the definition put forth in the recent article he shouldn't be one.  Course there's the current source we have in the article as well that specifically lays out the rules for the Triple Crown and WHC and WWE tag are explicitly laid out.  This recent article does not in any way explicitly lay out anything, although it may hint at it.  It may also just be erroneous about Punk winning the TC at MITB as he technically won it earlier.  Or it could have been written the way it was to avoid mentioning he who shall not be named.  There's too much previous statements from the same source that contradict what has simply been inferred from this one comment.LM2000 (talk) 04:30, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Could also be hinting at something entirely else: Maybe there's a Triple Crown Championship and a WWE Triple Crown Championship, depending on whether the top of the crown had "WWE" in the title. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:51, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

This article and The Miz's bio also list him as the "21st Triple Crown". How much more evidence do we need that the World title doesn't count anymore? Feed back  ☎ 12:08, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Currently, if we include the World title, we would have 25 Triple Crowns, but excluding the World title, there are 21 with The Miz as #21. Booker T, Chris Benoit, Dolph Ziggler and Christian don't count. The WWE Tag Team Championship still seems eligible though. Feed  back  ☎ 12:19, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
 * One thing we're not considering is that instead of thinking it's some kind of change in policy, it could also be simply a case of the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing over at Titan Towers. Vjmlhds 15:05, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
 * What I think was inferred from the original link posted in this thread is that only the original three (WWE, World Tag, IC) belts count towards TC... only 18 superstars have their pictures listed. Miz's profile claims that 20 TCs came before him which would have to count more than just the original three, but never explicitly says anything about who those 20 are or what combo they used to get TC.  Then the source already in this article says WHC and World Tag explicitly do count.  Obviously you can interpret the first link you posted in a couple of ways in the first place, as Hulk pointed out, but it does seem to me that three sources are saying three different things.  But only one of them says anything explicitly.  Because Miz's 21 and the first link you posted don't even agree with each other I think we would be dealing with a WP:SYN problem if we use the two of them to reach one conclusion.   Until WWE publishes something on the triple crown where they clearly and explicitly lay out an updated set of rules that cannot possibly be misconstrued I don't think we should be axing long-standing material just because we're looking too hard into things.LM2000 (talk) 19:31, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
 * LM2000 is exactly correct. If WWE comes right out and says the World Title is no longer part of the equation, then we adjust.  But as long as it's "woulda-coulda-shoulda" then the status quo remains, as a clear set of requirements was established, and anything else that may hint at this or imply that could be left too much up to interprutation. Vjmlhds 20:46, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Original and alternate definition
I think that the different clours is too problematic. I think that we can delete them. Original definition, alternative definition, alternative but he won after... I think that is not relevant for the article, is confusing and is original search. What do you think? --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 19:06, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Support- It's silly, agreed. Feed back  ☎ 20:32, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Support- Especially in the case of TNA where the original definition is now impossible to complete. A triple crown is a triple crown, whatever combo they won it from (originally) is irrelevant I think.LM2000 (talk) 21:35, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

In TNA, I think that the only "original definition" is R-Truth. Also, WWE without the world tag team, ended the original definition (except the previous champions). Also, do we delete the golden champions also? --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 21:51, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Support Has always seemed like pointless detail to me. Gold colour, as well. If someone wants to know which champion won all the belts, they just have to look for blanks. No blanks, there's your answer. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:26, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
 * In that case,  4yes, I'll retire the colours in triple crown and grand slam, both are the same case. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 15:22, 18 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm down with all of it except the part about the gold...those that do "run the table" and win everything should get some special notation. Vjmlhds 17:05, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

WCW International Heavyweight Title
shouldnt this title count as an alternate for the WCW World Title? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.24.231.104 (talk) 02:30, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
 * WWE owns all of the WCW trademarks and they won't even recognize the WCW International Championship as a world title. So, no, I don't think it's a viable alternative.LM2000 (talk) 06:22, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I think that, If somebody finds a reliable source calling Rick Rude Triple Crown champions, we'll include it. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 15:13, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Triple Crown Championship or Winner?
Shouldn't this article be call "Triple Crown Winners" instead of "Triple Crown Championship"? WWE recognized wrestlers who accomplished the feat as Triple Crown winners, not champions. See the first link below as an example of such reference. This is unlike when wrestler who accomplished the Grand Slam, those are actually called Grand Slam Champion. See the second link below as example of such reference.

http://www.wwe.com/classics/wwe-triple-crown http://www.wwe.com/superstars/specialsections/hbk/hbkfacts

So what do you think? Seasrmar (talk) 00:35, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Also, TNA calls Styles Triple Crown Winner http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ziibdnytTY --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 00:43, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Seems like Sesrmar has a point, less someone comes across sources that can prove him otherwise.LM2000 (talk) 03:01, 24 February 2014 (UTC)


 * A point for WWE, but there are seven other promotions to consider. That's not to say I'm against it. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:35, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I do believe the best name for this would be Triple Crown (professional wresting), since it talks about the accomplishment and not just the winners of multiple promotions. Not exactly a championship nor a list of winners, moreso just an accomplishment.-- Will C  03:33, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I like Will's idea the best so far.LM2000 (talk) 18:17, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

The first link also calls them Triple Crown Champions. Its like having won a title basically. Your a winner and a champion. Black Dragon 22:07, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

WWE Triple Crown - US Title
So, I just got the new WWE magazine and there is a section about The Undertaker. It goes on to say:

"Undertaker is not a Triple Crown Champion. Although he's been World Champion and a Tag Team Champion (and even a Hardcore Champion), he's never won the Intercontinental or U.S. Championships."

Now this could be saying that he has never held a secondary title or it could be saying that the US title counts towards the Triple Crown. Thoughts? Black Dragon 20:56, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Mmmm, that's interesting. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 21:18, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Show a picture of that page? starship.paint   "YES!" 04:24, 28 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Yay. This again. And again, it relies on readers to combine two sentences to form an idea not outright stated, like the LA Times clown (can you spot the difference from reality?). It's an illusion! Not an organic illusion like the second Doink, but a synthetic one. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:33, 29 April 2014 (UTC)


 * InedibleHulk If you dont have a proper opinion I wouldnt bother. I was asking for ideas. Most who ask this dont a a source.

Otherwise, I can try to find a pic on the web or I could just take a picture of the magazine with my phone or something. Black Dragon 23:31, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't bother with what?


 * You asked for thoughts. I think it only says he hasn't won a secondary. And I think WWE.com writers lack consistency (in many ways). Not sure what your third sentence means, but I know it doesn't make a difference whether you find a photo, take a photo or just cite the magazine. The source exists, no doubt. It just doesn't say anything that warrants changing the article. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:34, 6 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Well, its just your like "UHHHH<< not this again" Which isnt an opinion and then you go on to basically bash my comment. Besides someone else asked for a pic, so I said I might be able to take one. You dont have to be so freakin' rude just because you dont like me. Black Dragon  22:05, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

CHIKARA
I think that with the return of CHIKARA, there should be a part of this wiki dedicated to their triple crown. Additionally, I think that the triple crown in CHIKARA would be the Grand Championship, The Campones de Parajas, and The King Of Trios set. These three are truly the main open accomplishments ( the Young Lions Cup has an age barrier, Cibernetico isn't really an accomplishment in terms of a tournament) and at this moment out of their decade plus history only one man has accomplished the feat ( Icarus ) Special:Contributions/MNOWAX (talk) 18:41, 20 June 2014 (UTC)MNOWAXMNOWAX (talk) 18:42, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Nope. Original research. Until CHIKARA'll release a note claiming Icarus as the first Chikara Triple Crown Winner, no way.--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 19:31, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

WCW International World title
Is that title pretty much like how WWE had the World Heavyweight Title(for Smackdown) in a way? If so, then that would make Rick Rude a Triple Crown Champion! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.123.73.149 (talk) 19:08, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm gonna create a template to answer the questions about new TTC definitions. To include a new title, we need sourec who call the wrestler Triple Crown Champion. We need a source from WCW or WWE which recognized the World International title as substitute. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 19:11, 29 November 2014 (UTC)

Possible new WWE Triple Crown format, with the United States Championship counted towards it
If the WWE were to make a new format, and have the United States Championship counted, it's possible that with the new format, it'll be easier to become Triple Crown, and you'll only need to have held on to three out of the four active titles, without the need for the WWE World Heavyweight Championship. It might happen, and if it did, the WWE section would look like this:

WWE
In WWE (formerly known as the World Wrestling Federation and World Wrestling Entertainment) the term Triple Crown Champion has traditionally been used to describe a wrestler who has won the WWE Championship, the Intercontinental Championship, and the World Tag Team Championship. For a span of nearly eighteen years, from 1979 up through 1997, these were the only three championships of the company, and a wrestler who won all three championships (not necessarily concurrently) was considered a "Triple Crown Champion." Until the 1990s, the accomplishment was extremely rare, with Pedro Morales remaining the sole Triple Crown Champion for more than a decade.

Following the brand extension in 2002, the (now defunct) World Heavyweight Championship and the WWE Tag Team Championship became alternate titles that can compose part of the Triple Crown. Since the unification of the company's two world championships and two tag team championships, the only three current Triple Crown championships of WWE are the WWE World Heavyweight, Intercontinental, and WWE Tag Team Championships, with the United States Championship not counted towards accomplishing the feat. But, a new format for the Triple Crown Championship was announced, courtesy of WWE.com, with the United States Championship now becoming an eligible title for the Triple Crown Championship. Superstars can become a Triple Crown champion, with the United States Championship, as long it has a reign while as a member of the WWE promotion. Under the new format, eligible champions must have held three out of the four currently active titles in the WWE.

CM Punk holds the record for completing the Triple Crown Championship in the shortest amount of time between the first and third title. It took him 203 days between June 2008 and January 2009. This broke Diesel's previous record of 227 days set in 1994, which is notable, as Diesel had only been with the company for a year and a half at the time. Under the new format, five superstars have become Triple Crown champions in 2009, which is the most throughout its existence. In that same year, two sets of tag teams have members reach Triple Crown status, after winning the then Unified WWE Tag Team Championship, with Chris Jericho and The Big Show from Jeri-Show winning it on July 26, and D-Generation X members Shawn Michaels and Triple H on December 13.

List of WWE Triple Crown Champions
The following is a list of WWE Triple Crown Champions with dates indicating the wrestler's first reign with the respective championship.

Candidates
As of July 29, 2024, a grand total of 31 wrestlers have been recognized as WWE Triple Crown champions. Here is a list of superstars who need one more title to reach the accomplishment, depending on what format they need it for.

Under the original format:
 * Big E, Curtis Axel, Goldust, Kofi Kingston, and Stardust require the WWE World Heavyweight Championship
 * John Cena, Seth Rollins, and The Undertaker require the Intercontinental Championship

Under the new format:
 * Cesaro, R-Truth, and Zack Ryder require either the WWE World Heavyweight Championship, or the Intercontinental Championship]]
 * Curtis Axel, Goldust, and Stardust require either the WWE World Heavyweight Championship, or the United States Championship
 * Booker T requires either the WWE World Heavyweight Championship, or the WWE Tag Team Championship
 * Seth Rollins and The Undertaker require either the Intercontinental Championship, or the United States Championship
 * Sheamus requires either the Intercontinental Championship, or the WWE Tag Team Championship

1 Though a Triple Crown champion under the new format, John Cena still requires the Intercontinental Championship under both formats, in order to hold every eligible title for Triple Crown, under both formats. 2 Despite holding on to the United States Championship at one point during his tenure at WCW, he is not yet eligible for the Triple Crown Championship, as he has yet to have a United States title reign in the WWE.

That should be copied/pasted to the article, if it were to become official. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jacked14 (talk • contribs) 10:14, 22 May 2015


 * Thanks. However, WWE doesn't regonized the US title as part of the Tripe Crown. Maybe, someday... (and we'll use your table) --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 17:17, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

1-away candidates
Should we list the groups of people who only need to win 1 title, be it world, IC or tag? If not openly, then I think I will begin doing so commented-out as meta-data. Ranze (talk) 23:59, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * They are already listed --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 00:09, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Criteria for inactivity
if you wish to exclude what you call "inactive" wrestlers then please establish what your criteria are for that. It is not for us to insert our personal opinions as to who we consider "active" and who we do not.

We can certainly shape the list by describing parameters. For example "has not wrestled an official match for a year" or something like that.

All it currently says is "wrestlers" and simply saying "active" would be too vague. I consider it vandalism to simply remove data without justification as you have, and I am reverting it back.

If you wish to insert a specific criteria for excluding people, and can support that criteria with references, then I welcome you to comment out those you think should not be listed.

I say comment out rather than delete, because your 'activity' criteria could change over time. For example, if Batista came back and wrestled a match on Monday, and that fit whatever maximum time period you wanted to establish.

I would suggest we work in a period of years, if you want to go by inactivity, since that is easiest to calculate by. We could exclude Batista since he last competed in the WrestleMania prior to last, far as I know. However if you made the period 2 years then we could not exclude him.

I think 1 year is fairest since Undertaker has always been listed even though he's gone that long without competing on multiple occasions. Ranze (talk) 17:29, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I explained the criteria. Active wrestlers under contract with WWE. People like Bob Backlunds or Marella aren't active wrestlers, so I don't understand your criteria (also, including RVD or Rey Mysterio as potential Grand Slam Champion or Jericho last match at NOC 14, when he wrestled at house shows and Beast from the East.--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 17:57, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Seth Rollins

 * Because Rollins won the US title last night at Summerslam, doesn't this make him a Triple Crown/Grand Slam Champion? --Evil Yugi (talk) 15:46, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Source?--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 18:24, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Daniel Bryan is one for the same way. Rollins has had a WWE WHC reign, a tag title reign and now a US title reign which now constitutes a Grand Slam. --Evil Yugi (talk) 18:46, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
 * ???? Rollins never held the IC title. Please, read about Triple Crown and Grand Slam. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 22:24, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
 * When/if Rollins wins the IC title he'll be both a Grand Slam and a Triple Crown winner. At the moment he is neither.LM2000 (talk) 22:30, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Lucha Underground Triple Crown Championship
Currently Lucha Underground has 3 titles, Lucha Underground Championship, Gift of the Gods Championship, and the Lucha Underground Trios Championship. As such, someone who has won all 3 would be considered a triple crown champion. Despite not all of the episodes airing yet, Fenix has done this, so I believe we should include a new sectionThorn in Side (talk) 19:42, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Lucha Underground has not officially recognized a Triple Crown accomplishment yet, therefore a table for that promotion cannot be added until they do.Jacked14 (talk) 03:40, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * On the most recent episode of Lucha Underground on June 29th, Matt Striker stated that Fenix had a chance to become the first ever Lucha Underground Triple Crown Champion. As these episodes are pretaped and the results are known, this means that Fenix has become a Triple Crown Champion so this section can be re-included Thorn in Side (talk) 19:41, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Triple Crown Women's Champion?
With the official retirement of the WWE Divas Championship and introduction of the brand-new WWE Women's Championship last night, I'm starting this section to discuss whether or not we ought to add Charlotte's name to the article since, with her victory last night, she becomes the first female Triple Crown winner, having held the NXT Women's Championship, WWE Divas Championship, and now the WWE Women's Championship.

Thoughts? DigificWriter (talk) 17:39, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Two reasons: 1. NXT is a developmental promotion, and WWE is a main promotion, so it's unlikely that the WWE will count NXT titles towards a Triple Crown, once a NXT alumni is on the main roster 2. The WWE hasn't recognized a Women's Triple Crown yet, and probably isn't going to either Jacked14 (talk) 21:25, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
 * WWE would have to announce such a thing, we can't just make it up. It wouldn't make much sense for them to though, there's just one active women's belt on the main roster.LM2000 (talk) 23:24, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

WWE Universal title and Smackdown tag titles
This was bound to come up sometime but does anyone think that the Universal title and the Smackdown tag titles will become apart of the triple crown? last time they did the brand split the new titles were added so I can only assume that they would be added again although its getting a bit over the top of how many title there are in WWEs triple crown. Browndog91


 * Well, the Universal and SD Tag Titles have been included as part of the Grand Slam, so I wouldn't see why they shouldn't be considered part of the Triple Crown (as a Slam is basically a Triple Crown + U.S. Title in modern times or in the old days a TC + Euro/Hardcore Title). Vjmlhds (talk) 15:31, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I was surprised how quickly they updated the grand slam to include the new titles, in the past we had to spend years debating on whether the US title was part of it before they made an official announcement. That said, until they make an official announcement it would be WP:OR to assume they're including the new belts. I'm not sure why they wouldn't but I don't understand WWE's logic on most things. We'll have to wait and see.LM2000 (talk) 15:38, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * They updated their list when Jericho joined the (modern day) Grand Slam club upon winning the U.S. title. And in Wiki's Grand Slam article, it says that a Slam winner is inherently a Triple Crown winner...basically saying if you get a Slam, it automatically also gives you a TC (simple math...a TC is 3, a Slam is 4). Vjmlhds (talk) 19:11, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I just dropped the Grand Slam "a Slam winner is inherently a Triple Crown winner." According to the new Grand Slam (and previous IWA and FCW) isn't correct. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 10:51, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Champion or Winner?
Should a wrestler who achieved the Triple Crown be call a Champion or Winner? WWE call wrestlers who achieved the Triple Crown winners. See WWE's Triple Crown Winner It makes sense championship indicate they won a new belt. When a wrestler achieved the Triple Crown sure they get a belt, but it's of that missing championship of the three required. There's no separate belt for Triple Crown. It's more of an accomplishment rather than a championship. What do you think? Seasrmar (talk) 10:20, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * My reasoning is the same as yours; it's an achievement, not a championship itself. It's equivalent to winning the Royal Rumble or Money in the Bank. You win the match and are given the title shot; the achievement and the prize are two different things. Ozdarka (talk) 11:39, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Cena, Batista and Sheamus
John Cena, Batista and Sheamus are listed as WWE Triple Crown Winners when none of the three have been IC champion. Is this an oversight or is wrong info?Gamekeeper7 (talk) 02:44, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
 * It's wrong and I've removed it.LM2000 (talk) 02:59, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

List of people who won three different championships in one promotion
I propose we move the page to List of people who won three different championships in one promotion since that is what this seems to be, most recent example is the AAA entry where Original Research indicates that winning those three titles is AAA's "Triple Crown" - no source for such a claim. So let's move the page to a name that actually matches the content on it.  MPJ  -DK 22:31, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I've reverted just now, largely because of this comment. Does ICW have a triple crown, or did BT Gunn just win three belts?LM2000 (talk) 21:13, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Insane Championship Wrestling's website contains a video of the end of the match. The description of the video reads "Gunn becomes the first ever ICW Triple Crown winner when he defeats three-time champ Kenny Williams at Shug's Hoose Party IV Night 2." The video itself the commentary contains two verbal references to the triple crown: at 1 minute 14 "BT Gunn, the first ever triple crown winner in Insane Championship Wrestling"; and 1 minute 55 "And only one man can say they are the first triple crown champion, and that man is The Oddity, that man is BT Gunn". Jxan3000 (talk) 19:14, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the source, I have restored the edit.LM2000 (talk) 20:16, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Triple Crown (professional wrestling). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110410204745/http://corporate.wwe.com/news/2011/2011_04_07.html to http://corporate.wwe.com/news/2011/2011_04_07.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.wwe.com/magazine/magazinefeatures/featureoftheweek20090423a/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070508214208/http://www.tnawrestling.com/news/fullnews2.php?all=1268 to http://www.tnawrestling.com/news/fullnews2.php?all=1268
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070715141550/http://www.tnawrestling.com/news/fullnews2.php?all=1437 to http://www.tnawrestling.com/news/fullnews2.php?all=1437
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110418042654/http://www.ovwrestling.com/roster/cliffcompton to http://www.ovwrestling.com/roster/cliffcompton

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:10, 16 January 2018 (UTC)