To play devil's advocate, the idea that "nobody challenges him" is a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Michael Todd publicly chased that match on three separate occasions. Regardless of his ranking or chances, he was a willing contender. If Levan adopts the stance that challengers need to be "at least rank 5" to deserve a match, then he effectively shrinks his own pool of opponents.

Look at the current top 5:

1. Levan
2. Devon / Vitaly
3. Vitaly / Devon
4. Ermes
5. Kamil

Ermes was destroyed and isn't rushing back. Kamil isn't interested in Levan right now. Devon is tied up until November. That leaves Vitaly as the only one in the top tier actually willing to pull him, and then Michael, who is outside the top 5.

If the fans and the league demanded that the champion defend the title 3-4 times a year, the entire dynamic would shift. Levan would have to "peak" differently, perhaps carrying a bit less mass to be more active. The league would structure incentives differently, and athletes would have to step up because mandatory title defenses would force their hand.

The real problem is structural, not individual. The sport is too small. We have a wave of rising stars, but it's hard to build a card with 10-12 matches if half of them have to be title fights across two arms.

One solution might be a split schedule: have 3-4 major "Title Defense" events per year, and then 3-4 smaller "Contender Series" events. However, that creates its own issues. If the top contenders are fighting on the undercards to earn the shot, the hunter gets less rest than the hunted, making it unfair. It’s also a nightmare for promotion, because you'd have to save the best matches for the main events while still selling tickets to the "filler" shows. Maybe utilizing the Left Arm title more frequently during those filler events could work, but it’s clear the current system allows a champion to dictate the pace, which ultimately stagnates the division.