Media Gus vs bones 1. Am i missing something?

[Dream20]

I just watched it again this morning.
Had it 3-2 for Gus, with him getting 1,3, & 4.

Gus was also up in headstrikes 88-18 mid way through the 4th.
So the answer is yes, you must be missing something .

Why do you think Jones won the second? Jones only had a few kicks. Gus clearly out boxed him and also landed a takedown.

 

[JustBleed69]

Why do you think Jones won the second? Jones only had a few kicks. Gus clearly out boxed him and also landed a takedown.

It was a pretty lack-luster round with Gus not doing much and Jones landing more kicks. Also the takedown was in the first round I'm pretty sure.

 

[tat2man5k]

close fight by jones fans dictionary means he lost.
Using word "but" before explaining how gus won most of the fight also means by jones fans dictionary he lost.
And finally saying "clear victory" by jones fans dictionary means he lost decisively.
Oh forgot, saying you are scandinavian means you are a traitor.
Am i missing something?

I hear ya. I've never understood this, along with the obligatory "and I'm a (insert name) fan."

 

[jeremyemilio]

So... Nothing happened in rounds 1-3 and Jones took 4 clearly and 5 was close.

That’s why Jones was hospitalized right?

For that nothing in the 1st 3

I’m no Scandinavian

Not only did Jones win rounds 2, 4, and 5, but if that fight had continued to the death, Jones would have been the last one breathing. Would have still needed the hospital after, but that's hardly the point.

 

[CptHowdy187]

2nd time watching this fight. This time on mute without rogan in my ear.

Yes one of Jon Jones hardest fight. But still clear that he won it.

Nothing really happens before midway into round 4. Jon Jones find his timing on his elbows. And gets gus in some real trouble..

Round 5 was again close. But again Jon Jones finding a home for his elbows. He could also keep spamming his left head kick at gus. Who had no answer for it. Other then just eating it with a lazy block.

At the end of the last round jon jones lands a nice flying knee.

Gus also gassed midway into the last round..

So Yeah. Close fight. But clear victory to Jones.

And i am a Scandinavian .

This is where I stopped reading.

It's hilarious that you would remark about having the fight on mute so you wouldn't have to hear Rogan, as if he was biased in Gus's favor. Rogan was riding Jon's dick the whole fight. He did the same in the first Cormier fight. He commentates exclusively from Jones vantage point in every one of his fights.

 

[Frode Falch]

Gotta love the cheap personal insults some of you random nicknames uses.

Always a good way to make a argument more legit.

 

[fiftywattmafia]

Not only did Jones win rounds 2, 4, and 5, but if that fight had continued to the death, Jones would have been the last one breathing. Would have still needed the hospital after, but that's hardly the point.

Highlighted part has absolutely nothing to do with the judges scorecard. Its important in Sherbro code but it holds no bearing on judging the fight.

That 2nd round is the big question in looking at this fight. I think its a close round and just by my eyes I think Gus won it but I'll concede its highly debatable.

 

[acannxr]

Close fight.

How I scored not too long ago:

49-48 Gustafsson (in before Sherdoggers cite significant strike count)

Round 1: 10-9 Gustafsson
5:00-4:00 Striking Jones (primarily leg kicks)
4:00-3:00 Striking Draw
3:00-2:00 Striking Gustafsson (landed flush head punches and cut Jones open)
2:00-1:00 Striking Gustafsson (inconsequential takedown)
1:00-0:00 Striking Jones (eye poked Gustafsson)

Round 2: 10-10 Draw
5:00-4:00 Striking/Grappling Draw (Jones landed leg kicks, Gustafsson landed a takedown)
4:00-3:00 Striking Draw (Jones landed an elbow, Gustafsson landed a flush hook)
3:00-2:00 Striking Jones
2:00-1:00 Striking Gustafsson
1:00-0:00 Striking Draw

Round 3: 10-9 Gustafsson
5:00-4:00 Striking Gustafsson (landed a right hook and right uppercut)
4:00-3:00 Striking Gustafsson (jabs to the body/head, counter hooks)
3:00-2:00 Striking Gustafsson (jabs to the body/head, straights to the head)
2:00-1:00 Striking Jones (landed hard kicks to the body)
1:00-0:00 Striking Gustafsson

Round 4: 10-10 Draw
5:00-4:00 Striking Jones
4:00-3:00 Striking Draw
3:00-2:00 Striking Gustafsson (landed flush punches to the head)
2:00-1:00 Striking Gustafsson (more punches to the head; Jones' cut bleeding badly by this point)
1:00-0:00 Striking/Clinch Jones (landed elbows)

Round 5: 10-9 Jones
5:00-4:00 Striking Gustafsson
4:00-3:00 Striking Jones (inconsequential takedown)
3:00-2:00 Striking Jones (brief top/wall control, two head kicks, one body kick)
2:00-1:00 Striking Draw (Jones landed a head kick, Gustafsson landed head/body punches)
1:00-0:00 Striking Jones (head kicks, a knee, and some elbows)

 

[CptHowdy187]

Gotta love the cheap personal insults some of you random nicknames uses.

Always a good way to make a argument more legit.

Lol...I think you're imagining things. I haven't seen any of that in this thread.

Saying nothing happened in the first 3 rounds really hurts your credibility though dude, seriously. There's been quite a few other posters that remarked on that part of your post too. If you think nothing happened during the first 3 rounds then you're clearly ignorant to what you're watching or watching the fight only from Jon's viewpoint, only scoring the strikes you saw Jones land.

Gus boxed him up big time for 3 rounds and 4+ minutes of the 4th round. Check the stats of the fight to see just how wide the margin was when it comes to punches landed.

Jones absolutely finished the fight strong and may have even finished it if were to hypothetically have gone to a 6th round.....but that's not how fights are scored. You don't get rewarded an earlier round retroactively for finishing the fight strong. It's scored round by round and if you win the first 3 rounds then you're opponent either needs to finish you or have a dominant 10-8 4th or 5th round which Jon didn't do enough to get.

I'll admit that 2 was a kind of close round and Jon was pushing forward more, but I thought Gus' boxing won him that round. Clean jabs and crosses should beat out oblique kicks in the significant striking department by a considerable amount.

Re-watch the fight, again. This time pay attention to the first 3 rounds and the 4th round up until the hail mary elbow which I'd even argue should've only made the round a draw since Gus was clearly winning for 4+ minutes of the round. You seem like the sort of clueless fan who can only tell something lands if it's visibly rocked their opponent. Either way, you clearly don't know what you're watching.

Gus - Rounds 1,2 & 3
10/10 - Round 4
Jones - Round 5

Judge Chris Lee should never have scored a fight again for scoring it 49/46 Jones. No-one with even a modicum of objectivity could've possibly scored Round 3 for Jones.

 

[ybot337]

damn any notice jones lips at the end of rd5 my god

 

[Dbreiden83080]

He won 3-2. Closed out round 4 huge and outworked Gus in round 5. It is a clear win for Jones. 12 days till the rematch at last..

 

[Where you at Georges?]

Jon is gonna try to wrestle fuck Alex I guarantee it. Alex is much better standing.

The 2nd round was pretty close. Not a crystal clear Jones round in my opinion. I gave it to Gus based on activity.

 

[fiftywattmafia]

If anything this gets me more hyped for the rematch. Man just let both guys arrive to the cage making weight, no injuries and no positive tests for roids, PCP, coke and commit no major crimes. Chances are around 40% of this FYI.

 

[Jimmy Jazz]

Jon is gonna try to wrestle fuck Alex I guarantee it. Alex is much better standing.

The 2nd round was pretty close. Not a crystal clear Jones round in my opinion. I gave it to Gus based on activity.

well if take downs score as heavily as they did, then Gus should of been given the round. Take downs were a much bigger deal back then. Any time off your feet or pulling guard= take down in the eyes of the judges back then.

 

[CptHowdy187]

damn any notice jones lips at the end of rd5 my god

Gus landed flush shots all fight up until the hail mary elbow with less than a minute to go in round 4. Everyone seems to give Jones this round just because he finished it strong and unfairly discount 4+ minutes of fighting before the elbow landed. You don't score fights like that.

The story of the fight was Gus boxed him up for the vast majority of the fight with Jon landing a a couple of decent elbows, but mostly throwing nothing little oblique kicks. The tide absolutely turns after the spinning elbow near the end of Round 4 and Jon pours it on strong throughout most of Round 5.

Again though, you score a fight round by round and it's neither here nor there who finishes the fight stronger. They got this right in the first Hendo vs Shogun fight. Shogun finished strong and took rounds 4 & 5 100%, but Dan clearly won the first 3 rounds and you can't discount that. That's the criteria for how fights are scored - round by round.

 

[TheDwayneomenon]

Round 1: Gustafson moves well but Jones lands the most effective shots.

Round 2: Gustafson back-pedals the entire round and aside from stuffing some TDs does very little.

Round 3: Jones took a breather and Gustafson took the round. A close round nonetheless.

Round 4: Pretty competitive, Gustafson did well early but Jones had him hurt and desperate near the end. I'd give the round to Jones based on the final 20 seconds.

Round 5: Round was pretty even to the midway point but Jones got the TD and about a 100 head kicks while Gustafson did f-all

In no way did Jones lose this fight.

 

[DelanoRunnymede]

This

Gus won round 2, Jones did nothing. Gus won 4:30 out of round 4 as well.

This is the issue. When Gus fought DC, he dropped him and almost finished him in round 3. The judges gave the round to DC. So do you win the round if you land one big shot, or do you win it because you marginally won the rest of the round. If people argue Jones won round 4 because of the elbow, surely Gus won round 3 against DC.

 

[CptHowdy187]

https://www.mmafighting.com/2013/9/22/4759124/fortunes-changed-for-five-at-ufc-165

There's parts here I disagree with, but overall I think Dave Meltzer makes a lot of sense, not just about this fight but about title fights and how judges score fights in general:

Any time there is a close fight in a high-profile championship situation, the next few hours are predictable.

Robbery. Fix. Incompetent judges.

Saturday night was no different, although the voices of reason came out pretty quickly afterwards. For the most part, it seems most people recognized none of the above came close to fitting the situation with Jon Jones retaining his light heavyweight title on a 49-46, 48-47 and 48-47 decision over Alexander Gustafsson in the now-greatest light heavyweight championship fight in UFC history.

Coming after the C.J. Ross fiasco last week in the Floyd Mayweather title defense -- not to mention some legitimately questionable scoring on that show's undercard -- the fight Jones and Gustafsson had was only bound to further the flames about judging. But in this fight, judging was not a problem. Even the current ten-point must system really wasn't a problem. The nature of the fight, and two rounds being so difficult to call, was the issue.

I thought it was pretty clear that Gustafsson won the first round, and Jones won rounds four and five. Rounds two and three were very close and could have gone either way. Any scorecard that ranged from 49-46 to Jones to 48-47 for Gustafsson was valid. Nobody clearly dominated the other in the fight overall or clearly won three rounds. Whoever won going to be lucky, but not undeserving.

As someone who has judged in the past, and unofficially has in real time judged nearly every UFC fight in the last decade plus, criticism of judges is at times valid. Scorecards can make you scratch your head. On rare occasions, they can be outrageous. But more often than not, it's overblown. With every close fight, the people with their tinfoil hats and conspiracy theories come out of the woodwork when, in actuality, they are just fights that could go either way.

So this as good a time to address a few things about judging, all of which Saturday's fight exemplified.

"It should have been a split decision" – Anyone who makes this comment should immediately be ignored on judging for the rest of their natural lives. Judges have no idea what the other judges are scoring or thinking. They are all independent. You can say that in a three-round fight it should have been 29-28, but even in the closest of fights, all three judges can be in agreement of who won and there is nothing wrong with the judging.

"Gustafsson didn't win by enough to take the championship" – No such thing exists. From the age of ten I heard the adage that you have to convincingly beat the champion to take his title, or that there is a champion's edge in a close fight. Undeniably, stars have the benefit, as do hometown favorites, because of crowd reaction since judges aren't in a soundproof booth. But they shouldn't. And by rules and regulations, they don't.

Once the fight starts, there is no champion. There are two people fighting for the championship. There is no such thing in MMA or boxing scoring where the tie goes to the runner. If two of the three judges on Saturday gave Gustafsson rounds two and three, and conceivably that could have happened, he'd be the champion, whether you thought he did enough to convincingly unseat Jones or not.

The only margin in winning is taking three rounds in a fight where there are no 10-8 scores. A judge can't redo his card. If two judges had scored Gustafsson winning three rounds, but both felt Jones' two rounds that he won were far stronger, and each felt Jones overall won the fight, Gustafsson would be champion. There should be no consideration as to who the champion is when scoring any individual rounds.

"It was close, the judge that had it 49-46 was crazy" – It was close. Chris Lee wasn't crazy, certainly not in this fight. It's rare, but you can have a razor close fight and end up 50-45. Razor-close fights ending 30-27 are not rare. You can have a near slaughter in the end and it end up 48-47. The score can reflect the closeness of the fight, but it's a round-by-round system. Plenty of 29-28 fights are not close fights at all.

Fightmetric in its post-fight analysis gave both of those rounds 10-10. The problem is that judges are strongly discouraged from handing out 10-10 rounds. In this case, on two of the three cards, the two close rounds evened each other out, though often that isn't the situation. But if Lee did believe two and three were close, and gave round two to Jones, there is supposed to be no such thing as evening it up. If I gave Jones round two and it's razor-close, and round three was also razor-close, there is a psychological tendency to even things up and be fair.

But that would be wrong. Each round is scored individually and what happened in prior rounds shouldn't play into it. Each round, in theory, is a blank slate.

If there was any controversy at UFC 165, it should have been Brian Beauchamp's 29-28 score for Roland Delorme over Alex Caceres. All three rounds were obvious, Delorme in the first and Caceres in two and three. It was an exciting fight, but it wasn't a close fight. The 29-28 score for Caceres sounds closer than 49-46 does. That's another example of looking at final scores and then arguing the fight was closer without taking the nature of how fights are scored into account.

The key thing, and this happens fairly often, particularly in three-round fights, is that the fighter who wins on a judge's card may not be the fighter who people believe won the overall bout. If there is a fight where the first two rounds were like rounds two and three of Jones-Gustafsson, and a third round was a one-sided domination, the judge who gave the same fighter the two close rounds can't go back and change their card to reflect who they thought really won the fight.

When I tell people, since this happens once every few shows, that I thought one guy won the fight but my score said somebody else, far too many people can't grasp the concept. I suppose you could give the guy who destroyed the other in round three a 10-7 to make up for it, but real-life scoring doesn't work like that, and you wouldn't last long in the judging world if you operated towards such compensation. And if the dominant round is the first or second, you can't "make up" a third round score to reflect who you think really won if your scores are going to say something else.

A perfect example of this was last weekend. I was watching the Lucas Matthysse vs. .Danny Garcia boxing match with the Mexican pro wrestling legend, Charles "Konnan" Ashenoff, a former amateur boxer and lifelong aficionado of that sport. He's the type of guy who when the fight is on falls into a state of hypnosis in watching it. He's watched boxing since childhood and has never scored a fight, yet has discussed badly scored fights with me in boxing and MMA for decades.

We were both scoring, in real time, and posting scores, as judges would do. When the fight was over, he said that Garcia won handily. Yet his scorecard was even. And when the actual scores came out, it wound up a split decision in a fight which, overall, nearly everyone thought Garcia won. When it was over, he remarked to me how many close rounds there are in boxing matches, and how eye-opening it was to actually score like a judge.

As for what happens next with Jones vs. Gustafsson, if both are healthy and ready to go, there should be a rematch. The vast majority of fans would rather see Jones against Gustafsson II than any fight other than a potential bout with Anderson Silva or Cain Velasquez. Daniel Cormier can afford a win at 205 first. Glover Teixeira can wait.

There are two types of title matches. There are the ones that happen because it's time for the champion to fight, and you pick the best guy available on that date. Anthony Pettis vs. Josh Thomson falls into that category. There's nothing wrong with the fight. It was the best fight available for the lightweight belt on that day. But not many people are dying to see it, nor was there a strong clamor beforehand prompting the UFC to make bring the fight together.

Jones vs. Teixeira falls into that category, just as Jones vs. Gustafsson did on Friday.

Then there are the fights people badly want to see, like Chris Weidman vs. Anderson Silva II or GSP vs. Nick Diaz. Jones vs. Gustafsson on Sunday is closer to this category. Historically, the UFC rarely -- if ever -- misses when it comes to the fight people want to see the most, particularly in this case, when a rematch is perfectly justified..

As far as fortunes changing for five on Saturday, we'll look at the stars of the show.

More Coverage: UFC 165 Results | UFC news
Download MMA Fighting iPhone App

JON JONES - For all the talk of Jones' physical gifts, and they are certainly there, Jones' stature as the greatest light heavyweight fighter in UFC history needs to add another trait. Toughness under fire.

Jones (19-1) could have lost any of his last three fights. The armbar from Vitor Belfort should have finished him in the first round right then and there, but he survived and won. Given the adrenaline rush of a fight, most fighters would not have quit with the dislocated toe he suffered against Chael Sonnen in the first round. But had he not finished Sonnen immediately, that fight would have been called between rounds and he would have lost his title.

With Gustafsson, he was in a war with a guy at the top of his game. The fight was nearly stopped by the doctor after the fourth round. And with the benefit of hindsight, had Jones not turned it on late in round four -- a round he was handily losing -- the end result of the fight would have been different.

And he still needed to win round five, which he did.

This fight was the greatest thing for Jones for a number of reasons. There were a variety of reasons fans don't really like him. In the end, regardless of whatever they perceive of his personality, people are going to respect the guy who constantly survives adversity and sets records in the process.

The second thing is, unless Jones chooses to fool himself, he knows he easily could have lost this fight. It's a lesson because it should tell him that if he gives anything short of his best in training, he absolutely can be beat. For someone who had really only been in trouble for a split second in his entire career, it's good to learn that lesson in a fight that you win. Most aren't that fortunate.

For that reason, I almost feel sorry for who he faces next.

The third is, every great champion to reach his potential legacy needs that great rival. It looked like Jones was so far ahead of the pack that such a rival wasn't even born yet. Now he's got him.

 

[Kirin]

Any fight that jones is in seems to go the same way: whatever he lands is blown out of proportion; whatever his opponent lands is ignored and overlooked. Because everyone is expecting jones to win, what they see reflects what they believed going into the fight ahead of time.

 

[Kneeuinthenutz]

The only thing you're missing is the fact you're a moron. There was absolutely nothing clear about either man winning that fight. It was incredibly close and an argument can be made for either man winning.