49-46 is a defensible score

[Medulla Omoplata]

I see a lot of people disagreeing with the 49-46 score, but IMO given the circumstances it is logically defensible. I personally don't agree with that score but that's not the point.

Everyone agrees Jones won 4 and 5. But I've seen a lot of debate regarding rounds 2 and 3. The 2 judges who had it 48-47 disagreed with each other on who took rounds 2 and 3.

Given no clear consensus from the judges or the fans we can conclude rounds 2 and 3 were close rounds and scoring could go either way. If it is both conceivable that someone could give Jones round 2, and conceivable that someone could give Jones round 3, then it is equally conceivable that someone could give Jones both rounds 2 and 3.

The bottom line is that if you disagree with the 49-46 score then logically you must also disagree with one of the 48-47 scores, and since I haven't seen consensus disagreement with either 48-47 then it stands that 49-46, while an outlier, is not inherently unreasonable.

The issue I think is that people want to use the scoring to tell the tale of the fight, and it feels bad that Reyes can put together such a strong performance, and have such a razor thin close fight only to receive a blown out 49-46 score. But the scoring isn't intended to show how close a fight was, it is merely a means to record the winner of each round. 5 very close rounds can still be rightfully scored as 50-45, and 5 rounds with a clear victor can also rightfully be scored as 50-45. The final score does not give tell to the nature of the fight but many fans treat it that way.

More liberal use of 10-10 and 10-8 rounds could help allow scores to more accurately convey the tale of the fight, but that is an entirely different discussion.

 

[wilKO]

It's a defensible score for Reyes.

 

[tnsinga]

Agreed - it's justifiable and reasonable. I also think that for the many people that dislike JJ, seeing him come so close to being beaten for the first real time but not quite, makes them even more infuriated by that score.

 

[applesbananas]

It's a defensible score for Reyes.

Hahahaha. I'm taking a shit at work and actually lold at this.

 

[Robotnickx]

Agreed - it's justifiable and reasonable. I also think that for the many people that dislike JJ, seeing him come so close to being beaten for the first real time but not quite, makes them even more infuriated by that score.

Bullshit.

"The judge isn't even watching the fight"

Is what you morons are defending.

 

[Ballsaque]

I see a lot of people disagreeing with the 49-46 score, but IMO given the circumstances it is logically defensible. I personally don't agree with that score but that's not the point.

Everyone agrees Jones won 4 and 5. But I've seen a lot of debate regarding rounds 2 and 3. The 2 judges who had it 48-47 disagreed with each other on who took rounds 2 and 3.

Given no clear consensus from the judges or the fans we can conclude rounds 2 and 3 were close rounds and scoring could go either way. If it is both conceivable that someone could give Jones round 2, and conceivable that someone could give Jones round 3, then it is equally conceivable that someone could give Jones both rounds 2 and 3.

The bottom line is that if you disagree with the 49-46 score then logically you must also disagree with one of the 48-47 scores, and since I haven't seen consensus disagreement with either 48-47 then it stands that 49-46, while an outlier, is not inherently unreasonable.

The issue I think is that people want to use the scoring to tell the tale of the fight, and it feels bad that Reyes can put together such a strong performance, and have such a razor thin close fight only to receive a blown out 49-46 score. But the scoring isn't intended to show how close a fight was, it is merely a means to record the winner of each round. 5 very close rounds can still be rightfully scored as 50-45, and 5 rounds with a clear victor can also rightfully be scored as 50-45. The final score does not give tell to the nature of the fight but many fans treat it that way.

More liberal use of 10-10 and 10-8 rounds could help allow scores to more accurately convey the tale of the fight, but that is an entirely different discussion.

Please try and convince me how Jones won round 2?

 

[TheAmericanGazelle]

When you drill down, rounds two and three were not seen as especially contestable by the masses.

I think Sherdog had it at roughly 10 and 20 percent agreement for Jones for those two rounds. Another site I post on had it roughly the same.

That doesn't automatically mean the rounds weren't close, but in terms of the binary vote for two distinct rounds *both* going against the heavy masses...it's extremely unlikely.

And looking at the striking statistics seem to bear that out (even though I do agree that Reyes wasn't laying as much damage on Jones as some were thinking, especially in some of those flurries).

It's not close to the biggest robbery ever, but a 4-1 score is not defensible. And not as a result of falsely linking the idea of the scoring discrete rounds to "telling the fight story"...but because Reyes won two rounds very cleanly.

 

[20falarVerdades]

Please try and convince me how Jones won round 2?

Look at Dominick's face. Jones did more damage

 

[tnsinga]

Bullshit.

"The judge isn't even watching the fight"

Is what you morons are defending.

Lol, that's so completely different and not at all related to what I said. Try again and do better or take your insults elsewhere nicky.

 

[Ballsaque]

Look at Dominick's face. Jones did more damage

Try harder.

 

[20falarVerdades]

Try harder.

 

[johncola]

Bullshit.

"The judge isn't even watching the fight"

Is what you morons are defending.

I don't think you read the OP. That isn't what OP is defending. I'm sure he thinks that judges should watch the fights.

 

[Jean-Claude_Bloodsport]

It's a defensible score for Reyes.

Round 5- Jones 10-8. Deal with it

 

[johncola]

Please try and convince me how Jones won round 2?

You missed the point of the thread.

 

[Medulla Omoplata]

Please try and convince me how Jones won round 2?

This isn't actually yet another thread to debate which rounds Jones won or lost. This is a discussion of how the 49-46 scoring is logically acceptable in the context of the two other 48-47 scores.

When you drill down, rounds two and three were not seen as especially contestable by the masses.

I think Sherdog had it at roughly 10 and 20 percent agreement for Jones for those two rounds. Another site I post on had it roughly the same.

That doesn't automatically mean the rounds weren't close, but in terms of the binary vote for two distinct rounds *both* going against the heavy masses...it's extremely unlikely.

And looking at the striking statistics seem to bear that out (even though I do agree that Reyes wasn't laying as much damage on Jones as some were thinking, especially in some of those flurries).

It's not close to the biggest robbery ever, but a 4-1 score is not defensible. And not as a result of falsely linking the idea of the scoring discrete rounds to "telling the fight story"...but because Reyes won two rounds very cleanly.

We're both basing our posts on anecdotes here but reading through a bunch of reddit threads there seemed to be enough uncertainty from the posters regarding rounds 2 and 3 that IMO there wasn't an obvious consensus, obviously you're interpretation of the fan's POV is different from mine.
In my favour though are the two judges scoring the bout 48-47 could not agree on rounds 2 and 3. Although you know... judges don't have the hottest rep right now...

 

[SKYNET]

Round 5- Jones 10-8. Deal with it

 

[TheAmericanGazelle]

We're both basing our posts on anecdotes here but reading through a bunch of reddit threads there seemed to be enough uncertainty from the posters regarding rounds 2 and 3 that IMO there wasn't an obvious consensus, obviously you're interpretation of the fan's POV is different from mine.
In my favour though are the two judges scoring the bout 48-47 could not agree on rounds 2 and 3. Although you know... judges don't have the hottest rep right now...

It's not "just" anecdotal evidence.

The numbers last I checked here and on another site were about 10 and 20 percent in favor of Jones for rounds two and three.

If you hold those probabilities constant and consider the rounds independent events (as they should be scored), the probability of someone giving Jones both rounds is about two percent (.1*.2).

Then looking at significant strikes per fightmetric, Reyes outlanded Jones in R2 by 11 strikes and R3 by 7 strikes. By comparison, Jones outlanded Reyes in R4 and R5 by 7 and 5 strikes, albeit with some small credit for a small amount of effective grappling. I actually agree that the damage Reyes landed on Jones was somewhat overstated, but there wasn't enough coming back at him to give Jones an advantage.

It just doesn't add up. It's not the biggest robbery ever in terms of who won, but there is enough evidence to call the 4-1 card wrong and incompetent.

 

[Luis Rivera]

Agreed!, exactly my thoughts about rounds 2 and 3, they were very close. One judge gave round 2 to Jones and round 3 to Reyes, another judge did the opposite and a third gave both to Jones. Why is that so strange when they were both close rounds?, the scoring of one round is not dependent on the scoring of the previous round, so the judge that gave rounds 2 and 3 to Jones had at least one other judge agree with him in both cases.

 

[keepemup]

When I heard 49-46 I was convinced Reyes won.

 

[eiyuu]

This is why you never let it go to the judges.