Fight Metric: Jones vs Reyes

[Willy Knuckles]

I don't agree with the "efficiency" bit. If I throw 50 punches and land 25, that's better than you throwing and landing 10 out of 10, assuming that the strikes that land are equal.

But I do agree that I'm not just counting strikes and giving the round to whoever lands the most. It matters how hard and how clean the strikes land. Moving forward, and body language in general, matter too.

Under the scoring system that exists I still give the nod to Reyes, but the decision doesn't bother me because if you throw the scoring system out, I think Jones won that fight. When fights are close (like this one was) and the fighters run out of time to get to a clear cut winner via stoppage (as they did in this one) I have no issue with the fight going to the guy who most looked like he would win if the fight was allowed to continue until its authentic conclusion (which I think happened here).

You guys keep bringing up hypothetical situations and I don't get why. The strike differential in this fight was 8, when both fighters landed over 100. I'm not saying efficiency matters in every situation. But in a fight like this, where the strikes landed are so close and neither fighter did real damage to the other(No it wasn't a KD in round 1, and no I don't think Jones was ever actually hurt), efficiency should for sure matter. The hypothetical you just mentioned has the less efficient fighter landing 5 times as many strikes as the more efficient one, that isn't an accurate representation of the Jones-Reyes fight at all. I dont think we'll agree and that's fine, but I really don't see how you guys are ignoring Reyes throwing 93 more strikes but only landing 8 more, and saying it doesn't matter in the fight lol

 

[Shinobi]

Lmaooo classic sherdog quote right here. Throwing efficiency rate into a contact sports shows my lack of understanding of it,when literally every COMBAT sport tracks efficiency by showing the amount of strikes landed, compared to the amount of strikes thrown. You sir are by far the dumbest person I've encountered on here lol hands down. You dont even know what efficiency means I feel like lmao

Jon wasn't more efficient in the first 3 rounds. He was outstruck. Nothing too major happened, but one guy clearly did more than the other, so he wins the rounds. Saying otherwise is being retarded for the sake of protecting one guy.

 

[IvanDrago2.0]

I had rds 2,4,5 for jones .. add that jones had 4 take downs, controlled most of the fight and kept the pressure, etc.. plus rds 4 and 5 always have a huge impact in championship fights . That fight saved the card tbh . The only robbery that occurred that night was latifi getting robbed

 

[Willy Knuckles]

Jon wasn't more efficient in the first 3 rounds. He was outstruck. Nothing too major happened, but one guy clearly did more than the other, so he wins the rounds. Saying otherwise is being retarded for the sake of protecting one guy.

He was more efficient, you can just look at the stats on this post. There's a percentage right next to Sig. Strikes, showing the amount landed vs thrown. Man. I thought football fans were dumb but this is next level

 

[Shinobi]

He was more efficient, you can just look at the stats on this post. There's a percentage right next to Sig. Strikes, showing the amount landed vs thrown. Man. I thought football fans were dumb but this is next level

It doesn't matter what percentage of your punches you landed. All it matters is how many punches you landed and how many you ate. Because the main goal of any fighter is to land strikes. So when you land strikes, you're accomplishing your mission. What percentage did you learn is nothing but a curiosity. If i throw 20 punches and punch you 10 times and you throw 3 punches and punch me 2 times, you still got punched 10 times and landed only 2. That's all that matters.

 

[Yaboy Lex]

I don't agree with the "efficiency" bit. If I throw 50 punches and land 25, that's better than you throwing and landing 10 out of 10, assuming that the strikes that land are equal.

But I do agree that I'm not just counting strikes and giving the round to whoever lands the most. It matters how hard and how clean the strikes land. Moving forward, and body language in general, matter too.

Under the scoring system that exists I still give the nod to Reyes, but the decision doesn't bother me because if you throw the scoring system out, I think Jones won that fight. When fights are close (like this one was) and the fighters run out of time to get to a clear cut winner via stoppage (as they did in this one) I have no issue with the fight going to the guy who most looked like he would win if the fight was allowed to continue until its authentic conclusion (which I think happened here).

The difference in strikes isn't that pronounced. He landed 10% more shots but threw over 20% more. These things don't happen in isolation. When he was missing, jones was landing over 60% of his strikes.


The cumulative damage on reyes' mobility and stamina was clear, and that body work happened all throughout the fight

 

[Willy Knuckles]

It doesn't matter what percentage of your punches you landed. All it matters is how many punches you landed and how many you ate. Because the main goal of any fighter is to land strikes. So when you land strikes, you're accomplishing your mission. What percentage did you learn is nothing but a curiosity. If i throw 20 punches and punch you 10 times and you throw 3 punches and punch me 2 times, you still got punched 10 times and landed only 2. That's all that matters.

Yeah I'm not going to keep doing this. I've replied that I'm not saying efficiency always matters, but when the strike totals are close, like it was in this fight, it should be taken into account. Jones landed 106 and threw 161, Reyes landed 114 and threw 253. Those are the numbers I'm talking about. Not these 2 digit hypothetical situations you retards keep making up lmaoo. This is literally laughable

 

[EXOICHO]

Yeah I'm not going to keep doing this. I've replied that I'm not saying efficiency always matters, but when the strike totals are close, like it was in this fight, it should be taken into account. Jones landed 106 and threw 161, Reyes landed 114 and threw 253. Those are the numbers I'm talking about. Not these 2 digit hypothetical situations you retards keep making up lmaoo. This is literally laughable

You've still yet to explain how missing strikes even though you LANDED more means you actually didn't do more damage

 

[Shinobi]

Yeah I'm not going to keep doing this. I've replied that I'm not saying efficiency always matters, but when the strike totals are close, like it was in this fight, it should be taken into account. Jones landed 106 and threw 161, Reyes landed 114 and threw 253. Those are the numbers I'm talking about. Not these 2 digit hypothetical situations you retards keep making up lmaoo. This is literally laughable

Why does 5 or 10% more "efficiency" matter more than 5 or 10 more strikes landed? Do you realize how arbitrary that is? Ask yourself: if you are in a fight, do you prefer to be the guy who lands 20 punches and 45% of what he throws or the guy who lands 10 punches and 55% of what he throws? Because i sure hell wanna make my priority to get hit as less possible. No fighter is concerned about percentages. They wanna hit. If it takes 100 to land 1, so be it. All that matters is what you do to your opponent. The percentage of strikes you land is a personal issue. It has to do with how you fight. It's not a tangible aggression. That's as arbitrary as measuring heart rate at the end of the rounds and giving points to whoever has lower heart rate.


Reyes landed more strikes. It's dishonest to give someone else the round because of percentages. You're clearly getting hit more than you hit. That's literally the opposite of what you're trying to do. Do you think Jon goes out there and thinks "Humm...let me try to hit 60% of my punches"? Lol. He doesn't. He wants to hit as many punches as possible and not to get hit.

Can we stop with the BS excuses already? Just face it: Jon lost and the judges are corrupt/incompetent. It happens in many sports.

 

[Willy Knuckles]

You've still yet to explain how missing strikes even though you LANDED more means you actually didn't do more damage

Because the number of strikes landed doesn't indicate damage. There is no way to measure damage effectively. Basically Reyes missed so much because of Jones defense, that's why I think Jones being more efficient should count for something. He landed pretty much the same amount as reyes, yet should way better defense while moving forward the whole time. That should be rewarded and considered when judging a fight

 

[Willy Knuckles]

Why does 5 or 10% more "efficiency" matter more than 5 or 10 more strikes landed? Do you realize how arbitrary that is? Ask yourself: if you are in a fight, do you prefer to be the guy who lands 20 punches and 45% of what he throws or the guy who lands 10 punches and 55% of what he throws? Because i sure hell wanna make my priority to get hit as less possible. No fighter is concerned about percentages. They wanna hit. If it takes 100 to land 1, so be it. All that matters is what you do to your opponent. The percentage of strikes you land is a personal issue. It has to do with how you fight. It's not a tangible aggression. That's as arbitrary as measuring heart rate at the end of the rounds and giving points to whoever has lower heart rate.


Reyes landed more strikes. It's dishonest to give someone else the round because of percentages. You're clearly getting hit more than you hit. That's literally the opposite of what you're trying to do. Do you think Jon goes out there and thinks "Humm...let me try to hit 60% of my punches"? Lol. He doesn't. He wants to hit as many punches as possible and not to get hit.

Can we stop with the BS excuses already? Just face it: Jon lost and the judges are corrupt/incompetent. It happens in many sports.

Yeah no fighter cares about efficiency as long as they land lmaoo. Again stop bringing up hypotheticals bro, shit has no relevance to this fight. Just agree to disagree lol you guys dont think efficiency matters and that's clear, I just disagree, and this when the striking totals are this close that efficiency should be considered

 

[Shinobi]

Yeah no fighter cares about efficiency as long as they land lmaoo. Again stop bringing up hypotheticals bro, shit has no relevance to this fight. Just agree to disagree lol you guys dont think efficiency matters and that's clear, I just disagree, and this when the striking totals are this close that efficiency should be considered

I can't agree to disagree because what you say is a totally made up arbitrary rule. "You think" doesn't really matter. It's either in the rules or is not, and it isn't. Have fun trying to justify why 5% better is more important than 5 more punches. There is no logic behind what you're saying. You're saying X is important but you aren't justifying why it is more important than actual strikes. So we can basically just pick any stat we want and give them the importance we want, as long as it help us give our lovers the victories in the fights they clearly lost. Also, you say the number of punches was close...well so was the %. It's not like Jon landed 80% and Reyes landed 10%.

 

[Mmmmmmma1234]

I had it 3-2 jones, rd 2 seems to be the most disputed round

And yet that's the round jones got hit the most.

 

[Willy Knuckles]

I can't agree to disagree because what you say is a totally made up arbitrary rule. "You think" doesn't really matter. It's either in the rules or is not, and it isn't. Have fun trying to justify why 5% better is more important than 5 more punches. There is no logic behind what you're saying. You're saying X is important but you aren't justifying why it is more important than actual strikes. So we can basically just pick any stat we want and give them the importance we want, as long as it help us give our lovers the victories in the fights they clearly lost. Also, you say the number of punches was close...well so was the %. It's not like Jon landed 80% and Reyes landed 10%.

So you think the only time efficiency should matter is when a its something like 80% vs 10%? What would that look like? How would they have similar strike totals? You sound so dumb my guy. Jones landed 62% vs Reyes 44%. I'm not weighing those 8 strikes,(which could have been jabs for all we know), more than the vastly more aggressive fighter landing at a way higher percentage. But it's close. I never said it wasn't close, but how can you call it a robbery or call someone stupid for saying jones won, then bring up the stats which show a close fight which could have gone either way? My original response was to the TS about the stats not showing Reyes clearly wining rounds 1-3. All my follow up responses have been trying to explain to people who obviously don't understand basic math like ratios,(evident by the multiple hypothetical scenarios that were nowhere close statistically to this fight) and percentages so they can see why efficiency is important, and gets measured for a reason. You really are saying "8 random strikes should be weighed more, regardless or the strikes, or how many times you failed to land those strikes before you actually landed it", in a fight where both fighters landed over 100 shots on each other. You have balls for brains sir, you suck

 

[JoshTehV]

You guys keep bringing up hypothetical situations and I don't get why. The strike differential in this fight was 8, when both fighters landed over 100. I'm not saying efficiency matters in every situation. But in a fight like this, where the strikes landed are so close and neither fighter did real damage to the other(No it wasn't a KD in round 1, and no I don't think Jones was ever actually hurt), efficiency should for sure matter. The hypothetical you just mentioned has the less efficient fighter landing 5 times as many strikes as the more efficient one, that isn't an accurate representation of the Jones-Reyes fight at all. I dont think we'll agree and that's fine, but I really don't see how you guys are ignoring Reyes throwing 93 more strikes but only landing 8 more, and saying it doesn't matter in the fight lol

If you want to go by logic the they’d have to fight for 25 minutes straight in order to have objective judging

 

[Shinobi]

So you think the only time efficiency should matter is when a its something like 80% vs 10%? What would that look like? How would they have similar strike totals? You sound so dumb my guy. Jones landed 62% vs Reyes 44%. I'm not weighing those 8 strikes,(which could have been jabs for all we know), more than the vastly more aggressive fighter landing at a way higher percentage. But it's close. I never said it wasn't close, but how can you call it a robbery or call someone stupid for saying jones won, then bring up the stats which show a close fight which could have gone either way? My original response was to the TS about the stats not showing Reyes clearly wining rounds 1-3. All my follow up responses have been trying to explain to people who obviously don't understand basic math like ratios,(evident by the multiple hypothetical scenarios that were nowhere close statistically to this fight) and percentages so they can see why efficiency is important, and gets measured for a reason. You really are saying "8 random strikes should be weighed more, regardless or the strikes, or how many times you failed to land those strikes before you actually landed it", in a fight where both fighters landed over 100 shots on each other. You have balls for brains sir, you suck

I don't see any reason for efficiency to matter at all. Like i've said countless times, your main objective is to land strikes. It doesn't matter what it takes for you to land punches. All it matter is who lands more. Reyes landed more. Percentages don't change that. You can value percentages all you want. What you can't is justify WHY it matter more than strikes. Like i said, your whole argument is arbitrary and lacks any sort of logic consistency. More important: it doesn't reflect the official rules at all.

 

[GordaoPreguico]

Reyes outstruck jones through rounds 1-3 by a total of 24 strikes
While Jones edged Reyes through rounds 4-5 by a total of 12 strikes and 2 td's that lead to almost zero accumulated damage or any real offensive positions such as half guard etc.

View media item 32719http://www.ufcstats.com/fight-details/fae99a4089f8abb0

I gotta say, this decision is fucking infuriating. Even the commentators were biased as well, they said everything they could just to beat around the bush not saying Reyes has this fight in the bag.

You’re wrong about the damage during jones takedown. Reyes damaged jones with a nasty elbow during the break.

 

[jeremyemilio]

Yeah I'm not going to keep doing this. I've replied that I'm not saying efficiency always matters, but when the strike totals are close, like it was in this fight, it should be taken into account. Jones landed 106 and threw 161, Reyes landed 114 and threw 253. Those are the numbers I'm talking about. Not these 2 digit hypothetical situations you retards keep making up lmaoo. This is literally laughable

I just disagree on that detail, is all. Even if I throw 200 and land 101, and you throw 100 and land 100, I don't think your 100 are better than my 101.

I do agree, though, that landing an extra strike or two (or even and extra 10 or 12) doesn't mean you won the round. There are all sorts of other factors to consider, including going forward or even looking confident, fresh, and unfazed. I grant that throwing and missing will make you look worse, and this can cost you a round if it's otherwise close. It can also cost you some energy that will take its toll in later rounds, so that could certainly be counted against a fighter, too, even if we don't see it having a negative effect right away.

All I'm saying is that in isolation, your ratio of strikes thrown vs strikes landed shouldn't be counted against you. I know that it often is. But it shouldn't. Just like you shouldn't be given credit for throwing strikes that miss (which a lot of people also believe).

Also, just like you shouldn't be given credit for failed subs attempts, nor should you be getting penalized for them.

 

[Willy Knuckles]

I don't see any reason for efficiency to matter at all. Like i've said countless times, your main objective is to land strikes. It doesn't matter what it takes for you to land punches. All it matter is who lands more. Reyes landed more. Percentages don't change that. You can value percentages all you want. What you can't is justify WHY it matter more than strikes. Like i said, your whole argument is arbitrary and lacks any sort of logic consistency. More important: it doesn't reflect the official rules at all.

It matters more THAN THE 8 MORE STRIKES REYES LANDED, because it shows better defense from Jon. And on top of that it matter even more because Jon was also moving forward, being the aggressor for a vast majority of that fight. So in this fight, where 8 strikes landed was the only difference, I will score accuracy and striking defense,(in other words efficiency) more than those 8 strikes. UNLESS there was a huge damage difference, which there was not. So yeah accuracy and striking defense are the things I'm scoring, and the things that made Jones more efficient IN THIS FIGHT. If striking efficiency doesn't matter, than make a thread on it, you can roast me all you want and I can see how many people think it doesn't matter. Or you'll look like a fuckin idiot who thinks they measure striking efficiency just for curiosity purposes

 

[Willy Knuckles]

.I grant that throwing and missing will make you look worse, and this can cost you a round if it's otherwise close.

This. This is why efficiency and accuracy is important. You can't miss way more shots for a few more strikes and not expect the judges to count that against you in a close round. Judges don't just sit there counting strikes and award it to whoever lands more, why would we need judges to do that when we have compubox/FightMetric. This robotic style of judging people seem to want just isn't realistic. You missing on way more shots, will always effect how the judges score striking exchanges. You want them to ignore everything in the stand up and just count strikes landed in a close fight like this? Go look at the stats for Holloway vs Poirier 2. Most people consider that a clear loss, and besides 1 TD that fight was all striking. Holloway landed more but was less efficient. How can Holloway out land Dustin and still lose CLEARLY, but people are cool with it. Yet when Reyes out lands Jon, and loses, its a robbery lmaoo