I hate to say it but Gus has 0 credible wins on his resume

Obvious butthurt Jones fanboy.

He gave JJ the beating of his life, and should have gotten the nod. Or at least a draw.

Another classical example of Dana's bullshit rule "To beat the champ you have to brutally stop him! And then do it again in an immediate rematch, because fans love that shit!"

Also, Shogun was way out of his prime and looked a weight class smaller than Gus, but he really made his work for that victory, there were sparks of the old Shogun in that fight.

Gus is one tough white boy

RF


I want someone to beat Jones really bad, but I still the the decision for Jones was the right call, it was sooo close, but it always goes to the champ.
 
Your logic is pure retardation. TS is right about most of Gus's win. And Rashad isn't retired. Jones resume is easily superior. You are shertards finest

First of all my logic isn't much different from TS'. Secondly, please kill yourself.
 
The majority of people agree he beat Jones and was screwed by the judges


That's a pile of shit. The majority of people think Jones won. Every mma site except one, had Jones winning. That's 18-1, from what I remember. While it was a close fight, jones clearly won.
 
Your logic is pure retardation. TS is right about most of Gus's win. And Rashad isn't retired. Jones resume is easily superior. You are shertards finest

it's the exact same logic lol.

if you are a hater, you can make anyone's fight resume look like shit.
 
If the Jones fight was a 3 rounder, he would have beat him, and he was beating him pretty good till the end of the fourth round.

This fight alone speaks for itself!


If if if. haha. Champion ship fights are always 5 rounds. We can play the if game with anything in life.
 
Have you actually watched the Shogun fight?... Shogun hit Gus with some big power, and looked more like himself than in a lot of other recent fights.
 
First of all my logic isn't much different from TS'. Secondly, please kill yourself.

Your reasoning is being applied to much better fighters and what you said about those fighters are much much more retarded. May you bask in your ignorance.

I'm not saying I agree with all TS said but Jones resume is easily superior to Gus
 
Rumble was the only fight where Gus did not look like the better fighter. His talent and physical advantages will give any LHW a lot of problems.

He does tend to lose to any opponents who are ranked higher than borderline top 10 at the time. But you can think of many great fighters with a high loss ratio.
 
That poll was taken mere minutes after the fight when emotions were running high. This poll was taken a year afterward once tempers cooled off and had Jones winning.

Who do you believe should have won Jones v Gus?

You could also argue that the first poll was taken when all voters had the best/most recent memory of the fight. I could also point out that the sampling of the latter poll is almost 10 times smaller, and the result of the vote so close (10 votes difference) that it easily fits in the margin of error, which is not the case with the bigger poll.
 
But if you've seen him fight, you know he's good. You've seen him fight, right ?
 
i think it could be noted that a lot of Jones wins come over much smaller opponents, with much MUCH shorter reach.


What does that say about Gus then? The same complaints about Jones can be thrown at him too and he's not even in the same league with Jones in beating quality opponents.

If he doesn't beat or put up a great fight against DC, I see him crying again and retiring this time.
 
But if you've seen him fight, you know he's good. You've seen him fight, right ?

I saw him fight once in the last year and a half against Rumble. Yeah, he looked terrific in that fight. The guy not only doesn't have a great resume but he hasn't been very active either.

BTW, I'm not saying Gus is a bad fighter. Quite the opposite. I think he's very good but his main claim to fame is still a loss and he's done nothing to deserve another title shot.
 
Last edited:
Sorry but Gus isn't going to be able to depend on that "near win" to keep his stock high for the rest of his life. Especially now that Rumble got off in that ass.

He should consider himself lucky that Dana gifted him a shitle tot but if he loses again then he needs to start fading into obscurity.
 
Anthony Johnson - Brutal Loss

Jimi Manuwa - Win, Jimi has never done anything in the top ten of the division

Jon Jones- Loss

Mauricio Rua - Win, this was the old sloppy Shogun with multiple knee surgeries.

win Thiago Silva - Win, Thiago lost recently in WSOF by brutal stoppage

Vladimir Matyushenko - Win, this was a good win over a aging vet.

Matt Hamill - Win over a Hamill who was going to hang the gloves up

James Te Huna - Win another person who has done nothing int the top 10.

Cyrille Diabate - Win over aging kickboxer

Phil Davis - Loss brutal sub.

Jared Hamman - Win over a 185 fighter.


Going by just facts Vladimir Matyushenko is Gus marquee win. Vladimir Matyushenko is a good but not great fighter but somehow this is Gus's keystone career win.

I have to disagree here. I understand your point that most of these fighters' careers were going downhill, however the only two fights where Gus looked bad were the Davis fight and the Johnson fight.

Besides these two bouts, the guy owned the competition, and in his fight against Jon Jones, he looked great : took Jon Jones down, stuffed TD's consistently, and basically came closer than anyone else to defeating Jon Jones. He basically looked great in defeat.

Then he handed Manuwa his first loss, for what it's worth.

Context has to be taken into consideration when judging whether a win was "credible" or not.

Thiago Silva getting stopped in WSOF had not happened yet. He managed to destroy 3 opponents right after losing to Gus.

Shogun was three fights past losing the LHW title, including two KO wins, and an absolute back and forth war with Hendo, who, at the time, was supposed to be next in line for a fight with Jones.

I don't know. It's easy to look at it now, and say these wins were not "credible". The same could be done with the competition that all dominant champs have faced, the moment former contenders lose a fight or two, or go past their prime. It doesn't mean that, at the time they fought for the title, they were not complete murderers.

One problem that I have is guys fighting for a title coming off a loss. That's reminiscent of the 2003-2004 era, when the UFC roster looked like complete horsecrap in most divisions.
 
Your reasoning is being applied to much better fighters and what you said about those fighters are much much more retarded. May you bask in your ignorance.

I'm not saying I agree with all TS said but Jones resume is easily superior to Gus

Obviously his wins are better. You completely missed the point I was making and that is that you can make anyones wins look bad if you apply the right logic behind it.

And you called me "one of shertards finest" :rolleyes:.
 
so what if jones has a reach on his opponents,thats their problem.
 
Back
Top