If someone does finally beat jones

[Talon81]

Are you even serious right now?

The majority of these forums scored the GSP fight for Hendricks.

Amazingly stupid and obviously biased post.

Now its not that Ive ever respected you at all anyway, but even this surprises me. I was in a room of over 200 people who erupted in surprise at the decision of Hendricks/GSP. People all over were going nuts about how they were sure Hendricks was going to get it. I was literally screaming for GSP, but after the fight I was bothered at the decision. Happy for GSP, but bothered at the ineptitude of the judges. I am not the only one. Sherdog is not the only one. The casino viewing room I was in was not the only one. The majority of the fight community and the public in general felt that Hendricks won and that Gus won. It is you who are amazingly stupid and biased if you are suggesting that is proof of Sherdog's stupidity in those polls.

If you were suggesting that what happened with GSP/Hendricks makes my point invalid regarding the "flukeness" of GSP/Silva and the "non-flukeness" if Jones loses, you are forgetting a couple things. I never called what happened with GSP/Hendricks a fluke, he did not lose afterwards and he did not make it a habit to have fights that were close in scoring. He was known for decisions that were very clear cut and dominating. His previous fights were pretty dominating aside from a nasty headkick by Condit. There was little confusion on how to score it. If he had lost AFTER the close decision with Hendricks, few would have called it a fluke. They would have said he had slowed down, lost a step, etc

Same now with Jones. He is now where GSP was AFTER the Hendricks fight. To call his fight with Gus a fluke would have been one thing (same with GSP/Hendricks). To call a loss at this point a fluke would be stupid (just as it would be if GSP lost after the Hendricks fight)

 

[LyotoMacheetah]

lol... dude, just yes. Don't be an idiot. Have facts instead of bias.

All three judges scored round 2 for Cormier, did they not? As did 93% of Sherdog.

54% of Sherdog scored round 3 for Cormier, although the judges did not. Everything I said was dead f***ing spot on.

http://forums.sherdog.com/forums/f2/score-jon-jones-vs-daniel-cormier-round-round-2903157/

Now politely fck off until you learn how to watch a fight with open eyes.

1 judge gave round 3 to cormier.

 

[Talon81]

1 judge gave round 3 to cormier.

ok, my bad. I was too lazy to look it up so I gave the guy I was arguing with the benefit of the doubt

 

[FallonFoxGOAT]

Now its not that Ive ever respected you at all anyway, but even this surprises me. I was in a room of over 200 people who erupted in surprise at the decision of Hendricks/GSP. People all over were going nuts about how they were sure Hendricks was going to get it. I was literally screaming for GSP, but after the fight I was bothered at the decision. Happy for GSP, but bothered at the ineptitude of the judges. I am not the only one. Sherdog is not the only one. The casino viewing room I was in was not the only one. The majority of the fight community and the public in general felt that Hendricks won and that Gus won. It is you who are amazingly stupid and biased for not seeing that.

I am confused, and based on your reply you obviously are too.

So what I am going to do is chop your other post into pieces so you can see where you blatantly contradict yourself.

Not that long ago (Jones) had an even closer fight in which he was clearly the more battered of the two contestants and the great majority of these forums scored the fight for his opponent.

The same could not be said for GSP

Spoiler

the great majority of these forums scored the fight for his opponent.

The same could not be said for GSP

Spoiler

majority of these forums scored the fight for his opponent

The same could not be said for GSP

 

[Talon81]

I am confused, and based on your reply you obviously are too.

So what I am going to do is chop your other post into pieces so you can see where you blatantly contradict yourself.

You are right, I was confused. It might have something to do with the fact that you were speaking as if we were talking about GSP/Hendricks being a fluke, when we were in fact talking about GSP/Serra.
Thats what happens when your reading comprehension fails and you take half of a sentence out of context and apply it where it was not intended. The suggestion of the previous poster was that what happened with GSP/Serra was a fluke. I said that if Jones were to lose now, it is not comparable to GSP/Serra in terms of "flukiness" because prior to GSP/Serra GSP did not have a history of riding close decisions. At this point Jones has two pretty close fights of the past 3.

You are applying what I said as if I were talking about GSP losing AFTER Hendricks, but that was never the suggestion by me or the guy I was replying to. We were talking about GSP/Serra. Thank you. Try again

 

[FallonFoxGOAT]

yeah, thats what happens when your reading comprehension fails and you take half of a sentence out of context and apply it where it was not intended.

I took nothing out of context, you placed the two sentences side-by-side.

You said something astoundingly stupid and hypocritical (also you admitted you hate Jones in another post, shocker) and are now back pedaling your hardest.

 

[Talon81]

I took nothing out of context, you placed the two sentences side-by-side.

You said something astoundingly stupid and hypocritical (also you admitted you hate Jones in another post, shocker) and are now back pedaling your hardest.

Im not backpeddling. We were talking about GSP/Serra. Your post is completely invalid. You are applying it to GSP/Hendricks. That was not the discussion. Not to mention that even if you applied it to GSP/Hendricks it would still not be a valid comparison. Jones/Gus was the comparison to GSP/Hendricks. We are talking about Jones losing NOW... AFTER his close fight with Gus (and competitive fight with Cormier)... which is totally different than GSP's fight with Hendricks.

 

[LikeItIs]

In most cases it depends on the manner of the loss but I imagine Jones would get an immediate rematch regardless.

 

[schwe30]

look, I invite you to present facts to the contrary. I am an admitted Jones hater, but I don't discredit the mans skills. He is the current p4p best IMO, or at least tied with Aldo. He is an amazing fighter and that is not just because of his reach or his eyepokes, cheap as they may be. I do think he is a better fighter than Cormier OR Gus, and I do not think either of them could have run the gauntlet Jones has run in the impressive fashion he did. However, the fact is he has had 2 pretty close fights in his last 3, and if he had come ANY less prepared he would have lost those. In the opinion of the majority of the world, he DID lose one of them.

See, that's the thing. The Gus fight was close. The DC fight wasn't. Jones clearly won 49-46. He out-struck, out-clinched, and out-wrestled DC. And DC isn't some can. He's an Olympian who beat HW's and who people picked to beat Jones. Ok, so it wasn't a 50-43 domination, but it was a clear win and not really a close fight. Jones was never in trouble. You seem to think that the has to win every fight 50-40 for some reason. He doesn't. No champ is without a close fight or two or three. So 1 close fight in his entire career, and we'll get to see a rematch of that fight. And in the opinion of the majority of the world? No. In the opinion of the majority of Sherdog, and the people here hate Jones, so hardly a legit source. Instead of saying how he showed grit, determination, and fought thru adversity to win a close fight (Gus), you're saying he's not good cause it was a close fight. If that fight was a domination, you'd be saying he's no good cause he was never tested/fought thru adversity. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Also, of course he'd lose fights if he came less prepared. Every fighter would. That's honestly a pretty stupid statement.

 

[Talon81]

See, that's the thing. The Gus fight was close. The DC fight wasn't. Jones clearly won 49-46. He out-struck, out-clinched, and out-wrestled DC. And DC isn't some can. He's an Olympian who beat HW's and who people picked to beat Jones. Ok, so it wasn't a 50-43 domination, but it was a clear win and not really a close fight. Jones was never in trouble. You seem to think that the has to win every fight 50-40 for some reason. He doesn't. No champ is without a close fight or two or three. So 1 close fight in his entire career, and we'll get to see a rematch of that fight. And in the opinion of the majority of the world? No. In the opinion of the majority of Sherdog, and the people here hate Jones, so hardly a legit source. Instead of saying how he showed grit, determination, and fought thru adversity to win a close fight (Gus), you're saying he's not good cause it was a close fight. If that fight was a domination, you'd be saying he's no good cause he was never tested/fought thru adversity. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Also, of course he'd lose fights if he came less prepared. Every fighter would. That's honestly a pretty stupid statement.

Most of the fight community also felt he lost the Gus fight, and I invite you to show me a poll ANYWHERE with as many participants as the ones here on Sherdog, which show most people thinking Jones won. You wont.... period. There is absolutely no basis to think that most people believe Jones won. None. Sherdog may not be totally credible, but to my knowledge there is no better source out there to get a large number of opinions.

His fight with Cormier left quite a few people scratching their heads at 49-46. It was NOT a clear 49-46. If you say a clear win... I dont completely disagree, but it was not a clear 49-46 at all. Very easy to say Cormier won 2 rounds. That would make it a close fight, yes.

you're saying he's not good

You seem to have missed this
"I don't discredit the mans skills. He is the current p4p best IMO, or at least tied with Aldo. He is an amazing fighter and that is not just because of his reach or his eyepokes, cheap as they may be. I do think he is a better fighter than Cormier OR Gus, and I do not think either of them could have run the gauntlet Jones has run in the impressive fashion he did."

This subject was never about whether Jones was good. If that was the subject, I would have wholeheartedly agreed. I would not even use the word good. I would use the word amazing. The subject was whether him losing, AT THIS POINT, would be a Fluke on par with Anderson or GSP/Serra. The answer is easily no, especially related to GSP/Serra. Look at the odds of those fights. Now look at the odds of Jones/Cormier, or imagine the odds on Jones/Gus 2. Do you think it would be lopsided like GSP/Serra? Not even close. Therefore the same fluke factor is definitely not present.

Also, of course he'd lose fights if he came less prepared. Every fighter would. That's honestly a pretty stupid statement.

No. Just no. Look at the way he dominated all of the other fighters. Shogun, Bader, Rampage, Glover, Belfort, Sonnen etc... heck even Machida and Evans. He could have come at 90% and still won all of those. He could have come at 70% and won some of them. If he had come at 95% of where he was at he would have lost to Gus for sure and probably to Cormier as well. You seem to think "coming any less prepared" means "not coming prepared at all"

 

[Ghost in the Shell]

This

and take away that meaningless take-down from that kick that jones caught in round one and one could argue that DC one the first 3 rounds. The fight was a lot closer than people seem to think. DC gassed and jones is a tough SOB.

So what you're saying is discredit what Jones did and look at what Cormier is, for the sake of opposing Jon Jones. Good take yo!

 

[Talon81]

So what you're saying is discredit what Jones did and look at what Cormier is, for the sake of opposing Jon Jones. Good take yo!

I may not be the one you quoted, but in defense of him, I think what he is trying to say is that even round 1 was close. I do believe Jones won round 1, but it isn't because he did any real damage or landed anything significant. Neither one of them did. Essentially only 2 rounds were clearly dominated. Round 2 by Cormier and round 4 by Jones. The other 3 rounds, while scoring criterea may require a "winner", were not really of much significance. It was a lot of back and forth pitter patter.

All that said, I do understand why that post bothered you (the "but if this didnt happen" kind of argument), although I pretty much agree with him in the principle that the fight was closer than many make it out to be.

 

[Just Jared]

look, I invite you to present facts to the contrary. I am an admitted Jones hater, but I don't discredit the mans skills. He is the current p4p best IMO, or at least tied with Aldo. He is an amazing fighter and that is not just because of his reach or his eyepokes, cheap as they may be. I do think he is a better fighter than Cormier OR Gus, and I do not think either of them could have run the gauntlet Jones has run in the impressive fashion he did. However, the fact is he has had 2 pretty close fights in his last 3, and if he had come ANY less prepared he would have lost those. In the opinion of the majority of the world, he DID lose one of them.

Not really...

http://www.mmadecisions.com/decision/4518/Jon-Jones-vs-Alexander-Gustafsson

It's basically split amongst fans with only a very slight majority in favour of Gustafsson. Nearly every single media outlet scored for Jones as well. Hardly the consensus opinion you're making it out to be.

 

[Ghost in the Shell]

I may not be the one you quoted, but in defense of him, I think what he is trying to say is that even round 1 was close. I do believe Jones won round 1, but it isn't because he did any real damage or landed anything significant. Neither one of them did. Essentially only 2 rounds were clearly dominated. Round 2 by Cormier and round 4 by Jones. The other 3 rounds, while scoring criterea may require a "winner", were not really of much significance. It was a lot of back and forth pitter patter.

All that said, I do understand why that post bothered you (the "but if this didnt happen" kind of argument), although I pretty much agree with him in the principle that the fight was closer than many make it out to be.

That's a laugh. How are you gonna say neither men did enough to win but give the round to one fighter? It was close, but there needs to be a winner, even if its by a small margin. To say that the fighter who won whichever round and follow it with a "won because/take that away" statement is just ludicrous. That's my gripe.

 

[GSPenn1991]

Look what happened to silva. The scary thing is jones could possibly have another 10 years on him, 20 if he has se couture skills in him.

 

[HuntersCreed]

So you're saying Gus will have to beat him three times? Dayummm

Heyo! *rimshot*