So I just rewatched Jones v Gustafsson 1. The round most people unanimously score for Gus is round 1. Frankly it didn't look that way to me. Where Jon clearly had the edge: Striking. Jon outstruck Gus everywhere except strikes to the head and Gus had maybe 1-2 significant strikes up top and a handful of jabs. Jon was way more active all round initiating the action and hitting gus with kicks everywhere at will and pretty much went shot for shot with punches. Gus opened him up above the eye but that was on a punch that basically missed target and the corner of the glove caught him--personally I wouldn't give that any more credit than Jones' eye poke late in the round. However, that cut definitely affected Jon as the fight went on, it was nasty. Where Alex clearly had the edge: Takedowns. He stuffed Jon's attempts and got one of his own. However, Jon immediately stood back up taking no damage. So, is the takedown and the cut what gave Alex the edge when he was outstruck all round? I think we give way to much credit for takedowns if that's the case. A big slam like old school hughes or rampage is one thing but should a takedown where the other guy stands right back up taking no damage swing a round in which a guy was otherwise outstruck?