The stupid myth of Jones having weak double/single

Human Bass

Silver Belt
@Silver
Joined
Oct 14, 2009
Messages
11,742
Reaction score
5,648
Every now and then I someone shertard trying to sound smart by saying that Jones has a great clinch game, but his "freestyle" takedowns are subpar. It is somewhat comprehensible since many of us saw Jones for the first time against Bonnar, where he put a judo and supplex clinic.

But since then he was able to take down Machida, Bader, Sonnen, Vlad and Rampage by going for the legs (he combinited the double with a trip against Vlad and Quinton). The shot against Bader was specially impressive, being half cage away. We have plenty of examples that Jones double isnt second to none, except maybe GSP.

So please, I beg you to stop propagating this bullshit, thank you.
 
He doesn't really go for them now because he used to fight out of an extremely front-foot heavy stance, to somewhat disguise his level change, but now stands in a more upright stance that is less vulnerable to kicks-- and because he's so tall, his level change would be ridiculously telegraphed if he tried to do the same out of that stance, which more or less accounts for his recent preference for clinch takedowns (ignoring the fact that his background is in Greco, which is wrestling without the use of the legs).
 
I see what you mean. He does look kinda awkward when he goes for them at times because of the height, but he can land them. He took Chael down with a single leg too.
 
The only thing that probably makes his freestyle takedowns "weak" are his height. But none the less they aren't weak at all. Also, its his height that makes his clinch so much stronger.

5.gif


Pretty "weak" flying double from Jones here.
 
Some people grasp at straw due to Jones being...let me create a new word...lankward (lanky + awkward). His movement may look weird, but that doesnt make him any less profecient. It would be stupid to try to move as if he had usual proportions, he embraced hos physique and potential.
 
Any time he went for a double or single he basically got it. Who calls them weak?
 
Never really understood why people get so pissed off if anyone questions Jones' skills - who cares?
 
Never really understood why people get so pissed off if anyone questions Jones' skills - who cares?

One thing is to say that his punches lack KO power, since he doesnt KO people with them. But another very different thing is to say a thing that was being disproven time and time again, or better saying, outright lying and spreading misinformation.
 
Link to people saying that? Sounds like you're making an argument against nobody.
 
Who thinks this? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
 
Bro do you even read the threads here on Sherdog? Mayweather has to good of footwork and movement to get taken down by Jones. He would totally just bounce around use awesome glove and shoulder roll defense then counter Jones and KO him in 15 seconds.
 
Are you sure they weren't saying his power is subpar?
 
I think you're making shit up, ive never read that on here. Who actually said any of this? Thread?
 
Jones has such a crazy arsenal of weapons that people don't see enough of ONE particular move to get a good enough grasp of it.Some of the ignorant ones will say that move is weak,etc.
 
But since then he was able to take down Machida, Bader, Sonnen, Vlad and Rampage by going for the legs (he combinited the double with a trip against Vlad and Quinton). The shot against Bader was specially impressive, being half cage away. We have plenty of examples that Jones double isnt second to none, except maybe GSP.

So please, I beg you to stop propagating this bullshit, thank you.

- What people have been saying is he doesn't have great distance covering single or double, which is true. He's a tall, lanky greco and puts nowhere near the drive GSP does into his shots when he rushes in for a TD.

- Almost all the examples you listed are doubles coming from the clinch. And off the top of my head two of them (Rampage and Vlad) was Jon ducking under for the clinch as they were coming in rather than him pursuing it.

- The TD against Bader is as far as I remember it the only which was a proper distance covering shot (albeit I remember it as him grabbing the ankle and it was nowhere near "half cage away", more like 6 feet, gif to change my mind please) which I suppose is why you chose to highlight it.

- IF he had such a great distance covering shot he wouldn't have spent the time he did getting punched in the face by Machida, Rashad, Rampage, Bader etc etc etc where more than a few of them are not precisely what you'd call mobile. Why it's important in relation to the Gustafsson fight is because he has the movement to potentially negate the clinch at which point Jon will have to cover distance with his shots. It's not an attempt to belittle your hero but a sober assessment of where some may feel that Jon could run into problems if his jabs, teeps, eye-pokes and clinch isn't working for him.
 
Link to people saying that? Sounds like you're making an argument against nobody.

I don't have the time to search for examples, but I've seen people expressing the sentiment that TS is talking about. It used to come up frequently before Silva lost to Weidman and before Jones fought Sonnen. A lot of people claimed that Jones would have a hard time taking down Silva because he doesn't have the kind of shot that Sonnen does or some such nonsense.


Jones prefers to work from the clinch, but he seems to have a higher rate of success with his shots when he employs the technique.
 
- What people have been saying is he doesn't have great distance covering single or double, which is true. He's a tall, lanky greco and puts nowhere near the drive GSP does into his shots when he rushes in for a TD.

- Almost all the examples you listed are doubles coming from the clinch. And off the top of my head two of them (Rampage and Vlad) was Jon ducking under for the clinch as they were coming in rather than him pursuing it.

- The TD against Bader is as far as I remember it the only which was a proper distance covering shot (albeit I remember it as him grabbing the ankle and it was nowhere near "half cage away", more like 6 feet, gif to change my mind please) which I suppose is why you chose to highlight it.

- IF he had such a great distance covering shot he wouldn't have spent the time he did getting punched in the face by Machida, Rashad, Rampage, Bader etc etc etc where more than a few of them are not precisely what you'd call mobile. Why it's important in relation to the Gustafsson fight is because he has the movement to potentially negate the clinch at which point Jon will have to cover distance with his shots. It's not an attempt to belittle your hero but a sober assessment of where some may feel that Jon could run into problems if his jabs, teeps, eye-pokes and clinch isn't working for him.


Yeah, he spent a bunch of time getting punched in the face in all of those fights.

:rolleyes:

You're a fucking clown. I can't wait to see want kind of spin you'll have if you even bother posting here after Gustafsson gets owned on Saturday night.
 
I don't have the time to search for examples, but I've seen people expressing the sentiment that TS is talking about. It used to come up frequently before Silva lost to Weidman and before Jones fought Sonnen. A lot of people claimed that Jones would have a hard time taking down Silva because he doesn't have the kind of shot that Sonnen does or some such nonsense.


Jones prefers to work from the clinch, but he seems to have a higher rate of success with his shots when he employs the technique.

Give us 5 examples where he successfully employed the technique and covered some actual distance then. Being vague is not a great basis for a argument.

Yeah, he spent a bunch of time getting punched in the face in all of those fights.

:rolleyes:

You're a fucking clown. I can't wait to see want kind of spin you'll have if you even bother posting here after Gustafsson gets owned on Saturday night.

... nor are retarded insults.
 
Back
Top