UFC 165 Jones vs. Gustafsson: Fighters Opinions

Quote :

Alex.got robbed imo
— Kelvin Gastelum (@KelvinGastelum) September 22, 2013

Quote :

To recap: I clearly had Gustafsson for rnd 1 & 2. Had Jones winning 3, 4 & 5. In close rnds, u have to assume rnds will go to champ. #ufc165
— Kenny Florian (@kennyflorian) September 22, 2013

Quote :

Can we just call the Jones vs Gustafson that fight a draw?
— Cung Le (@CungLe185) September 22, 2013

Quote :

WTF....??? Really???
— Brandon Vera (@Verafied) September 22, 2013

Quote :

that was the greatest light heavy weight fight in ufc history. Gustafsson won it on my card 3-2
— Chris Leben (@cripplerufc) September 22, 2013

Quote :

#UFC165 That was BS! Gustaffson won that fight!!
— Martin Kampmann (@MartinKampmann) September 22, 2013

Quote :

" @notcdub: @dc_mma how'd you have it DC?" 3-2 Jones, very close fight. 2,4,5. Gus had 4 until he got hurt with elbow to end the round.
— Daniel Cormier (@dc_mma) September 22, 2013

Quote :

Great fight by #Jones & #Gustafson but no way Jones won that fight. Draw...maybe but I feel Gustafson won 3rnds to 2. #UFC165 #ufc #MMA
— Josh Barnett (@JoshLBarnett) September 22, 2013

Quote :

I was absolutely convinced that @AlexTheMauler won the fight. Excellent performance and super humble...
— George Sotiropoulos (@georgesots) September 22, 2013

Quote :

That was a terrible decision. Terrible.
— Dan Hardy (@danhardymma) September 22, 2013

Quote :

Hats off to @AlexTheMauler great fight I had u winning. Wow great show.
— Tito Ortiz (@titoortiz) September 22, 2013

Quote :

I thought @AlexTheMauler won that one
— Gray Maynard (@GrayMaynard) September 22, 2013

Quote :

Nail bitter, I got Gusta by split
— Luke Rockhold (@LukeRockhold) September 22, 2013

Quote :

Omg crazy fight!! I have jones for sure taking rds 4/5 but the first 3 are a toss up. I have jones eking out rd 2/3 so 49-46 but idk #ufc165
— Sarah Kaufman (@mmasarah) September 22, 2013

Quote :

Guys just remembering that in a close decision the champion keeps the belt because the challenger must have a clear victory to win the fight
— Junior Dos Santos (@junior_cigano) September 22, 2013

Yeah...on par with what JDS said I can't recall one single time where I've seen a champion be dethroned by way of a decision.

i agree, gustafsson might have won a close one on points but his winning margin is no bigger than the error margin.

Yeah...I guess to beat a champion you have to do it with zero question. I suppose in terms of a decision, ESPECIALLY one where there could be mixed thoughts...there's not a clear cut victory over the champion.

As everyone has said in the past...never leave it in the hands of the judges...you can't really feel bad for a guy that can't stop his opponent and then loses the fight.

samger2 wrote:

Yeah...on par with what JDS said I can't recall one single time where I've seen a champion be dethroned by way of a decision.

Frankie Edgar.

Ha! I was just going to say that. The whole "You gotta KO or Sub the Champ to win" notion is fuckin nonsense. Especially when you take into consideration Bendo/Edgar.

Quote :

you can't really feel bad for a guy that can't stop his opponent and then loses the fight.

But a Champ should retain his belt for not being able to stop his, by all accounts, very beatable challenger?

To answer your question Chrom...yes. The champ has already proven himself...and in many cases time and time again, IMO he gets the benefit of the doubt...it's like in a court of law, the burden of proof is on the plaintiff not the defendant...the champ is the plaintiff and it has to be shown that "without a shadow of a doubt" he was beaten. At least that's my opinion.

Wait I said that wrong...the champ is the DEFENDANT...so the burden of proof is on the plaintiff...

And thank you for pointing that out trigger...I had forgotten about that fight.

I agree to an extent that you have to "beat" the champ, but let's not get carried away.
If the champ is getting his ass handed to him, but doesn't get finished, would you say he deserves to keep the belt? No, of course not.
This fight was close, but if Gustaffson gets one more TD or rocks Jones on the feet at any point in the 4th or 5th, he's the champ right now, evne if he doesn't finish or almost finish Jones.

yeah i agree with this argument
again, i will reiterate; the win has to be bigger than the margin of error. just like in science, if the result is within the error, it is not taken into account. in this fight, the overall opinion was "it can go either way" so it is within the error.
yes, one more hard shot or take down from gustafsson would have tipped the scales but it didnt happen. and he did almost fall down on his own in the fifth round.

I never understood the whole "to beat the champion you should have to stop him or win VERY convincingly" argument.

I mean aren't the judges just supposed to score the rounds as they come? What is a judge supposed to do with their card when the fight is over? Say, "well I have Gustaffson winning 3 out 5 rounds on my card, but since he isn't the champion I am going to change it to Jones winning"?

I don't think that's really how it's viewed.
I always looked at it like the judges are going to subconcsiously, automatically favor the champ throughout the fight, so the challenger is going to have to really pour it on to snap them out of it and convince them that he did enough to win.

exactly

Triggerman99 wrote:

I don't think that's really how it's viewed.
I always looked at it like the judges are going to subconcsiously, automatically favor the champ throughout the fight, so the challenger is going to have to really pour it on to snap them out of it and convince them that he did enough to win.

No this part I get. If a judge is subconsciously favoring the champ in close rounds because he is the champ that is just being human.

And btw - I also agree with the fact that I would like to see a champion really lose his belt and not lose it with controversy.

I just meant i never got when people said "You should have to finish a champion to take his belt" or "a champion should never lose a close decision" I mean in a perfect world that would be nice, but what is the judge supposed to do once the fight is over and they have already scored it closely the other way? Change it? lol It's tough when it's just a five round fight and you are scoring it round by round. I don't mean you guys at all, but the way some people talk its almost like if a championship fight is really close and the challenger has won the first couple of rounds they want to give the last rounds to the champion just because its a close fight or something.