Jones vs. Gustafsson: Who do you think won and why?

We're all seasoned MMA fans here; let's all put our 2 cents in and see what we can come up with. No simplistic answers, lets get in depth with this one.
(I'll let some one else kick off the answers so as to not sway opinions right from the get go)

I would go 48-47 Gustaffson, with the understanding that 1 point in a 5 round fight doesn't mean that I think it's an easy call one way or the other. This fight was close, no doubt about it, and I can see giving it to Jones. But because no fighter was able to really put the other in any real trouble throughout the fight, and no fighter was able to impose their will to any great extent over the other, I have to go with a wildcard; damage.

Gustaffson may have been really hurt by those Jones elbows late in the fight, but he may also have simply just been brutally gassed-out after such a grueling fight. Point is, we don't really know. What we do know is that when looking at both fighters post-fight, it's pretty obvious who took the worse beating.

Edge; Gustaffson

I had gus 48-47. I thought rounds 1,2,3 were gus with round 4 being up in the air and round 5 for jones. both had a take down. Jones had the upper hand in leg kicks but i thought overall more strikes were done by gus and i felt gus did more damage over all. It was a great close fight but i think gus got robbed on this one.

Im not one to make any escuse for a win or a loss but i feel like the ufc wanted jones to win if for anything his name and the fact he is getting big endorsement deals through nike and gatoraide and the ufc would not want to lose any possible future bussiness with them. But thats my own personal opion.

i honestly would like to rewatch the fight. it is very even. my initial opinion was that gustafsson won, or actually, that he was winning up until the end of the 4th round. that one elbow did more damage that anything else in the fight. in the fifth round, both fighters barely stood up, and im asking myself "who would have won if the fight went another round?". Gus was so exausted he might not have beeen able to continue, jones might not have been able to fight due to damage. so its sort of even.
hence, the decision goes to jones.

wait, my vote is 48-47 gustafsson haha

Meh ... who won the fight Jones did.... that's what the judges said.

It's nice having our opinions but really.... the only winner is the guy with his arm raised by ko, tko, submission, quitting etc.

Another really good point that someone made here in the past a few times (stock I think?);
If the judges reward takedowns, shouldn't they also reward TDD? Really, a takedown attempt is just a small battle in the war (fight), so if you win that battle, shouldn't that count for something? If they're going to give so much credit to a fighter for scoring a takedown- enough credit that a fighter can actually steal a round by getting one in the final seconds- I think you have to give equal credit to a fighter if he defends it. So if a round is really close and fighter A shoots for the TD near the end and it is defended by fighter B, shouldn't fighter B be given that round? You would have given it to fighter A if he got the TD, right?

Gustaffson defended what, 4 TD attempts early on in the fight? That should have counted for something, and it seems like it didn't.

DEP wrote:

I have found my new av.

Agree.... Take Down Defense is certainly a HUGE part of the fight game and should be rewarded at least on par with Take Downs.

As well as Take Downs that are pointless and non-productive or neutralized, should be stood up immediately or given very little in the way of points.

It's kinda like kicking someone in the assss when they are laying on their back.... meh ... not a lot of damage or even hope for damage.

In a perfect world, these fights should be draws.
One round Gustafsson CLEARLY won and one round Jones CLEARLY won.
The other 3 rounds were close enough where a judge pretty much had to just pick a winner, and likely gave the edge to the champ.
No fighter was ever really rocked or in danger of getting finished.

To me, the later rounds deserve more weight, but also more weight should be given to damage. This was a tough fight to call.
If a gun were held to my head, I'd likely flip a coin.

I had Gustaffson winning 48-47.

In all honesty I think I need to watch the fight again, but I was leaning towards Gustaffson in the 4th round also. I know everyone else in the world thinks Jones won it so I want to watch it again. But, imo Gustaffson was kicking Jones's ass in that round worse than any other until that elbow landed and I didn't feel Gustaffson was out on his feet or anything. He did get rocked, but I didnt really think Jones took advantage of the situation after that either. Like I said the whole world can't be wrong, but I still would like to watch it again.

I agree about the 4th.
Maybe folks gave it to Jones since that was really the most rocking blow of the entire fight. It was difficult to see if it was all out fatigue, but Gus didn't even appear to be fully recovered from the elbow coming into the 5th.
I loved how both guys were just totally spend in the 5th round but continued to throw everything they had left.

I finally watched the fight last night. It was a great fight, but plain and simple Gus didn't stop the champion, he came the closest out of anyone, but not enough to beat him....again IMHO. It's a very rare case where we see a champion lose by decision, and I agree with this one. You REALLY REALLY have to win an extremely decisive victory to beat the champ by decision, and although Gus looked great I can see the argument either way. And when you can see the argument either way it's always gonna go the way of the champ.

Edgar/Henderson

I hate to keep pointing it out, but it's a blatant example of how untrue that theory is.

It's not at all a theory it's a fact. You absolutely have to beat the champ decisively to win a decision against him. Gus fought a great fight but there are obviously enough people thinking he didn't do it convincingly enough...therefore imo the decision was a valid one.

I thought Henderson won easily.

I don't think anyone could really make the case that Henderson beat Edgar twice decisively.