Is this proof Reyes won 3-2 ?

[Myrddin Wild]

Long story short... absolutely not. Significant strike count does not tell the whole story.

• They're counted live, so are flawed even on the count itself
  
• Those numbers don't consider strength of strike

Those "significant strike" counts are never accurate for what I would consider a "damaging strike" so it's just a general guide but it doesn't tell the whole story. A swiping blow gets the same count as a direct fooking knockdown strike.

Also, we need to be aware that these counts are done by someone live just clicking buttons on the side live.... & so are flawed even in the count itself.

I've taken EXTREME time to break down certain questionable rounds in many different fights... & came up with vastly different figures. For example, I would watch it in slow motion & move it forward & back to determine if a strike actually landed... & how hard it landed, & take very detailed notes. It would be really hard to argue with that kind of advantage over someone who's just clicking buttons live making no distinction on the amount of impact.

/thread

 

[Rear Naked Toke]

The main goal of a fight is to hit and not to get hit. Many martial arts use walking backwards as a legit defense strategy. It's pretty valid style of fighting, and in many ways the smarter one.

I completely agree, it's always irritated me that such high regard is placed on forward movement in scoring criteria. Moving forward doesn't mean anything if you're losing the fight.

 

[POWER2]

I posted some silly troll threads that have nothing to do with this. If you're unable to respond to my post then it looks like I'm right and you're wrong.

Implying that I "have" to respond to you, as if it's some type of obligation is the height of stupidity.

You're wrong. For one, you're confusing "significant strikes" with "total strikes". Secondly, Reyes had more significant strike and more total strikes for first 3 rounds. And a higher accuracy rating for strikes in the first 3 rounds. So he landed more, caused more damage, and landed more precisely.

Don't respond. I won't read whatever you write.

 

[Asahi]

Yes... but the criteria is on clean and EFFECTIVE striking.

The clean effective strikes in round 2 came from Jones.

Most of Reyes strikes were not effective.

The whole point of significant strikes is that they are effective and and clean. Hence winning the round!

 

[Shinobi]

I completely agree, it's always irritated me that such high regard is placed on forward movement in scoring criteria. Moving forward doesn't mean anything if you're losing the fight.

It's literally on the same level of saying that hitting with your knee gets you more points than hitting with your food. It's one fool deciding what fighting style has value and what fighting style does not. By his retarded line of thinking Floyd would have lost most of his fights.

 

[Perrichet]

Landing more significant strikes doesn’t necessarily mean you win the round.

No but in the context of this fight definitely. Jones didn’t do anything notable in those rounds so it’s easy to give Reyes them

 

[Oldman1]

Have more than 3 judges.

 

[johncola]

Implying that I "have" to respond to you, as if it's some type of obligation is the height of stupidity.

You're wrong. For one, you're confusing "significant strikes" with "total strikes". Secondly, Reyes had more significant strike and more total strikes for first 3 rounds. And a higher accuracy rating for strikes in the first 3 rounds. So he landed more, caused more damage, and landed more precisely.

Don't respond. I won't read whatever you write.

I never said you have to respond. But you have to respond to demonstrate that I'm wrong.

I didn't confuse significant strikes with total strikes. You seem like someone that doesn't even know FightMetric's definitions for the terms. Regardless, as I said, not all significant strikes are the same. It's possible to do more damage with 16 sig strikes than with 17 sig strikes.

I expected you to run away, as people typically do. People do it when it comes time to admit they're wrong. But you've been particularly spineless.

 

[BabyBlue_Bomber]

The main goal of a fight is to hit and not to get hit. Many martial arts use walking backwards as a legit defense strategy. It's pretty valid style of fighting, and in many ways the smarter one.

Yes... but the problem for Reyes is that he wasn’t able to avoid the offense that was coming back.

It was fine for Machida to land 5 body kicks and win the round because he would not get touched at all.

Pernell Whitaker clearly lacked power with his punches, but won because his opponents would land nothing.

Reyes, even though he showed a lot of movement, is more from the the “hit and get hit back” academy of fighting than he is the “hit and not get hit” academy.

 

[Rod Farva]

Those punch stats don’t always tell the whole story. So, no, that alone isn’t proof.
But I think Reyes won 3-2

 

[Franklin U.]

No because first 3 rounds , the numbers are close enough where quality and percentage( thrown ) play a role.

If Dom was like 24-9 -ing him every round then Jones side would be tough to defend unless Jones had come close to finishing fight with his limited but obviously effective offense ( but that didnt happen).

The fight was razor close, either fighter couldve edged the win. The champion retained. I dont have a problem until I re watch as a judge and not " caught up in the moment " mma fan.

 

[Barteh]

Long story short... absolutely not. Significant strike count does not tell the whole story.

• They're counted live, so are flawed even on the count itself
  
• Those numbers don't consider strength of strike

Those "significant strike" counts are never accurate for what I would consider a "damaging strike" so it's just a general guide but it doesn't tell the whole story. A swiping blow gets the same count as a direct fooking knockdown strike.

Also, we need to be aware that these counts are done by someone live just clicking buttons on the side live.... & so are flawed even in the count itself.

I've taken EXTREME time to break down certain questionable rounds in many different fights... & came up with vastly different figures. For example, I would watch it in slow motion & move it forward & back to determine if a strike actually landed... & how hard it landed, & take very detailed notes. It would be really hard to argue with that kind of advantage over someone who's just clicking buttons live.

/thread

This, might as well be some random sherdogger pushing buttons and somehow people pretend those stats have any kind of credit at all. It's fucking ridiculous how stupid it is and it's insane even a single person would give any importance to those stats.

 

[Your Account]

That, plus all the takedowns Reyes stuffed.

Then what stats are showing Jones won at least one of those 3 rounds ?

 

[Harlekin]

Reyes outstruck him, although Jones landed the weaker strikes and most of them were leg kicks.

 

[Shinobi]

Yes... but the problem for Reyes is that he wasn’t able to avoid the offense that was coming back.

It was fine for Machida to land 5 body kicks and win the round because he would not get touched at all.

Pernell Whitaker clearly lacked power with his punches, but won because his opponents would land nothing.

Reyes, even though he showed a lot of movement, is more from the the “hit and get hit back” academy of fighting than he is the “hit and not get hit” academy.

No, you're created rules based on your own arbitrary criteria. It doesn't matter if you're walking forward or backwards. It's a strategy decision, a style decision. All that matters is who is hitting who. Like i said, certain martial arts base their entire strategy in walking backwards and being as defensive as possible while still doing damage. Jon himself has done it many times, even when he was also getting hit, and nobody ever said he didn't win those rounds just because he was walking backwards and getting hit too. Reyes won because he landed more and better for 3 rounds. It's as simple as that. Everything else is BS to justify BS decisions awarded to your lovers.

 

[BabyBlue_Bomber]

No, you're created rules based on your own arbitrary criteria. It doesn't matter if you're walking forward or backwards. It's a strategy decision, a style decision. All that matters is who is hitting who. Like i said, certain martial arts base their entire strategy in walking backwards and being as defensive as possible while still doing damage. Jon himself has done it many times, even when he was also getting hit, and nobody ever said he didn't win those rounds just because he was walking backwards and getting hit too. Reyes won because he landed more and better for 3 rounds. It's as simple as that. Everything else is BS to justify BS decisions awarded to your lovers.

He landed more in the first 3 rounds for sure...

But he did not land better in the 2nd round.

 

[BraNerd]

No, this isn't amateur boxing or point fighting.

 

[Papa Shaun]

Going back to no rounds, no judges, and straight up 20 minute fights would change a lot of things. I've always been all for it, and if there is no finish, then it's a draw...this forces everyone to go for the kill, instead of "playing it safe" at times.

 

[old school 2]

Fight metrics usually don’t mean too much as they don’t take a lot of things into account so I’m gonna say no.

(I think Reyes probably won 3-2)

Reyes also threw the harder shots particularly going after Jones liver. Reyes absolutely won the first 3 rounds and lost the last 2 IMO.

 

[old school 2]

Jones avoided and blocked a lot of those strikes that supposedly landed and were significant.

There was only 27 counted in round 2. He absolutely got hit 27 times and did not block or avoid any of those.