Jump to content

Talk:Alexander Gustafsson

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reach

[edit]

He himself said that his reach is 81.5 today on the 165 press conference. The ESPN source where it says "76.5" is most likely attributed by the UFC which has fudged up ALOT of physical stats in the past. Come fight night the tale of the tape will say 81.5 in. After that we will have no choice but to revert it to 81.5 inches. Any problems?Imhungry4444 (talk) 23:33, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is wikipedia. First hand sources aren't good enough. 206.132.125.2 (talk) 00:15, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Then we'll have to wait for the 165 tale of the tape.Imhungry4444 (talk) 00:20, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First-hand accounts like this are suspect especially since he was using it to make a point (possible trash-talking). ESPN is considered a reliable source but that does not mean they get everything correct. As far as how this all ends up going we're always going to need a verifiable source, something that any reader can check up on for themselves. Referencing a TV broadcast or citing a Youtube link, if it's not an officially sanctioned video from UFC, is generally not considered verifiable or appropriate. It's also important to keep in mind WP:TRUTH which tells us that what matters are claims that are backed up by reliable sources, not what we might know the truth to be. If the tale of the tape (and who does that by the way? Is it something that is done by objective officials at the fight? Or is it self-reported?) states either one of these options then that can go supporting one source over the other but the issue will still need to be discussed. SQGibbon (talk) 13:49, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The tale of the tape is done by the UFC through pre-fight NSAC physicals. The ESPN source basically relays the fighter info from either UFC.com or the pre fight tale of the tape. If the UFC has Gustafsson's reach at 81.4, then that'll be the reach from then on with all media outlets using that. That's how it works.Imhungry4444 (talk) 13:38, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That's interesting, thanks. So best is to wait for the tale of the tape. SQGibbon (talk) 16:13, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

About his reach- I'll just leave this here: http://oi42.tinypic.com/314fpz9.jpg Not an official source, but it clearly shows his reach is pretty close to that of Jones reported 84 inch reach. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.140.56.58 (talk) 23:38, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

At ten seconds of the official UFC weight-in video it shows their official reach: Gus' reach is 81.25, Jones' is 85.13: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkeNcwb5H44 --Raphaeldpm (talk) 01:50, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The pre fight tale of the tape has his reach at 79 inches. 108.34.218.189 (talk) 04:05, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 25 September 2013

[edit]

Please change the reach to 81.5" (207 cm) 83.209.193.165 (talk) 21:04, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made.. RudolfRed (talk) 00:42, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Expert Reaction to Jones/Gustafsson Fight

[edit]

The article currently states that "Several prominent people in the MMA world disagreed with the decision and stated that Gustafsson clearly won." I doubted this statement and asked for a citation and the one provided is a collection of tweets from mid-fight expressing enthusiasm for Gus or indicating that he was winning. That is reasonable, and most experts (and judges from the fight) had Gus winning after three rounds. But, the citation does not support the claim in the article. Nobody gave Gus the last two rounds and hardly any notable figures had Gus winning the fight. A collection of 21 media scores had 19 for Jones, 1 for Gus (48-47), and 1 for a draw.[1] I think this hardly supports the current claim in the article. I would like to see this statement removed or at least supported with a citation that actually shows that multiple prominent MMA experts believed Gus clearly won, although I'm not sure any such citation exists. Sangaman (talk) 14:22, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I agree this section should be removed. Udar55 (talk) 16:27, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

They already did. The tweets where reactions of post fight. I would like it restated and to stop emotional ranting of sherdog quality. Source http://www.mmafighting.com/2013/9/22/4756880/ufc-165-in-tweets-pros-score-jon-jones-vs-alexander-gustafsson-react — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.157.110.197 (talk) 17:36, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://forums.sherdog.com/forums/f2/other-media-official-scorecards-jones-vs-gus-updated-2565449/
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alexander Gustafsson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:56, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Alexander Gustafsson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:36, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Alexander_Gustafsson&oldid=1233603813"