Or is he really that good? I’m certainly assuming it’s the former as I was not impressed with the Brazilian once again during UFC 84. As Machida pulled off a 30-27 decision win over Tito Ortiz, I wondered if UFC judges were really listening to Mike Goldberg when he told us (once again) that each five minute round would by decided by effective striking, grappling, aggression, and octagon control by the judges.
For the record, I have nothing against Machida. Sure, he was boring at UFC 84, but I didn’t think BJ Penn was exciting as he jabbed his way through nearly three full rounds either. I’m also not a Tito Ortiz fan more than any MMA junkie. Ortiz has been around long enough that I’m aware of his abilities and I respect him as a ground and pound fighter.
It’s not that Machida is a bad fighter, he is just able to exploit the flaw in the judging system to win 8 out of 13 fights via decision. So more than 60% of his fights are left to the judges as he dances away from the fight and he continues to move on up in the UFC’s light heavyweight division. Two TKO’s in 2003, a guillotine in 2004, a rare technical knockout in 2005, and an arm triangle choke against Rameau Sokoudjou in 2007 make up his decisive wins as a fighter. The rest of his fights, the eight he didn’t end, were left to three judges to decide and only once did a split decision nearly cost him his undefeated status. That was in 2003, quite a while back if we are talking about current MMA standards, against an unknown Sam Greco.
I didn’t really think my thoughts on Machida were worthy of an article until I spotted two quick clips of him battling Tito Ortiz on BloodyElbow from MMA-Core. In both clips, you see Machida attack and then immediately fall back even after he lands successful blows. While I can see his double kick could have forced him to momentarily step backwards, his explosive knee into Ortiz’s liver deserved more than a side-step into safety and out of range. Whatever happened to the fighters instinct to move in for the kill? There’s no aggression in moving backwards after every offensive attack.
As for octagon control, Ortiz moved the pace throughout the fight as Machida continued to circle the cage. You could see Ortiz step back and drop his hands as a sign as frustration when Machida refused to engage. Octagon control went to Ortiz, why was no credit given? A fight scored 30-27 means one fighter was able to dominate the four aspects of judging criteria for three rounds in this non-title fighter. But did Machida really do more than avoid confrontation to set up the seldow offensive attack? I don’t think he did.
And as a side note, will Machida ever get a shot at the light heavyweight title by dodging the competition? While the UFC has continued to trim its roster of habitual losers and boring fighters, Lyoto Machida continues to move forward. Other fighters, like Andre Arlovski, who have engaged in a less than stellar performances and came away with the win, had been showing signs of frustration with the organization. We know that Machida would be a terrible candidate as a UFC champion with his defensive fight style and inability to gain mainstream acceptance by only speaking Portuguese. Is he doomed to fighting the gatekeepers to the the belt until he finally comes away with another decisive victory (if you count his submission over Sokoudjou, a Judo fighter) in the UFC or loses? He’s potentially up against Wanderlei Silva, Chuck Liddell (imagine a counter-puncher verses Machida), Muaricio “Shogun” Rua, Rameau Sokoudjou, and the loser of Rampage/Griffin. There’s a long way to go for someone who has escaped the wrath of many. Tito Ortiz almost had the triangle choke - a couple of judges, if UFC judging rules are properly upheld, may finally sink in an unescpable choke of their own.
Loading ...
May 27th, 2008 at 10:19am
Brandt, check out this post on from Sherdog.
http://www.sherdog.net/forums/f2/machidas-sytle-entertainment-value-787177/
Excerpts:
“The UFC was put togehter to see who’s fighting style is superior. I think limiting a fighters success because of lack of enteratinment value is a crime. Look at Tim Duncan and the Spurs. Their boring and unenjoyable, however, they are effective,but extremely successful. Do you think the NBA would limit the best team in order to provide more entertainment, no, this would ruin the integrity of the sport. Similar to Machida, the spurs are great defensively, very methodical, and calculating on offense. I don’t know, maybe that is a formula for success.”
Whatever happened to the fighters instinct to move in for the kill?
Every fighter has a different style and fighting philosophy. Machida does go for the kill, he has a different approach. How many times have you seen a fighter go in for the final kill only to be KO’ed themselves? Wanderlei’s exciting and entertaining wreckless abandon has also cost him some fights, and if he lost this fight against Jardine, many would question whether or not he’s past his prime and unable compete against UFC fighters. Honestly, I really could not believe how many people felt he was in a real do or die situation to save his spot on the UFC roster. And let’s not look no further than Houston Alexander. Exciting style? Check. Entertaining? Check. He lost to Thiago and than James Irwin. If he loses a third fight in a row, do you think you will see Alexander in the Octagon in the near future? Probably not.
Do we begin to question Jardine? Was his unorthodox cautious style gets called into question. Where was his killer instinct in his fight against Chuck Liddell? Surely he could have finished Chuck? But he didn’t. When he moved forward to finish Houston Alexander after the very quick knockdown, what happened to Jardine? I’m not arguing whether or not Machida is boring, I thought the 2nd round was boring, but that’s due to both fighters. Hey, Anderson Silva is very boring for the 1st minute of most of his UFC fights except the match against Chris Leben.
Are judges favoring Lyoto’s style? Yes, they’re favoring the amount of effective strikes. Hopefully Joel Silva will give Machida an opponent that will force Machida to engage in a general crowd pleasing manner.
Everybody loves the offensive minded fighter but does not appreciate a defensive strategy. Entertainment is a factor, but if that was really factored many lay and pray wrestlers will find difficulty making it into the PPV shows or main events. Too bad every fighter can’t be like Clay Guida and Wanderlei Silva.
May 27th, 2008 at 12:50pm
Brandt,
Machida was getting beat up in the clinch. The knee to the body was from the clinch. So he landed his blow, moved to the side, got out of the clinch, and as soon as he saw Tito going down he went in for the kill. It’s not like he stood there and watched Tito go down and didn’t do anything about it.
May 27th, 2008 at 1:10pm
Terrible article and fyi he spoke english during the countdown to ufc84 show and at the post-fight interview, which means the UFC is pushing him to learn english and he is being groomed for a title shot sooner than later.
He massively outpointed tito on the feet, scored a takedown and a knockdown and you are suggesting that it wasn’t a CLEAR 30-27? Maybe you should spend some more time watching the sport and getting some knowledge before posting write-ups. Sorry if that sounds harsh but placing columns on public sites means you are opening yourself to criticism and this articly simply doesnt cut it.
May 27th, 2008 at 1:24pm
Hey Adam - I saw what he did, but I wasn’t seeing the killer instinct. He didn’t do anything wrong, obviously. He’s just not a risky fighter.
As for Mr. Elusive here, the entire premise of the article was about Machida’s style and the judging around it. When his fights go to a decision, judges are quick to score 10-9’s without factoring agression and control. I didn’t say Tito clearly dominated any of the rounds and I’m not surpised he lost 30-27, I’m looking more at the judging criteria while using Machida’s recent fight as an example.
As for your overly harsh critique - don’t worry, I’m not offended.
May 27th, 2008 at 1:54pm
Brandt,
It by no means was a bad article. It was just badly mis-read by VERY elusive. Seems that people get very touchy when it comes to fighters they care about.
May 27th, 2008 at 2:07pm
Just one of the challenges of an opinion site!
May 27th, 2008 at 6:27pm
“As for octagon control, Ortiz moved the pace throughout the fight as Machida continued to circle the cage. You could see Ortiz step back and drop his hands as a sign as frustration when Machida refused to engage. Octagon control went to Ortiz, why was no credit given?”
Tito didn’t set the pace of the fight, he was frustrated because he DIDN’T have control over what was happening. Who the hell would get frustrated if they were in control of what was happening? Like, “Oh man, I have this fucken octgon control, damn it!!!” Give me a break. Machida decided everything that happened in that fight. He decided when they engaged, he decided when it went to the ground. He had CONTROL of the action.
May 27th, 2008 at 6:44pm
Then why didn’t he end it? Not to mention when he he almost lost when Ortiz had that triangle clamped down. I don’t think he decided that. Machida is a decision fighter because he don’t want to control the fight. He uses defense to win.
May 27th, 2008 at 9:11pm
I agree with you on this one, Brandt, though for slightly different reasons, and on a slightly different level.
Personally, I can’t stand Machida, because he’s so unapologetic about being incredibly boring.
When Andrei went to decision, he apologized to his fans. Why doesn’t Lyoto feel the need to apologize? Why does he think it’s okay to do that again and again?
“I’m gonna delay for three rounds” is not a game plan, and no one should be encouraging him to do it.
As soon as we start acting like decisions are okay, we’ve becoming boxing, and nobody wants that.
May 28th, 2008 at 1:42am
If you guys are so worried about fights going to decisions or being boring why don’t you check out pro-wrestling? They don’t have any judges and they try their hardest to be exciting.
May 28th, 2008 at 1:44am
“Then why didn’t he end it?”
So ability to end the fight at any time is your definition of octagon control? In that case, if you really think Tito had control, why didn’t HE end it? Shouldn’t you be pissed at the guy who could have finished the fight the whole time and didn’t, not the poor guy who is being controlled?
May 28th, 2008 at 6:21am
Trevor,
The UFC is in the business of making exciting fights. That is one of the reasons for the latest cuts. You can’t disagree that the best fights are in the UFC.
Machida is just a boring figter, you can blame his style.
RULEBOOK
J. Octagon Control
1. The fighter who is dictating the pace, place and position of the fight.
2. A striker who fends off a grappler’s takedown attempt to remain standing and effectively strike is octagon control.
3. A grappler who can takedown an effective standing striker to ground fight is octagon control.
4. The fighter on the ground who creates submission, mount or clean striking opportunities
Yes Machida won. By definition he had control. However he is using the rules to his advantage and it will bite him in the end. Fights that go to the judges don’t always go your way. He bobbed and weaved, and landed just enough.
It was boring and in my opinion not something the UFC wants to promote. it is not good for the sport.
May 28th, 2008 at 12:15pm
trevor, you’re missing the point.
The point is not simply that Machida’s boring, it what that does to the sport. There are plenty of reasons not to watch pro-wrestling, for sure. The problem is actually something that you mentioned:
“Shouldn’t you be pissed at the guy who could have finished the fight the whole time and didn’t, not the poor guy who is being controlled?”
Yeah, and I am pissed at that guy. His name is Lyoto Machida.
May 28th, 2008 at 3:32pm
“You can’t disagree that the best fights are in the UFC.”
I don’t know, so far this year I’ve liked Pellegrino/Diaz and Bocek/Danzig best of the UFC’s fights and I think Hansen/Alvarez and Uno/Ishida were as good as those.
“It was boring and in my opinion not something the UFC wants to promote. it is not good for the sport.”
Randy Couture v. Tim Sylvia was a boring fight. Georges St. Pierre v. Josh Koscheck was a boring fight. Boring fights and fighters are part of the sport, just like boring players and teams are parts of other sports. What would hurt the sport would be favoring exciting fighters over more skilled fighters, which inherently compromises the integrity of the sport. I watch fights to see whose skills match up with who, how great fighters deal with each other, etc. I know there are both types of fans, but seriously, if you screw great fighters over just because they are boring you really have taken a step away from being a competition and a step towards “sports entertainment”.
“Yeah, and I am pissed at that guy. His name is Lyoto Machida.”
So you honestly think Machida could have finished the fight at any time? If you haven’t noticed Tito is a tough guy to put away. It took intense barrages of punches from Chuck Liddell, who hits way, way harder than Machida, to put Tito away. And Lyoto jumped on and tried to finish Tito twice, at the end of the first and end of the fourth. You can’t honestly say he never tried to finish the fight.
May 28th, 2008 at 3:33pm
ooops, I meant end of the third not fourth.
May 28th, 2008 at 3:58pm
I wouldn’t agree that he didn’t try to finish it, but he holds back. I’ll leave my final say at that - Lyoto Machida is a fighter who holds back. Does that sound good to everyone?
May 28th, 2008 at 4:01pm
I would agree because I feel for him to win he has to hold back… He can’t push and come forward, it pushes to his weaknesses.
May 28th, 2008 at 5:28pm
Boring?
Tell me you weren’t standing or atleast on the tip of your chair when Randy hit Tim and almost finished the fight right off, or the way he dominated the taller fighter?
The Koscheck versus St. Pierre was only boring if you are a superficial fan. Meaning if you don’t enjoy the true sport of the fights. That fight was great in the sense that you had the most decorated college wrestler in the UFC vs. what many consider to be one of the best wrestlers in his own right.
You are also trying to compare apples to footballs. You can argue that those are boring fights, but can you argue that Randy and GSP are boring fighters? Big difference my friend.
May 28th, 2008 at 6:28pm
“Tell me you weren’t standing or atleast on the tip of your chair when Randy hit Tim and almost finished the fight right off”
Yeah, and then I practically came when Randy did nothing with back control for the rest of the round.
“The Koscheck versus St. Pierre was only boring if you are a superficial fan. ”
Bullshit. It’s boring if you realize GSP was stalling, didn’t know how to execute a kimura and know Koscheck is notorious for not practicing wrestling in training and came in with the worst gameplan in history. Essentially you saw a guy who trained a ton of wrestling out-wrestling a smaller man who doesn’t train much wrestling. The only interesting part of that fight on any level were the take downs. If you thought that fight was exciting, I question how objectively you observe fights, because I suppose it might have been cool if I was a GSP fan.
“You can argue that those are boring fights, but can you argue that Randy and GSP are boring fighters? Big difference my friend.”
I wouldn’t say either guy was a boring fighter but both have been in their fair share of boring fights. You say you can appreciate the GSP/Koscheck fight as a display of skill… well what’s preventing you from appreciating Machida’s skill? FightMetric says one of the rounds he didn’t have a single blow landed on him.
And I agree he “holds back” but he still tried to finish Tito twice, and Tito showed off his guard skills in the fight as well, and Machida showed the skill to escape.
May 28th, 2008 at 6:55pm
If the fight was 10 rounds, we would have seen some action, but unfortunately not much happened in those 15 minutes. If everyone fights like Machida and wins via decision, there will be 10 undefeated fighters and no fans to pay $200 to watch live fights.
May 28th, 2008 at 7:16pm
hahaha what the fuck you really think anyone could do what Machida does?
May 28th, 2008 at 7:29pm
Yea, lots of guys do it. BJ Penn did it…and he did it better on Saturday night.
May 28th, 2008 at 7:41pm
I have never said Machida didn’t have skill. Anyone fighting in the UFC has skill.
June 2nd, 2008 at 7:35pm
The problem is that he hasnt fought Griffin, Rampage, Silva, Lidell or Shogun yet. That is: guys on his level and weight aswell as guys who need to start sparring against karatepractioners if they want to catch the irritating dragon and hit his nose really hard.
June 6th, 2008 at 1:16pm
Machida should not be judged by his performance against Tito — Machida had a very poor performance due to a sickness (flu) and he still won easily. I do not see how anyone could have scored the fight for Ortiz. Machida did control the action. This was, to me, a boring/exciting fight. There is something about anticipation that makes Machida’s style exciting IMO. I would not want every fighter to be like Machida, but I like him just because he is different.
June 6th, 2008 at 2:34pm
Henri, I don’t think that anyone is judging Machida just on his performance against Tito. It isn’t like this is the only fight he has won by decision.
I mean, he’s finished one opponent thus far in his UFC career, and he hasn’t stopped anybody standing up. I’ll be honest when I say that I have a hard time calling anyone a striker when they don’t knock people out.
You’re entitled to like Machida, your opinion is welcome. Unfortunately, Machida can’t be dubbed a serious title contender fighting the way that he fights. He can’t be called a legit force if he’s not finishing guys.
When Machida knocks out his first few guys, and if he does it with some force, then we can talk about how great a striker he is. Unfortunately, he has yet to do that and, as a result, I have yet to start recognizing his legitimacy standing up.
June 26th, 2008 at 10:01pm
This article was a complete wash out.
This quote from Blatnick at the original ufc may clear things up…
“First lesson of the octagon, SURVIVAL”
If you can’t survive you can’t win.
June 27th, 2008 at 1:25pm
Well here’s another quote for you and this one isn’t from 1993, grafdog. “If you don’t engage, you’re better off in another sport.”