Phil Davis vs Lyoto Machida

Discussion in 'MMA Forum' started by shadow111, Aug 4, 2013.


  1. shadow111

    shadow111 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    23,139
    9,870
    Aug 1, 2012
    His style isn't negative. The issue really is how the two takedowns swung the round in favor of Davis despite Machida getting the best of the standup.

    In this fight, Machida wasn't just waiting for a counter, he was actually trying to create openings and led with kicks and punches at times. Davis was also fighting cautiously himself knowing Machida's style, and really fought a smart fight. it's hard to judge those takedowns, because Davis couldn't do any ground and pound. Machida also stuffed many of Davis's takedowns. UFC tries to judge MMA fights by boxing scoring, and takedowns are tricky when you are weighing that vs the standup.
     
  2. BewareofDawg

    BewareofDawg P4P Champ Full Member

    27,677
    184
    Apr 8, 2006
    I never understood why a takedown gets points, but a successful defense of a takedown doesn't.

    In both cases, the fighter is dictating where the fight goes. In one case, the fighter wants to take it to the ground, while the opponent wants to stand, so he takes him down. In the other case, the fighter wants it to remain standing, while the opponent wants to go to the ground, so he avoids the takedown and keeps the fight standing.

    What am I missing?

    Machida landed the more significant strikes. And he had 8 takedown defenses vs Davis's 2 takedowns.
     
  3. Thom

    Thom Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,621
    21
    Jun 25, 2006
    How can you say that he doesn't have a negative style? You're conceding the fact that that he was more aggressive than usual, yet he still only averaged 20 strikes a round in this fight.

    Here's Machida's flurry from the first that they kept showing:


    https://lh3.ggpht.com/-jDLrvD3IpU4/Uf3QQEbPgiI/AAAAAAAAqW8/d2g4VlirKoI/s1600/1.gif

    Maybe one of those shots landed flush on Davis, and those few seconds accounted for about a third of the offense that he mustered in that entire round.


    He landed some shots in the first after he passed to half guard and while he was working for a kimura.


    https://lh3.ggpht.com/-PxDfOjv51Ew/Uf3QRA1aCwI/AAAAAAAAqXE/vrvtE5x32GM/s1600/2.gif

    This is the TD from the second round:

    https://lh3.ggpht.com/-U_jn1zfm1nA/Uf3R1tOFWqI/AAAAAAAAqXc/8zcj0AkPcHQ/s1600/4.gif


    Davis landed a few decent shots here. Not much, but Machida did almost nothing in that round.

    Most of the stuffed TDs occurred in the third round, which was the only decisive round in the fight.

    Like I said earlier, I think that Machida should have won, but he was going tit-for-tat in the stand up against a vastly inferior striker. He's been in the sport long enough to know what kind of shenanigans the judges get up to. It's his fault that he put himself in a position to lose like that.

    His style is based on trying to frustrate guys into opening up. When that doesn't happen, his fights are incredibly dull and close.
     
  4. shadow111

    shadow111 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    23,139
    9,870
    Aug 1, 2012
    If you look at my scorecard, I scored the first two rounds even. Rd 1 Machida didn't land that much, but slightly better than Davis, and the Davis takedown in round 1 was not as good as his takedown in round 2 and his ground and pound didn't last as long as it did in round 2. (end of the round)

    Machida's knee barely missed in that first round combo by Machida. That knee could have hurt Davis badly but it barely missed (inches). When you look at the first round, the takedown happened at the very end of the round, so it was only a very small portion of what happened in the round. They were on their feet for the large majority of the round. By giving Davis that round based on that late takedown, you are rendering that rally by Machida and his other strikes meaningless. I thought 10-10 was fair, giving Davis credit for the takedown, otherwise it was 10-9 Machida. (barely but clear)

    Round 2 Machida was more active and Davis's take down was much better and longer. One judge gave Rd1 to Machida and Rd 2 to Davis, and that would have been an okay score. (better than 20-18 Davis after 2, which imo is a ridiculous score) What makes this tough is that I think Machida landed his best strike of the fight in this round, a straight left hand that was by far the best strike landed in the round. So that's why this round is so hard to score and why I scored it even.

    If Machida stays on his feet in rounds 1 and 2, I think he wins clearly wins the round. However, the rounds were close as a lot of Machida fights are against top competition. Davis is definitely a well rounded athlete in his prime.

    Right and that's why I gave Machida round 3, and two of the three official judges did too. Machida once again edged him slightly in the quality of the striking, but this time there were no takedowns and multiple stuffed takedown attempts by Machida.

    A vastly inferior striker? Davis is an above average striker, but he's coming from a wrestling backround. Davis was an NCAA wrestling champion in college. Machida is imho the most superior striker in MMA, so all of his opponents are inferior in striking compared to him. Where Davis excels in his wrestling and takedowns.

    It's not his fault that he put himself in a position to lose like that, because he fought his fight and did what he had to do to win. However he let himself get taken down, and in such close rounds he can't do that. I don't think he planned on getting taken down. Machida is a guy that prefers to stay on his feet, and part of that is a very good takedown defense where he moves his legs quickly. He showed this in round 3. If he didn't fight the way he did, he could have gotten taken down more or submitted. I think fights like this where one guy wins the striking and the other guy gets takedowns should be scored a draw and not seen as either guy winning. MMA scores are always debatable, but your critique of Machida is the same type of thing we heard after Machida won a controversial 5 round decision of Rua in their first fight. Machida then was more aggressive (listening to the opinions too much) and got badly knocked out by not fighting his usual style. Remember Machida was winning and looking great and more active early in the 2nd Rua fight, but then he got too aggressive, trying to win the rounds too convincingly and got stopped. So he has to be careful not to abandon his Karate style. The takedown defense is the key, and it's not like he has to re-invent the wheel. What Lyoto is doing works, he just has to try and not get taken down as much. Though I don't think a takedown like Davis's in the 1st round is enough to swing anything, even a close striking win. You really have to evaluate the quality of the takedown, the damage done on the ground, and the length of the ground work.
     
  5. JoeAverage

    JoeAverage Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,150
    1
    Oct 26, 2008
    That was a horrible decision.

    Machida won two VERY clear rounds where he landed the most and had superior ring generalship for 90% of the rounds. And then one round that was closer but also Machida's.

    The commentators live had Machida winning all three rounds.

    Phil was obviously meant to win before the fight started....

    Machida is so interesting to watch.. and this sucks.

    With decisions like this UFC has NOTHING to say to boxing about bull**** decisions...
     
  6. EL BULLY

    EL BULLY Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,722
    0
    Aug 19, 2006
    The cold hard truth is: If you are a striker and fight for 15 minutes with most of the fight being fought on the feet and there could even remotely be an argument for you losing due to 2 take-downs, you didn't do enough. End of story.