Talk:Lyoto Machida/Archive 1

Generic header to move stuff off the top

Some vandal keeps deleting the rematch against Shogun on Machida's record, it is happening isnt it? Yes it is. Im Lyoto's fan and I want him to win the rematch but i think whoever keeps deleting that fact is just a nuthugger who's scared because he/she thinks Machida's not going to make it this time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.163.231 (talk) 00:42, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Machida claims to drink his own urine for health benefits (this is easily sourced). While it's one of the first things I think about the guy when he comes to mind, what is the consensus on including this bit of trivia in the wiki? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.116.109.137 (talk) 03:07, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

i think we could add something to the page about how [he] is the god of mma. for a source, we could cite "his fight footage" Kingcrimson12345 (talk) 08:04, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

• I believe Fedor holds that title right now. Regalion (talk) 07:10, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

 Agreed on the Fedor comment. What a stupid suggestion anyway. Don't think I need to explain why.

There is a Polish version of the article. Please link it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.76.181.181 (talk) 10:06, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

• Done. Regalion (talk) 07:10, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
• i think there should be a section on the 'machida divide' about his fighting style which gained traction following his defeat win over tito. Nitron (talk) 22:36, 10 August 2008 (UTC)nitron

Drinking Urine?

Machida claims to drink his own urine for health benefits. While this is true the way it is put in is too blunt and trivial, as well as unreferenced. I recommend the sentence be removed, or expanded in a more academic manner, e.g. "Machida's father introduced him to the health benefits of uropathy" as opposed to the simple statement that almost seems derogatory or like slander. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mthulisi (talk • contribs) 05:32, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

• I have rephrased the way this is communicated as well as quoting Lyoto directly from an interview and provided a reference LordAradon (talk) 15:01, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Machida's use of English

In terms of Machida's language, is it really necessary to include that his language, or lack of English would in any way hamper his ability to become champion? I believe this kind of talk borders on the xenophobic and is believed only by a fringe section of fans. Should not be included in Machida's article. There are many great fighters in the UFC who don't speak English, Anderson Silva is an example. His lack of English has not gotten in the way of his popularity or status as a mixed martial artist. Outside the UFC, Fedor is another example of a great fighter who always depends on an interpreter.24.30.49.127 (talk) 20:53, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

The claim that speaking English could help build Machida's fanbase comes from the referenced article, which is on the biggest MMA website on the internet. If you can reference another article from a comparable source that claims that speaking English will not have an effect on his following, then we can include that as well. -Captain Crawdad (talk) 00:08, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

That's fine, a reference from a columnist with an opinion published by sherdog does not prove the statement to be fact. The assertion seems to be the author's opinion rather than provable, measurable fact. (24.30.49.127 (talk) 03:48, 7 February 2009 (UTC)).

IIf you can prove the notion that Machida's lack of English is a marketing liability, by proving it is a widespread notion in the mma journalism community and not just 1 person's opinion, then you may put this in the article. Otherwise this is a biased assertion which should not be put on the article. I haven't read elsewhere how this hampers Anderson Silva's ability to be a 'marketable champion.' (24.30.49.127 (talk) 23:24, 11 February 2009 (UTC))

Well here's two more:

• "From a marketing standpoint there are obvious drawbacks. He's not particularly charismatic, doesn't speak English and he doesn't have an exciting style."
• The only drawbacks with Machida are that he isn't aesthetically pleasing for the casual fan to watch and he doesn't speak English.,

That's four total commentators so far saying Machida's English has an effect on his popularity. As an aside, here's two quotes I stumbled across about Anderson Silva's English, the first from his own manager:

• "the only thing holding {Anderson Silva} back from breaking through to be a superstar is his English."
• "{Anderson Silva's} inability to speak English well has not helped his star turn"

-Captain Crawdad (talk) 01:22, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Controversial Stance

On the initial paragraph, you say his stance is 'controversial'. Unfortunately the source you used does not confirm this assertion.

Someone put sources on the "controversial" remark, but they were invalid (they only showed he was being criticized by some) and I've removed them. The point is that being merely criticized is not the same as being controversial. hateless 22:46, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Recent edits to "fighting style" section

I have provided reasons for the recent changes I made to the "Fighting style" section, but those changes were reverted without explanation. I would like to get the reasons for the revert and try to come to a consensus here on the talk page to avoid an edit war. - Captain Crawdad (talk) 23:14, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Any reason why the obvious karate influence on his fighting style is edged-around? Yes, he fights with a cautious, hang-back then big hit approach, as stated, but this is very characteristic of people with training in shotokan karate. I understand that many UFC fans dislike acknowledging the success of karate tactics in the compeition - is this the reason? Shinji nishizono (talk) 21:49, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

The section is based on what reliable sources say, so I doubt it's not mentioned due to bias on the part of editors. If you have any reliable sources mentioning the connection I'm sure it can be included. --aktsu ^(t / c) 22:43, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Machida Karate

His style is Machida karate created by his father he confirms this in an interview regarding Georges St Pierre's karate during ufc 100. This is an ofshoot modified version of shotokan but still differs from shotokan and should not be labled as such. However, it must be noted that Machida Karate is a registered variation, and that Yoshizo himself has said that its aim is be more like the original version of Shotokan when it was hybrid and devoid of tournament emphasis. Therefore, Machida Karate could be more Shotokan Karate than modern Shotokan Karate. Both Yoshizo and Lyoto had said similar statements. Finally, clich knees are in almost all martial arts with leg attacks including Karate, but due to the high risk of injury they are banned in sparring under most Karate masters especially when considering the most natural and best target for the knee attack is generally the groin area.

My own question is why is Machida under Machida Karate and Shotokan Karate on the top right summary box. Shouldn't it just be one? If Machida karate really is a registered variation I'd just put it under that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BarraganLL (talk • contribs) 09:21, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Sumo

He actually trained Sumo for quite time... I'm trying to find realiable sources to quote. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thrapt (talk • contribs) 02:15, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Exact words in the May Issue of Fight Magazine: Dragon Culture. In 2000, Lyoto Machida placed second in the Brazilian Sumo Championships in the 253 pounds division. Finding difficulty locating the online version of the article. Squirrelfighter (talk) 01:55, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

The reach conversion on wiki is wrong

74 in is about 1.88 M, 75 in is about 1.90 1/2 M and 77 in is about 1.95 1/2 M. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.219.166.18 (talk) 19:46, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Replied at Talk:Forrest Griffin. --aktsu ^(t / c) 19:58, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Judo???

Who was the idiot that changed the article saying that "Judo" is one of his fighting styles? There is no proof of this, not a single reference. I have corrected the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sheik07 (talk • contribs) 00:01, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Punch/es

Some people have been changing the last two fights on Machida's record to KO (Punch), however, since Sherdog lists them both as KO (Punches) and is currently the only reference to Machida's record linked in the article, I think the article should reflect the site's content. Also, since Sherdog is the only site of which I am aware that maintains a database of MMA fighter records, I think it should stand as a fairly definitive source. -Captain Crawdad (talk) 03:34, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I can understand how someone might call it punches when Machida knocked out Evans. It was one punch that knocked Evans out, but was preceded by previous punches. However, Machida knocked Silva out with one clean punch at 4:59. His follow up punch was after the bell and after Silva was already out. It was a punch, not punches. Machida threw Silva on the ground then knocked him out with his first punch. When I read the play by play on Yahoo! Sports and MMAWeekly.com I thought they made it clear that it was a one punch knockout. Watching the pay per view it is obvious that it was a one punch knockout. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.124.30.35 (talk) 23:50, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

We can't use original research to go against a reference. If we're going to contradict Machida's listed record on Sherdog, we're going to need solid references that don't leave anything open to interpretation. -Captain Crawdad (talk) 00:41, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't consider MMAWeekly.com and Yahoo! Sports as original research, let alone the fight itself. I mean fact is fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.124.30.35 (talk) 01:01, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I haven't found the pages you're referring to, and they're not referenced in the article. They need to be properly linked in order to be considered references. -Captain Crawdad (talk) 01:41, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

No more false positives

SorryDr. Szląchski (talk) 00:13, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Someone please fix his record.

Someone has edited his record and it needs to be updated. His last fight was against Rashad Evans at UFC 98, all the other fights added are fake results. Machida will face off against Shogun Rua at UFC104 on October 24th.

So someone please erase the Shogun Rua, Nick Diaz, Fedor Emelianenko, and Brock Lesnar results please, they are fake. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SugerSpider (talk • contribs) 21:05, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

The article needs to be corrected again. He got unanimous decision against Rua and has no control what the judges say, someone correct it. Also, this article should be locked after it is corrected, as many people will have edit wars over it. 74.186.190.52 (talk) 05:00, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Somebody should add a little explanation regarding Lyoto's Shogun fight, or else future fans will think Lyoto won a regular 'well deserved' unanimous decision (which is not the case. At the least it was a controversial fight. At most, a robbery) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tkwon (talk • contribs) 12:34, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

And someone should change the unanimous(49-47) decision in the Rua fight to (48-47), cause thats what actually happened. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.23.109.94 (talk) 15:35, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

````For one, Lyoto only said that all three judges scored the fight for him holding up three fingers to reinforce this. Further, the 24th resource is clearly a biased website and contains numerous challenges. Since there where no actual instruments of measuring the changes in blood pressure, muscle damage, bone fracturing,speed of the strikes, mass of the instruments of strikes, etc... then the resource is a biased analysis and unworthy of being considered fact. Further, the website has shown a biased view in placing Maui Thai kicks over Shotokan and since Lyoto uses a Shotokan Karate stance and both himself and his main teacher (Yoshizo his father) are registered Shotokan black belts even though it is an offshoot the almost exact stances and techniques in striking are enough to register Lyoto as using both Shotokan and a registered variation with Shotokan in Japan as Machida Karate. Saying Lyoto doesn't use Shotokan is like saying Anderson Silva doesn't use Maui Thai because his camp is in Brazil and the U.S.A. Maui Thai like most kickboxing variations contains numerous variations undocumented yet the website I am critizing states Anderson Silva and Rua as using Maui Thai. Even further, Lyoto has entered various Shotokan Karate championships(which he has won some officially regestered)where Machida Karate was represented as Shotokan and was under Shotokan Karate rules under said events.At the very least the 24th source should be striken from being used as a legit record of fact when in fact they are not (not even backed by the UFC or the U.S.A. government or boxing commissions thereof which cover the rules and oversight of most MMA events throughout the U.S.A.). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiggalama (talk • contribs) 05:13, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

````Also, since Yoshizo is a confirmed 7th dan in Shotokan Karate and has his Machida Karate registered under the current Grandmaster of all Grandmasters of all of Shotokan Karate as such it is still therefore Shotokan. When a martial artist is given a grandmaster dan (7th or above with most and with Shotokan) it is a right to modify your interpretation of the core teachings of your style to have your own variation and still be of the original core. Under Japanese law it is only under the circumstances of cutting the ties and registration of your variation within the style that one becomes devoid of the parentage.Lyoto uses the exact same stance in his footing and only has his hands up closer to his face due to MMA having punches to the face (see youtube for much video). Since fighting doesn't have exactness (for all movements are not perfect)to say anything is anything could be challenged as well for styles are philosophies on how to fight and no fighter executes the attack perfectly therefore due to variations with practioners and environment to be existential one could say there are no styles. Regardless, if we are going to say they exist Machida should be noted as both Shotokan and his father's variation of said style as Machida for it is his father's earned legal right. Those of you not willing to even acknoledge that it is Shotokan even while saying his father tried to restore more of the traditional techniques therein(thus in a way becoming more Shotokan than the other styles) then it could be said that Lyoto's father/teacher has declared Lyoto a Shotokan karate master and his personal heir. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiggalama (talk • contribs) 05:30, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Even if Machida Karate where seperate from Shotokan Karate, someone has placed Machida Karate and Lyoto's way of fighting in MMA as one and the same when it is not. Machida stated in a prefight interview before Rashad Evans that he had adapted his karate to MMA! Therefore, Machida Karate is not a MMA style but still a martial art style for self-defense on the streets and this should be corrected immeadiately. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.52.128.29 (talk) 06:09, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

The Decision Was Not Overturned.

There is only one "source" reporting that it was. The UFC and CSAC have not officially said anything, this record needs to be fixed to reflect that he did win at UFC 104. SChaos1701 (talk) 00:24, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

{{editsemiprotected}}

There are two sources I've found confirming this: http://www.mmafighting.com.au.tt/news/2009/10/29/overturning-controversial-decision-bound-to-cause-more-controversey http://i.imgur.com/5CNCA.png

It would appear it has been changed. If you do not change his record, you should verify there is at least talk of overturning his decision.—Preceding unsigned comment added by MachidaFan22 (talk • contribs)

Edit declined. Stated reference is not a reliable source. Please find the original Sacramento Bee article in the "reference" or other reliable source that the decision was overturned. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 00:28, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

And your websites are also fake. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 00:36, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

The image someone sent me, the link I don't think is fake. Here's a link to the article on Sacramento Bee: http://www.sacbee.com.au.tt/ourregion/story/governor-schwarzenegger-overturns-decision-ultimate-fighting-championship.html | Now, please fix his record, or, at the least, note the demand for an overturn, waiting for Dana White to comment... —Preceding unsigned comment added by MachidaFan22 (talk • contribs) 01:06, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Above is fake, kindly ignore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MachidaFan22 (talk • contribs) 01:18, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Pronunciation

I'm wanting to put the Portuguese pronunciation of his name in the intro, but I can't seem to find a reliable version of it. The best would be him pronouncing his own name (say, in an interview), but a YouTube search turns up nothing. There is all kinds of false info out there, considering his Japanese ancestry and his career in the US and Japan. My best guesses are: 1. [ˈljotu maˈʃidɐ], 2. [liˈotu maˈʃidɐ], 3. [ˈljotu maˈtʃidɐ], 4. [liˈotu maˈtʃidɐ]; but it's possible I'm totally off on the stress, and I've seen some suggestion that that /l/ may even be an /ɾ/. — ˈzɪzɨvə (talk) 02:10, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Official Site and random link?

There should be a link to his official site 'lyotomachida.net' in the external links section. Also I think the hyperlink "machida instructional" at the bottom of the page should be removed as it links to 'dvdlearningcenter.com' which is a site that has an amazon store that stocks a lyoto machida dvd boxset. Is it customary to lock pages that have random links disguised at the bottom of them?

It seems lyotomachida.net is a site run by Lyoto's sponsor Boni Acai, his official site is machidalyoto.com.br could someone please edit the page to reflect this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.134.154.191 (talk) 18:18, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from 66.31.175.0, 9 May 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} Lyoto lost 30 mins ago and is no longer heavy weight champ NEEDS TO BE FIXED ASAP!!! Thanks 66.31.175.0 (talk) 04:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Requests to edit semi-protected articles must be accompanied by reference(s) to reliable sources.

I suggest you get an account, then you can help us improve articles.94.196.202.221 (talk) 16:00, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

 Not done

Machida vs Rua controversy

Does anybody agree that this section should be cleaned up. My opinion is that it is not impartial and still too much point of view. In particular the statement that those who agreed with the decision were current and former training partners of Machida and the Fightmetric / Compustrike statistics. If they are irrelevant to scoring as stated, then should they be mentioned? Also should everything below this still fit in this section?76.76.120.29 (talk) 15:51, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

I think its better to just list the other fighters that agree with a machida win. You might claim it gives people a better idea of bias to include that they are former or current training partners, but wouldnt it then also be a good idea to note that some of the guys that agree with the decision are guys that were beaten by machida, and that some of the guys who think machida won are current weight class champs? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.178.148.237 (talk) 08:52, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Rampage Controversy

This section reads like it was written by Ed Soares. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.57.177.161 (talk) 04:31, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Agreed, I came to the talk page just for this. I have no idea what is being said in this section, and theres a lot of "Some people think..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.246.2.129 (talk) 20:45, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Front Kick KO

Surely the correct name for this kick is not "crane kick". Whilst the kick used at the end of the Karate Kid movie is described as such, in karate the crane stance is actually a very different stance. This kick is more commonly referred to as a jumping front snap kick and NOT a crane kick. Actually, its a Jumping Switch-Foot Front Foot. The "snap" is a slang term refering more in terms of board breaking and with less hip power; Kung Fu ideology. We both agree its not a "crane kick" a that move is either in a combo or from a stance made famous in the Karate Kid movie(ironically since it is a Kung Fu move in a Karate movie lol) that has its origin in Souther Kung Fu. While being the originator, it is not the move used in Karate. Its certainly not a snap also in that he uses his back leg as a faker and the position as an amplifer, almost going circular stance, to set up his front kick. A snap has no hip power to it, it focuses on speed and just the movement of the knee. Also, it is not a regular front kick at all in that it involves a small jump, hits with the front foot, and hits with an advanced part of the foot specific to thrust kicks or front kicks. A regular front kick is from the back leg, this on was a front foot front kick. And fuck you Mauy Thai biased punks. :D Yes there are clinch knees in Shotokan and TKD, and YES there jump moves are not "flying". Where this a MT page, then mabye, and also Anderson Silva's was Kyokushin in the way he used it and not a MT technique. That one was a regular front kick aside from the advanced part of the foot used. We need to avoid biased termonology or fancy names, roundhouse is as fancy as it should get for example since most know thats a turn kick. No flying, animal names to give Kung Fu too much credit, and no superman or cobra bs. Call the techniques what they are exactly. :D Wiggalama (talk) 17:22, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

According to WP:V, Wikipedia requires a reliable source for controversial content, such as how to refer to the kick. So, until we have a reliable source that states the name of the kick and says that Sherdog is wrong, we don't have a choice but to call it just a "front kick". No sources call it a "Jumping Switch-Foot Front Foot" kick, and attacks such as "fuck you Mauy [sic] Thai biased punks" may lead to a block per WP:CIVIL. —LOL <sup>T</sup>/<sub>C</sub> 20:10, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Guy, I can use the fight vid itself as a source. There is a jump, he uses his front foot to kick, not his back, and he switches feet mid air using his back leg as a fake and its partial position to amplify his front kick. I am not calling it by a fancy and/or inaccurate name, it is what it is. Further, we need to be more specific on the punches used, cause saying what type of choke a win is and not the punch or kick for example is a double standard against striking. A front kick is delivered from the back leg in terms of what is universally considered a standard front kick in all martial arts. As I said above, unlike say Anderson Silva's KO over Belfort, Machida's Kick was far mroe detailed. If the kick or punch is not to be specified, then the submission victories for fighters should not either. You couldn't find a source cause I gave it is detailed and empirically accurate name. Most styles give kickes fancy names to shorten the actual name of the attack. For example, a roundhouse is actually a turn kick. A "axe" kick is actually a downward heel strike; you see how inefficient it is? Well guess what, I am avoiding the biased of any martial art termonology and calling it EXACTLY what it is. Tell you what though, you want a source, then check out Shotokan Karate and look up= Mae Tobi Kondi Geri Wiggalama (talk) 00:22, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Tell you what, in the interests of compromise, we should at the very least call it a jumping front kick. Most websites are at least detailed enough to call it that if you will not except the exact name. All in favor? Wiggalama (talk) 00:32, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Guy, you can't use the fight video itself because it's a primary source and one would have to use their own analysis of the video to draw a conclusion (which is original research). Your explanation of the kick doesn't matter on Wikipedia if it's not explicitly backed up by a reliable source. Even after learning "Mae Tobi Kondi Geri", one would have to compare it with Machida's kick, leading to synthesis of multiple sources. These details are far less important than having a reliable source (WP:V reads, "verifiability, not truth", after all). However, because of the amount of controversy surrounding this kick and the fact that I found a Sherdog article calling it a "jumping front kick" (although it's just one of their columnists), I'll agree with the compromise and call this a special case where deviation from the current record table standards is justified. —LOL <sup>T</sup>/<sub>C</sub> 01:18, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

If you see an apple on a video, its an apple. "Reliable" is subjective, but regardless, we are in agreement. We need to stop that Kung Fu enthusiast from constantly edit warring with us though. Wiggalama (talk) 18:07, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

And when you see another fruit, you have to perform your own analysis to determine whether it's an apple or a nectarine—a violation of WP:NOR. I recently noticed that the Kung Fu enthusiast 70.64.16.175 (talk · contribs) has made a number of biased, unsourced, and generally questionable edits to Machida's article that have been surviving for a while, so we'll have to look over them. —LOL <sup>T</sup>/<sub>C</sub> 18:50, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

I am indeed a Kung Fu enthusiast, and I can tell you wish to use something with a bit more of a pejorative context in reference to me. Thank-you for showing a bit of restraint, even if you let loose on the accusation of "biased, unsourced and generally questionable edits".

What I have added to this article is accurate. With respect to "reliably sourced" vs "primary research" --> I have quoted Joe Rogan's statement. Joe Rogan is a recognized expert on Mixed Martial Arts technique's, and far more reliable than anyone bickering in this stem, including myself. Hence, the statement is valid to remain even by your own dogmatic application of wiki-law, since I am not even providing my own interpretation, but rather his. I pointed out that the Crane Technique originates from White Crane Kung Fu, and provided a reliable source which referenced not only the technique, but also explained its presentation in the movie.

I accept that you can delete the statement that it's the first time a top-rated fighter has been KO'd by a flying front kick in a modern-era professional MMA bout. However -- that is simply because [no one] could provide a single source to verify this, because no one has published a comprehensive review of every single video of professional mixed-martial arts in the modern era. BUT -- by the same token, it's overwhelmingly likely to be true. Evidence? There is not a single reference in wikipedia to a top-rated fighter being finished by this method. Given how comprehensively Wikipedia has archived modern professional MMA, I'd call that pretty convincing evidence. It is more convincing than some article that quotes the opinion of a single, random MMA website author, which the bulk of citations on this page are. It should certainly be strong enough to keep it up until someone can refute it, as opposed to just deleting it outright.

As to bias -- you are selectively deleting some statements, while leaving other statements in place that are in actuality no better supported than the ones you are deleting. This is every bit as bad (arguably worse in some cases) than committing "original research" or "synthesis". So yes, I will continue to "war" with you while you continue to foster a biased presentation -- which is precisely the justification you are using for warring with me. As I see it, there are a few alternatives we have: we can continue to war/mentally posture, which I agree is unproductive. We're clearly both geniuses with a massive amount of contempt for one another's opinion, and both so very right. Alternatively, you can attempt to get me banned, which I don't think will fly, since I'm not actually doing anything wrong. Or -- we can come to a compromise, which I think we both agree would be best. I'm not trying to troll this page. I have also made repeated attempts to modify and improve the statements I've added, while also maintaining the other statements I'm building around in their original form. Your net contribution to this point appears to be continuosly reverting back to those original statements, as if it's the ideal form and nothing I've added has any value. I would suggest that attempting to create a common ground that blends the additions would likely make "enthusiasts" like myself feel more inclined to agree with the result, and less inclined to war with you.

My main concern is that, in the present form you continue to revert to, you present two facts: Lyoto Machida was under pressure to win this fight or he'd be cut, and his kick looked like a kick from an 80's pop culture movie. While true to some extent, this presentation, in such a limited form, is A) misleading and B) trivializes the technique used. If you can provide an alternative that is not misleading, and gives the technique justice, I will be more than happy to stop warring with you? I think that's a fair request. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.64.16.175 (talk) 04:58, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Why do you believe I would want to refer to you with a more pejorative term? If you were to register an account, then it would be much easier for us to properly refer to you. As for calling some of your edits "biased, unsourced and generally questionable", is it not clear that saying "[the kick] demonstrated the mastery Machida has a karate practitioner"[1] is biased and unsourced? (Even the bias in the Rampage controversy section, of which you are a major contributor, caused the random person above to remark that "This section reads like it was written by Ed Soares." I admit that the section was definitely worse before you first edited it,[2] but it's still not neutral.) Anyway, I only stated that as my reason for reviewing your edits, not as an attack.

Commentators, especially Joe Rogan, say many, many things. If a secondary source doesn't quote Goldberg or Rogan on what they said about the kick, then what they said about the kick doesn't belong on Wikipedia. WP:NOR states that "Unless restricted by another policy, primary sources that have been reliably published may be used in Wikipedia, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them" (emphasis added). I'm quite sure that Matt Hamill's article should never say anything about a "rape choke".

While it may be true that Couture is the highest-profile fighter to be knocked out like that, it doesn't matter because there are so many facts out there that are not worth mentioning due to a lack of reliable sources that state them.

I haven't overhauled the entire article yet, so if you can identify the "other statements in place that are in actuality no better supported than the ones [I am] deleting", then I'll be happy to delete them or supply appropriate references. Edit warring can be used as a reason for blocking, so it's better for you to continue participating in this discussion instead. If you review the edit history, you'll find that I haven't directly undone any of your edits.

I can only imagine my version being misleading if the reader were to jump to the conclusion that the kick originated from a 1980s film, but my version only states that it was demonstrated in that film. I don't understand what you mean by "trivializes the technique used". The Birmingham martial arts reference that you supplied has nothing to do with Machida himself, so it doesn't belong in his article. I'm not exactly sure what your problem is with my version, and my version seems to be more popular among Wikipedia editors judging from the edit history, so is there anything else you can offer without digressing into details that aren't directly relevant to Machida? —LOL <sup>T</sup>/<sub>C</sub> 19:13, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm happy to leave it up in the present form, as you at least have expanded slightly and included the additional quotes from Joe Rogan and Mike Goldberg. While I recognize your point that "commentators say a lot of things", the same point holds true for virtually any source you could ever cite? Winston Churchill said a lot of ridiculous sounding things. That doesn't mean he's not a recognized authority on military strategy, and that many of his statements in that respect aren't worth quoting. And yes, I'm suggesting Joe Rogan is the Winston Churchill of MMA.

If you insist on blocking the recognition that this kick originated from White Crane Kung Fu's historical influence on Karate, I do still feel that there should at least be some additional recognition of how rare this kick is. It was a spectacular knockout. Saying that it demonstrates Machida's mastery over karate should not require source, as it falls under the category of "general observation" and not "synthesis" or "original research". At some point --> "the background of wikipedia is white", "the sky is blue", and "karate fighters who knock out a top rated opponent with a flying front kick have demonstrated their expertise in karate". It's not "original research", it's not some obsession with fruit comparisons, it's simply stating the obvious. At the beginning of the article, it says Machida is Brazilian. I don't see any sources cited to prove this. Gee...it must be original research? Better delete it...

As to edit warring, it would result in both of us being banned, if anything. More than likely it would simply result in a temporary lockdown on editing, and a "final version" being decided on by an impartial moderator who would review everything and leave up the most unbiased version possible. The comment that the earlier section "sounds like it was written by Ed Soares" came before many further modifications and changes occurred. In the form that it was in before I made contributions, it sounded like it was written by Dana White. The present form sounds like it was written as if Dana White and Ed Soares squared off, and wiki referee's disqualified as much bias as possible. It's ended up being an accurate description of what occurred in the fight, and why it was such a controversial decision. This is the general process of wiki evolution. Machida had one loss to a fighter he'd defeated previously. He had a second loss in a fight that a huge chunk of people (if not the majority) felt that he won. Both losses were to top five ranked fighters. Citing simply (and only) that Dana white stated "this is a must win for him" is misleading. While it's true that Dana white said that, it begs a missing premise. And if you're going to say "Commentators say a lot of things" --> DANA WHITE says a lot of things too. Machida isn't in the same boat as Tito Ortiz, who has already had four losses in a row to much lower ranked fighters. The only person to suggest that is the author of the single MMA article that is cited in reference to the statement. My advice is that Dana White's comments from the same interview, which included his being a fan of Machida and compliments his style of fighting, would give a much more balanced representation of his opinion, as opposed to just quoting the single line that his feeling was that Machida needed to win this fight. Particularly since it's quoted from a sensationalized article in which a single MMA author has offered his own "original research" that this meant Machida's job was at stake. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.64.16.175 (talk) 01:08, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Where did I say anything about Rogan's expertise on martial arts? Since you missed my point, I'll repeat: "If a secondary source doesn't quote Goldberg or Rogan on what they said about the kick, then what they said about the kick doesn't belong on Wikipedia." I haven't removed the quotes you added because I'm giving you a chance to provide a secondary source for them, but if you're unable to find one then they should eventually be removed.

I'm not "blocking the recognition" of White Crane Kung Fu; I'm removing a statement whose source had absolutely nothing to do with Machida himself. If you can find a source that explicitly states that Machida's kick originated from White Crane Kung Fu, then there is a much higher chance of having the statement stay (perhaps after some rewording). If you want to express how rare the kick is, then find a source. Saying he's masterful at karate is a violation of WP:NPOV; for a more neutral tone, I suggest stating that the technique is advanced, but of course we need a source for that. The fact that Machida is Brazilian didn't come from any analysis, and isn't a subject of controversy, so there isn't any need to provide a source for his nationality. I think you should familiarize yourself with the policies before you make jokes about them that don't work.

If one person were to be banned, then it's very unlikely to be me because (1) I'm only one of several editors who've been removing the statements you added; (2) my edits removed content that violates Wikipedia's policies, not added. As for White saying "this is a must-win", the "Commentators say a lot of things" argument doesn't apply here because his quote is supported by the given source. White compliments many fighters, so we're not going to write about his opinion on every fighter who's in danger of being cut. The original research policy applies only to Wikipedia, not professional journalists when they are working outside of Wikipedia. —LOL <sup>T</sup>/<sub>C</sub> 20:29, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Nobody is getting banned.

I don't entirely agree with everything you've said, but I do accept that most of your points are reasonable and well placed. From here on I think we can agree to disagree. I do appreciate this discussion, because I think the final product we've compromised on is better than the original. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.64.16.175 (talk) 15:20, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

While this is my first attempt to engage in a talk about an article, I will try my best to keep up with those more adept than myself, and also to properly antiquate myself to this communication system. I apologize for any errors made in my presentation.

There are a great any ways to describe the technique used by Machida to finish this fight. The "Crane Kick" is one, another is a jumping front kick, another is the switch-foot front kick, as well as the scissor front kick. Lets go over each of these titles one at a time to try and understand exactly what they are saying.

"Crane Kick" there is in point of fact no actual technique called the "Crane kick" there are several techniques similar to both the strike of, and the prepatory motion of, the strike in White Crane Kung Fu. However, nowhere in said Kung Fu is this technique (with the motion of the switching feet) ever included. There are several videos on Youtube that demonstrate White Crane forms which use both positions from the film The Karate Kid, but never both at once. This makes this title an inaccurate description.

The jumping front kick does describe the technique, however it is inaccurate, in that the jumping front kick implies that the fighter has thrown a front kick, but simply did so while jumping in the air. The basic front kick (or in this case, straight snap kick) is performed with the rear leg, Machida struck with the lead leg. This also is an inaccurate description.

The switch-foot front kick is an apt description from the idea that the fighter did strike with the foot that is not generally used to perform the technique. However, the "switch-foot" description in terms of Martial Arts is used to describe a separate movement, like the way a fighter may switch from southpaw to orthodox, or vice-versa with an overhand, or cross punch. For this reason this is also inaccurate.

Finally, the scissor front kick. Firstly we must breakdown the manner in which striking techniques are named. First, the prepatory movement if any, secondly, the direction of the strike (in reference to his own body), thirdly, the form of strike. In this case the fighter, lifts his rear leg above his lead leg, the lifts his lead leg above his rear leg before his rear leg touches the ground. Secondly, he is striking directly forward with his technique. Thirdly, the technique is a kick. The scissor motion is described as one leg crossing over the other, followed by the other leg crossing over the first before the strike lands. This motion is demonstrated in the scissor heel kick used by Ryo Chonan against Anderson Silva. For this reason, total technique breakdown, the "scissor front kick" is the best way to describe the kick Machida used. Squirrelfighter

As far as Wikipedia talk page structure goes, just remember to indent appropriately (which you did) and sign with ~~~~ (this macro will be substituted with a proper signature upon saving the page). I only removed the indentation on your message because it isn't a direct response to any of the messages above.

I tried to avoid having another person write up an analysis of which terms are accurate/correct and which are not by telling you to read my first response in this talk page section, but unfortunately my attempt failed, so I will reiterate what I said above: "According to WP:V, Wikipedia requires a reliable source for controversial content, such as how to refer to the kick." Since we haven't found any reliable sources calling it a "scissor front kick", we can't refer to the kick as such on Wikipedia in spite of how technically accurate it may be. —LOL <sup>T</sup>/<sub>C</sub> 02:46, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Jesus Christ, enough talking? Alright, first Joe Rogan was obviously making an allusiong to The Karate Kid for he directly quoted Mr. Miyagi. Second, the move used in the picture is a Kung Fu technique, and the crane technique, but NO, the move used by Lyoto was NOT a crane. Oh, and Joe Rogan never did Karate specifically, Tae Kwon Do when he was young was the closest he got and he ABANDONED it. Both the color commentators did such similar comments in the Rashad Evans fight with Mike Goldberg saying "...bring back the Kobra Kai..." in reference to the pop culture flick. A crane kick involves no hip power, it is solely for the purpose of speed and unpredictability. For you Kung Fu guys who fail to see the advancements made on your art in the forms of Karate, TKD, Mauy Thai, Judo,etc... you fail to realize your technique's fancy names only apply when the technique is done SPECIFICALLY as it is outlined. Lyoto did a jump, a switch, and used his front foot. No fancy, telegraphy hand geastures, and he moved his hips focusing on more power and range at a slight cost of speed, AGAINST the kung fu way of doing such a kick. Stop trying to claim BS credit, Shotokan and Judo are FAR more original than say Mauy Thai or BJJ, so go bug them about ripping people off, which is not you Kung Fu guys anywayz. You are the origins, not the completion. Even if it was the "crane kick", which it is not as I described above, such a fancy thing as "flying" or an animal name is not exceptable anyway for naming the attack as one needs to name it with an ubiased title. Hell, ARMLOCK is the real term for armbar, but those BJJ fags are more dogmatic than you and I get tired of the edit wars. I could just say a juji gatame, but eh, I would not.

Now, for the flying debate. Again, wrong. One does not need to specify which direction and how fast one was moving while JUMPING. ITS A JUMP, NOT A FLYING YOU MMA BIASED PRICKS :D There is always some directional gain in a jump. Let the flying stuff stay on Mauy Thai pages, they need to have something original :D The direction is unimportant, that he hit his opponent is what counts on this page, the specifics go above fight stats.

THERE WAS NOT "SCISSOR" MOVEMENT. Watch the video, his back leg, acting as a fake and simultaneously the postion as an augment only reached medium height, while his front extended in air as he jumped with the same foot and went well above his back legs height. No "scissor" BS.

The "switch-foot" was done while the fighter had one of his legs in the and the kick immediately followed the switch foot from the position the switch foot made, thus it is indeed accurate, but I took it out as a compromise with the clearly non-martial artists who haunt this page.Wiggalama (talk) 00:20, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

All these walls of text with original analysis of the kick don't belong here, nor do the attacks against particular disciplines. Please keep your responses relevant to Wikipedia. —LOL <sup>T</sup>/<sub>C</sub> 02:55, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

While I stand by the statement that the "scissor" motion does exist under careful analysis, It has been explained more than once that without legitimate verifiation from the wonderful realm of the interwebz, none of it matters. Link presented previously noting that fact: "scissor front kick."

As for the rest of this rant, which is all it can be described as since no relevant information was provided, only a pile of self-indugence and rhetoric. You're mostly wrong. IN just about every case you take a tiny grain of fact and smuther it under a wall of opinion and false logic. In short sir, you fail. Hard. Squirrelfighter (talk) 01:28, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

First of all, here is what logic is. Logic is the religion of believing in our human perception of the empirical by trusting the seneses by which we observe an aspect of the universe. Therefore, its all gambling, and we like to think we are good at card counting with the universe. If we relie solely on relational biased, i.e., others to agree with what we see for ethos and confidence in what is seen, then we are limited in our gambling that much further. The kick is what it is, and there are countless sources that in general would be considered reputable that state that it is indeed a jumping front kick, even though they leave out the switch-foot and the fact that its with the front leg and not the back. I have already won by getting a compromise, I'm just hear to keep you tards in check :D At scissor kick backer guy, seriously? You think some MMA forum sites or twitter can say what a technique is?! lol There is no intersecting of the legs, so it doesn't even resemble a scissor kick of any kind. At squirrel guy, its called a REBUTTAL. You support your thesis statement with evidence, not just saying "no, I'M RIGHT!" like a child. Every time I have stated something its either in the common sense analogy or if detalied backed with evidence and even first hand experience as a bonus though not used as the core basis. Most sites say jumping front kick, that the kick is similar but more advanced and under Karate/Tae Kwon Do ideology(The Karate Kid does not actually use a Karate style, its a movie version and perception of Karate) is what matters, and even then the specific Karate term for it translates as a jumping front kick in english anywayz basically :P Hell, it doesn't matter much, in a street fight Lyoto would have nailed his opponent in the groin, probrably with just a regular front kick and that would be it. But I digress, you have failed and lost, so stop spamming the damn debate page.Wiggalama (talk) 18:39, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Firstly, a personal interpretation of the term "logic" as card counting with the universe has nothing to do with Machida's performace at UFC 129, nor does it further any discussion regarding the nature of the technique used to defeat Couture. In this way you are in fact spamming.

Secondly, regurgitating the fact that there is no basis for the term "scissor front kick" to be found on Sherdog, MMAfighting, etc is again, spamming, in that you repeat the exact same thing I said in the post which you are replying to.

Finally, the debate of whether or not a scissor motion occurs, something that legitimately deals with the topic at hand. Congratulations, it only took you the majority of a paragraph to get there. The knee of his rear leg lifts clearly above the knee of his lead leg, then the knee of the lead leg lifts above the knee of the rear leg. This motion occurs in mid-air. Machida then strikes with the ball of his foot on his right leg, before the rear leg touches the ground. For this reason the technique is classified as a scissor movement. As for calling it a rebuttel (which it was not) I was simply stating that while I am a believer in the fact that it is a scissor technique; this is not verified through any acceptible source, therefor it cannot be named in that manner on Wikipedia.

On a separate note, the "switch-foot" classification also known by the term in Martial Arts "switch" implies a change in angle. See the "switch roundhouse kick" used by Machida against Ortiz. He feigns with the rear leg as a leg kick, then throws the head kick with the opposing leg. This differing angle is why it comes under the "switch" title. The "switch" does not refer to the leg, but to angle of attack. In regards to the street fight aspect, I was under the impression this discussion was about an MMA competition with rules and regulations noting legal and illegal techniques.

In conclusion, you are not correct in any way. You support the classification of "switch-foot" which is completely innaccurate. The classification of "jump" is acceptible if incomplete. Because the words used denote a similar piece of body mechanics does not denote accuracy. As for winning by compromise, I see no way you won by compromise when you still support the innaccurate concept of "switch." Squirrelfighter (talk) 22:25, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

It takes a wall of text to break through your thick skull :D ITS NOT A SCISSOR GUY, you need to cross your legs and combine the two in one hit of some sort, be it a strick or a sweep, scissors go INWARD in striking, not OUTWARD as Lyoto did.

The switch-foot is self-explainatory, its switching the foot in the middle of a motion, thats why its CALLED A "SWITCH"-FOOT :D And even if you where right about the angle BS, the angle from the back leg when doing even a front kick is always at least slightly horizontal due to body mechanics, where as the front leg is always at least 5 degrees more upward, so there is a difference in angle. I am glad you remember that switch-foot front roundhouse(turn kick) he did on Ortiz, classic fun that fight was for Ortiz and his getting pwned :D I can talk about applications elsewhere as a side not if I wish, its minor color commentary and no where near the majority of what I have said, so get some ammo elsewhere and perhaps actually take Shotokan and TKD and use it in Kickboxing and MMA before you mouth off to me and the others who ruled it a jumping front kick. :DWiggalama (talk) 03:06, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

The technique Machida used to knock out Couture was the flying crane kick. Joe Rogan stated this during the fight and Steven Seagal stated it after. http://www.mmabay.co.uk/2011/05/01/ufc-129-–-steven-seagal-‘amazingly-proud’-of-lyoto-machida-and-his-highlight-reel-kick-video/ ColeRoberts (talk) 02:10, 10 December 2011 (UTC) ColeRoberts

You people are wasting your lives... — Preceding unsigned comment added by NerdNinja9 (talk • contribs) 21:45, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Taylor Swanson and possible vandalism

I fixed a few random name changes in the Early life section, where Lyoto's brother's names were changed to random names like "St. Nick" and "Buck." I noticed in the same section that it also says he won some tournaments under "Taylor Swanson." I'm guessing this is probably also vandalism, as the name doesn't sound very Brazilian, but I can't say for sure, because, due to the vagueness of that section, I don't know what tournaments it's even referring to - Sumo or BJJ, or possibly Karate or something else. All I can say for sure is that he received his black belt in BJJ from Walter Broca. Could someone more knowledgeable about Machida's career fix this potential vandalism if needed, and perhaps scan the rest of the page for other false name changes that need to be fixed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.82.55.112 (talk) 06:55, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Notable wins missing

Most major MMA fighters have a "notable wins" comment near the top of their page. In the past, any attempt to add Machida's notable wins has been met with summary deletion. This information is especially relevant for Lyoto Machida as he has wins over 7 past, present or future UFC or Pride champs (Rich Franklin, B.J. Penn, Tito Ortiz, Rashad Evans, Mauricio Rua, Randy Couture and Dan Henderson) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.80.240.242 (talk) 15:26, 11 July 2013 (UTC)