Upcoming UFC fights

Milosevic brings a cleaner striking profile into this one. She lands 3.77 significant strikes a minute and absorbs 3.35, with 63% defence, while Cachoeira lands a bit more at 4.23 but absorbs 7.00 with just 46% defence. Wrestling is a minor factor: neither woman takes down much or controls the clock, and their takedown defence is nearly identical at 71% and 69%. Cachoeira has been submitted five times in 14 UFC fights, so any grappling Milosevic does attempt carries real finishing risk. Cachoeira is 38 and on a three-fight losing streak, and Milosevic is eight years younger.

Our model gives Milosevic 82%, and the market is almost the same at 81%, so there is no real disagreement. The drivers are the gap in striking differential, Cachoeira's poor defence and heavy damage absorbed, and her loss streak, set against Milosevic's higher Elo of 1522 to 1450. One caution: Milosevic has only one UFC fight, so her rates are heavily blended toward league averages and are a small sample, not a settled profile.

Key question: can Cachoeira's volume offset her defensive leaks, or does Milosevic simply out-land her and find a finish?

Both men have just one UFC fight, so the numbers below come from a small sample and are heavily blended toward league averages. They are not real profiles yet. On paper, the striking output is nearly identical: Nakamura lands 3.28 significant strikes a minute to Schmid's 3.29, and both are 40% accurate. The gaps show up elsewhere. Nakamura defends strikes better (60% to 51%) and carries more knockdown power at 0.65 per 15 minutes. Schmid attempts more takedowns (1.10 to 0.68 per 15 minutes) and holds more control time, 16% to 9%. Nakamura has a 50% finish rate and has never been KO'd. Schmid was knocked out once. Nakamura is also two years older, 27.9 to 25.9, while his listed height and reach are both 70 inches. We have no height or reach figure for Schmid.

Our model leans only slightly to Nakamura at 53%. The drivers are his edge in Elo (1528 to 1475), his better striking defence, and his higher knockdown rate. The market is far more confident at 76%, a 23-point gap. The most likely reason is that our model knows only UFC fights, so it can't see regional records, camp changes or recent news that bettors may be weighing. With one fight each, our read is low confidence.

Key question: can Schmid turn the fight into grappling exchanges before Nakamura's sharper defence and power take over on the feet?

Fernandes is the busier striker, landing 3.48 significant strikes a minute to Silva's 2.42, but she also absorbs 4.96 a minute with 53% defence, so her fights tend to be exchanges she doesn't clearly win. Silva is the grappler. She attempts 1.96 takedowns per 15 minutes at 48% accuracy, holds control for 23% of her fight time and throws 1.25 submission attempts per 15 minutes. Fernandes defends 68% of takedowns, which is solid, but she has rarely been the one controlling the fight (7% control share). Silva also has the better finish rate (35% to 19%). Reach and height are nearly even.

Our model gives Silva 63% mainly because of three things: her higher Elo (1558 to 1513), her grappling output and control against Fernandes' modest takedown game, and the gap in strikes absorbed (2.74 against 4.96 a minute). The market is close at 67%, so there is no real disagreement. Both women are on losing streaks and have had long layoffs, so neither arrives with momentum.

Key question: can Fernandes keep the fight standing and win the volume battle, or does Silva get her to the mat and hunt a submission?

Both men have just one UFC fight, so the numbers below come from a small sample and are blended toward league averages. They shouldn't be read as real profiles. On the page, Delano is the more active striker at 5.22 significant strikes landed per minute against 3.35 for Magomedov, with better accuracy (58% to 48%) and defence (64% to 59%). Magomedov brings the grappling: 2.12 takedowns per 15 minutes to Delano's 0.65, 1.38 submission attempts per 15 minutes, and a 22% control share against 11%. Magomedov also carries the higher finish rate at 50%. Reach is even at 70 inches, Magomedov is an inch taller and nearly three years younger.

Our model leans Magomedov at 55%, a modest edge. The drivers are his grappling output, his finishing numbers, and a slightly higher Elo (1529 to 1521). Delano's takedown defence of 73% against Magomedov's 65% accuracy-adjusted threat keeps this close. The market sees it the other way, with Delano at 52%, a gap of seven points, so the disagreement is small. With so little UFC data on either man, treat this lean as low confidence.

Key question: can Delano's cleaner striking keep the fight standing, or does Magomedov's wrestling drag it to the mat?

Petroski is a 13-fight UFC veteran who is a grappling-minded, low-volume striker: he lands 2.81 significant strikes a minute but absorbs 3.02, and he has been knocked out four times. His 2.94 takedown attempts per 15 minutes and 80% takedown defence are his best tools, though he has lost his last three. Kondratavicius throws far more, landing 4.15 a minute at 61% accuracy while absorbing just 2.22, and his 0.62 knockdowns per 15 minutes is a real power signal. He is also two inches taller with a two-inch reach edge and is eight years younger. Keep in mind he has only one UFC fight, so his numbers are a small sample heavily blended toward league averages, not a settled profile.

Our model likes Kondratavicius at 68%, driven by the gap in striking output and damage taken, Petroski's durability record against a heavier-hitting opponent, and the age and reach advantages. His Elo (1518) is actually a bit lower than Petroski's (1544), so the lean comes from style and physical traits rather than résumé. The market is close to us, at 74% for Kondratavicius, a gap of only six points, so there is no real disagreement. Given the thin UFC sample on Kondratavicius, confidence should be moderate.

Key question: can Petroski make this a grappling fight, or does Kondratavicius's volume and power finish him on the feet?

Seokhyeon Ko and Wellington Turman land at a similar pace, about 3.1 and 3.2 significant strikes a minute, but the difference is what comes back. Ko absorbs just 1.93 a minute and defends 63% of strikes, while Turman absorbs 4.05 and defends 46%. Ko also pushes the wrestling, with 2.83 takedowns per 15 minutes and 49% control time, against Turman's 1.52 and 28%. Turman has been stopped twice and submitted once, and he brings a bit of height at 72 inches to Ko's 70. Neither man is a big finisher, at 10% and 14%. Ko's numbers come from only 3 UFC fights, so that sample is small and his rates are pulled toward league averages.

Our model gives Ko 76% mainly because of the defensive gap (1.93 absorbed against 4.05), his control time edge, and a higher Elo, 1526 to 1457. Turman is on a three-fight losing streak and hasn't fought in 1,071 days, which the model reads as a negative. The market is higher on Ko at 84%, an 8-point gap, so the two views are fairly close. The market may simply be weighing Ko's small but clean UFC sample more heavily than our model does.

Key question: can Turman make this a striking exchange without absorbing more than he lands, or does Ko's takedown pressure and tighter defence take over?

Both men have just one UFC fight, so treat every rate here as a small sample pulled toward league averages rather than a real profile. On paper, Jonny Parsons lands a bit more (4.51 significant strikes a minute to 4.05), defends better (63% to 56%) and carries more knockdown power at 1.35 per 15 minutes against 0.12. Jose Souza's numbers are close to average everywhere, and his takedown and control figures are modest. Neither fighter shows much wrestling threat. Parsons has a small edge in control time, 17% to 8%. The physical gap is unclear, since we have no height or reach figure for Souza.

Our model leans Parsons at 56%, driven by his sharper striking defence, his knockdown rate and a 7-point Elo edge (1529 to 1522), which is tiny. Parsons is also 35 and has been out 1,204 days, which the model weighs against him, while Souza fought 161 days ago. The market sees it very differently, making Souza 69%, a 25-point gap. The most likely reason is information the model can't see, such as regional records, camp changes, or how the ring rust and age of Parsons are viewed. The model only knows one UFC fight for each man, so confidence is low.

Key question: can Parsons turn his striking and power edge into a finish after more than three years away, or does Souza's recent activity decide it?

Austin Bashi brings a small, three-fight UFC sample, so his numbers are heavily blended toward league averages and shouldn't be read as a firm profile. What we see is a modest striker, landing 2.19 significant strikes a minute and absorbing 2.64, with 54% striking defence. His wrestling is the more active part of his game: 2.56 takedown attempts per 15 minutes, though only 24% land, and he holds 31% control time. Carlos Calderon is a UFC debutant, so we have no UFC data on his style. Physically, he is five inches taller (71 to 66) with a one-inch reach edge, and he is about five and a half years older.

The model leans Bashi at 64%, but with low confidence. With nothing on Calderon, it is essentially rating Bashi's UFC résumé against an unknown, and his Elo of 1492 sits close to average. The market is far more bullish at 85%, a 21-point gap. The likeliest reason is that the model only sees UFC fights, so Calderon's regional record, finishing history and level of competition are invisible to it, while bettors can weigh them. The market may also be rating Bashi's age and recent activity more kindly than a thin sample allows.

Key question: can Bashi use his takedown attempts to negate Calderon's size, or does the debutant's unseen skill set make up for the gap in UFC experience?

This looks like a volume-versus-power matchup. Waldo Cortes Acosta lands more, at 4.74 significant strikes a minute against Johnny Walker's 3.73, and he defends better too (55% to 49%). Walker is the bigger threat to end it, with 0.74 knockdowns per 15 minutes and a 47% finish rate, but he has been knocked out four times, while Cortes Acosta has never been finished. Neither man wrestles much. Both have a 9% control time share and under half a takedown per 15 minutes, so the fight should stay on the feet. Walker has a clear physical edge at 78 inches tall with an 82-inch reach.

Our model gives Cortes Acosta 59%, mostly on his higher Elo (1611 to 1571), his better striking output and defence, and his clean record of never being finished. Walker's 34.6 age and durability record add to the lean. The market is more confident at 68%, nine points above us, which is just under our threshold for flagging a disagreement. Cortes Acosta has lost his last two, though, and the model may be giving that less weight than a bettor would.

Key question: can Walker land one big shot with his reach before Cortes Acosta's volume and sturdier chin take over?

This is a grappler-versus-grappler fight with a clear gap in how cleanly each one fights. Suarez lands more (3.07 significant strikes a minute) while absorbing far less (2.01), and she hits at 58% accuracy. Jandiroba is the more active submission hunter at 1.32 attempts per 15 minutes, but she gives up 2.89 strikes a minute and lands only 2.36. Suarez drives takedowns at 4.49 per 15 minutes and holds control for 64% of her fight time. Jandiroba defends takedowns well at 71%, so the wrestling exchanges could be tighter than Suarez's usual rounds. Suarez also has a slight edge in height and reach, and neither woman has ever been knocked out or submitted in the UFC.

Our model gives Suarez 68%, driven by her striking margin, her control time, and her higher finish rate (54% against 30%). Her Elo of 1660 also sits above Jandiroba's 1607. The market is close at 65%, so there is no real disagreement. Jandiroba's edge in takedown defence and submission volume is why this isn't more lopsided, and she is 38 against Suarez's nearly 36.

Key question: can Jandiroba stuff enough takedowns to turn this into a scramble fight, or will Suarez's pressure and control take over?

Davey Grant is the volume striker here, landing 5.42 significant strikes a minute against 3.54 for Elijah Smith, though he also absorbs almost 4 a minute with 55% defence. Smith is the more well-rounded threat, with 1.60 takedowns per 15 minutes, 29% control time and nearly a submission attempt per 15 minutes. Grant's takedown defence is a decent 65%, but he has been submitted four times in 16 UFC fights. Smith is 24 against a 40-year-old, with a 2-inch reach edge and a 1-inch height edge. Smith has a 50% finish rate to Grant's 25%.

Our model likes Smith at 78%, and the market is close at 74%, so there is no real disagreement. Three things drive the pick: Smith's higher Elo (1573 to 1537), his much lower strikes absorbed per minute (2.30 versus 3.99), and Grant's history of submission losses against Smith's grappling. The age gap also weighs against Grant. One caution: Smith has only 3 UFC fights, so his rates are heavily blended toward league averages and that sample is small. The model's confidence in him is partly an estimate rather than a proven profile.

Key question: can Grant's volume striking keep the fight standing, or does Smith get him to the mat and find a submission?

Billy Elekana and Lucas Fernando are the same height, but they meet with different profiles. Fernando lands more on the feet, 4.53 significant strikes a minute to Elekana's 2.89, and he absorbs fewer (2.39 against 3.50). His knockdown rate of 1.29 per 15 minutes is well above Elekana's 0.37, and he has a 3-inch reach edge. Wrestling looks fairly even and neither man controls much, though Elekana has the better takedown defence (65% to 59%) and more submission attempts. Fernando has only one UFC fight, so his numbers are a small sample, heavily blended toward league averages, and not a real profile.

Our model likes Fernando at 63%, mainly because of the gap in striking output, the defensive numbers (66% striking defence to Elekana's 48%) and the reach. Elekana's three-fight streak and 281 days off keep him in it. The betting market is more confident in Fernando at 74%, 11 points above us. The likeliest reason is that the market is weighing things the model can't see, such as Fernando's fights outside the UFC, or it simply trusts his one UFC performance more than our blended numbers do.

Key question: can Elekana's durability and grappling slow Fernando down, or will Fernando's volume and power take over on the feet?

Marcos Degli is a UFC debutant, so the model has no UFC data on him and there is no style profile to describe. Mitch Raposo has four UFC fights, which is still a small sample, so his numbers are only a rough sketch. He lands 2.11 significant strikes a minute and absorbs 2.97, with 60% striking defence. He attempts 1.66 takedowns per 15 minutes but connects on only 33%, and his 69% takedown defence is decent. His finish rate is 8% and he has never been knocked out or submitted. He is compact at 65 inches with a 64-inch reach, and he comes in on a two-fight win streak.

The model leans Raposo at 61% mostly because he is the only fighter it can measure. His Elo of 1509 sits slightly above average, he has that +2 streak, and he has not been finished in the UFC. The pick is low confidence, because Degli's side of the ledger is blank. The market sees it very differently, with Degli at 68%, a 29-point gap from our number. The most likely reason is that the model only knows UFC fights, so Degli's regional record, finishing history, camp or recent news are all invisible to it, while bettors can price those in.

Key question: does Degli's unseen pre-UFC form translate against a durable, if modest, veteran like Raposo?

Radtke and Thompson meet as a clear contrast in styles. Thompson is the volume striker, landing 4.01 significant strikes a minute to Radtke's 2.66, and he has a 3-inch height edge and 3 inches of reach. Radtke is the more accurate striker (52% to 46%) and brings the only real grappling threat, with 1.85 takedowns per 15 minutes against Thompson's 0.28 and 47% control time against 6%. Thompson's takedown defence is a modest 63%. Both men have been knocked out twice, and both absorb strikes at a similar rate on paper, though Thompson's 3.01 per minute comes against a much heavier output. Radtke's finish rate is 39% to Thompson's 27%.

Our model likes Radtke at 63%, mainly because of his wrestling and control advantage, his better accuracy, and his recent form (a +2 streak against Thompson's -3). Thompson is 43.8 and has been out 490 days, which the model treats as a mild negative. The market disagrees by 18 points and prefers Thompson at 55%. The likeliest reason is that the model only sees UFC numbers and may undervalue Thompson's 22-fight experience and the quality of opposition behind his volume, along with anything about his layoff or camp that we can't see.

Key question: can Radtke get Thompson to the mat often enough to blunt the volume striking?

Chris Duncan and Drew Dober are almost mirror images on the feet. Both land around 4.4 significant strikes a minute, both absorb a little over 4, and both defend 53% of incoming strikes. Duncan is the more accurate striker at 46% against 41%, while Dober carries more knockdown power at 0.65 per 15 minutes to Duncan's 0.40. The grappling gap is clearer. Duncan attempts 2.5 takedowns per 15 minutes and holds control for 22% of fight time, while Dober attempts just 0.65. Both defend takedowns at 59%. Duncan is also younger by nearly five years, and he has a slight edge in height and reach.

Our model leans Duncan at 67% because of three things: his accuracy edge on the feet, his wrestling volume, and his age and rating advantage (1580 Elo to 1567, with a 70% smoothed win rate against 57%). Dober's durability is a concern for him, since he has been knocked out three times and submitted four. The market is closer at 56-44, an 11-point gap. The likeliest reason is that the model leans heavily on Duncan's efficiency numbers and may undervalue Dober's 26 fights of experience and his current two-fight win streak, while Duncan comes in on a loss. Dober's finishing power also gives him a live path that averages can understate.

Key question: can Duncan use his takedowns to avoid Dober's power, or does the fight stay standing, where Dober's knockdown threat matters most?

Jim Miller brings a veteran's all-around game, while Terrance McKinney is the far busier and more explosive fighter. McKinney lands 6.54 significant strikes a minute to Miller's 2.93, and he hurts people, with 0.99 knockdowns per 15 minutes against Miller's 0.20. His defence is a weakness, though: he absorbs 4.32 a minute, has been knocked out four times, and has a 44% striking defence. Miller is the steadier defender at 57% but gives up more than he lands. On the mat, McKinney shoots more often and holds up better (69% takedown defence to Miller's 49%), while Miller is a constant submission threat at 1.68 attempts per 15 minutes. McKinney also has a 3-inch reach edge and is 11 years younger.

Our model gives McKinney 60%, driven by his volume gap, his knockdown power and his better takedown defence, which should make it harder for Miller to drag him into grappling exchanges. His 1532 Elo is below Miller's 1616, which keeps the lean modest. The market is more confident at 70%, a 10-point gap from us. The likely reason is age and durability: Miller is 43, and the market may weigh that more heavily than our UFC-only numbers do.

Key question: can Miller survive McKinney's early pressure long enough to find a submission, or does McKinney finish him first?

Cesar Almeida is the taller man at 73 inches to Donte Johnson's 68, though their reach is identical at 74. Almeida lands a bit more on the feet, 3.44 significant strikes a minute to 3.04, and he is accurate at 58%. But his defence is shaky: he only avoids 45% of strikes, and he has been knocked out once. Johnson is the better defender at 60% and gives up fewer shots. The bigger gap is on the mat. Johnson attempts 1.70 takedowns per 15 minutes, stops 72% of attempts against him, and holds control for 26% of his fight time, against Almeida's 8%. Johnson also finishes half his fights and is nine years younger.

Our model likes Johnson at 77% because of that wrestling and control gap, his better striking defence, and his higher Elo (1569 to 1511) with a three-fight win streak. Almeida is 38 and has lost his last two. Caveat: Johnson has only three UFC fights, so his numbers are a small sample and are blended toward league averages. The market is much closer, at 58% for Johnson, a 19-point gap. The likeliest reason is that our model only sees UFC fights, so it can't weigh Almeida's size, his striking accuracy, or anything from outside the UFC that might make the market trust Johnson less.

Key question: can Johnson get Almeida to the mat and hold him there before Almeida's accurate, longer striking lands something big?

Bia Mesquita brings a grappling-leaning game with real output on the feet. She lands 3.86 significant strikes a minute while absorbing 2.37, and she hunts takedowns at 2.34 per 15 minutes with 1.90 submission attempts in the same span. Macy Chiasson is the bigger frame at 71 inches tall with a 72-inch reach, and she is far more experienced with 14 UFC fights. But she lands 3.22 a minute, absorbs 2.81, and defends only 46% of strikes against Mesquita's 63%. Chiasson's takedown defence of 63% is decent, and she has been finished once by KO and once by submission.

The model likes Mesquita at 65% mainly because of the striking gap: better accuracy (52% to 46%), better defence, and a clear edge in differential per minute. Her 70% finish rate and submission volume against Chiasson's 34% finish rate add a second route to victory. Chiasson is also on a three-fight losing streak. The market is almost identical at 66%, so there is no real disagreement to explain. One caution: Mesquita has only 3 UFC fights, so her rates are a small sample and partly blended toward league averages.

Key question: can Chiasson use her length to keep Mesquita at range and stop the takedown and submission game from taking over?

Gordon brings the higher output, landing 5.72 significant strikes a minute to Costa's 4.17, and he mixes in about two takedowns per 15 minutes with decent defence at 60%. Costa is the more dangerous finisher: a 38% finish rate against Gordon's 18%, plus 0.80 submission attempts per 15 minutes, which is a real threat on the mat. Costa also has the physical edge, with a 3-inch reach advantage and about eight years of age on a 38-year-old opponent. Both men are coming off losses.

Our model likes Costa at 72% mainly because of his cleaner defensive profile and his experience-adjusted rating. He absorbs only 3.20 strikes a minute against Gordon's 4.50, and his Elo is 1585 to Gordon's 1525. Gordon's durability is a worry too, since he has been knocked out four times and submitted twice in 17 UFC fights. The market is a bit more confident at 78%, but the gap is only six points, so the two views are broadly aligned. Gordon's volume and wrestling give him a path if he can keep the pace high.

Key question: can Gordon's volume and takedowns outwork Costa, or does Costa's finishing threat and longer frame end it first?

Gane brings the cleaner, longer game. He lands 5.24 significant strikes a minute and absorbs only 2.38, with 61% accuracy and 61% defence, and he has a 5-inch reach edge (81 to 73) and 3 inches of height. Hokit is the volume brawler: 7.95 landed a minute, but he also absorbs 5.18 and defends only 49%. He is the bigger knockdown threat (1.08 per 15 minutes to Gane's 0.32) and the more active wrestler, with 1.43 takedowns per 15 and 26% control time. Gane has never been knocked out, though he has been submitted once. Hokit has only four UFC fights, so his numbers are a small sample.

Our model likes Gane at 60%, mainly because of the gap in striking differential, his experience across 13 UFC fights, and his Elo edge (1696 to 1613). Hokit's defensive leaks and shorter reach are the main reasons he is the underdog. The market is more confident at 67%, a 7-point gap that is within normal range, so we don't see real disagreement. Hokit's youth (29 vs. 36.6) and his four-fight win streak keep our number lower than the market's, as the model is cautious about how much to trust his small UFC sample.

Key question: can Hokit close the distance and force wrestling exchanges, or does Gane keep him at range and pick him apart?

Nunes brings the bigger striking output and real power. She lands 4.46 significant strikes a minute to Harrison's 3.97 and has the higher knockdown rate (0.56 per 15 minutes versus 0.08). Harrison absorbs less (1.81 a minute against 2.50) and has been more accurate, but her profile comes from only three UFC fights, so that sample is small and her numbers are heavily blended toward league averages. Harrison's clearest edge is control: she holds it for 50% of fight time, while Nunes holds it for 34%. Nunes has a 3-inch reach advantage, and both are 68 inches tall.

Our model leans Nunes at 55% mainly because of experience and track record: 18 UFC fights, an Elo of 1697 against 1587, and a far larger body of evidence behind her numbers. Her knockdown rate adds to that. The market sees it very differently, making Harrison 63%, a 18-point gap from our view. The likeliest reason is that the model only knows UFC fights, so it can't see Harrison's wider record or grappling pedigree. It may also underweight Nunes' 1254-day layoff and her age of 38.5, though it does include both.

Key question: can Nunes keep this standing and land first, or does Harrison turn it into a grappling fight?

This is a striking matchup between a long, experienced Holland and a more accurate, harder-hitting Medic. Holland has a 10-inch reach edge (81 inches to 71) and 2 inches of height, and he has 28 UFC fights behind him. Both men land at a similar volume, 4.53 strikes a minute for Holland and 4.79 for Medic, but Medic lands at 56% accuracy to Holland's 48% and defends slightly better, 56% to 50%. Neither is a real wrestling threat. Takedown rates are low on both sides, and both defend takedowns at roughly 58-59%, so this likely stays standing. The finishing gap is notable: Medic scores 2.43 knockdowns per 15 minutes and finishes 65% of his wins, while Holland's knockdown rate is 0.34.

Our model leans Medic at 57% because of his power and efficiency. The knockdown rate, the accuracy and defence edge, and his four-fight win streak drive it, along with a slightly higher Elo (1599 to 1584). Holland's reach and durability keep it close, but he has been knocked out twice and submitted three times. The market is at 61% for Medic, within a few points of us, so there's no real disagreement. Medic's 11 UFC fights are a decent but smaller sample than Holland's.

Key question: can Holland use his reach to keep Medic at the end of his punches, or does Medic close the distance and land the power shots?

Bilal Hasan is the younger and more dangerous fighter on paper, but his UFC sample is a single fight, so his numbers are heavily blended toward league averages and shouldn't be read as a real profile. Luis Gurule has five UFC fights and a clearer picture: he throws more (5.58 significant strikes a minute to Hasan's 4.56) but absorbs a lot (6.36 a minute), which makes his fights messy. Hasan's knockdown rate of 0.83 per 15 minutes is well above Gurule's 0.05, and Gurule's finish rate is just 7%. Neither man wrestles much. Gurule's takedown accuracy is only 20%, and both defend takedowns reasonably well. Gurule is 33 and carries a 64-inch reach at 65 inches tall.

Our model gives Hasan 76% mainly because of Elo (1528 against 1434), Gurule's weak smoothed win rate of 29%, and the gap in how many strikes each absorbs and how often each lands knockdowns. The market is higher on Hasan at 86%, a 10-point gap. The likeliest reason is that the market sees things the model can't, such as Hasan's regional record, his camp, or how he looked in his lone UFC fight. Our model only knows that one fight and treats it cautiously.

Key question: can Gurule's volume survive Hasan's power long enough to turn this into a grind?

Nickal and Pyfer meet as two finishers with different routes to the same result. Pyfer throws slightly more (3.49 significant strikes a minute to 3.34) and carries the bigger knockdown rate, 0.91 per 15 minutes against 0.74. But he absorbs 3.33 a minute and lands just 43% of his strikes, while Nickal lands 59% and gives up only 2.29. The wrestling gap is clear: Nickal attempts 2.11 takedowns per 15 minutes and stops 82% of those against him, while Pyfer stops 66%. Nickal also holds control 31% of the time to Pyfer's 12%. Size is close, with Pyfer an inch taller and Nickal an inch longer in reach.

Our model leans Nickal at 57% to 43% because of three things: his accuracy and defence on the feet, his takedown defence, and his control time edge. Those suggest he can pick when and where the fight happens. Pyfer's Elo (1631 to 1594) and four-fight win streak keep the gap modest, and Nickal has been knocked out once, so Pyfer's power is a real threat. No betting market line is available to compare against.

Key question: can Pyfer land something heavy before Nickal drags him to the mat and starts controlling the fight?

Pereira and Pavlovich are two heavy hitters with similar UFC résumés, but they get there differently. Pereira lands more (4.84 significant strikes a minute to 4.26) and is far more accurate, at 61% to 45%. Pavlovich is the bigger knockdown threat at 1.58 per 15 minutes against 0.71, and he has a five-inch reach advantage (84 to 79 inches). Neither man wrestles much, though Pavlovich shoots more often and holds more control time (13% to 3%). Both have been knocked out twice, and both finish a little over half their fights.

Our model leans Pavlovich at 59%, mostly on three things: his knockdown rate, his reach, and his current three-fight win streak against Pereira's -1 streak. Age also plays a part, as Pereira is 39 and Pavlovich is 34. Pereira's better accuracy and Elo edge (1665 to 1644) keep this close. The market is at 64% for Pavlovich, only five points away from us, so the two largely agree.

Key question: can Pereira get inside Pavlovich's long reach and land his accurate shots first, or will Pavlovich's power land before that happens?