Gabriella Fernandes

He frames the pick as something he feels obliged to make on stylistic grounds, immediately attaches a condition that his pick must chase takedowns because she cannot win a pure striking fight, and trails off still weighing it.

A technical, high-output striker with the better resume who he nonetheless sees as a bad stylistic fit here because grapplers shut her down.

stay away, really unsure

By a wide margin the superior pure striker here -- decent power, a full menu of kicks, sharp combinations, and generally heavy output -- to the point the analyst says a 15-minute standing fight is hers outright. The catch is her takedown defense, which he grades poorly even while noting a slight uptick; she can still be pinned down, and fear of being taken down makes her output noticeably dry up, a real issue against someone hunting the takedown. She also fights well in the clinch when that fear isn't in play.

Says Fernandes 'just runs away with this' if the armbar fails; only caveat is a round-1 submission side-bet suggestion for Stoliaranko, which is a live-dog note, not a reversal of the pick.

Graded a good, well-rounded striker who brings good output and decent pop, kicks to every level and good combinations, plus good clinch striking that should blunt the throws she will face. Her clear hole is takedown defense -- she can be held down -- though the analyst reasons the takedowns coming at her are more standard wrestling shots her clinch control should handle. Read as the cleaner fighter overall and the pick to win unless caught by an early armbar.

He calls her the biggest favorite on the card and closes with a short, direct statement that she gets this one done, dismissing his one concern about her as a longer-term issue rather than a near-term risk in this fight.

A good striker with good volume who kicks at every level and lands decent power of her own, with her clinch work -- rooted in a Muay Thai base -- singled out as her single best tool. Her takedown defense is called not good, and she can be controlled on the mat once taken down, which the analyst calls a real hole in her game.

He frames this as a hard fight to call given limited information, builds the pick around a grappling wrinkle he admits he has never actually seen on tape, and ends by wondering aloud whether he is just rooting for his pick -- real hedging on top of a disclosed personal fondness for Judice.

Our words: a good striker whose best work is in striking and the clinch, built on a Muay Thai-influenced style -- good volume, decent power, kicks to all levels, and good combinations, plus good clinch striking. Her well-documented problem across her UFC run is very poor takedown defense, which lets opponents hold her down. She is trying to snap a two-fight losing skid here.

Repeatedly declares 'very confident' / 'pretty darn confident... very confident in fact', names Bleda explicitly as pick ('Theresa blade is my pick'), discloses a real wager (+800 by KO), with no hedge on the win.

An active, good striker who works combinations, carries decent power and can kick to the leg, body or head. Her takedown defense is poor and she stays down once grounded, which the analyst treats as decisive against a wrestler like Bleda. Public/Twitter sentiment favored her heading in, which the analyst explicitly argues against.

He commits to Jasudavicius by name, repeating the lean again at the close -- real mechanism (wrestler-over-striker thesis, Fernandes's shaky takedown defense) -- but pairs it with explicit wager caution, calling it not worth a bet, and he openly allows that Fernandes could still take this one purely on her striking.

Making her UFC debut, Fernandes is an active striker with solid combinations and kicks to all levels who also strikes well in the clinch. Her takedown defense is the problem: the analyst says she doesn't have the best of it and can be held down, though he adds -- a point not on the board -- that she is somewhat dangerous working off her back.