The Ultimate Fight Fan
+ Log a bet
UFC 193: Rousey vs Holm
Jake Matthews
Jake Matthews
9-1 · AUS
VS
Akbarh Arreola
Akbarh Arreola
25-9-1 · MEX
November 14, 2015 · Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Lightweight · 3 rounds
155.0lb
Weigh-in
155.0lb
Jake Matthews def. Akbarh Arreola by KO/TKO (Eye Injury), R2 5:00
Performance
Round by round
SSTDKDCtrl
R1
Matthews21/480/200:59
Arreola19/390/011:59
R2
Matthews41/501/104:40
Arreola2/20/000:00
Total
Matthews62/981/305:39
Arreola21/410/011:59

Pre-fight

The model's read going in

The walk-forward model's call at the time of the bout — persisted out-of-sample, with no hindsight about the result.

Prediction
MatthewsWin probabilityArreola
89.3%10.7%
KO / TKO
26%
Submission
40%
Decision
34%
Expected fight time: 8.5 min
What drives the pick

Each bar is a feature's push on the model from the center axis. Red pushes toward Matthews, blue toward Arreola. Tap a bar for why.

Predicted outcomes
Matthews89%
Wins by
Model
Equity
Mkt
KO / TKO23%26%
Submission35%39%
Decision31%35%
Predicted output
Sig. strikes38 (2149)act 62
Takedowns0.8 (0.02.6)act 1
Arreola11%
Wins by
Model
Equity
Mkt
KO / TKO2%21%
Submission6%52%
Decision3%27%
Predicted output
Sig. strikes23 (1229)act 21
Takedowns0.1 (0.00.8)act 0
Combined totals~60 sig strikes~0.9 takedownsmkt —
How it ends
mkt —
R146%
R25%
R315%
Distance34%
Fighter props
Most sig. strikestie 1.6%
Matthews
71.1%-261
Arreola
+26127.3%
Most takedownstie 39.7%
Matthews
49.5%-459
Arreola
+45910.8%
Significant strikes — over/under
Matthews
Expected: 37.7
37.5
Over 37.5
42.9%
+133
Under 37.5
57.1%
-133
04895
Arreola
Expected: 22.7
22.5
Over 22.5
43.0%
+133
Under 22.5
57.0%
-133
02957
Takedowns — over/under
Matthews
Expected: 0.8
1
Over 1
30.8%
+144
Exactly 1
24.9%
push
Under 1
44.3%
-144
035
Arreola
Expected: 0.1
0
Over 0
19.5%
Exactly 0
80.5%
push
Under 0
0.0%
035

Odds are model-implied (no real prop market is priced for these). The “most” prices are draw-no-bet — a tie (for takedowns, usually 0–0) is a push, so each side is priced off its chance of winning given a result, while the % shown is the raw chance of landing strictly more. Drag a line in half-point steps: a half line (e.g. 2.5) is a clean over/under, while a whole number adds a third outcome — landing exactly on it, a push — so over, exact and under sum to 100%. On a whole number the over/under odds are draw-no-bet (priced off the decisive mass, since the push refunds), so the two sides stay mirror images rather than implying an arbitrage.

Expected fight time 8.5 min. Predicted-output ranges are percentiles of the model’s simulated fights: sig strikes the middle 50% (25th–75th); takedowns the wider 10th–90th, since they’re 0 in most fights so a narrow band would collapse to 0. Win-by-method = win probability × that fighter’s own method split: the model forecasts how the fight ends, and that forecast is divided between the corners by each fighter’s finishing record — UFC wins in full, earlier-career wins at half weight, as of fight night — reconciled so the fighters’ totals still equal their win probabilities and the methods still total the fight-level forecast above. “Equity” is each of those over that fighter’s win % — how they win given that they win — so a column adds to 100%, and it differs by corner. A fighter with no classifiable wins at any level leans on the fight-level split. “How it ends” is the model’s round-of-finish split. “Mkt” is the de-vigged market prop (consensus across books), shown for context, not as a betting signal; rounds & totals slots fill as that data lands. Percentages are apportioned by largest remainder, so each set adds to its total exactly and an individual figure can sit a point off its own rounding.

Model vs market
Final
ModelMarketGapLine
To win
Matthews89.3%87.2%+2.1-1000
Arreola10.7%12.8%−2.1+650

Market % is the de-vigged (no-vig) consensus across the books that price both fighters; the line is the average across books with the min–max range in parentheses. Gap is the model minus the market in points (+ = the model rates that outcome above the market). Thin or one-sided markets are flagged or left blank rather than shown as a fabricated %. Shown for context, not as a bet — the closing line is the sharpest public price and the model trails it on average. For 5-round bouts the model splits its round-3+ finish mass into rounds 3–5 by the historical within-bucket rate, so the over-3.5 / 4.5 lines carry a model estimate.

Trait web
73.8Striking63.1
Matthews +10.7
76.2Grappling37.9
Matthews +38.2
Str/minStr accStr defAbsorbedTD/15TD accTD defSubs
Hover a point to see the values
MatthewsArreola
Tale of the tape
Ratings (Elo)
1538
Pound-for-pound
1517
1539
Divisional
1517
1477
Striking offense
1504
1511
Striking defense
1505
1549
Grappling offense
1492
1532
Grappling defense
1509
Physical
21 yrs
Age
32 yrs
5'11"
Height
5'10"
73"
Reach
71"
Orthodox
Stance
Southpaw
Striking (UFC career)
3.60
Strikes landed / min
2.38
51%
Strike accuracy
44%
1.40
Strikes absorbed / min
3.33
51%
Strike defense
64%
Grappling (UFC career)
3.60
Takedowns / 15 min
1.41
40%
Takedown accuracy
100%
100%
Takedown defense
0%
1.2
Sub attempts / 15 min
0.5
Form & résumé
67%
UFC win rate
33%
-1
Win/loss streak
-1
67%
Last-5 win rate
33%
100%
Finish rate
100%
Recent opp. quality
189
Days since last fight
238
Recent form (last 5 UFC)
Jake Matthews
  • LJames VickSUB R1
    Close -1906mo before
  • WVagner RochaSUB R2
    Close -4751y before
  • WDashon JohnsonSUB R3
    Close -1651y 5mo before
Akbarh Arreola
  • LFrancisco TrinaldoU-DEC R3
    Close +1708mo before
  • WYves EdwardsSUB R1
    Close +2451y before
  • LTiago dos Santos e SilvaU-DEC R3
    Close +2751y 4mo before
Matthews — win / loss by method
Record: 9-1-0

Bar length is fight count (largest bar = full width); shading splits finishes by round and decisions by unanimous vs split — tap a bar for the round-by-round count.

KO/TKO
3 wins, 0 losses
W
33% of wins
L
0% of losses
Submission
5 wins, 1 loss
W
56% of wins
L
100% of losses
Decision
1 win, 0 losses
W
11% of wins
L
0% of losses
UFC
2win1loss0draw0NC
WinsLosses
0 (0%)KO/TKO(0%) 0
2 (100%)Submission(100%) 1
0 (0%)Decision(0%) 0
Non-UFC
7win0loss0draw0NC
WinsLosses
3 (43%)KO/TKO() 0
3 (43%)Submission() 0
1 (14%)Decision() 0
Arreola — win / loss by method
Record: 25-9-1

Bar length is fight count (largest bar = full width); shading splits finishes by round and decisions by unanimous vs split — tap a bar for the round-by-round count.

KO/TKO
4 wins, 5 losses
W
16% of wins
L
56% of losses
Submission
19 wins, 0 losses
W
76% of wins
L
0% of losses
Decision
2 wins, 4 losses
W
8% of wins
L
44% of losses
UFC
1win2loss0draw0NC
WinsLosses
0 (0%)KO/TKO(0%) 0
1 (100%)Submission(0%) 0
0 (0%)Decision(100%) 2
Non-UFC
24win7loss1draw0NC
WinsLosses
4 (17%)KO/TKO(71%) 5
18 (75%)Submission(0%) 0
2 (8%)Decision(29%) 2

Profiles

Experience
Matthews
Arreola
3
UFC fights
3
25.0 min · 8.3 avg
Octagon time
31.9 min · 10.6 avg
13y 10m
Career length
23y 11m
UFC schedule strength

Opponents' records on fight night — toggle their full cross-promotional record vs UFC bouts only.

Matthews
Arreola
27W–3L · 90.0%
Overall
75W–28L · 72.8%
20W–3L · 87.0%
Wins
42W–20L · 67.7%
7W–0L · 100.0%
Losses
33W–8L · 80.5%
Non-UFC schedule strength
Matthews
Arreola
18W–10L · 64.3%
Overall
170W–90L · 65.4%
18W–10L · 64.3%
Wins
102W–58L · 63.8%
0W–0L
Losses
68W–32L · 68.0%
Distance striking
Matthews
Arreola
3.03
Landed / min
3.68
28.4%
Accuracy
39.9%
57.1%
Defense
71.0%
0.00
Knockdowns / 15 min
0.47
41.0%
Time at distance
52.1%
Grappling & control
Matthews
Arreola
3.60
Takedowns / 15 min
1.41
40.0%
Takedown accuracy
100.0%
100.0%
Takedown defense
0.0%
1.20
Sub attempts / 15 min
0.47
93.4%
Control share
6.7%
Strike target map
Matthews
  • Head80%(72)div 63%
  • Body8%(7)div 20%
  • Legs12%(11)div 17%
Arreola
  • Head45%(34)div 63%
  • Body33%(25)div 20%
  • Legs22%(17)div 17%

Where each fighter lands significant strikes (career). “div” = the weight-class average.

Jake Matthews
CloseSSTDKDCtrl

Per-fight: SS & TD shown landed/attempted; Close = consensus closing line.

Akbarh Arreola
CloseSSTDKDCtrl

Per-fight: SS & TD shown landed/attempted; Close = consensus closing line.