The Ultimate Fight Fan
+ Log a bet
UFC Fight Night: Miocic vs Hunt
Brad Scott
Brad Scott
9-3 · GBR
VS
Dylan Andrews
Dylan Andrews
17-6 · NZL
May 9, 2015 · Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
Middleweight · 3 rounds
185.0lb
Weigh-in
185.0lb
Brad Scott def. Dylan Andrews by SUB (Guillotine Choke), R2 4:54
Performance
Round by round
SSTDKDCtrl
R1
Scott19/301/403:27
Andrews16/211/220:38
R2 · 4:54
Scott23/450/001:39
Andrews9/350/000:05
Total
Scott42/751/405:06
Andrews25/561/220:43

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
ScottWin probabilityAndrews
59.3%40.7%
KO / TKO
27%
Submission
37%
Decision
35%
Expected fight time: 8.6 min
What drives the pick

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

Predicted outcomes
Scott59%
Wins by
Model
Equity
Mkt
KO / TKO13%22%
Submission26%44%
Decision20%34%
Predicted output
Sig. strikes30 (1740)act 42
Takedowns0.5 (0.01.9)act 1
Andrews41%
Wins by
Model
Equity
Mkt
KO / TKO14%35%
Submission12%28%
Decision15%37%
Predicted output
Sig. strikes29 (1638)act 25
Takedowns0.7 (0.02.6)act 1
Combined totals~60 sig strikes~1.2 takedownsmkt —
How it ends
mkt —
R143%
R210%
R312%
Distance35%
Fighter props
Most sig. strikestie 1.8%
Scott
50.7%-107
Andrews
+10747.5%
Most takedownstie 42.1%
Scott
21.7%+167
Andrews
-16736.2%
Significant strikes — over/under
Scott
Expected: 30.4
30.5
Over 30.5
42.2%
+137
Under 30.5
57.8%
-137
03876
Andrews
Expected: 29.4
29.5
Over 29.5
42.2%
+137
Under 29.5
57.8%
-137
03774
Takedowns — over/under
Scott
Expected: 0.5
0.5
Over 0.5
30.7%
+225
Under 0.5
69.3%
-225
035
Andrews
Expected: 0.7
0.5
Over 0.5
44.8%
+123
Under 0.5
55.2%
-123
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 8.6 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
Scott59.3%47.2%+12.1+105
Andrews40.7%52.8%−12.1-120

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
60.5Striking64.9
Andrews +4.5
40.7Grappling53.2
Andrews +12.4
Str/minStr accStr defAbsorbedTD/15TD accTD defSubs
Hover a point to see the values
ScottAndrews
Tale of the tape
Ratings (Elo)
1506
Pound-for-pound
1519
1521
Divisional
1520
1499
Striking offense
1506
1501
Striking defense
1489
1505
Grappling offense
1510
1500
Grappling defense
1492
Physical
25 yrs
Age
35 yrs
6'1"
Height
6'1"
76"
Reach
74"
Orthodox
Stance
Switch
Striking (UFC career)
3.21
Strikes landed / min
2.10
41%
Strike accuracy
53%
3.68
Strikes absorbed / min
2.17
56%
Strike defense
49%
Grappling (UFC career)
0.44
Takedowns / 15 min
3.31
13%
Takedown accuracy
50%
79%
Takedown defense
50%
0.9
Sub attempts / 15 min
0.0
Form & résumé
33%
UFC win rate
50%
-1
Win/loss streak
-2
33%
Last-5 win rate
50%
100%
Finish rate
100%
Recent opp. quality
427
Days since last fight
183
Recent form (last 5 UFC)
Brad Scott
  • LClaudio SilvaU-DEC R3
    Close -2601y 2mo before
  • WMichael KuiperSUB R1
    Close +2651y 6mo before
  • LRobert WhittakerU-DEC R3
    Close +2102y 5mo before
Dylan Andrews
  • LSam AlveyKO/TKO R1
    Close -1506mo before
  • LClint HesterKO/TKO R2
    Close -1401y 5mo before
  • WPapy AbediKO/TKO R3
    Close -3151y 8mo before
  • WJimmy QuinlanKO/TKO R1
    Close -1302y 1mo before
Scott — win / loss by method
Record: 9-3-0

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
5 wins, 0 losses
W
56% of wins
L
0% of losses
Submission
4 wins, 1 loss
W
44% of wins
L
33% of losses
Decision
0 wins, 2 losses
W
0% of wins
L
67% of losses
UFC
1win2loss0draw0NC
WinsLosses
0 (0%)KO/TKO(0%) 0
1 (100%)Submission(0%) 0
0 (0%)Decision(100%) 2
Non-UFC
8win1loss0draw0NC
WinsLosses
5 (63%)KO/TKO(0%) 0
3 (38%)Submission(100%) 1
0 (0%)Decision(0%) 0
Andrews — win / loss by method
Record: 17-6-0, 1 NC

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
12 wins, 3 losses
W
71% of wins
L
50% of losses
Submission
3 wins, 3 losses
W
18% of wins
L
50% of losses
Decision
2 wins, 0 losses
W
12% of wins
L
0% of losses
UFC
2win2loss0draw0NC
WinsLosses
2 (100%)KO/TKO(100%) 2
0 (0%)Submission(0%) 0
0 (0%)Decision(0%) 0
Non-UFC
15win4loss0draw1NC
WinsLosses
10 (67%)KO/TKO(25%) 1
3 (20%)Submission(75%) 3
2 (13%)Decision(0%) 0

Profiles

Experience
Scott
Andrews
3
UFC fights
4
34.3 min · 11.4 avg
Octagon time
27.2 min · 6.8 avg
17y 5m
Career length
20y 1m
UFC schedule strength

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

Scott
Andrews
30W–5L · 85.7%
Overall
43W–11L · 79.6%
12W–2L · 85.7%
Wins
12W–2L · 85.7%
18W–3L · 85.7%
Losses
31W–9L · 77.5%
Non-UFC schedule strength
Scott
Andrews
26W–14L · 65.0%
Overall
160W–83L · 65.8%
21W–14L · 60.0%
Wins
103W–63L · 62.0%
5W–0L · 100.0%
Losses
57W–20L · 74.0%
Distance striking
Scott
Andrews
4.64
Landed / min
3.41
35.6%
Accuracy
43.6%
59.6%
Defense
58.9%
0.00
Knockdowns / 15 min
0.55
53.4%
Time at distance
36.7%
Grappling & control
Scott
Andrews
0.44
Takedowns / 15 min
3.31
12.5%
Takedown accuracy
50.0%
78.9%
Takedown defense
50.0%
0.88
Sub attempts / 15 min
0.00
58.1%
Control share
30.8%
Strike target map
Scott
  • Head55%(61)div 63%
  • Body29%(32)div 19%
  • Legs15%(17)div 18%
Andrews
  • Head67%(38)div 63%
  • Body14%(8)div 19%
  • Legs19%(11)div 18%

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

Brad Scott
CloseSSTDKDCtrl

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

Dylan Andrews
CloseSSTDKDCtrl

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