The Ultimate Fight Fan
+ Log a bet
UFC on FOX: Henderson vs Melendez
Josh Thomson
Josh Thomson
19-5 · USA
VS
Nate Diaz
Nate Diaz
16-8 · USA
April 20, 2013 · San Jose, California, USA
Lightweight · 3 rounds
155.0lb
Weigh-in
156.0lb
Josh Thomson def. Nate Diaz by KO/TKO (Kick), R2 3:44
Performance
Round by round
SSTDKDCtrl
R1
Thomson15/331/100:23
Diaz10/440/000:25
R2 · 3:44
Thomson21/380/010:59
Diaz11/301/100:30
Total
Thomson36/711/111:22
Diaz21/741/100:55

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
ThomsonWin probabilityDiaz
23.2%76.8%
KO / TKO
38%
Submission
10%
Decision
51%
Expected fight time: 10.4 min
What drives the pick

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

Predicted outcomes
Thomson23%
Wins by
Model
Equity
Mkt
KO / TKO9%40%
Submission1%5%
Decision13%55%
Predicted output
Sig. strikes31 (1741)act 36
Takedowns0.4 (0.01.8)act 1
Diaz77%
Wins by
Model
Equity
Mkt
KO / TKO29%38%
Submission9%12%
Decision39%50%
Predicted output
Sig. strikes44 (2558)act 21
Takedowns0.4 (0.01.8)act 1
Combined totals~76 sig strikes~0.9 takedownsmkt —
How it ends
mkt —
R124%
R221%
R34%
Distance51%
Fighter props
Most sig. strikestie 1.4%
Thomson
33.8%+192
Diaz
-19264.9%
Most takedownstie 49.7%
Thomson
26.5%-112
Diaz
+11223.7%
Significant strikes — over/under
Thomson
Expected: 31.4
31.5
Over 31.5
42.2%
+137
Under 31.5
57.8%
-137
04079
Diaz
Expected: 44.4
44.5
Over 44.5
42.3%
+136
Under 44.5
57.7%
-136
056111
Takedowns — over/under
Thomson
Expected: 0.4
0.5
Over 0.5
33.3%
+200
Under 0.5
66.7%
-200
035
Diaz
Expected: 0.4
0.5
Over 0.5
30.1%
+232
Under 0.5
69.9%
-232
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 10.4 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
Thomson23.2%41.8%−18.6+135
Diaz76.8%58.2%+18.6-145

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
70.3Striking67.4
Thomson +2.8
55.7Grappling51.7
Thomson +4.1
Str/minStr accStr defAbsorbedTD/15TD accTD defSubs
Hover a point to see the values
ThomsonDiaz
Tale of the tape
Ratings (Elo)
1535
Pound-for-pound
1590
1535
Divisional
1593
1490
Striking offense
1501
1497
Striking defense
1539
1543
Grappling offense
1530
1529
Grappling defense
1496
Physical
34 yrs
Age
28 yrs
5'10"
Height
6'0"
71"
Reach
76"
Orthodox
Stance
Southpaw
Striking (UFC career)
2.87
Strikes landed / min
3.95
59%
Strike accuracy
43%
1.71
Strikes absorbed / min
2.99
43%
Strike defense
57%
Grappling (UFC career)
3.37
Takedowns / 15 min
1.11
71%
Takedown accuracy
25%
50%
Takedown defense
46%
0.0
Sub attempts / 15 min
1.7
Form & résumé
67%
UFC win rate
65%
-1
Win/loss streak
-1
67%
Last-5 win rate
60%
50%
Finish rate
82%
Recent opp. quality
3164
Days since last fight
133
Recent form (last 5 UFC)
Josh Thomson
  • LYves EdwardsKO/TKO R1
    8y 8mo before
  • WHermes FrancaM-DEC R3
    Close -1159y 3mo before
  • WGerald StrebendtKO/TKO R1
    9y 7mo before
Nate Diaz
  • LBenson HendersonU-DEC R5
    Close +1854mo before
  • WJim MillerSUB R2
    Close +15011mo before
  • WDonald CerroneU-DEC R3
    Close +2551y 4mo before
  • WTakanori GomiSUB R1
    Close -2551y 7mo before
  • LRory MacDonaldU-DEC R3
    Close +1272y before
Thomson — win / loss by method
Record: 19-5-0, 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
5 wins, 1 loss
W
26% of wins
L
20% of losses
Submission
8 wins, 0 losses
W
42% of wins
L
0% of losses
Decision
6 wins, 4 losses
W
32% of wins
L
80% of losses
UFC
2win1loss0draw0NC
WinsLosses
1 (50%)KO/TKO(100%) 1
0 (0%)Submission(0%) 0
1 (50%)Decision(0%) 0
Non-UFC
17win4loss0draw1NC
WinsLosses
4 (24%)KO/TKO(0%) 0
8 (47%)Submission(0%) 0
5 (29%)Decision(100%) 4
Diaz — win / loss by method
Record: 16-8-0

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
19% of wins
L
0% of losses
Submission
11 wins, 1 loss
W
69% of wins
L
13% of losses
Decision
2 wins, 7 losses
W
13% of wins
L
88% of losses
UFC
11win6loss0draw0NC
WinsLosses
1 (9%)KO/TKO(0%) 0
8 (73%)Submission(0%) 0
2 (18%)Decision(100%) 6
Non-UFC
5win2loss0draw0NC
WinsLosses
2 (40%)KO/TKO(0%) 0
3 (60%)Submission(50%) 1
0 (0%)Decision(50%) 1

Profiles

Experience
Thomson
Diaz
3
UFC fights
17
22.3 min · 7.4 avg
Octagon time
188.9 min · 11.1 avg
25y 6m
Career length
21y 9m
UFC schedule strength

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

Thomson
Diaz
40W–10L · 80.0%
Overall
282W–67L · 80.8%
14W–2L · 87.5%
Wins
181W–45L · 80.1%
26W–8L · 76.5%
Losses
101W–22L · 82.1%
Non-UFC schedule strength
Thomson
Diaz
238W–92L · 72.1%
Overall
53W–19L · 73.6%
158W–78L · 66.9%
Wins
26W–10L · 72.2%
80W–14L · 85.1%
Losses
27W–9L · 75.0%
Distance striking
Thomson
Diaz
5.59
Landed / min
7.53
51.5%
Accuracy
37.1%
69.6%
Defense
66.5%
0.67
Knockdowns / 15 min
0.24
27.3%
Time at distance
38.2%
Grappling & control
Thomson
Diaz
3.37
Takedowns / 15 min
1.11
71.4%
Takedown accuracy
25.5%
50.0%
Takedown defense
45.7%
0.00
Sub attempts / 15 min
1.75
57.6%
Control share
30.0%
Strike target map
Thomson
  • Head44%(28)div 64%
  • Body14%(9)div 19%
  • Legs42%(27)div 17%
Diaz
  • Head73%(542)div 64%
  • Body17%(124)div 19%
  • Legs11%(81)div 17%

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

Josh Thomson
CloseSSTDKDCtrl

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

Nate Diaz
CloseSSTDKDCtrl

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