Amanda Lemos vs Gillian Robertson

Each row splits one source's view of the fight. The dashed line is even odds. Where the models sit further from the market, they are claiming an edge.

Career UFC averages. Bars are scaled within each row, so compare left against right, not row against row. The stronger side is highlighted, and for strikes absorbed the lower number is the better one.

Each model's split across the ways this fight can finish, out of 100.

Robertson's superior grappling metrics (2.48 TDAvg vs 0.9, 1.1 SubAvg vs 0.8) and Lemos' vulnerability to submissions (2 sub losses in last 5) create a clear path to victory. While Lemos has better striking accuracy (54% vs 48%), Robertson's improved striking defense (56% vs 44%) and consistent takedown pressure should allow her to weather early exchanges and impose her grappling. Lemos' 61% TDD is concerning against Robertson's relentless wrestling approach.

Lemos is the far more dangerous and explosive striker with superior power and 54% accuracy, while Robertson is hittable on the feet and heavily reliant on volume takedowns against a physically stronger opponent with solid 63% offensive wrestling and serviceable 61% takedown defense. Robertson's path is clearly grappling-based, but her 42% TD accuracy and historically porous TD defense suggest she will struggle to get consistent, clean entries without eating big counters. Over three rounds, the most likely dynamic is Robertson attempting to force clinches and shots, getting stalled or punished, and Lemos landing the far more damaging strikes, with a high chance of a knockdown or ground-and-pound finish once Robertson slows or gets stuck on the end of Lemos' power shots.