Michael Aswell Jr. vs JooSang Yoo
Featherweight · Prelims · UFC 331: Van vs. Pantoja 2
Who wins, by source
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.
Tale of the tape
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.
How it ends
Each model's split across the ways this fight can finish, out of 100.
The analysis
Aswell's dataCompleteness block says debut, but his log shows four UFC-era bouts and a DWCS appearance, so again the per-minute numbers are small-sample. Still, the picture across those fights is consistent: he is 1-4 in that stretch with four decision losses (Bolanos, Riley, Oki, Grad), and his stats show a fighter who trades at nearly even volume (7.60 landed vs 7.03 absorbed) with just 52% striking defense. He is durable - never finished in that log - but he loses rounds because he gets hit as often as he hits. Yoo is the more efficient striker at 58% accuracy and a positive +1.37 differential, and he showed real one-punch power stopping Jeka Saragih in the first round. The concern with Yoo is the 337-day layoff following his own KO loss to Daniel Santos, which exposed his 56% defense against a sharp counter-puncher. Aswell is not that kind of puncher - his one finish came against a faded Lucas Almeida - so the matchup favors Yoo landing the cleaner, more accurate shots over three rounds while Aswell's durability carries him to the bell. Yoo's two-inch reach edge and precision should win the exchanges; Aswell's 0.24 TD average shows he has no grappling escape hatch when the striking goes against him.
Yoo's higher striking accuracy, stronger defense and better strike differential favor him in a predominantly standing matchup. Aswell's greater output provides a credible path to winning rounds, but he also absorbs substantially more strikes. Limited grappling activity supports a striking-led decision; missing sample sizes and reliable finish histories limit confidence.