UFC on ESPN: Bonfim vs. Brown - November 8, 2025 Predictions

Last Week’s Results: UFC Vegas 110 (November 1, 2025)

Parlay Result: ✅ 2-0 (1.88x payout)

Our November 1st parlay cashed both legs despite some controversy on the scorecards.

Norma Dumont (-166) defeated Ketlen Vieira via Split Decision

Scorecards: 28-29, 29-28, 29-28 in a highly debated outcome where 6 of 7 media members scored it for Vieira.

What We Predicted: Dumont would use lateral movement and systematic leg kicks to neutralize Vieira’s plodding forward pressure. Our write-up specifically noted that “Vieira marches forward in straight lines” and that “Dumont will replicate the Aldana performance, circling left while landing jabs and leg kicks.”

What Happened: Dumont circled effectively for three rounds, landed the cleaner leg kicks, and won on damage despite Vieira’s forward pressure. Round 2 was the decisive frame where Dumont’s technical striking outweighed Vieira’s aggression on the judges’ cards.

The Controversy: Most media scored it for Vieira, but the judges saw more value in Dumont’s damage output. Our prediction focused on technical superiority over cage control, which is exactly how the judges scored it. Close fight, but the right read on the stylistic matchup.

Talita Alencar (-245) submitted Ariane Carnelossi (RNC, R3 at 4:36)

What We Predicted: Alencar’s world-class BJJ would exploit Carnelossi’s turtle position passivity. We wrote that Alencar would “secure takedowns within the first 90 seconds of rounds” and finish “via submission in Round 3 or cruise to a unanimous decision.”

What Happened: Alencar got Carnelossi to the mat repeatedly. She locked in a deep rear-naked choke in Round 2 that was saved only by the bell. In Round 3, she secured another takedown off a kicked leg and finished the same submission with four minutes to spare. Fight path played out almost exactly as analyzed.

Grappling Hierarchy: Our analysis correctly identified that once Alencar got top position, Carnelossi’s bottom game wouldn’t be able to escape. The late submission finish matched our prediction of either a R3 sub or dominant decision.

What This Tells Us About Model Alignment

Both legs of last week’s parlay showed strong WT5 legacy model conviction (Dumont +13.8% EV, Alencar +8.2% EV) despite WT6 showing negative expected value. The legacy models read these fights correctly.

More importantly, the detailed technical breakdowns predicted how these fighters would win, not just that they’d win. Dumont’s footwork and Alencar’s grappling control played out on tape exactly as the data suggested they would.

This week we’re using the same approach: full consensus across WT6 and all legacy models (WT5, Profit, Plain) on fighters with proven track records. When the models align and the technical matchups make sense, we bet it.

---

TL;DR

Top Betting Opportunities:

Best Single Bet: Hyder Amil (-146) vs Jamall Emmers - Pressure wrestling meets counter-striking, +10.2% EV with 88.5% positive EV probability

Parlay Play: Amil + Bonfim - Full model consensus on both fighters with complementary grappling advantages

Quick Summary:

• 12 total fights analyzed with WT6 predictions
• 1 parlay recommendation: Amil + Bonfim with full model consensus
• 2 positive EV opportunities (Amil +10.2%, Bonfim +4.3% WT6 / +8.9% WT5)
• Radar chart analytics reveal key stylistic mismatches
• Fight-by-fight analysis explains model predictions and matchup dynamics

Event Overview

• Total Fights: 12 (all analyzed with WT6 predictions)
• Positive EV Opportunities: 3
• Strong Consensus Picks: 2 fights with BET recommendations
• Weight Classes: 8 represented (Welterweight, Flyweight, Lightweight, Bantamweight, Middleweight, Featherweight, Women’s Bantamweight, Women’s Strawweight)

This ESPN card features welterweight veteran Randy Brown taking on surging grappler Gabriel Bonfim in the main event. While the headliner offers marginal value, the real opportunities lie in the undercard where pressure fighters face stylistic nightmares.

---

Model Predictions Summary

Below is a complete breakdown of all predictions from both our WT6 (current) and WT5 (legacy) models. The table shows win probabilities, expected value (EV), odds, and recommendations.

Main Card

Fighter	WT6 ML	WT6 EV	WT5	Profit	Plain	WT5 EV	Fights	Odds
Gabriel Bonfim	67.2%	+4.3%	12	13	16	8.9	6	-180
Randy Brown	32.8%						20	+140
Matt Schnell	39.4%				8		15	+200
Joseph Morales	60.6%	-16.3%	16	0		3.6	4	-265
Muslim Salikhov	46.8%		0	10	14	10.4	13	+146
Uros Medic	53.2%	-18.2%					8	-188
Chris Padilla	42.6%			5	9		3	+164
Ismael Bonfim	57.4%	-15.5%	12			4.9	4	-215
Ricky Simon	67.5%	+8.8%		8			15	-164
Raoni Barcelos	32.5%		1		6	11.8	13	+128
Christian Leroy Duncan	48.6%			4			7	+140
Marco Tulio	51.4%	-20.2%	6		23	-2.1	2	-180

Preliminary Card

Fighter	WT6 ML	WT6 EV	WT5	Profit	Plain	WT5 EV	Fights	Odds
Hyder Amil	65.4%	+10.2%	8	10	11	9.8	4	-146
Jamall Emmers	34.6%						8	+114
Adrian Yanez	68.2%	-4.2%	17	17	13	6.2	9	-245
Cristian Quinonez	31.8%						3	+186
Mayra Bueno Silva	37.0%			3			12	+210
Jacqueline Cavalcanti	63.0%	-14.1%	27		21	5.5	4	-280
Tecia Pennington	46.5%			8			18	+154
Denise Gomes	53.5%	-19.6%	7		3	-2.5	7	-200
Miles Johns	47.6%			8			11	+142
Daniel Marcos	52.4%	-19.2%	8		1	4.4	6	-184
Jackson McVey	48.6%			9	16		1	+140
Robert Valentin	51.4%	-20.0%	1			-8.6	3	-180

Table Key:

• Bold fighter names = WT6 predicted winner
• WT6 ML = Win probability from current WT6 model (AutoGluon ensemble with 57 features)
• WT6 EV = Expected Value from WT6 (positive = betting opportunity)
• WT5 = Legacy WolfTickets model confidence percentile
• Profit = Profit Model confidence percentile from WolfTickets system
• Plain = Plain Model confidence percentile from WolfTickets system
• WT5 EV = Expected Value from legacy WT5 model (positive = betting opportunity)
• Fights = Total UFC fights for each fighter
• Note: Higher percentiles in WT5/Profit/Plain indicate stronger predictions; empty cells mean model favors opponent

Key Insights:

• Amil shows strongest value (+10.2% WT6 EV, +9.8% WT5 EV) with full model consensus across all systems
• Bonfim provides +4.3% WT6 EV and +8.9% WT5 EV with all models aligned (WT5=12, Profit=13, Plain=16)
• Simon shows +8.8% WT6 EV but WT5 model disagreement (WT5 slightly favors Barcelos at 1st percentile)
• Most favorites are overpriced: 6 fights show -15% EV or worse, making this a selective card
• Only Amil and Bonfim have full consensus across WT6 and all legacy models, making them parlay-worthy

---

Hyder Amil vs Jamall Emmers Analysis

Preliminary Card • Featherweight

The radar chart reveals Emmers’ surprising edges in Striking Offense and Experience, but Amil’s advantages in Grappling Offense, Durability & Cardio, and Physical Edge align with the model predictions. The chart shows what the data confirms: Emmers has technical refinement, but Amil’s pressure system and wrestling threat create an asymmetric matchup that favors the younger fighter.

Why Models Favor Amil

ML Perspective (65.4% win probability, +10.2% WT6 EV, +9.8% WT5 EV):

• 88.5% positive EV probability - highest confidence on the card
• Amil’s pressure system counters Emmers’ counter-striking style
• Recent striking impact differential: +38.59 for Amil vs +15.70 for Emmers
• Amil’s 10.08 sig strikes per minute overwhelms technical defense
• Perfect recent takedown defense (100%) protects against Emmers’ limited wrestling

Fighter Analytics Perspective:

• Amil’s Sanchai kick catch directly targets Emmers’ low kick game
• Emmers’ catastrophic 27.27% takedown defense (18.15% recent)
• Four-inch reach disadvantage for Amil creates risk, but pressure neutralizes
• Age factor: 35-year-old Emmers coming off year-long layoff vs active Amil

The Nightmare Matchup

Pressure vs Counter-Striking:

Amil’s relentless forward movement eliminates the space Emmers needs for his technical counter-striking. Against William Gomis, Amil demonstrated his signature pressure system: constant forward movement forcing binary choices (counter or absorb punishment). This directly neutralizes Emmers’ double-handed checking system and straight-right counter that dropped Gabriel Miranda.

The Sanchai Kick Catch:

Amil’s signature weapon specifically targets Emmers’ primary distance management tool. Against Gomis, Amil repeatedly caught left kicks with his right forearm, scooped underneath with the left hand, then pulled the kick across his body while stepping back. This immediately converts to a single leg by kicking out the opponent’s base leg.

Against Jack Jenkins, Emmers consistently attacked the lead leg with low kicks to slow movement and compromise power generation. If Amil catches these kicks and converts to wrestling positions, Emmers’ 27.27% takedown defense becomes catastrophically exploitable.

Wrestling Threat:

Emmers’ takedown defense is his Achilles heel. Against Gabriel Miranda, he was taken down immediately and had his back taken in a three-quarter position. Against Pat Sabatini, he was caught in a heel hook after committing to stand-up exchanges without transitioning to defensive grappling. Amil’s 1.26 takedowns per fight on 6.32 attempts with perfect takedown defense creates a one-way grappling threat.

Critical Risk Factors

Amil’s Centerline Vulnerability:

Against Jose Delgado in June 2025, Amil was knocked out at 20-26 seconds by a devastating sequence: body jab, right hand, collar tie, then a fight-ending knee up the middle. Amil showed zero defensive reaction to the collar tie establishment—no hand fighting, no frames, no angle changes. His head remained on the centerline throughout, the most dangerous position against taller opponents.

Emmers (74” reach vs Amil’s 70”) presents the same geometric problem Delgado exploited. If Emmers can establish his jab, maintain distance, and land his straight right hand, Amil’s tendency to position himself in the “dead zone” (too close for safety, too far to neutralize reach) becomes dangerous.

Emmers’ Clinch Proficiency:

Against Khusein Askhabov, Emmers moved into the clinch whenever his opponent committed to power shots, landing multiple uppercuts in quick succession. This could counter Amil’s aggressive striking entries if Emmers recognizes the transitional threats.

Why Amil Still Wins

Despite the Delgado knockout, the stylistic dynamics heavily favor Amil:

1. Volume Overwhelms Precision: Amil’s 10.08 significant strikes per minute creates cumulative damage that compromises defensive responsibility. Emmers’ 65.40% recent striking defense is solid, but not elite enough to handle sustained volume.

2. Age and Layoff: At 35 coming off a year-long layoff, Emmers’ conditioning in extended fights is questionable. Amil’s youth and recent activity suggest better cardio depth.

3. Wrestling Asymmetry: Emmers can’t threaten takedowns (40.91% accuracy, 1.89 per fight) while Amil’s kick catches and level changes create constant threats. Once on the ground, Emmers lacks scrambling ability to escape.

4. Binary Pressure: Emmers thrives when given space to establish timing. Amil refuses to provide it. The constant forward movement forces immediate engagement that eliminates Emmers’ primary weapon.

---

Ricky Simon vs Raoni Barcelos Analysis

Main Card • Bantamweight

The radar chart is nearly identical (72.5% vs 73.7% average percentiles), showing how evenly matched these fighters are statistically. Barcelos’s slight edges in Durability & Cardio and Striking Defense align with WT5’s concerns, while Simon’s advantages in Grappling Offense support WT6’s prediction. This model disagreement makes the fight compelling but adds uncertainty—WT6 sees a statistical edge for Simon while WT5’s traditional percentiles slightly favor the veteran Barcelos.

⚠️ MODEL DISAGREEMENT CASE

This fight presents a fascinating teaching moment: WT6 favors Simon (67.5%) while the WT5 legacy model slightly favors Barcelos (Barcelos rated 1st percentile in WT5, meaning very strong). When our models disagree, we dig deeper into the stylistic matchup.

WT6’s Case for Simon (67.5% win probability)

Statistical Advantages:

• Recent win streak: 2-0 after brutal three-fight skid
• Knockout power: KO’d Javid Basharat with perfectly timed combinations
• Wrestling volume: 4.28 takedowns per fight at 39% accuracy
• Compact boxing effective in close quarters
• Age advantage: 32 vs 38 years old

Technical Weapons:

• Thigh-slap to left hook/uppercut sequence blends striking and wrestling threats
• Tendon grab to snatch single-leg attacks mechanically vulnerable points
• Constant level changes disrupt opponent rhythm

Why WT5 (Slightly) Favors Barcelos

The Experience Factor:

• Three-fight win streak vs elite competition (Cody Garbrandt, Payton Talbott, Cristian Quinonez)
• Elite cardio at 38 years old exceeds younger opponents
• Recent performances show improved striking-to-wrestling integration

Barcelos’s Technical Arsenal:

• Devastating step-up calf kicks that swept Garbrandt’s feet in Round 3
• Counter left hook combinations from high guard
• Bump-and-roll mount transition (Marcelo Garcia technique)
• Relentless pressure: 4.87 significant strikes per minute at 53% accuracy

The Model Disagreement Explained

WT6 weighs Simon’s recent momentum and wrestling threat heavily. The model sees:

• Odds advantage: Simon at -164 represents value given his wrestling volume
• Recent win percentage: Simon’s 2-0 streak after losses creates upward trajectory
• TrueSkill rating: Simon’s 34.64 vs Barcelos’s 31.01 reflects overall UFC record

But WT5’s slight favor for Barcelos captures:

• Cardio mismatch: Barcelos’s conditioning at 38 vs Simon’s technical decline under pressure
• Level of competition: Barcelos’s recent wins over Garbrandt (former champ) and Talbott (undefeated prospect) vs Simon’s wins over Smotherman (short-notice replacement)
• Stylistic counter: Barcelos’s counter left hook exploits Simon’s predictable inside slip pattern

Why I Side With WT6 (Simon Wins)

Despite the WT5 concerns, three factors favor Simon:

1. Wrestling Asymmetry:

Simon’s 4.28 takedowns per fight vs Barcelos’s 9% completion rate (1 of 11 vs Garbrandt) creates offensive pressure. While Barcelos threatens takedowns constantly, his inability to finish against strong defensive wrestling forces him to rely on striking. Simon’s wrestling creates the control time Barcelos couldn’t achieve against Garbrandt.

2. Age and Recent Trajectory:

Barcelos at 38 is on borrowed time. Against Quinonez, his defensive reactions slowed significantly in later rounds, and his snapping head movement became predictable by Round 3. Simon’s recent knockout power (Basharat finish) shows he’s finding his best form after the losing streak.

3. Stylistic Puzzle:

Simon’s compact boxing in close quarters matches well against Barcelos’s pressure. While Barcelos’s leg kicks are devastating (swept Garbrandt’s feet), Simon’s wrestling-heavy approach limits standing exchanges. If Simon establishes early takedowns, Barcelos’s cardio advantage matters less because he’s fighting off his back.

Critical Risk: Simon’s Predictability

The Inside Slip Pattern:

Mario Bautista exposed Simon’s defensive nightmare: consistent slipping to the inside of jabs. Bautista feinted jabs to trigger Simon’s slip, then landed right hands and elbows to his right side during the predictable lean. Barcelos’s counter left hook specifically exploits this pattern—when Simon slips inside to avoid jabs, Barcelos can time devastating short-range hooks.

Technical Decline Under Pressure:

Against Song Yadong, Simon was finished in Round 5 after failing to adjust strategy. Against Vinicius Oliveira, he abandoned wrestling for extended periods, making attacks predictable. When forced to work at high pace, Simon’s striking becomes telegraphed and wrestling entries more obvious.

Fight Path Analysis

Rounds 1-2:

Simon attempts to establish wrestling immediately, shooting double-legs after 1-2 combinations. Barcelos pressures forward with leg kicks, looking to counter Simon’s entries. If Simon completes early takedowns, he controls rounds and accumulates damage. If Barcelos stuffs takedowns (as Garbrandt did), his leg kicks and body strikes accumulate, compromising Simon’s offensive output.

Round 3:

This is Barcelos’s historical advantage—maintaining output while opponents fade. But Simon’s recent finishes suggest improved cardio management. If the fight is close entering the final round, expect Simon to rely on wrestling control time rather than striking exchanges.

---

Gabriel Bonfim vs Randy Brown Analysis

Main Event • Welterweight

The radar chart shows Bonfim’s overwhelming advantages in Physical Edge (97.9th percentile), Grappling Offense (76.2%), and Grappling Defense (84.1%). Brown’s clear edges in Experience (98.5th percentile) and Durability & Cardio (62.9% vs 36.9%) create an interesting dynamic where the younger grappler’s physical gifts face off against the veteran’s ring IQ and conditioning.

Why Models Favor Bonfim

WT6 Perspective (67.2% win probability, +4.3% WT6 EV, +8.9% WT5 EV):

• Gabriel Bonfim’s grappling threat (76.5% takedown defense, 4.07 TDs per 15min)
• Physical advantages: 97.9th percentile physical edge
• Striking offense: 84.6th percentile
• Moderate decision robustness suggests close fight

WT5 Legacy Models:

• All three models (WT5=12, Profit=13, Plain=16) favor Bonfim with moderate confidence
• Consensus suggests stylistic advantage for the grappler

The Grappling Mismatch

Bonfim’s Signature Techniques:

Against his UFC opponents, Bonfim has shown elite-level jiu-jitsu:

• Sanchai kick catch → single leg: Catching kicks and immediately converting to wrestling positions
• Chain grappling: Failed taiotoshi throw → calf slicer attempt → single leg pursuit
• Scrambling ability: Willingness to pursue submissions from chaotic positions
• 53.8% takedown accuracy with strong control time (14.2 minutes per fight)

Randy Brown’s 73.3% takedown defense is respectable but not elite. More concerning: he’s been submitted by Neil Magny (2017) and Bryan Barberena (2019), showing vulnerability when fights hit the mat.

Striking Analysis

The Reach Factor:

Brown holds a massive 6-inch reach advantage (78” vs 72”) which creates problems for Bonfim’s pressure game. Brown’s signature weapon is his outside high kick from kicking range, setting up his jab-cross. Against Court McGee, Brown showcased excellent distance management, preventing the wrestler from closing distance consistently.

Brown’s Technical Evolution:

At 35 years old with 20 UFC fights, Brown has developed sophisticated counter-striking:

• 47.4% striking accuracy (better than average)
• 4.47 significant strikes per minute
• Strong low kick defense and checking technique
• Improved head movement and ringcraft

Bonfim’s Striking Gaps:

While Bonfim lands 4.4 significant strikes per minute at 46% accuracy, his 36.9th percentile Durability & Cardio is concerning. Against higher-volume strikers, can he maintain his grappling-heavy pace for 15 minutes?

Why This Is Only “Marginal”

Three Red Flags:

1. Bonfim’s Limited UFC Experience: Only 6 UFC fights vs Brown’s 20. The veteran has seen every style and knows how to neutralize grapplers.

2. Brown’s Scrambling IQ: Against Thomas Gifford, Brown showed excellent ability to create separation when clinched against the fence. He uses strong underhooks and hip positioning to prevent body locks.

3. The Five-Round Factor: Neither fighter has championship round experience. Brown’s superior cardio (62.9th percentile) vs Bonfim’s concerning durability metrics (36.9th percentile) suggests Brown gains advantage in later rounds.

Fight Path Prediction

Rounds 1-2: Bonfim pressures forward, mixing striking with level changes. Brown maintains distance with jab and low kicks, making Bonfim work to close distance. Bonfim likely secures 1-2 takedowns but Brown scrambles effectively, preventing extended control time. Close rounds with slight edge to Bonfim’s aggression.

Round 3: Bonfim’s cardio becomes questionable (36.9th percentile). Brown’s experience and superior conditioning (62.9th percentile) allow him to increase output. If Bonfim hasn’t established dominant grappling control early, Brown’s volume striking and distance management could win the round.

Most Likely Outcome: Bonfim wins via decision 29-28 or 30-27, securing rounds with takedowns and control time. Both models agree on the pick, with WT5 showing particularly strong confidence (+8.9% EV) in the grappling mismatch overcoming Brown’s veteran advantages.

---

Preliminary Card Highlights

The undercard features several fights where the betting markets have overpriced favorites, creating negative EV across the board. Here are the quick breakdowns with radar chart analysis for context.

Adrian Yanez vs Cristian Quinonez

Bantamweight

Model Analysis: Yanez shows 68.2% win probability but -4.2% EV due to overpriced odds at -245. Despite clear skill advantages (12 KO wins, 59% striking accuracy), the market has priced in the dominance. WT5 models show strong consensus (17/17/13 percentiles), but the value isn’t there at this line. Quinonez’s durability (only 1 KO loss) means this could go to decision.

---

Jacqueline Cavalcanti vs Mayra Bueno Silva

Women’s Bantamweight

Model Analysis: Cavalcanti shows 63.0% win probability but -14.1% EV due to severely overpriced odds at -280. Despite her undefeated UFC record (3-0) and massive advantages in Grappling Offense (93.3rd percentile) and Striking Defense (86.7%), the market has overvalued her against a former title challenger. Silva’s submission skills create upset potential the odds don’t reflect.

---

Denise Gomes vs Tecia Pennington

Women’s Strawweight

Model Analysis: Gomes shows only 53.5% win probability yet is priced at -200, creating -19.6% EV (one of the worst on the card). This is essentially a coin flip being priced as a heavy favorite. Pennington’s veteran experience (18 UFC fights) and volume striking (5.31 sig strikes/min) make this far more competitive than the odds suggest. WT5 shows negative EV (-2.5%) as well.

---

Daniel Marcos vs Miles Johns

Bantamweight

Model Analysis: Marcos shows only 52.4% win probability at -184 odds, creating -19.2% EV. This is essentially a coin flip being priced as a moderate favorite. Johns’ solid wrestling (2.42 TDs/fight) suggests a grindy decision where the slight favorite could easily lose. WT5 shows positive EV (+4.4%) but model disagreement adds uncertainty.

---

Other Fights of Note

Matt Schnell vs Joseph Morales (Flyweight):

• Morales predicted at 60.6% with -16.3% EV at -265 odds (overpriced)
• WT5 shows +3.6% EV, creating model disagreement on value

Muslim Salikhov vs Uros Medic (Welterweight):

• Medic predicted at 53.2% with -18.2% EV at -188 odds (overpriced coin flip)
• WT5 shows strong +10.4% EV for Salikhov at +146, creating interesting model disagreement

Chris Padilla vs Ismael Bonfim (Lightweight):

• I. Bonfim predicted at 57.4% with -15.5% EV at -215 odds (overpriced)
• WT5 shows +4.9% EV, moderate consensus on Bonfim but poor line value

Christian Leroy Duncan vs Marco Tulio (Middleweight):

• Tulio predicted at 51.4% with -20.2% EV at -180 odds (worst WT6 value on main card)
• WT5 shows -2.1% EV, confirming this is essentially a coin flip being mispriced

Jackson McVey vs Robert Valentin (Middleweight):

• Valentin predicted at 51.4% with -20.0% EV at -180 odds
• WT5 shows -8.6% EV, both models agree this is terrible value

---

Recommended Parlay: Model Consensus Play

The Strategic Case

Our parlay combines Hyder Amil and Gabriel Bonfim—the only two fighters on the card with full model consensus across both WT6 and all legacy models. This isn’t just about positive EV; it’s about confidence through agreement:

1. Full Model Agreement: Both fighters have WT6, WT5, Profit, and Plain models aligned
2. Complementary Styles: Both leverage grappling advantages against opponents with defensive weaknesses
3. Positive Combined EV: Amil (+10.2% WT6, +9.8% WT5) + Bonfim (+4.3% WT6, +8.9% WT5)
4. Independent Outcomes: Different weight classes (Featherweight vs Welterweight), different fight dynamics

The Parlay Math

Return: $23.10 on $10 bet (2.31x return) Combined Probability: 67.2% × 65.4% = 43.9% Expected Value: Positive (both legs show +EV across all models)

Why This Parlay Works

Model Consensus = Higher Confidence:

When both WT6 (statistical ML) and WT5 (traditional percentiles) agree, we have higher confidence the prediction captures the true fight dynamics:

• Amil: WT5=8, Profit=10, Plain=11 (all strong), WT5 EV=+9.8%
• Bonfim: WT5=12, Profit=13, Plain=16 (all strong), WT5 EV=+8.9%

Compare this to Simon vs Barcelos where WT6 favors Simon (67.5%) but WT5 slightly favors Barcelos (WT5=1 for Barcelos, meaning very strong for him). That model disagreement creates uncertainty we don’t want in a parlay.

Grappling Dominance Theme:

Both fighters win through grappling superiority:

• Amil’s Sanchai kick catch exploits Emmers’ 27.27% takedown defense
• Bonfim’s elite jiu-jitsu (76.2% grappling offense) attacks Brown’s submission vulnerability

Age and Experience Asymmetry:

• Amil (younger) vs Emmers (35, year-long layoff)
• Bonfim (28) vs Brown (35, veteran but declining cardio)

Both underdogs are older fighters past their physical prime facing younger grapplers with momentum.

Why Not Simon?

Despite Simon being a strong BET recommendation (+8.8% EV), the WT5 model disagreement makes him risky for parlay construction:

• WT6 favors Simon at 67.5%
• WT5 slightly favors Barcelos (WT5=1 percentile for Barcelos = very strong)
• Barcelos’s elite cardio at 38 and counter-striking creates a legitimate upset path

Simon is excellent as a straight bet, but for parlays we want fights where all models agree. That’s Amil + Bonfim.

Alternative Approaches

Conservative Strategy (No Parlay):

• 3-4 units on Amil (-146) straight
• 1-2 units on Bonfim (-180) straight
• 2-3 units on Simon (-164) straight

This captures +EV from all three without parlay risk. If all three hit, you profit ~6-8 units depending on sizing.

Moderate Strategy (Our Recommendation):

• 2-3 units on Amil + Bonfim parlay (2.31x)
• 1-2 units on Amil straight (insurance)
• 1 unit on Simon straight (value play)

This maximizes parlay upside on the consensus plays while maintaining downside protection. If Amil + Bonfim both hit, you profit ~6-8 units. If one fails but the other wins, you minimize losses.

Aggressive Strategy:

• 3 units on Amil + Bonfim parlay (2.31x)
• 2 units on Amil + Bonfim + Simon 3-leg parlay (~4.2x)

Only for bettors comfortable with variance. The 3-leg parlay has huge upside (~8.4 units profit) but requires all three to hit.

Conclusion

UFC on ESPN: Bonfim vs. Brown presents a selective card where overpriced favorites dominate, but our analysis reveals one compelling parlay opportunity with full model consensus.

Our Recommended Play:

Amil + Bonfim Parlay (2.31x) - The only two fighters on the card with complete agreement across WT6 and all legacy models (WT5, Profit, Plain). Both leverage grappling advantages against older opponents with defensive weaknesses.

The rest of the card features overpriced favorites (6 fights show -15% EV or worse) where the betting market has eliminated value. While Ricky Simon shows positive EV (+8.8%), the WT5 model disagreement makes him less suitable for parlay construction—his fight represents an interesting case study in model divergence where statistical ML and traditional percentiles reach different conclusions.

Good luck!

-Chris@WolfTickets.AI