UFC Kansas City: Best Bets, Fight Previews, and Daily Fantasy Picks

If you crave violence, artistry within the sports world, and competition in its purest form, the Ultimate Fighting Championship might be for you.

Colloquially known as "UFC," the world's largest mixed martial arts promotion holds around a dozen MMA fights a vast majority of the weekend throughout the year. The promotion has fathered some of the largest combat-sport stars of the 21st century, including Conor McGregor and Jon Jones.

There are plenty of ways to get in on the action each and every Saturday. FanDuel Sportsbook provides MMA odds including moneylines, round totals, and prop bets for each fight, and FanDuel Fantasy has several UFC daily fantasy contests with lucrative prizes. No matter your preferred way to play, we'll break down the environment, chances for each fighter to win, and matchup specifics for each bout here.

Without further delay, let's break down this week's event, which is UFC Kansas City: Holloway vs. Allen, taking place at the T-Mobile Center in Kansas City, Missouri on Saturday.

Lucie Pudilova (-142) vs. Joselyne Edwards (+116)

Women's Bantamweight (135 pounds)

We weren't sure what to expect of Lucie Pudilova in her return to UFC, but by adding a grappling element, she easily dispatched Yanan Wu via a second-round finish.

That was a wild reversal from her previous trend and ability, still mustering just 0.43 takedowns per 15 minutes in UFC overall with low accuracy (27%). In that fight with Wu, she still only landed 48% of her own significant strikes and defended just 39%, which was part of the reason she was let go originally.

Still, this match was made because Joselyne Edwards has shown volatility to wrestlers before. Her 65% takedown defense isn't too bad, but she was controlled for over 73% of the fight by both Jessica-Rose Clark and Karol Rosa.

As a striker, Edwards has three inches of reach and a superior +1.96 SSR. She's unbeaten in her other three fights where wrestling wasn't a factor, so this fight could be that simple.

Joselyn is a live underdog to win, but I'm too wary of her wrestling defense to feel the need to go there. This fight is more helpful through a DFS lens where Edwards could be a key underdog on the slate.

From that perspective, she's topped 100 significant strikes in consecutive fights, and Pudilova's poor striking defense in her return wasn't the convincing statement of improvement we'd have hoped for.

Betting Verdict: With no finishes thus far in UFC, a lean but no official action toward Edwards by Points (+200).

DFS Verdict: Edwards at $13 is the preferred side.

Gaston Bolanos (-194) vs. Aaron Phillips (+156)

Men's Bantamweight (135 pounds)

This betting line is more about the struggles of Aaron Phillips in UFC than the heavy dose of "nada" we know about Gaston Bolanos at this level.

Phillips last fought in July 2020, and he was dismantled in less than two rounds by Jack Shore (6-1 UFC) while landing only six significant strikes. Phillips' -1.79 SSR might be kinder to him than either his 39% striking defense or 44% takedown defense. He's shown an inability to defend at the UFC level -- especially when wrestling. He's ceded at least three takedowns in every UFC bout.

The question is whether or not Bolanos can do that at a UFC level. His regional work doesn't point to that of a skilled grappler with zero wins via submission -- and two losses to chokes.

With no data, there's not really enough known about Bolanos to make this a can't-miss betting opportunity, but Phillips has been pretty terrible regardless of the opponent. He lost to Sam Scilia (5-8 UFC) and Matt Hobar (1-2 UFC) back in 2014, and the return against Shore didn't prove much better.

With under 2.5 rounds sitting at -142, this fight is too relevant to ignore in daily fantasy. You could embrace the volatility of Bolanos' resume, which appears that of an unskilled brawler. However, I just can't get past Phillips' defensive struggles facing a guy who sports a 100% professional knockout rate.

Betting Verdict: No leans with incomplete data.

DFS Verdict: Bolanos at $20 is a high-risk, high-reward flex option -- but with too much volatility for MVP. Phillips at $11 is an even riskier punt option that could pay off if Bolanos isn't a UFC-caliber fighter.

Bruna Brasil (-170) vs. Denise Gomes (+138)

Women's Strawweight (115 pounds)

I always get trepidatious buying into women's favorites in their debut. The weight classes are so prone to upsets and volatility.

However, Bruna Brasil appears to be a special one for plenty more reasons than a viral knockout to earn this chance. She left Dana White's Contender Series with a +2.20 striking success rate, and she landed all three takedown attempts. Her combination of power, versatility, and multi-level striking was on full display.

That makes for another tough test for Denise Gomes after having to face Loma Lookboonme (5-2 UFC) in her debut. Gomes eclipsed 100 significant strikes in her appearance on DWCS, but she struggled to defend Lookboonme's wrestling in her debut, ceding four of five attempts to Loma.

That's bad news for this particular matchup. Brasil is much larger than Lookboonme and flashed elite efficiency with her takedowns on the show. At worst, Bruna likely can pull the air out of this fight and dominate it with her offensive wrestling.

Neither of these ladies has been finished since 2017, which is why over 2.5 rounds sits at -210 in this fight. Those damper the DFS environment a bit, but Brasil's solid pace of FanDuel scoring in her DWCS appearance -- and her size -- might make her a sneaky flex play in DFS.

Betting Verdict: Lean toward an inside-the-distance (ITD) win by Brasil at +260.

DFS Verdict: Neither fighter is likely to be popular in a fight expected to go the distance, but Brasil's size and scoring ability in her debut does provide upside at $19.

Daniel Zellhuber (-132) vs. Lando Vannata (+108)

Lightweight (155 pounds)

A week ago, I'd have had a different read on this fight, but data is so sparse that just last week, we got a bit of an idea of what happened to Daniel Zellhuber in his UFC debut.

Trey Ogden, Zellhuber's first opponent, held Ignacio Bahamondes under 100 significant strikes for the first time in four UFC fights last week. Ogden's odd defensive style might have been why Zellhuber struggled, landing just 29% of his significant strikes despite a five-inch reach edge.

"The Golden Boy" will have a massive, six-inch edge in reach on Lando Vannata. The 31-year-old Vannata tried a stint down at featherweight, which was a largely unsuccessful 1-1 stint with the only triumph by split decision. He's largely been undersized at 155 pounds, and that'll be the case here.

Zellhuber's first appearance was obviously a cause for concern, but this is still a prospect who held a +19 striking differential over Lucas Almeida, who became a UFC winner himself. Whether it was due to nerves or Ogden's odd style, Zellhuber should find Vanatta (4.96 significant strikes absorbed per minute) more hittable.

It's telling that Zellhuber is still a favorite here after his debut. After all, so long as his 88% takedown defense holds, he'll have length and accuracy advantages on plenty of lightweights.

Betting Verdict: With Vannata never being knocked out in his pro career, a small dart at Zellhuber by Points (+210) works.

DFS Verdict: Many will likely turn to the veteran Vannata to save salary, but Zellhuber at $16 has plenty of advantages to score points striking if his solid takedown defense remains that way.

Gillian Robertson (-128) vs. Piera Rodriguez (-104)

Women's Flyweight (125 pounds)

It appears Gillian Robertson is moving from 125 to 115 pounds after realizing a ceiling at flyweight. She's lost convincingly to four currently-ranked flyweight contenders.

"The Savage" holds several divisional records at 125, including most wins by an early finish (7). If she can make this lower weight in a healthy and reliable fashion, it's hard to not see her dominating most of these smaller athletes. At flyweight, she was landing 2.59 takedowns per 15 minutes on solid 41% accuracy.

This is a great first test. Piera Rodriguez has steamrolled three low-level strawweights with an overall record of 4-8 in UFC-affiliated bouts, and for the first time, she may choose to strike. She's been better there (+0.89 SSR) than the one-dimensional Robertson. Gillian's 28% takedown defense was also an issue at flyweight, and Piera averages 3.67 takedowns per 15 herself.

Handicapping this fight is a really fine line to walk across. How much weight should we give Robertson's vastly superior competition against her metrics, and how much will they change facing smaller athletes?

The bottom line for my approach to this fight is that it shouldn't matter. Robertson's the proven finisher of these two, and Rodriguez was unable to dispatch Kay Hansen (1-3 UFC) inside the distance. As the larger athlete, I project she wins the bulk of these grappling exchanges with a vast majority of the upside to win it early.

Betting Verdict: Robertson's ML (-125) for 1.0 units. A tiny sprinkle on Robertson by Submission (+260).

DFS Verdict: Over 2.5 Rounds is a reasonably short -122. To me, it significantly would favor the larger, more potent Robertson to win early. She's the one I'd choose at these nearly identical salaries.

Zak Cummings (-230) vs. Ed Herman (+184)

Light Heavyweight (205 pounds)

This is the worst fight on the card from a handicapping perspective with 80 total years of age involved.

Zak Cummings hasn't fought since August 2020, and his entire career before this bout has come at 185 pounds. He's not cutting weight at 38 years old, apparently. That is a volatile proposition considering, when he left, he just wasn't getting a lot done.

Cummings has gone to a decision in four of his last five, and landing just 2.58 significant strikes per minute with 32% accuracy, he just doesn't put forth quality striking offense. Averaging less than a takedown per 15 minutes, a low-volume striking approach has been his style his entire career.

On the flip side, Ed Herman is older (42), but this is his organic weight class, and he's not flunking out of fights recently. He's either scored an early finish himself or seen the entire distance in six straight fights, which is rare for his age in this sport.

To this day, Herman lands 2.08 takedowns per 15 minutes with solid 42% accuracy. He's always preferred to grapple, averaging 1.0 submission attempts per 15. The problem is that "Short Fuse" has always relied on his durability to get there rather than his striking defense (42%), and that's concerning as he ages.

While it's possible Cummings knocks out Herman, he wasn't doing that to others in a lighter weight class when we last saw him. Herman's put forth a semblance of durability, so if there's fight-ending danger here, perhaps it's his submission game.

It's impossible to see true value with so much unknown about two aging veterans, but this betting line is ludicrous considering what we've seen from Cummings recently.

Betting Verdict: Herman's ML (+200) is worth a 0.5-unit dice roll in a fight so unpredictable.

DFS Verdict: Without per-minute scoring upside or recent finishes, Cummings' $21 salary is insane. I'd rather punt to Herman at $9 and hope for a patented "Short Fuse" submission. He might still be the preferred side in a loss.

Matheus Nicolau (-200) vs. Brandon Royval (+160)

Men's Flyweight (125 pounds)

Brandon Royval is a guaranteed good time, but he's far from a sure bet.

Royval was knocked down and hurt in his last fight with Matt Schnell but found a choke as Schnell pounced on him. Schnell's similar pedal-to-the-floor style was obvious for fireworks, but it's also no surprise. The winner of five of Royval's six UFC bouts eclipsed 100 FanDuel points.

The problem is that Royval isn't always on the right side. His 50% striking defense and 39% takedown defense are both mediocre to poor, and Royval's offense -- evidenced by the rate of fantasy points -- hasn't been that elite to ignore completely.

Matheus Nicolau is a very different fighter. His 67% striking defense and 93% takedown defense are both top-five marks in his division (minimum of five fights). His offensive ceiling has been a work in progress, but 32 significant strikes and 2 knockdowns in a second-round finish of the aforementioned Schnell showed he can excel in a firefight.

This particular bout is a nightmare matchup for Royval. Charging head-first into a more efficient fighter led to blowout losses to Alexandre Pantoja and Brandon Moreno. Analytically, Nicolau is as good as those two -- if not better. He's been untouchable since returning to UFC in 2021.

Betting Verdict: Nicolau's ML (-200) has value up to -250 and can be used as a parlay piece if you prefer to not lay the juice. He's an awesome bet ITD (+165), too.

DFS Verdict: Royval's style brings the upside to Nicolau's extreme efficiency. Think the outlook is similar for him at $21 as it was versus Schnell, and he was the optimal MVP back in December.

Bill Algeo (-210) vs. T.J. Brown (+168)

Men's Featherweight (145 pounds)

This fight is a great example of competition level.

Bill Algeo has three UFC losses, but those three fighters have 32 combined wins with the promotion. TJ Brown has three UFC losses, but those three fighters have five combined wins with the promotion. Even knowing Algeo has fought tougher guys, his peripherals are better, too.

"Señor Perfecto" lands 5.68 significant strikes per minute on lethal 56% accuracy. He's undoubtedly the better striker in this matchup, and it'll all come down to whether or not his 55% takedown defense holds. Algeo hasn't been submitted with UFC, and he's ceded seven total takedowns in his three UFC wins, so it's not even a true must.

Brown has bullied lesser fighters, landing 3.52 takedowns with 56% accuracy. With that said, his four wins have come against an average takedown defense of 47.3%, so he's actually just a few percentage points above expectation.

Algeo isn't much of a wrestler (0.77 takedowns per 15), but I've seen the veteran do it enough that I wouldn't be shocked if he flipped the script on Brown's poor 38% takedown defense.

Either way, Algeo figures to score points through his striking, and so long as he can avoid submissions, he's got a proven track record of getting back to his feet after takedowns and outpointing weaker opponents anyone. Brown would be -- by far -- the worst UFC resume to defeat Algeo to this point.

Betting Verdict: With a 0% knockdown rate and minimal power from Algeo, I'm intrigued by Algeo via Points (+155). There's mathematical value on his moneyline (-210) if you want to lay the juice.

DFS Verdict: If Brown isn't the first UFC fighter to submit Algeo, he's got ostensibly no upside with his wrestling-heavy approach. I'll mix in Algeo at $20 in flex spots due to Brown's poor 49% striking defense.

Rafa Garcia (-265) vs. Clay Guida (+210)

Lightweight (155 pounds)

This fight, above all, stinks for fantasy and betting.

Rafa Garcia and Clay Guida both average under 3.30 significant strikes per minute on 40% or lower accuracy. They're sloppy strikers who prefer to wrestle, which made for an organic matchup. In his prime, Garcia is the moderate favorite over the 41-year-old.

Guida just isn't a guy who has been prone to explosive results. He's gone to a decision in four of his last six fights with a tremendous striking defense (62%), and the takedown defense (68%) has held fine to this stage.

As the favorite, Garcia has also gone to a decision in seven of his last eight bouts. He's also held strong as sensible on the feet (58% striking defense).

This could be an ugly striking match that heads to a decision, according to the -205 odds this fight goes over 2.5 rounds. There's limited upside here when my stuff is right in line with Garcia via the full distance.

Betting Verdict: No value showing on Garcia's ML (-245) or Garcia by Points (+110). Right in step with both of those.

DFS Verdict: In a sloppy fight, Guida's $8 salary could be useful to get up to better favorites on this card. Cashing wins in three of his last five as a 'dog, it's not impossible this fight goes his way.

Chris Gutierrez (-220) vs. Pedro Munhoz (+176)

Men's Bantamweight (135 pounds)

For as poor of a fight environment as the last one, this one is on the opposite end of the spectrum.

These two fighters both average less than 0.60 takedowns per 15 minutes with takedown defenses north of 70%. We're looking at a striking match here.

With that the case, it's easy to see why Gutierrez is favored with the edge in SSR. Powered by tremendous leg kicks, "El Guapo" also has a much higher striking accuracy (58%) and striking defense (64%). While he's the "trendy" pick here coming off an electric knockout of Frankie Edgar, he might still be the right one.

Munhoz lost by decision to Edgar in 2020, and his only respite from a six-fight losing skid is a feigned eye poke -- in terms of severity -- against Sean O'Malley and a decision win over the now-retired Jimmie Rivera.

By ranking, Munhoz has fought tougher competition, but Gutierrez's last three wins have come over guys with a combined 23 UFC wins themselves. It's been close enough in that area that we can't ignore Gutierrez's staggering efficiency advantages behind a two-inch reach edge.

Betting Verdict: Munhoz had been to a decision in five straight before the eye poke. Gutierrez has seen the cards in five of his last eight. Gutierrez by Points (+110) is my favorite way to back this one.

DFS Verdict: This type of predictable environment gives Gutierrez at $22 an awesome floor for the MVP spot as one of the card's larger favorites.

Ion Cutelaba (-132) vs. Tanner Boser (+108)

Light Heavyweight (205 pounds)

Tanner Boser has always been a bit small for a heavyweight, and he's finally making the lifestyle commitment to lean out to 205 pounds for a realistic shot at UFC gold.

At times, he'd be stuck under larger dudes. Rodrigo Nascimento and Ilir Latifi controlled him for over six minutes a piece. However, Boser's excellent striking has led to a positive differential in six of his seven UFC appearances. The only exception? A tight loss to title contender Ciryl Gane.

With that the case, he'll likely hold a striking edge over Ion Cutelaba, who has a poorer 42% striking accuracy and 47% striking defense than his SSR lets on. He's always willing but rarely able.

The drama in this fight is whether Cutelaba's outstanding wrestling (57% takedown accuracy) melts Boser's 64% takedown D. Now facing smaller guys, Boser's takedown defense should improve over time.

To me, this fight could look a lot like Cutelaba's bout with Dustin Jacoby, which ended in a draw. Cutelaba, without a career submission attempt, exerts an enormous amount of energy to repeatedly take guys down, and then Boser -- as the better striker and solid durability in a heavier weight class -- finishes the bout stronger when Ion's gas tank is empty.

Betting Verdict: I see this fight as a pick 'em largely in line with the betting odds. Boser's nonexistent light heavyweight tendencies make it hard to handicap fully.

DFS Verdict: There could be an explosive score on both sides with Cutelaba's reckless offensive approach. I still prefer the striker, Boser at $14, over the wrestler when the ground technician hasn't even attempted a submission in UFC.

Dustin Jacoby (-168) vs. Azamat Murzakanov (+136)

Light Heavyweight (205 pounds)

Speaking of Dustin Jacoby, he's on this card, too.

Jacoby, a former GLORY kickboxer, has been a fan favorite since his 2020 return to UFC, amassing a 6-1-1 record. He's coming off his first promotional loss, which was an awful judging decision in light of Jacoby outstriking Khalil Rountree by 35 significant strikes.

The explanation by most for the Rountree decision was that Jacoby's shots weren't damaging, and there's some validity to that. His 0.52% knockdown rate in this division built on power isn't very high.

That's why I was stunned to find a competitive bout for him this weekend. Though the competition hasn't been as good, Azamat Murzakanov has a higher SSR, striking accuracy (60%), and striking defense (62%) than Jacoby with a massive 2.59% knockdown rate.

Murz's last two opponents had 11 combined UFC wins, so he's continued to bludgeon his way through divisional stalwarts. I see him as a more efficient version of Rountree, so there's real intrigue to this striking match despite the fact that Jacoby would otherwise be in a buy-low position off the "loss."

Betting Verdict: I'll bet Murzakanov's ML (+136) for a unit and a sprinkle on Murzakanov by KO/TKO/Submission (+240) in case that knockdown rate rears its head once more.

DFS Verdict: In a striking-exclusive environment, both of these fighters have a case in DFS. However, with efficiency and power advantages in Murzakanov's corner, his $12 salary is quite appealing.

Billy Quarantillo (-188) vs. Edson Barboza (+152)

Men's Featherweight (145 pounds)

This fight is an awesome measuring stick to see how much sand remains in Edson Barboza's hourglass.

Barboza's last two fights have been brutal. He's tumbled in the rankings after a -27 striking differential in a knockout loss to Giga Chikadze followed by spending 11:28 of the 15 minutes underneath Bryce "Thug Nasty" Mitchell.

In his prime, Barboza would have shredded Billy Quarantillo's 40% striking defense, but Billy Q's zombie-like tendencies haven't come close to a loss inside the distance yet. Quarantillo's non-stop offense includes 7.88 significant strikes landed per minute with elite 58% accuracy, and he's added 1.24 takedowns per 15 minutes.

While Billy is always hittable, Barboza's defensive issues are the larger concern. He defended just 28% of Mitchell's significant strikes and 49% of Chikadze's. He has also knocked down a total of three times. Quarantillo's offense is more efficient -- and his pace is much higher -- than either -- but that also was at a lower level of competition.

Barboza destroyed Shane Burgos, who destroyed Billy. MMA math isn't perfect, but it does absolutely conclude the 'dog is live in a great environment for fantasy MMA.

Betting Verdict: Because of Quarantillo's legendary durability, Barboza by Points (+380) and Quarantillo by Points (+240), respectively, are the specific outcomes showing the most value in my stuff. This fight going the full distance (+112) is showing value, too.

DFS Verdict: Both sides of this fight are viable thanks to the wide salaries. Billy Q is a fringe MVP candidate at $19 with his high-octane approach, and Barboza at $11 will have the opportunity to score strikes, too.

Max Holloway (-188) vs. Arnold Allen (+152)

Men's Featherweight (145 pounds)
Five-Round Main Event

This handicap is a bit like the co-main event. We just need to see if -- and how much -- Max Holloway might be declining.

He's only 31 years old, but there are plenty of miles accrued across 26 UFC bouts. Now, Holloway has lost to just Dustin Poirier and Alexander Volkanovski since the start of 2014, so it's hard to poke true holes in his profile against more "normal" divisional challenges like Arnold Allen.

Holloway's striking accuracy (42%) and striking defense (49%) were actually better marks in his third loss to Volkanovski than his second, so to pencil him in as "declining" might be a stretch. After all, he had a +71 striking differential against interim champion Yair Rodriguez just 17 months ago.

"Almighty" Arnie won't be an easy test, though. His 67% striking defense is the best mark of a Holloway foe to date -- and the best of an active featherweight with at least five bouts. He's also added a wrestling element (1.53 takedowns per 15 minutes with 50% accuracy) that Holloway doesn't bring.

Still, Max's 84% takedown defense -- tested by several title challengers -- is one of the best to ever compete in the UFC. Max hasn't been controlled for over 50% of a fight since a bout with Conor McGregor in 2013.

Allen's elite defense will likely provide better resistance than most foes, but Holloway has still averaged 191.7 significant strikes landed in his last 10 bouts. All were five-round fights like this one. It's natural -- if by nothing other than SSR -- to expect Max to still be a tiny bit ahead of a fun fight.

Betting Verdict: Allen has gone to a decision in six of his last nine, and Holloway has seen the cards in seven straight. This fight going the distance (-122) is a solid value bet when it's upwards of -215 in my stuff. I'll pass on a side with Holloway's non-existent sample at this tier of featherweight.

DFS Verdict: Even despite the salary increases, each of Holloway's last seven bouts has featured at least 85 significant strikes for both fighters. Max at $22 will justifiably be a popular MVP, but I don't mind Allen ($15) at that spot, either. Both are high-floor options in flex spots.