UFC Fight Night Vancouver: Expert Picks and Value Opportunities (De Ridder vs Allen)

Vancouver, Canada — October 18, 2025

This event analysis focuses strictly on moderate/optimal setups. We present clear, model‑driven insights for eight targeted fights with concise value takeaways.

Value Betting Meets Reliability

Our approach balances two pillars:

Model probabilities: Estimates derived from striking effectiveness, defensive responsibility, grappling threats, cardio/pace sustainability, and recent form trends.
Reliability overlay: A UFC‑experience filter (Optimal/Moderate/High Risk) that calibrates confidence. Optimal data typically comes from fighters with 5+ UFC bouts.

A bet has positive expected value when our true probability exceeds market implied probability. Sometimes the market prices a rightful favorite correctly; in those cases, the opposing side can offer contrarian value if pricing drifts too far.

Arbitrage Opportunities: Current Scan

No persistent cross‑book arbitrage windows identified at publish time. We’ll update if short‑lived mispricings appear.

Main Event: Reinier de Ridder vs Brendan Allen

Data Profile and Tactical Read

Experience reliability: De Ridder’s sample is building at UFC level; Allen has a deeper UFC tape bank. Mixed‑to‑optimal reliability overall.
Striking: De Ridder — 2.4 SLpM, 47% acc, 54% def (2.1 SApM). Allen — 3.9 SLpM, 53% acc, 53% def (3.4 SApM).
Grappling: De Ridder — 3.8 TD/15 @ 45%, TDDef 70%, Sub/15 1.9. Allen — 1.2 TD/15 @ 42%, TDDef 55%, Sub/15 1.2.
Physicals: De Ridder 6'4" with 79" reach; Allen listed at middleweight with strong clinch game.
Composites: Striking/Grappling — De Ridder 66/90 vs Allen 76/84.

🥊 Fight Analysis Breakdown

Grappling gravity: De Ridder’s body‑lock/outside trip entries into half‑guard shelves force defensive cycles that bank minutes and submission routes (arm‑triangle/back takes).
Pressure vs counters: Allen’s pressure grappling creates scrambles; de Ridder’s top pressure prefers control before damage.
Fence mechanics: Head‑position wins and wrist rides deny clean wall‑walks; even failed finishes steal optics.

🎯 Fight Prediction Analysis (Detailed Analysis Summary)

Model probability: De Ridder 64% vs Allen 36%
Official pick: De Ridder — positional control and submission gravity
Keys to victory: De Ridder — body‑lock/outside trips, wrist rides, half‑guard shelves; Allen — pressure wrestle, win second layers, threaten front‑chokes to deter shots.
Risk factors: Scramble volatility early; Allen’s pressure can flip optics; de Ridder’s striking entries vulnerable if telegraphed.
Value: Playable while ≤64% implied; Allen’s value appears only if markets overweight de Ridder.

Vancouver De Ridder

Manon Fiorot vs Jasmine Jasudavicius

Data Profile and Tactical Read

Experience reliability: Both with strong UFC samples; optimal reliability.
Striking: Fiorot — 6.1 SLpM, 48% acc, 68% def (2.8 SApM). Jasmine — 3.8 SLpM, 45% acc, 48% def (2.9 SApM).
Grappling: Fiorot — 1.0 TD/15 @ 27%, TDDef 92%. Jasmine — 1.9 TD/15 @ 30%, TDDef 60%.
Physicals: Heights 5'7" each; reach 66" vs 68" (Jasmine +2").
Composites: Striking/Grappling — Fiorot 88/74 vs Jasmine 70/75.

🥊 Fight Analysis Breakdown

Footwork economy: Manon’s outside‑in entries and exits reduce takedown setups; jab/low‑kick tempo wins optics.
Shot denial: First‑layer sprawl and frames force longer entries, where Jasmine’s accuracy drops.
Round texture: Minute‑winning power jabs and resets accumulate.

🎯 Fight Prediction Analysis (Detailed Analysis Summary)

Model probability: Fiorot 75% vs Jasudavicius 25%
Official pick: Fiorot — range control and defensive layers
Keys to victory: Fiorot — outside foot, jab/low‑kick cadence, deny collar‑ties; Jasmine — clinch cycles, mat returns, attritional fence time.
Risk factors: Early clinch exchanges if Fiorot concedes the line; low TDAcc but persistent attempts from Jasmine.
Value: Strong favorite profile; avoid overpaying if market inflates well above model.

Vancouver Fiorot

Bruno Silva vs Hyun Sung Park

Data Profile and Tactical Read

Experience reliability: Park smaller UFC sample; moderate reliability; Bruno veteran minutes.
Striking: Bruno — 3.5 SLpM, 46% acc, 52% def (3.1 SApM). Park — 3.8 SLpM, 50% acc, 54% def (2.7 SApM).
Grappling: Bruno — 1.0 TD/15 @ 35%, TDDef 68%, Sub/15 0.6. Park — 2.1 TD/15 @ 40%, TDDef 70%, Sub/15 0.7.
Physicals: Park +1" height and +3" reach.
Composites: Striking/Grappling — Bruno 70/72 vs Park 76/86.

🥊 Fight Analysis Breakdown

Pace and efficiency: Hyun’s strike/defense balance plus takedown looks tax Bruno’s bursts.
Scramble insurance: Quick posts and mat returns protect scorecards even without extended top time.
Damage vs control: Hyun banks cleaner minutes; Bruno’s KO equity remains live early.

🎯 Fight Prediction Analysis (Detailed Analysis Summary)

Model probability: Hyun 72% vs Bruno 28%
Official pick: Hyun Sung Park — efficiency and re‑attempts
Keys to victory: Park — jab first, vary entries, ride positions; Bruno — deny second efforts, counter on exits, force pocket trades.
Risk factors: Park’s young sample vs step‑up; Bruno’s early KO equity.
Value: Solid favorite profile unless priced north of ~72% implied.

Vancouver Hyun

Marlon Vera vs Aiemann Zahabi

Data Profile and Tactical Read

Experience reliability: Optimal on both sides.
Striking: Vera — damage‑forward style; model baseline 62%. Zahabi — defensive economy with live counters.
Grappling: Vera mixes clinch breaks and occasional TDs; Zahabi limited offensive wrestling volume.
Physicals: Comparable profiles at bantamweight; Vera generally more durable optics.
Composites: Model favors Vera in damage optics over time.

🥊 Fight Analysis Breakdown

Damage optics: Vera’s heavier connections flip close minutes even at lower volume.
Fence breaks: Short clinch turns and elbows on exits rack optics; manage Zahabi’s counter windows.
Cardio economy: Vera’s late‑round finishing threat narrows judge variance.

🎯 Fight Prediction Analysis (Detailed Analysis Summary)

Model probability: Vera 62% vs Zahabi 38%
Official pick: Vera — damage‑forward scoring
Keys to victory: Vera — body work, elbows on breaks, protect exits; Zahabi — counter timing, slow pace, steal optics with clean shots.
Risk factors: Low‑volume rounds increase variance; Zahabi’s counters early.
Value: Playable while ≤62–64% implied; Zahabi live only at wide prices.

Vancouver Vera

Kevin Holland vs Mike Malott

Data Profile and Tactical Read

Experience reliability: Holland optimal; Malott growing UFC sample.
Striking: Holland — length and intercept counters; Malott more traditional setups.
Grappling: Holland’s front‑choke/defensive layers deter entries; Malott mixes clinch looks.
Physicals: Holland significant reach advantage.
Composites: Edge Holland in striking composite; grappling close on paper but denial layers favor Holland.

🥊 Fight Analysis Breakdown

Length leverage: Holland’s reach and intercept counters punish level changes and fence entries.
Fail‑safes: Front‑choke threats and frames reduce clinch control time; quick resets keep optics in center.
Shot selection: Clean right hands and elbows on breaks win the optics race.

🎯 Fight Prediction Analysis (Detailed Analysis Summary)

Model probability: Holland 65% vs Malott 35%
Official pick: Holland — length, counters, and denial layers
Keys to victory: Holland — manage range, intercept level‑changes, frame to space; Malott — compress cage, layered entries, kick to set shots.
Risk factors: Holland’s occasional low‑urgency minutes; Malott’s surge moments.
Value: Good through mid‑60s implied.

Vancouver Holland

Charles Jourdain vs Davey Grant

Data Profile and Tactical Read

Experience reliability: Jourdain optimal sample; Grant veteran experience.
Striking: Jourdain — pace/variety edge; Grant carries power counters.
Grappling: Limited sustained control expectation; clinch breaks matter.
Physicals: Similar frames; Jourdain movement advantage.
Composites: Model leans Jourdain on volume and shot selection.

🥊 Fight Analysis Breakdown

Pace and variety: Jourdain’s combination variety and angles stress Grant’s guard.
Counter awareness: Finish combos on exits; protect square resets to avoid overhand counters.
Round ownership: Volume plus cleaner accuracy sways close rounds.

🎯 Fight Prediction Analysis (Detailed Analysis Summary)

Model probability: Jourdain 65% vs Grant 35%
Official pick: Jourdain — pace and shot selection
Keys to victory: Jourdain — angles, finish combos on exits, deny pocket brawls; Grant — intercept counters, clinch to slow tempo.
Risk factors: Grant’s power swings; Jourdain’s defensive lapses in pockets.
Value: Playable to mid‑60s implied.

Vancouver Jourdain

Kyle Nelson vs Matt Frevola

Data Profile and Tactical Read

Experience reliability: Frevola optimal; Nelson seasoned minutes.
Striking: Frevola — forward pressure with improving selection; Nelson — counter windows early.
Grappling: Frevola — A→B→C chain TDs; Nelson — denial better in open space than fence.
Physicals: Comparable; pressure dynamics are the separator.
Composites: Model leans Frevola on re‑attempt reliability.

🥊 Fight Analysis Breakdown

Forward pressure: Frevola’s cage cutting and level‑mixing steal minutes.
Re‑attempts: A→B→C chains on takedowns raise reliability even on partial finishes.
Risk windows: Nelson’s counters are live early; Frevola’s discipline improves late.

🎯 Fight Prediction Analysis (Detailed Analysis Summary)

Model probability: Frevola 65% vs Nelson 35%
Official pick: Frevola — pressure and re‑attempts
Keys to victory: Frevola — cage cuts, level mixing, ride time; Nelson — early counters, circle‑outs, deny fence.
Risk factors: Early exchanges volatility; Frevola’s entries vs counters.
Value: Solid through mid‑60s implied.

Vancouver Frevola

Cody Gibson vs Aoriqileng

Data Profile and Tactical Read

Experience reliability: Gibson veteran minutes; Aoriqileng aggressive but defensively porous at times.
Striking: Gibson — sharper straights; Aoriqileng — bursts and hooks.
Grappling: Gibson — fence cycles/wrist rides; Aoriqileng — lower control reliability.
Physicals: Comparable frames; Gibson cleaner mechanics.
Composites: Model favors Gibson’s jab economy and resets.

🥊 Fight Analysis Breakdown

Jab economy: Gibson’s lead‑hand control and resets blunt Aoriqileng’s bursts.
Fence cycles: Short clinch turns and wrist rides steal optics without heavy tax.
Damage vs volume: Gibson’s straights land cleaner in spread‑out minutes.

🎯 Fight Prediction Analysis (Detailed Analysis Summary)

Model probability: Gibson 62% vs Aoriqileng 38%
Official pick: Gibson — jab economy and cage resets
Keys to victory: Gibson — lead‑hand control, resets, deny pocket chaos; Aoriqileng — force brawls, clinch bursts.
Risk factors: High‑variance exchanges; optics vs volume in close rounds.
Value: Playable near low‑60s implied.

Vancouver Gibson

Top Value Opportunities (Market‑Dependent)

High Value (when priced ≤ model implied)
- Manon Fiorot — Range control; value up to ~75% implied if market is efficient.
- Hyun Sung Park — Efficiency and re‑attempts; value at ≤72% implied.
Medium Value (contextual pricing)
- Kevin Holland — Length and counters; value through mid‑60s implied.
- Matt Frevola — Pressure minutes; value through mid‑60s implied.
- Charles Jourdain — Pace/variety; value near mid‑60s implied.
Situational/Contrarian
- Brendan Allen (grappling volatility) — If de Ridder inflates >66–68% implied.
- Aiemann Zahabi (defensive optics) — If Vera inflates >65–68% implied.

Statistical Summary: Model Probabilities vs Market Notes

Fight	Fighter (Pick)	Model Probability	Edge/Note
De Ridder vs Allen	Reinier de Ridder (Pick)	64%	Positional control and subs
Fiorot vs Jasudavicius	Manon Fiorot (Pick)	75%	Range control and denial
Silva vs Hyun	Hyun Sung Park (Pick)	72%	Efficiency and re‑attempts
Vera vs Zahabi	Marlon Vera (Pick)	62%	Damage‑forward optics
Holland vs Malott	Kevin Holland (Pick)	65%	Length and counters
Jourdain vs Grant	Charles Jourdain (Pick)	65%	Pace and shot selection
Nelson vs Frevola	Matt Frevola (Pick)	65%	Pressure and re‑attempts
Gibson vs Aoriqileng	Cody Gibson (Pick)	62%	Jab economy and cage resets

Notes: Market edges depend on live pricing relative to our model and BetOnline availability.

Conclusion

UFC Fight Night Vancouver presents a value‑aware slate where control cycles, defensive stability, and initiative‑first striking underpin our positions. Respect contrarian finishing equity when prices stretch; size stakes to edge strength and avoid paying above model.

Hashtags: #UFC #UFCFightNight #DeRidderAllen #ValuePicks #MMAAnalytics