UFC 27: Ultimate Bad Boyz: Predictions & Analysis

Friday, September 22, 2000·New Orleans, Louisiana, USA
Published April 26, 2026
Predictions are for entertainment purposes only and do not constitute financial advice. Please gamble responsibly.

UFC 27: Ultimate Bad Boyz lands on Friday, September 22, 2000 in New Orleans, Louisiana, USA with 8 bouts on the card. Below is our fight-by-fight breakdown, combining Elo ratings, rolling statistical trends, style matchup data, and betting market context into a pick for every bout.

Quick Picks

MatchupPickConfidenceProb
Pedro Rizzo vs Dan SevernHeavyweightPedro RizzoLean65%
Maurice Smith vs Bobby HoffmanHeavyweightMaurice SmithToss-up53%
Jeremy Horn vs Eugene JacksonMiddleweightJeremy HornStrong79%
Fabiano Iha vs Laverne ClarkWelterweightLaverne ClarkConfident70%
Yuki Kondo vs Alexandre DantasMiddleweightAlexandre DantasLean60%
Ian Freeman vs Tedd WilliamsHeavyweightIan FreemanConfident69%
Jeff Monson vs Tim LajcikHeavyweightJeff MonsonToss-up54%
Brad Gumm vs CJ FernandesWelterweightBrad GummStrong75%

Like these picks? Bet on DraftKings

Place your bets on the fights above at DraftKings Sportsbook

Bet Now on DraftKings

Fight-by-Fight Breakdown

Pedro Rizzo vs Dan Severn

Heavyweight
65%
Pedro Rizzo
Rizzo
9-5
CO-III1328
Striker
VS
Severn
9-4
CO-II1355
Submission Artist
Over/UnderUnder 70%
Under 70%Over 30%

The Heavyweight matchup features Pedro Rizzo (9-5) taking on Dan Severn (9-4).

The Elo gap here is razor-thin — Rizzo at 1328, Severn at 1355. On paper, this is as close to a coin flip as it gets.

Stylistically this is Rizzo's striker game against Severn's submission artist approach. Rizzo brings a versatile approach, while Severn is most dangerous on the ground, constantly threatening chokes and joint locks. Historically these archetypes are dead-even when they collide.

A few statistical edges stand out. Severn throws significantly more leather — a 1.0 sig. strike per minute gap. Severn is far more active with takedowns, averaging 0.7 more per 15 minutes. Severn has tighter striking defense, making opponents miss more often.

The Pick: Pedro Rizzo over Dan Severn. The model gives Rizzo a slight nod at 65% — this could easily go either way.

53%
Maurice Smith
Smith
4-3
RK-I1186
Knockout Artist
VS
Hoffman
0-2
MC-II938
Over/UnderUnder 63%
Under 63%Over 37%

The Heavyweight matchup features Maurice Smith (4-3) taking on Bobby Hoffman (0-2).

Smith is rated at 1186 — 248 points above Hoffman's 938. Gaps this large usually mean one fighter has been consistently beating better opponents.

A few statistical edges stand out. Smith throws significantly more leather — a 1.9 sig. strike per minute gap. Hoffman is far more active with takedowns, averaging 0.0 more per 15 minutes. Hoffman has tighter striking defense, making opponents miss more often.

The Pick: Maurice Smith over Bobby Hoffman. This is essentially a pick'em. The model nudges toward Smith at 53%, but there's almost nothing separating these two.

79%
Jeremy Horn
Horn
6-7
RK-III1052
Wrestler
VS
Jackson
3-4
PR-I870
Wrestler
Over/UnderUnder 60%
Under 60%Over 40%

The Middleweight matchup features Jeremy Horn (6-7) taking on Eugene Jackson (3-4).

Horn is rated at 1052 — 182 points above Jackson's 870. Gaps this large usually mean one fighter has been consistently beating better opponents.

The style clash matters here: Horn is most dangerous on the ground, constantly threatening chokes and joint locks, while Jackson looks to close distance and put the fight on the mat. In our database, wrestlers own a 55% win rate against submission artists, giving Jackson the stylistic edge.

A few statistical edges stand out. Horn throws significantly more leather — a 0.2 sig. strike per minute gap. Horn is far more active with takedowns, averaging 4.2 more per 15 minutes. Jackson has tighter striking defense, making opponents miss more often.

The Pick: Jeremy Horn over Eugene Jackson. The model is firm on this one: Horn at 79%.

Fabiano Iha vs Laverne Clark

Welterweight
70%
Laverne Clark
Iha
3-4
MC-III925
Submission Artist
VS
Clark
4-1
RK-I1167
Over/UnderUnder 57%
Under 57%Over 43%

The Welterweight matchup features Fabiano Iha (3-4) taking on Laverne Clark (4-1).

Clark is rated at 1167 — 241 points above Iha's 925. Gaps this large usually mean one fighter has been consistently beating better opponents. Clark has won 4 straight.

A few statistical edges stand out. Clark throws significantly more leather — a 0.9 sig. strike per minute gap. Clark is far more active with takedowns, averaging 0.3 more per 15 minutes. Clark has tighter striking defense, making opponents miss more often.

The Pick: Laverne Clark over Fabiano Iha. We're leaning Clark here at 70%, a solid but not overwhelming edge.

60%
Alexandre Dantas
Kondo
1-2
MC-II954
VS
Dantas
0-2
UC-I769
Over/UnderUnder 58%
Under 58%Over 42%

The Middleweight matchup features Yuki Kondo (1-2) taking on Alexandre Dantas (0-2).

Kondo is rated at 954 — 185 points above Dantas's 769. Gaps this large usually mean one fighter has been consistently beating better opponents.

A few statistical edges stand out. Dantas throws significantly more leather — a 0.0 sig. strike per minute gap. Dantas is far more active with takedowns, averaging 0.0 more per 15 minutes. Dantas has tighter striking defense, making opponents miss more often.

The Pick: Alexandre Dantas over Yuki Kondo. The model gives Dantas a slight nod at 60% — this could easily go either way.

69%
Ian Freeman
Freeman
3-2-1
RK-I1187
Knockout Artist
VS
Williams
1-1
MC-II951
Over/UnderUnder 55%
Under 55%Over 45%

The Heavyweight matchup features Ian Freeman (3-2-1) taking on Tedd Williams (1-1).

Freeman is rated at 1187 — 235 points above Williams's 951. Gaps this large usually mean one fighter has been consistently beating better opponents.

A few statistical edges stand out. Williams throws significantly more leather — a 1.1 sig. strike per minute gap. Freeman is far more active with takedowns, averaging 1.4 more per 15 minutes. Freeman has tighter striking defense, making opponents miss more often.

The Pick: Ian Freeman over Tedd Williams. We're leaning Freeman here at 69%, a solid but not overwhelming edge.

Jeff Monson vs Tim Lajcik

Heavyweight
54%
Jeff Monson
Monson
4-3
CO-III1320
All-Rounder
VS
Lajcik
0-2-1
UC-I766
Over/UnderUnder 64%
Under 64%Over 36%

The Heavyweight matchup features Jeff Monson (4-3) taking on Tim Lajcik (0-2-1).

Monson is rated at 1320 — 555 points above Lajcik's 766. Gaps this large usually mean one fighter has been consistently beating better opponents. Monson rides a 3-fight win streak into this one.

A few statistical edges stand out. Lajcik throws significantly more leather — a 1.0 sig. strike per minute gap. Lajcik is far more active with takedowns, averaging 0.0 more per 15 minutes. Monson has tighter striking defense, making opponents miss more often.

The Pick: Jeff Monson over Tim Lajcik. This is essentially a pick'em. The model nudges toward Monson at 54%, but there's almost nothing separating these two.

Brad Gumm vs CJ Fernandes

Welterweight
75%
Brad Gumm
Gumm
0-1-1
PR-I895
VS
Fernandes
0-0-1
MC-I978
Over/UnderUnder 59%
Under 59%Over 41%

The Welterweight matchup features Brad Gumm (0-1-1) taking on CJ Fernandes (0-0-1).

There's a real Elo separation here: Fernandes at 978 versus Gumm at 895. That 83-point gap typically reflects a meaningful difference in recent quality of competition and results.

A few statistical edges stand out. Gumm throws significantly more leather — a 1.2 sig. strike per minute gap. Fernandes is far more active with takedowns, averaging 0.0 more per 15 minutes. Fernandes has tighter striking defense, making opponents miss more often.

The Pick: Brad Gumm over CJ Fernandes. The model is firm on this one: Gumm at 75%.

Methodology

Predictions are generated by our ensemble model combining LightGBM (65%) and CatBoost (35%), trained on every UFC fight since 1994. The model uses 23 features including Elo ratings, rolling 5-fight statistical averages, style matchup history, physical attributes, and market odds when available.

On our held-out test set (402 fights from January-September 2023), the model achieves 63.4% accuracy with a log-loss of 0.626. High-confidence picks (>75% probability) hit at 82.7%. For full model transparency, visit our Model page.