OctagonEdge

UFC Fight Night: Ankalaev vs. Guskov · Flyweight · 3 rounds

Opening locked Aug 19, 2026 · Steve Erceg 55% · Decision · Distance · scored miss (Ramazan Temirov / KO/TKO)

Steve Erceg vs Ramazan Temirov

Steve Erceg
AustraliaAustralia

Steve Erceg

“Astroboy”

Unranked · 14-5 · striker · Orthodox · 31 · IQ C+ 64

Wilkes Martial Arts · Australia

VS
Ramazan Temirov
UzbekistanUzbekistan

Ramazan Temirov

“Temurlan”

Unranked · 20-3 · striker · Orthodox · 29 · IQ C 55

Muradov Legion Gym · Uzbekistan

Steve Erceg

55.3%

Ramazan Temirov

44.7%

Model win probability · confidence 48%

No market posted yet.

Why the model leans this way

Erceg 55 — the tape favors pocket striker

Steve Erceg is the model side at 55.3% because the largest live edges sit where this fight is likely to be fought. Striker vs striker. The pocket and the counter become the whole fight. Ground game is the clearest separator: Erceg 37 (D) vs Temirov 27 (D). Erceg brings 1.1 TD/15 and 6 sub wins into Temirov's 82% takedown defense.

  1. 01

    Ground game

    Erceg

    Erceg 37 (D) vs Temirov 27 (D). Erceg brings 1.1 TD/15 and 6 sub wins into Temirov's 82% takedown defense.

  2. 02

    Takedown reaction

    Erceg

    Erceg 67 (C+) vs Temirov 58 (C). When the shot comes, Erceg stuffs it at 81% — Temirov is at 82%.

  3. 03

    Fight IQ

    Erceg

    Erceg 64 (C+) vs Temirov 55 (C). Problem-solving and win-lane diversity sit with Erceg (C+ vs C).

  4. 04

    Durability

    Temirov

    Temirov 85 (A) vs Erceg 80 (B+). Temirov has been finished by strikes 0 times; Erceg 0.

Path · Erceg

Erceg has to wrestle early, chain the second shot, and make Temirov defend the neck instead of throwing. That is the percentage path.

Path · Temirov

Temirov wins by forcing the fight into durability and denying Erceg a long look at durability.

A one-score fight on the model. Any three-minute pocket explosion or a stuck takedown against the grain wipes a lot of this number.

Full read

Style and location. Almost exclusively standing. Power and volume decide it. Erceg is built as: Pocket striker. Temirov is built as: Pocket striker. Fight IQ delta is +9 toward Erceg — that is composure, win-lane diversity, and whether they solve a second problem when the first look dies.

The edges that move the number. Ground game: Erceg 37 (D) vs Temirov 27 (D). Erceg brings 1.1 TD/15 and 6 sub wins into Temirov's 82% takedown defense. Takedown reaction: Erceg 67 (C+) vs Temirov 58 (C). When the shot comes, Erceg stuffs it at 81% — Temirov is at 82%. Fight IQ: Erceg 64 (C+) vs Temirov 55 (C). Problem-solving and win-lane diversity sit with Erceg (C+ vs C).

The finish path leans the mat (33% submission). Once a takedown sticks, the neck becomes the whole fight. A one-score fight on the model. Any three-minute pocket explosion or a stuck takedown against the grain wipes a lot of this number. These trait marks are derived from FightMetric rates, career method shares, and loaded bout rows — reaction time and agility are proxies, not stopwatch numbers. The model folds the same scores into win probability, so a hole on this card is a hole in the percentage.

Style & IQ board

Fight IQ, ground game, defense, counter punching, reaction, agility, and takedown reaction — scored from tape and folded into the win number above.

ErcegTraitTemirov
64 C+
IQ
55 C
37 D
Ground
27 D
67 C+
Defense
67 C+
38 D
Counter
34 D
64 C+
Reaction
66 C+
55 C
Agility
53 C
67 C+
TD react
58 C
80 B+
Chin
85 A

Method of victory

KO / TKO
29%
Submission
33%
Decision
38%

Almost exclusively standing. Power and volume decide it.

Duration

R1

26%

R2

17%

R3

20%

Dist

38%

Most likely: Distance. Expected 9.9 minutes.

Style matchup

Striker vs striker. The pocket and the counter become the whole fight.

  • Fight IQ

    C+ 64 vs C 55 — composure, win-lane diversity, adjustments

    Erceg

  • Ground game (tape)

    37 vs 27

    Erceg

  • Reach / length

    68.0" vs 63.0"

    Erceg

  • Takedown reaction

    81% vs 82% hips on the shot

    Erceg

  • Striking efficiency

    49% vs 43%

    Erceg

  • Striking differential

    1.56 vs 1.79 SLpM−SApM (recency / opp. adjusted)

    Temirov

  • Grappling composite

    TD avg × acc × def + control + submission threat (adj.)

    Erceg

  • Recency form

    Opp.-adjusted last 0/0 UFC rows

    Temirov

  • Counter punching

    38 vs 34

    Erceg

  • Damage ratio

    1.52 vs 1.61 landed/absorbed

    Temirov

  • Durability

    0 vs 0 KO losses

    Temirov

  • Output (SLpM)

    4.56 vs 4.73

    Temirov

  • Punching agility

    Output × accuracy × age curve

    Erceg

  • Timing & reaction

    Defense + absorb + knockdown timing proxy

    Temirov

  • Age-adjusted curve

    31 vs 29

    Temirov

  • Striking defense

    59% vs 59%

    Erceg

  • Pocket defense (tape)

    C+ vs C+

    Temirov

  • Takedown mismatch

    TD def 81% vs 82%

    Temirov

  • Cardio proxy

    Output sustainability + distance rate

    Temirov

  • Strength of schedule

    Opp. quality 50 vs 50

    Erceg

  • Style interaction

    Striker vs striker. The pocket and the counter become the whole fight.

    Erceg

  • Layoff / rust

    Time since last fight

    Erceg

  • Championship / 5-round

    Three-round fight

    Erceg

Tape

ErcegMetricTemirov
4.56SLpM4.73
3.00SApM2.94
49%Str Acc43%
59%Str Def59%
1.09TD Avg0.68
27%TD Acc50%
81%TD Def82%
0.36Sub Avg0.00
0.15KD/150.24
5'8"Reach5'3"
31Age29

Steve Erceg

No recent UFC tape in the book.

Ramazan Temirov

No recent UFC tape in the book.

Your pick

Desk briefing

Sign in to request a written analyst note on this fight.