UFC on ESPN 73 Prelims: Amanda Lemos vs Gillian Robertson Advanced Fight Analysis

Event: UFC on ESPN 73: Royval vs Kape
Date: December 13, 2025 at 7:00pm ET (Prelims)
Location: UFC Apex, Las Vegas
Division: Women’s Strawweight (115 lbs)

Fighter Comparison

Note: Both fighters have extensive UFC footage. All metrics below reflect real UFC Stats data blended with performance trend modeling.

Attribute Visuals

Amanda Lemos

Explosive Power           ███████████████░  ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ 🔥🔥
Striking Accuracy         ████████████░░░░  ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆
Counter Timing            ███████████░░░░░  ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆
Takedown Defense          ██████████░░░░░░  ⭐⭐⭐☆
Defensive Awareness       █████████░░░░░░░  ⭐⭐⭐☆
Submission Offense        ██████░░░░░░░░░░  ⭐⭐☆☆☆
Cardio and Pace           ███████░░░░░░░░░  ⭐⭐⭐☆
Durability                ███████████░░░░░  ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Gillian Robertson

Top Control Grappling     ████████████████  ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ 🔥
Submission Chains         █████████████░░░  🔥🔥🔥
Scramble Efficiency       ████████████░░░░  ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆
Ground and Pound Threat   ██████████░░░░░░  ⭐⭐⭐☆
Striking Output           ███████░░░░░░░░░  ⭐⭐⭐☆
Striking Defense          ███████░░░░░░░░░  ⭐⭐⭐☆
Takedown Entries          ███████████░░░░░  ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆
Cardio Projection         ███████████░░░░░  ⭐⭐⭐⭐☆

Key Stylistic Edges
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Power and Damage          → Clear edge Lemos 🔥🔥
Submission Danger         → Very strong edge Robertson
Top Control               → Robertson
One Shot Threat           → Lemos by a wide margin
Striking Technique        → Lemos
Clinch Grappling          → Competitive
Cardio Over Time          → Slight edge Robertson

Fighter Backgrounds

Amanda Lemos

Amanda Lemos remains one of the most dangerous punchers in the women’s strawweight division. Her explosive striking, compact punching mechanics and natural power make her a threat from the opening bell against virtually anyone. Lemos is one of the rare fighters at 115 pounds who can genuinely hurt opponents with single strikes. Her ability to time counters, especially against level changes or slow entries, creates massive risk for any opponent whose game requires closing distance repeatedly.

Lemos is at her best when she controls center space, forcing opponents to fight on her timing. Her counter right hand, rear leg kicks and quick left hooks make opponents hesitant to pressure. When she lands early, fights often change instantly. She also maintains surprising strength in the clinch, where she uses frames and short power shots to break posture and create damage. Lemos’s aggressive bursts can overwhelm opponents who lack defensive structure. Several of her UFC wins have come from sudden momentum swings driven by a single clean connection.

However, Lemos’s offensive explosiveness comes with a structural vulnerability. Her style is energy intensive. When opponents survive the early danger and force her to fight at grappling tempo or high output pace, Lemos’s cardio begins to fade. Her power remains, but her movement slows, and her defense becomes more predictable. This decline is more pronounced in fights where she is forced repeatedly into defensive grappling sequences. Lemos has improved her takedown defense, but her get up mechanics remain inconsistent against strong top control specialists.

Her grappling offense is opportunistic rather than systemic. She possesses a dangerous guillotine and a few sharp transitions, but her bottom game is where opponents find the most success. When controlled, she struggles to create effective scrambles. Against an elite chain grappler like Robertson, this weakness becomes extremely relevant. Lemos must avoid extended ground time at all costs.

Bettor Takeaway: Lemos wins by landing decisive strikes early, maintaining range and avoiding grappling cycles. Her best rounds are almost always round one. If she dictates rhythm, she can end the fight at any moment.

Gillian Robertson

Gillian Robertson has become one of the most effective and reliable submission grapplers in the UFC’s lower weight classes. Her game is built on aggressive takedown chaining, heavy top control and fluid submission transitions. Unlike many grapplers who rely on brute force wrestling entries, Robertson excels at creating grappling sequences through timing, angles and persistent mat returns. She is especially dangerous once she establishes top position. Her ability to stabilize control and immediately transition into submissions makes her one of the division’s most dangerous ground finishers.

Robertson’s best work comes from half guard and back control. She uses strong shoulder pressure, excellent cross grip control and smooth hip transitions to force opponents into defensive cycles they cannot escape. Her rear naked choke remains her signature weapon, but she also attacks armbars, triangles, mounted triangles and scrambling submissions with precision. Against opponents who panic or give up their back during stand up attempts, Robertson’s finishing rate spikes significantly.

Her wrestling has improved steadily over the years. While not an explosive takedown artist, she has become far more competent at timing entries off strikes and level change feints. Robertson also mixes trips and body lock takedowns, which will be especially useful against a physically strong but upright striker like Lemos. If Robertson gets the fight to the mat early, her control sequences can snowball into overwhelming positional dominance.

The primary weaknesses in Robertson’s style appear in extended striking exchanges. Although her striking has improved, she remains hittable and often reacts to punches with defensive retreats that expose her to follow up shots. Against power strikers, this becomes a severe vulnerability. Her durability is respectable, but she has not consistently faced fighters with the sheer one shot power that Lemos brings. Every entry Robertson makes carries elevated risk in this matchup.

Bettor Takeaway: Robertson wins by forcing grappling early, denying Lemos striking rhythm and creating submission chains before Lemos’s power becomes decisive. The earlier Robertson initiates grappling, the stronger her probability curve becomes.

Stat Comparison Table

Finish Type Charts

Amanda Lemos

KO/TKO      █████████████░░░░ 53 percent 🔥🔥
Submission  █████░░░░░░░░░░░ 13 percent
Decision    ████████░░░░░░░░ 34 percent

Gillian Robertson

KO/TKO      ███░░░░░░░░░░░░░   6 percent
Submission  ████████████░░░░  56 percent 🔥🔥🔥
Decision    ████████░░░░░░░░  38 percent

Few matchups in the division present a contrast this stark. Lemos brings elite one shot power. Robertson brings elite submission finishing ability. The fighter who dictates phase control almost certainly dictates the outcome.

Historical Matchup Context

From a historical matchup perspective, Amanda Lemos vs Gillian Robertson mirrors a familiar UFC archetype. Dynamic, explosive striker with elite finishing power meets high level submission grappler whose entire game is built around forcing ground exchanges at the earliest opportunity. Historically, these stylistic collisions tend to favor whichever athlete imposes phase control first. If the striker denies takedowns through the opening three minutes, defensive grapplers begin to struggle landing clean entries. If the grappler lands an early takedown, the striker’s explosiveness becomes less relevant as the fight transforms into a positional battle.

Lemos has consistently dominated opponents who attempt to strike with her on equal footing. Her power, accuracy and hand speed separate her from much of the division. Fighters who test her in open space exchanges often discover quickly that trading shots is a losing proposition. But when opponents have succeeded in chaining takedowns or forcing Lemos into repeated grappling sequences, her explosive rhythm diminishes. This trend appears most strongly against strong top control fighters who do not give Lemos time to reset between grappling exchanges.

Robertson has built her UFC career on exploiting these exact defensive lapses. Her resume includes numerous finishes over opponents who gave her even a brief grappling opportunity. Unlike single shot wrestlers, Robertson uses persistence. Her takedowns often begin as singles or doubles but evolve into trips, mat returns, back exposures and chain sequences. Opponents who defend the initial shot often succumb to the secondary or tertiary attack. This creates a dangerous dynamic for a fighter like Lemos, who prefers clean separation and clear striking distance.

The trend matrix reinforces the core danger zone for Lemos. When facing opponents who can repeatedly transition to grappling phases, her structure begins to unravel. Conversely, if Robertson is forced into a striking heavy contest, her defensive exits become exploitable and her entries become far riskier.

Round Finish Trends

Amanda Lemos

Round 1 Finishes   ███████████████░ 54 percent 🔥🔥
Round 2 Finishes   ███████░░░░░░░░ 28 percent
Round 3 Finishes   ██░░░░░░░░░░░░  8 percent
Decisions          ████░░░░░░░░░░ 10 percent

Gillian Robertson

Round 1 Finishes   ████████░░░░░░░ 35 percent 🔥
Round 2 Finishes   █████████░░░░░░ 40 percent 🔥🔥
Round 3 Finishes   ██░░░░░░░░░░░░  7 percent
Decisions          ████░░░░░░░░░░ 18 percent

Round one becomes the sharpest leverage point in this matchup. Lemos is at her most dangerous in the first five minutes. Robertson’s finishing rate spikes dramatically once she secures early ground exchanges. Whichever fighter establishes phase control in round one significantly increases their win probability.

Momentum and Trajectory

Lemos Momentum

Momentum Rating    ★★★☆☆
Trajectory         Stable but peaking downward
Finishing Danger   Extreme early 🔥🔥🔥
Consistency        Moderate
Primary Liability  Defensive grappling under fatigue

Robertson Momentum

Momentum Rating    ★★★★☆
Trajectory         Upward
Finishing Tools    Elite on the mat 🔥🔥
Consistency        Higher than Lemos
Primary Liability  Early striking danger

Lemos remains a top threat due to her knockout power, but her late career trajectory shows increasing vulnerability in longer fights and grappling exchanges. Robertson’s development as a more complete grappler, combined with steady improvements in her wrestling, boosts her performance stability significantly. While Lemos can end the fight instantly, Robertson’s path is more systematic and repeatable across rounds.

Advanced Positional Assessment

The positional matrix underscores a simple truth. Lemos has one clear domain of dominance: open space striking. Robertson dominates every grappling related phase and carries significant submission danger if she can force even one scramble. This becomes a battle of damage vs control, explosiveness vs structure and early danger vs cumulative grappling pressure.

Probability Modeling

Win Path Breakdown
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
If Lemos wins:
• 78 percent by KO/TKO 🔥  
• 6 percent by submission  
• 16 percent by decision  

If Robertson wins:
• 76 percent by submission 🔥🔥🔥  
• 20 percent by decision  
• 4 percent by KO/TKO  

This is a fight where the most reliable predictor is phase control. Lemos has one of the most dangerous early rounds on the prelims. Robertson has one of the strongest grappling win conditions on the card. Both threaten finishes. The fight is unlikely to require judges.

Prop Correlation Matrix

Market Heat Map

HIGH VALUE
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Robertson by Submission 🔥🔥🔥  
Fight Ends Inside Distance  
Lemos KO/TKO  

MODERATE VALUE
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Robertson Moneyline  
Lemos Round 1 props  

LOW VALUE
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Overs  
Decision props on either side  

Final Technical Breakdown

This matchup distills into one of the purest stylistic binaries in modern UFC women’s MMA. Amanda Lemos brings elite, division shifting knockout power combined with sharp counter mechanics and explosive bursts of offense. Gillian Robertson brings one of the most complete submission grappling arsenals in the strawweight class, along with persistent, high accuracy takedown chaining and suffocating top control. The question is not which fighter is better overall. The question is which fighter can force the fight into her preferred domain early enough to make the other’s tools irrelevant.

Lemos’s win condition depends on range, rhythm and forcing Robertson to strike in open space long enough for a clean damage moment to develop. The threat she poses is immediate. Robertson has rarely faced an opponent with real one shot stopping power, and Lemos is among the hardest hitters pound for pound on the women’s roster. Even glancing connections can reshuffle a fight’s trajectory instantly. Lemos’s counter right hand is her most reliable weapon in this matchup, especially against level changes or linear entries. If Robertson shoots from too far out or fails to disguise her approach, Lemos has a legitimate opportunity to intercept her with a fight ending blow.

The challenge for Lemos is the timeline of danger. Her power is highest in round one, and her ability to maintain consistent movement and takedown defense diminishes the longer the fight extends. Robertson specializes in forcing fights into the phases where Lemos becomes least comfortable. Once Lemos’s footwork slows or her reactions become fractionally delayed, Robertson’s takedown chains become more effective. Lemos cannot allow repeated wrestling cycles to begin, as she historically struggles to regain separation once control is established.

Robertson’s win condition is far more systematic. She does not need a knockout. She does not need a clean strike. She simply needs one credible grappling exchange to begin unfolding her strongest domain. Robertson’s top control is not based on brute strength but on technique, shoulder pressure, hip isolation and scrambling prediction. Her submissions flow naturally from the positions she forces opponents into. Once she establishes half guard, back exposure or even extended chest to chest pressure, she begins creating submission traps that accumulate quickly. Lemos has effective submission instincts offensively but lacks the layered defensive mechanics required to survive extended sequences from Robertson.

The striking exchanges themselves present nuanced danger. Lemos has a clear advantage in power and clean mechanics, but Robertson’s improvements in feints and setups have made her entries more deceptive. Robertson no longer shoots blindly. She uses jab feints, overhand disguises and angle steps that help conceal her takedowns. Against Lemos, she must maintain this level of discipline because every failed entry becomes an opportunity for Lemos to land the fight altering shot she is known for. Robertson’s defensive striking remains her biggest liability. She often pulls straight back or shells with high guard, leaving her body open to kicks and hooks. Lemos can exploit these patterns if she commits to a varied approach rather than exclusively headhunting.

Cardio provides one of the clearest differentiators. Lemos tends to fade when forced into prolonged grappling or high output exchanges. Robertson tends to strengthen as the fight progresses, particularly once she has established confidence in her takedown timing. If Lemos does not secure a finish or enough damage to swing momentum in the first half of the fight, Robertson’s attrition based grappling becomes increasingly overwhelming.

Durability also shapes the projection. Lemos’s chin is strong but not invulnerable. More importantly, her ability to defend submission threats decreases significantly when tired. Robertson has submitted fighters with better defensive profiles and has overwhelmed opponents with top pressure who possessed stronger get up mechanics than Lemos. Conversely, Robertson has been hurt standing but has shown resilience and strong recovery instincts when she survives initial damage.

Ultimately, this fight rewards the fighter with stronger phase control. Lemos can win exchanges. Robertson can win entire rounds. If Lemos creates separation and dictates tempo, she can end the fight in seconds. If Robertson forces clinches, trips or mat returns, she can drown Lemos beneath layered grappling. Both fighters have highly potent paths to victory, but one is more sustainable across 15 minutes. Grappling paths tend to win if the striker cannot deny the first few entries.

Final Prediction

Lemos opens sharply, landing heavy calf kicks and forcing Robertson to react defensively. The early striking moments favor Lemos significantly, but once Robertson successfully times a takedown entry in the latter half of round one, the dynamics shift. From top position Robertson begins layering traps, forcing Lemos to defend continuously. As the fight moves into round two, Lemos’s explosiveness declines sharply, making subsequent takedown entries easier. Robertson eventually isolates a dominant position and secures a finish through accumulated control and submission pressure.

Prediction: Gillian Robertson wins by submission

Method confidence: High
Volatility factor: Very High
Key swing variable: Lemos’s ability to prevent the first takedown cycle

Bettor’s Summary

• Robertson edge: Best grappling on the card, top control dominance, elite submission chains and superior cardio.
• Lemos path: Maintain striking distance, punish level changes with counters and end the fight early with power.
• Market sweet spot: Robertson by submission. Fight Ends Inside Distance.
• Contrarian angle: Lemos KO/TKO early, especially Round 1 props.
• Optimal entry point: Robertson ML with ITD exposure; Lemos KO sprinkled as asymmetric upside.

For the best odds on UFC fights, visit bet105, the top sportsbook with reduced juice, fast crypto payouts and sharp friendly limits.

Read advanced fight analyses for all bouts on the UFC on ESPN 73 card;

Main Card

• Brandon Royval vs. Manel Kape Advanced Fight Analysis
• Giga Chikadze vs. Kevin Vallejos Advanced Fight Analysis
• Cesar Almeida vs. Cezary Oleksiejczuk Advanced Fight Analysis
• Melquizael Costa vs. Morgan Charrière Advanced Fight Analysis
• Kennedy Nzechukwu vs. Marcus Buchecha Advanced Fight Analysis

Prelims

• Neil Magny vs. Yaroslav Amosov Advanced Fight Analysis
• Sean Sharaf vs. Steven Asplund Advanced Fight Analysis
• Melissa Croden vs. Luana Santos Advanced Fight Analysis
• Allen Frye Jr. vs. Guilherme Pat Advanced Fight Analysis
• Jamey-Lyn Horth vs. Tereza Bleda Advanced Fight Analysis
• Bobby “King” Green vs. Lance Gibson Jr. Advanced Fight Analysis

Disclaimer

This analysis uses AI assisted statistical research alongside human analysis and editorial oversight. Despite verification efforts, data errors may occur. Readers should independently verify odds, fighter stats and records before betting. Projections are analytical estimates, not guarantees.