PVZ and Waterson do battle this December 17, 2016 at the Golden 1 Center in Sacramento, California.

One sentence summary:

Phil: After Sage and Jouban, get ready for the main event of UFC Fight Night: Attractive People.

David: Joe Silva in the back said everyone attack, and now we have a Maxim-faced ballroom blitz.

History / Introduction to both fighters

David: Anytime a fighter is disproportionately criticized, you can almost always trace it back to Dana White. Like PVZ. Was it her fault that dancing in front of a car was the greatest thing to Dana White since Blackjack? More power to PVZ for siphoning Instagram clips into a Reebok deal. This history is what I think sometimes explain why PVZ doesn’t get enough credit for her pure pugilism. The Namajunas fight probably seemed like validation to her critics, but PVZ is 22, and displayed serious fortitude against a legitimate opponent.

Phil: VanZant appears to be the cliche of the blonde Californian bubblehead on first glance, and I think it’s interesting that if you look a bit closer, then that first assumption… isn’t actually that inaccurate? Paige really does appear to be who she is on the surface, albeit with a ton of ambition and mental fortitude mixed in. I find the dichotomy of a girl straight out of a Clueless remake being teak-tough and having a genuinely ugly, grinding fighting style to be… sort of rad?

David: Maybe it was just slumming around the old Sherdog forums too much, but for the longest time I thought Waterson was just some karate yeoman with a modeling gig. I didn’t realize how long she had been dipping her toes, fists, and knees into the sport. It’s a tough journey for her though. Being the older woman trying to take down the spritely whipper snapper. It’s an uphill battle. Especially if the Magana fight is any indication. But Waterson has plenty to offer.

Phil: Waterson makes it to the UFC as the artefact of a parallel world. In another lifetime, the UFC had an atomweight division and she was probably a low-key star in the division, and won the belt as she did in Invicta. As it is, she’s a welcome addition as a charismatic and well-rounded action fighter who still doesn’t have either the technical polish or the size and athleticism to make a serious run in the increasingly dangerous strawweight division.

What’s at stake?

Phil: I think the UFC gets behind whoever wins, but I don’t think they particularly mind who that is. They’d probably prefer PVZ to win, but Waterson is an almost equally saleable (and older) commodity.

David: Yea, two totally photogenic female athletes won’t suddenly lose all their clout no matter how bad one of them loses. I’d imagine a PVZ loss would suck in the UFC’s eyes, though. Just in terms of career progression. As we’ll get to, unless Paige is regressing, there’s no reason why she should lose.

Where do they want it?

Phil: PVZ is traditionally a clinch brawler. She just runs opponents into the cage, sticks her head under their chin and wails away with clinch knees, elbows and punches until they get tired. More recently, she’s been “enhancing” this with the… not very good circular outfighting and kick arsenal we saw against Bec Rawlings? I mean, it worked but it was a bit of a Vannata / Hall-type performance where the flashy KO shouldn’t distract us from the fact that the winning fighter didn’t really look terribly good before they landed it.

VanZant isn’t defensively sound, a particularly great offensive wrestler (being reliant as she is on low-percentage head and arm throws and clinch trips), or an even average striker. What she is absolutely relentless.

David: PVZ is a fighter who relies on abstract qualities, letting momentum and raw velocity take over in favor of mechanics and fundamentals. It’s a good quality to have, especially while young. Her techniques are still lacking, but unlike say, Sage Northcutt, Paige at least appears to do her homework, attend seminars, and study for her pugilism finals. That tapestry of facepunching may not be expertly woven, but there’s a foundation there (if it weren’t obvious and off topic, I’m skeptical of Northcutt’s fight IQ). Paige has solid chops in the clinch. It’s her instincts that sabotage her somewhat, but for the most part her high volume and posture allow her to maintain output.

Phil: Waterson is ostensibly an outside fighter… but it isn’t really where she’s been winning her fights of late. Instead she’s been looking increasingly effective as a wrestler and clinch striker. This is good and bad, because it means that she’s less likely to get overwhelmed by VanZant, but that she’s also less likely to treat tie-ups like she’s allergic to them.

She’s undeniably the more technical fighter, with a nice counter cross and a diet of front and round kicks which she sets up as short flurries on the way in. Her circular movement is good but has been consistently cracked in fights, as Waterson can rarely stop herself from losing patience, blitzing out, and then returning to the absolute edge of the cage. Like a Tyron Woodley, she has become far too used to backing herself into the fence. In the clinch she throws excellent knees from the plumm. Takedowns are mostly head’n’arm throws, and she’s a finish-oriented submission grappler, with all the positives and negatives (giving up position) that implies.

David: Waterson is a strong technical fighter who learned everything she needed to about options for offense, and very little on how to set up said offense. True, technical fighters are able establish a rhythm that’s hard for opponents to displace. Think Machida, Jones, or McGregor. Waterson can look so different from fight to fight because she has yet to establish said rhythm. But fighting still works in a vacuum. And to that extent, she can chain opportunities with her buffet of talents on the feet (the counter cross you mentioned, but truly table chopping leg kicks as well), and on the ground. Think CB Dolloway, but with less redneck Matt Damon face.

Insight from Past Fights

Phil: That Rawlings fight still stands out to me. It may have been the growing pains of a new, more effective style, but if VanZant fights like that again, then I think she gets absolutely slaughtered.

David: Was Waterson’s fight with Angela ‘Your Malady’ Magana any better? Magana is not a great fighter, who punches on par with her Tweets, but she still gave Waterson a scare in the first round. Did Waterson more or less dominate? Yea, but I can’t help but throw a red flag there.

X-Factors:

Phil: Waterson’s been out for a while, and has been recovering from injury. Also interested to see if PVZ actually makes significant developments at the increasingly empty Alpha Male gym.

David: Are they both nerds? One of them could be experiencing Rogue One hangover.

Prognostication

Phil: Tough pick. Any kind of outside striking match likely gets PVZ absolutely destroyed. She’s still just not very good at many areas of MMA. However, Waterson’s tendency to get stuck in the clinch, and her tendency to fight from her back are both tendencies which PVZ has feasted on in other fighters like Herrig and Chambers. Paige VanZant by submission, round 4

David: I think this fight favors PVZ for reasons I incorrectly assumed would favor PVZ against Namajunas: momentum, pressure, and percussion all rolled into a centerfold of collision that could force Rose astray. Of course, the difference is that Namajunas is more technical on the ground, and can counter with considerable violence. Waterson doesn’t have this kind of hard boiled, Frank Miller written constitution. This is a good fight, and Waterson will have her moments, but I think PVZ swarms efficiently and otherwise to take a close decision. Paige VanZant by Decision.