Matheus Camilo vs Jai Herbert
UFC Fight Night: Allen vs Duncan · Sat 10 Oct 2026 · Lightweight
Official forecast
Result
✗ Forecast missedJai Herbert won by U-DEC · round 3, 5:00
Winner estimate
Model pick: Matheus Camilo (71.2%). The model expects the other fighter to win about 29 times in 100 similar fights.
Evidence and reliability
- Matheus Camilo: 3 prior detailed UFC fights
- Jai Herbert: 10 prior detailed UFC fights
Official forecasts require at least 3 prior detailed UFC fights for both fighters. The estimate is a probability from one model, not a guarantee; small differences between fighters carry real uncertainty.
Why the model leans this way
Locked before the fightModel pickMatheus Camilo71.2%
Supporting the pick3
- AgeEdge: Matheus CamiloMatheus Camilo 25.0 yrs, Jai Herbert 38.0 yrs.
- Takedowns landed per roundEdge: Matheus CamiloMatheus Camilo 1.17, Jai Herbert 0.12.
- Striking defenseEdge: Matheus CamiloMatheus Camilo 66.7%, Jai Herbert 53.0%.
Working against the pick2
- ReachEdge: Jai HerbertMatheus Camilo 175 cm, Jai Herbert 196 cm.
- Significant strikes landed per roundEdge: Jai HerbertMatheus Camilo 9.33, Jai Herbert 14.21.
Method and distance
Method and distance estimates are unavailable for this bout.
Stat comparison
DescriptiveReason through the matchup yourself. The brighter side of each bar marks the fighter with the edge.
Biggest statistical gaps
- Matheus Camilo has more takedown production: 1.17 takedowns landed per round to Jai Herbert’s 0.12.
- Matheus Camilo brings more wrestling volume: 2.17 takedown attempts per round to Jai Herbert’s 0.58.
- Matheus Camilo completes more of their takedown attempts: 53.8% to Jai Herbert’s 21.4%.
Striking
- Significant strikes landedper roundMatheus Camilo 9.3, Jai Herbert 14.2. Edge: Jai Herbert.
- Significant strikes absorbedper round · lower is betterMatheus Camilo 12.8, Jai Herbert 14.9. Edge: Matheus Camilo.
- Striking differentiallanded minus absorbed, per roundMatheus Camilo -3.5, Jai Herbert -0.7. Edge: Jai Herbert.
- Striking accuracyshare of significant strikes landedMatheus Camilo 43.1%, Jai Herbert 41.6%. Edge: Matheus Camilo.
- Striking defenseshare of opponents’ significant strikes avoidedMatheus Camilo 66.7%, Jai Herbert 53.0%. Edge: Matheus Camilo.
- Knockdownsper roundMatheus Camilo 0.17, Jai Herbert 0.25. Edge: Jai Herbert.
Wrestling and grappling
- Takedown attemptsper round · wrestling volumeMatheus Camilo 2.17, Jai Herbert 0.58. Edge: Matheus Camilo.
- Takedowns landedper round · takedown productionMatheus Camilo 1.17, Jai Herbert 0.12. Edge: Matheus Camilo.
- Takedown accuracyshare of own attempts completedMatheus Camilo 53.8%, Jai Herbert 21.4%. Edge: Matheus Camilo.
- Takedown defenseshare of opponents’ attempts stoppedMatheus Camilo —, Jai Herbert 66.7%.
- Control timeminutes:seconds per roundMatheus Camilo 0:59, Jai Herbert 0:44. Edge: Matheus Camilo.
- Submission attemptsper roundMatheus Camilo 0.17, Jai Herbert 0.00. Edge: Matheus Camilo.
Fight profile
- Finish rateshare of UFC wins by KO/TKO or submissionMatheus Camilo 50.0%, Jai Herbert 50.0%.
- Wins by KO/TKOUFC winsMatheus Camilo 1, Jai Herbert 2. Style difference, no edge.
- Wins by submissionUFC winsMatheus Camilo 0, Jai Herbert 0. Style difference, no edge.
- Wins by decisionUFC winsMatheus Camilo 1, Jai Herbert 2. Style difference, no edge.
- Average fight timeelapsed time per UFC bout (minutes:seconds)Matheus Camilo 8:16, Jai Herbert 11:41. Style difference, no edge.
- Detailed UFC fightsmore fights = more evidence behind these numbersMatheus Camilo 3, Jai Herbert 10. Edge: Jai Herbert.
The fighters
Matheus Camilo
Ratings
Ratings V2 scores are not available for this fighter yet.
Chin and Cardio · Frozen through October 17, 2026
R1 research scaleJai Herbert
Ratings
Ratings V2 scores are not available for this fighter yet.
Chin and Cardio · Frozen through October 17, 2026
R1 research scalePost-fight review
Published- What happened
- Herbert defeated Camilo by unanimous decision, 29-28 on all three scorecards. Herbert was effective on the feet early before Camilo hurt him late in Round 1. Camilo took the fight down in the second, but Herbert swept into top position, and the veteran was the fresher and more active fighter in Round 3.
- What the model got right
- The model correctly identified Camilo’s youth, takedown production and defensive statistics as meaningful advantages. Camilo did have success hurting Herbert and bringing the fight to the ground, so those pre-fight signals were not meaningless.
- What the model missed
- At 71.2% Camilo, this was the most significant main-card miss. Herbert’s enormous reach advantage and higher striking output were already visible concerns, but the model weighted Camilo’s youth and statistical profile too heavily relative to Herbert’s experience, length and ability to remain effective across the full three rounds.
- Takeaway
- This is the fight most worth studying. Veteran context and recent form may need to complement career aggregates when a younger fighter’s efficiency numbers create a large model edge. One result should not trigger a model change, but this is exactly the kind of miss worth tracking prospectively.
Simulate in the Lab
The Lab's simulators currently run on a fixed library of historical example fights, so this exact matchup is not available there yet. They are research tools and can disagree with the official forecast.