In the highly anticipated rematch at UFC 312, Dricus Du Plessis reaffirmed his dominance over Sean Strickland by delivering a masterclass performance that culminated in a unanimous decision victory. With this win, Du Plessis improved his record to 23-2, marking a pivotal moment in his career as he showcased not just skill, but also the resilience necessary to defeat a seasoned opponent. Strickland, on the other hand, saw his record dip to 29-7. The scoring of the match reflected the clear disparity in their performances, with judges marking the fight 50-45, 50-45, and 49-46 in favor of Du Plessis. Such scores echo the one-sided nature of this championship clash, where Du Plessis left no stone unturned in his pursuit of victory.
From the opening bell, it was evident that Du Plessis had a well-thought-out game plan, and it involved a relentless assault on Strickland’s vulnerabilities. Utilizing a damaging left head kick that he targeted effectively throughout the fight, Du Plessis kept Strickland on the back foot. Despite his desire to achieve a knockout, Du Plessis had to settle for a dominant decision—a testament to both his striking accuracy and his ability to control the pace of the fight.
Strickland, known for his unorthodox style and ability to absorb strikes, struggled to find his rhythm. His corner, recognizing a significant shift in momentum, urged him to increase his output, but Du Plessis continued to dictate the exchanges. The South African fighter managed to connect a staggering 129 total strikes, demonstrating both volume and precision. Strickland’s inability to effectively counter was highlighted further when Du Plessis broke his nose in the fourth round with a right hand, a turning point that further tilted the fight in favor of the champion.
Sean Strickland came into the fight with the confidence of being a former victor over Du Plessis, believing that his previous victory was no fluke. However, as the fight progressed, the mental aspect of the competition began to weigh heavily on him, particularly post-injury. Strickland’s commentary post-fight indicated that the broken nose affected not only his physicality but also his mental focus, realizing that the “calm” approach he aimed for was nearly impossible amidst the escalating challenge of an injured opponent. His admission of being distracted by the injury sheds light on the psychological battles that are often just as significant as physical capabilities in high-stakes matches.
While Strickland aimed to maintain composure, Du Plessis’s relentless approach, combined with the injury to his opponent, effectively neutralized Strickland’s game plan. The fight serves as a telling reminder of how injuries can alter one’s strategy in the Octagon, effectively transforming fighters into more vulnerable versions of themselves.
Du Plessis’s victory sets the stage for an exciting future. The middleweight division is rife with potential challengers, and among them, the undefeated Khamzat Chimaev stands out as a significant threat. Following the fight, Chimaev’s remark on social media hinted at potential discontent with the match’s outcome. This could set the stage for a compelling clash between the two, both vying for dominance in a competitive division.
Additionally, Du Plessis did not shy away from expressing interest in moving up in weight to face light heavyweight champion Alex Pereira, signaling that he is ready for higher challenges. His display of skill and confidence will make any matchup with Chimaev or Pereira an intriguing spectacle for fans.
The UFC 312 bout between Du Plessis and Strickland was a statement of intent from Du Plessis, not just as a fighter but as a potential champion in waiting. His ability to dominate defensively and offensively against a fellow skilled opponent paves the way for what could be a legacy-filled future. As the dust settles on this encounter, one thing is clear: Dricus Du Plessis has established himself as a force in the middleweight division, and the journey ahead promises to be thrilling for fans and fighters alike.
Leave a Reply