Aspen Ladd

The same coinflip, read from this corner. She is picked against, but nothing in the chapter closes a route for her — the analyst has already declared himself "leaving it off the card" and advised the viewer to as well, before either name is attached to a pick. He dismisses both women in one phrase, "neither of them are trustworthy", and only names a side on the condition of being obliged "to make a pick". Her one credit in the chapter is itself doubly hedged — she is "probably the better" striker and he calls it, in the same clause, a "close call" — so it neither supports her nor rescues his pick. The reason he goes the other way is introduced with "i just feel like", a feeling about a comparison. A named side with no firm assertion and explicit advice to avoid the bout is inert.

Picked against by the narrowest of margins in a bout 138 MMA refuses to back. He credits Ladd with good top control of her own and thinks she is probably the better striker of the pair, while calling that judgement a close one in the same breath. The problem he identifies is underneath her: he says she struggles to work effectively from her back, and that is the only negative in the chapter he states without a hedge. He puts no rating on any phase of her game, brackets her with her opponent as untrustworthy on a two-from-five run, and lands on the other corner purely because he feels the wrestling is better there.