Compare Dan Hooker vs Paddy Pimblett — UFC matchup breakdown
Tale of the Tape
The biometric deltas where one side genuinely has an edge.
Activity & layoff
The recency dimension Tale of the Tape doesn't carry. How active each fighter has been, and how that compares to active peers in their division.
Division percentiles below rank both fighters against the Lightweight roster (470 fighters).
Recent form
Last five pro bouts (non-UFC fights dashed + tagged), current trajectory, and the level of opposition going into this matchup.
Common opponents
The single UFC opponent both fighters have faced. Reads as a directional signal, not a verdict.
Schedule Score
Who they've faced × what they've done. Composite + components compared head-to-head, percentile-ranked against every UFC fighter w/ ≥3 resolved bouts.
Per-tier records + bout-by-bout
| Tier | Dan Hooker | Paddy Pimblett |
|---|---|---|
| Champion | 0-1 | 0-1 |
| Top-5 | 3-7 | 2-0 |
| Top-15 | 4-1 | 1-0 |
| Cross-div ranked | 1-0 | — |
| Contender-level | 1-0 | — |
| Established | 2-0 | 2-0 |
| Building | 0-1 | — |
| Unproven | 3-0 | 2-0 |
- L vs Benoit Saint Denis#876Jan 31, 2026 · Top-5
- L vs Arman Tsarukyan#289Nov 22, 2025 · Top-5
- W vs Mateusz Gamrot#578Aug 17, 2024 · Top-5
- W vs Jalin Turner#1069Jul 8, 2023 · Top-15
- W vs Claudio Puelles30Nov 12, 2022 · Established
- L vs Arnold Allen#778Mar 19, 2022 · Top-5
- L vs Islam Makhachev#592Oct 30, 2021 · Champion
- W vs Nasrat Haqparast40Sep 25, 2021 · Contender-level
- L vs Michael Chandler56Jan 23, 2021 · Top-5
- L vs Dustin Poirier#391Jun 27, 2020 · Top-5
- W vs Paul Felder#675Feb 22, 2020 · Top-15
- W vs Al Iaquinta#679Oct 5, 2019 · Top-5
- W vs James Vick#1565Jul 20, 2019 · Top-15
- L vs Edson Barboza#582Dec 15, 2018 · Top-5
- W vs Gilbert Burns40Jul 7, 2018 · Cross-div ranked
- W vs Jim Miller#1474Apr 21, 2018 · Top-5
- W vs Marc Diakiese26Dec 30, 2017 · Established
- W vs Ross Pearson#1561Jun 10, 2017 · Top-15
- L vs Jason Knight42Nov 26, 2016 · Top-15
- W vs Mark Eddiva8Mar 19, 2016 · Unproven
- L vs Yair Rodriguez61Oct 3, 2015 · Top-5
- W vs Hatsu Hioki12May 9, 2015 · Unproven
- L vs Maximo Blanco18Sep 20, 2014 · Building
- W vs Ian Entwistle8Jun 28, 2014 · Unproven
- L vs Justin Gaethje#493Jan 24, 2026 · Champion
- W vs Michael Chandler#778Apr 12, 2025 · Top-5
- W vs King Green#1364Jul 27, 2024 · Top-15
- W vs Tony Ferguson#1583Dec 16, 2023 · Top-5
- W vs Jared Gordon30Dec 10, 2022 · Established
- W vs Jordan Leavitt26Jul 23, 2022 · Established
- W vs Kazula Vargas8Mar 19, 2022 · Unproven
- W vs Luigi Vendramini8Sep 4, 2021 · Unproven
All figures are 0–100 ratings (shown as %), not percentages of anything literal. Schedule strength = the average quality of every UFC opponent faced (win or lose). Win quality = the average quality of the opponents actually beaten. The composite Schedule Score combines schedule strength (65%) with win quality (35%). Per-bout opponent quality is scored on rank-at-time-of-fight (champion 100, ranks 1–5 = 90→78, ranks 6–15 = 75→60), with cross-division and P4P signals layered on, falling back to opponent UFC record-at-time for unranked opponents. For fighters with limited UFC experience the headline is held toward a rookie baseline, so debut / low-sample fighters read lower than established names. UFC ranking data is sparse before December 2018, so legacy-era fighters score from record-at-time when ranks are missing.
Career splits
Striking matchup
Each fighter's offense mapped against the other's defense — where one attacks meets where the other gets hit, across head, body, and leg. Per 15 minutes of UFC fight time.
Evenly matched striking — no clear edge either way.
Where Hooker attacks (green = high volume) vs where Pimblett gets hit (red = vulnerable) — Hooker’s green zones meeting Pimblett’s red zones are the openings.
- Head62%83rd729
- Body18%69th214
- Leg19%83rd228
Color = division rank · green elite → red low · % = share of strikes
- Head64%38th219
- Body21%35th73
- Leg14%43rd48
Color = division rank · green elite → red low · % = share absorbed · partly opponent-dependent
- Standing84%988
- Clinch9%100
- Ground7%83
- Standing77%263
- Clinch11%37
- Ground12%40
Each lane: the attacker’s strike rate (offense) vs the other’s rate absorbed (defense), graded on the division. The bar leans toward whoever wins the exchange — longer + greener = a bigger, higher-quality edge.
Full breakdown — all zones, both views
| Zone | Fighter | Landed / 15 | Accuracy | Absorbed / 15 | Career landed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Head | Dan Hooker | top 17% of division42.7 | 41% | bottom of the division50.1 | 729 |
| Head | Paddy Pimblett | top 16% of division43.7 | 43% | below division average36.0 | 296 |
| Body | Dan Hooker | above division average12.7 | 66% | well below average12.5 | 214 |
| Body | Paddy Pimblett | top 28% of division13.3 | 77% | below division average11.8 | 87 |
| Leg | Dan Hooker | top 17% of division13.1 | 77% | around division average8.0 | 228 |
| Leg | Paddy Pimblett | top 15% of division13.7 | 91% | below division average8.3 | 97 |
Per-15-minute rates are sourced from UFCStats fight totals across each fighter’s UFC career. Division percentile is computed against every UFC fighter who has competed in this weight class with at least two recorded bouts. Lower “absorbed” values are better — the percentile is inverted so “top of division” always means better outcome.
Grappling matchup
Takedowns, submission threat, and control. Per 15 minutes of UFC fight time, with takedown defense as a percentage of opponent attempts stopped.
Each metric graded on the division — the bar leans toward whoever wins that part of the grappling exchange (longer + greener = a bigger edge).
Evenly matched grappling — no clear edge either way.
Full breakdown — career grappling totals
| Metric | Dan Hooker | Paddy Pimblett |
|---|---|---|
| Takedowns landed / 15career takedowns | 0.711 | 0.74 |
| Takedown accuracycareer landed / attempted | 33%11 / 33 | 21%4 / 19 |
| Takedown defensecareer stopped / faced | 77%81 / 105 | 44%12 / 27 |
| Submission attempts / 15career attempts | 0.69 | 1.27 |
| Control time / 15 (min)career total | 2.6 min42:40 | 3.0 min17:44 |
| Time controlled by opponent / 15 (min)career total | 2.2 min36:08 | 4.1 min23:41 |
All rates computed from UFCStats fight totals across each fighter’s UFC career. Takedown defense = opponent attempts stopped ÷ opponent total attempts. Control time figures are minutes the fighter spent in a dominant position per 15 minutes of fight time. Accuracy under 8 career attempts is shown raw and ungraded — too small a sample to rate against the division.
Finishing & durability
How often each fighter ends fights early — and how often they get put away. Outcomes view, not per-minute output.
When their fights end
every pro finish on the fight clockFinish & durability rates
Full professional career
Full method breakdown
| Outcome | Dan Hooker | Paddy Pimblett |
|---|---|---|
| Wins | ||
| by KO / TKO | 11(46%) | 7(30%) |
| by submission | 7(29%) | 10(43%) |
| by decision | 6(25%) | 6(26%) |
| Losses | ||
| by KO / TKO | 4(29%) | 0(0%) |
| by submission | 4(29%) | 1(25%) |
| by decision | 6(43%) | 3(75%) |
Full professional career method splits, graded against the full-pro division distribution. Career KO losses are the total — clean knockouts and cut/injury stoppages can’t be separated outside the UFC corpus. Finish-time pace is UFC-only.
KO history
UFC fights only — knockout power and chin durability, head-to-head, then when the last finish landed, and on whom.
- Last time KO'dvs Benoit Saint Denis4 months agoUFC 325: Volkanovski vs. Lopes 2 · Jan 31, 2026 · R2 · 4:45
- Last time submittedvs Arman Tsarukyan7 months agoUFC Fight Night: Tsarukyan vs. Hooker · Nov 22, 2025 · R2 · 3:34
- Last time KO'dNever finished by strikes in the UFC
- Last time submittedNever submitted in the UFC
Pace & fade
How each fighter's work rate holds up as a fight wears on — round-by-round output (striking, takedown attempts, and control time combined), and whether they fade. The fade % compares round-3 output to round 1 over bouts that reached the third round.
No clear cardio edge — Hooker builds (+8% per round through round 5) and Pimblett builds (+6% per round through round 3). Within fights that reached round 3, Hooker lifts to 135% of round-1 output by round 3, Pimblett 95%.
Faded points are drawn from a single bout that reached that round, so they’re less reliable than the solid points averaged over many fights.
Rounds backed by fewer than 2 bouts are drawn smaller and dimmed with an n= count — a deep round seen in one or two fights is a thin sample, not a settled rate. Per-round bout counts are in the breakdown below.
Full per-round breakdown — both fighters
What drives the pace · per round
The composite output line above blends these three inputs. Splitting them out shows whether a fighter’s work rate is built on striking volume, takedown pressure, or top control — and which input fades.
| Round | Fighter | Output / min | Sig landed / min | Sig absorbed / min | TD att / min | Control | Bouts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1 | Dan Hooker | 5.0 | 4.4 | 4.0 | 0.06 | 10% | 24 |
| R1 | Paddy Pimblett | 7.0 | 6.0 | 4.0 | 0.22 | 8% | 8 |
| R2 | Dan Hooker | 6.2 | 5.2 | 5.9 | 0.11 | 15% | 16 |
| R2 | Paddy Pimblett | 6.1 | 4.8 | 3.6 | 0.00 | 32% | 5 |
| R3 | Dan Hooker | 7.1 | 5.6 | 5.5 | 0.12 | 29% | 11 |
| R3 | Paddy Pimblett | 7.8 | 5.2 | 2.8 | 0.39 | 37% | 4 |
| R4 | Dan Hooker | 5.4 | 2.6 | 4.5 | 0.40 | 40% | 2 |
| R4 | Paddy Pimblett | 7.6 | 7.0 | 6.4 | 0.20 | 0% | 1 |
| R5 | Dan Hooker | 8.1 | 4.3 | 5.2 | 0.90 | 28% | 2 |
| R5 | Paddy Pimblett | 6.6 | 4.2 | 5.8 | 0.60 | 16% | 1 |
Output / minis the headline work rate — significant strikes landed, plus 3 per takedown attempt, plus one per 15 seconds of control — so a takedown-and-grind round isn’t scored as idle the way bare striking volume would. The remaining columns are its components. Per-round rates use UFCStats per-round data (available for ~95% of bouts since 2008). Each round’s rates are averaged only over bouts that reached that round, so the bout count shrinks as rounds deepen. The final round of a finished fight is pro-rated by its actual length — a 2:30 stoppage counts as 2.5 minutes, not five — so an early finish doesn’t distort the per-minute pace.