Belal Muhammad`s tactical approach in his title-deciding loss to Jack Della Maddalena at UFC 315 has drawn increasing criticism.
Leading up to the fight, Muhammad expressed confidence in his boxing skills, aiming to prove they were elite. However, despite his reputation for strong wrestling and attempting nine takedowns during the bout, he is now being criticized for his strategy against the powerful Australian striker.
UFC veteran Matt Brown strongly disagrees with the idea that poor strategy was the primary reason for Muhammad`s defeat, arguing that this overlooks Della Maddalena`s effective counter-performance.
“Whether his game plan was good or bad is almost beside the point,” Brown stated on a recent podcast. “Jack had an answer for everything he tried.”
“Yes, if you`re part of Belal`s team, you might look back and think you could have planned differently,” Brown conceded, “but it`s hard to imagine it would have changed the outcome. When analyzing the fight with Jack Della Maddalena, Belal`s team faces significant challenges in finding solutions.”
Since the majority of the fight took place standing, Della Maddalena was able to win key exchanges using his superior boxing, reach, and power. Although Muhammad had moments of his own, he struggled to land significant strikes, while Della Maddalena consistently did more damage when connecting.
Regarding the wrestling aspect, Brown highlights that Muhammad didn`t necessarily abandon his takedowns; rather, Della Maddalena effectively defended against every attempt to take the fight to the ground.
“Jack`s wrestling defense looked excellent,” Brown observed. “Even when Belal managed a takedown, Jack got right back up, I believe every time. I don`t recall Belal holding him down for any significant duration. Jack used clever techniques, like hip tosses, to create space and was very good at avoiding being pinned against the cage.”
“Our assumption was that even if Belal couldn`t take him down, he would at least hold him against the cage for most of the fight, making it potentially boring,” Brown noted. “I think many people expected that, not just me. But it didn`t unfold like that.”
Brown suggests that if Muhammad is to be criticized for his performance, it should be more about the type of strikes he employed against Della Maddalena, rather than his lack of wrestling attempts.
Muhammad appeared overly focused on boxing, which Brown saw as potentially disastrous against someone as skilled and powerful with their hands as Della Maddalena.
“It seemed Belal was trying to box with him perhaps more than was wise,” Brown commented. “If I were advising him, I`d have preferred to see more kicks, teeps, and mixing up the distance. We know Jack is a very good, technical, and powerful boxer. Standing and trading purely with a boxer is the worst approach, whether you plan to stand for a few rounds or try takedowns. The only thing I would have liked to see more of from Belal was a Muay Thai or kickboxing style. Just boxing a boxer doesn`t logically make sense to me.”
Ultimately, Brown questions whether Della Maddalena simply presented a stylistic challenge that Muhammad couldn`t overcome, regardless of strategy.
Brown has witnessed instances in combat sports history where fighters encounter stylistic “brick walls” they cannot surpass. While it`s impossible to be absolutely certain, Brown believes the evidence from this fight points towards this being the case for Muhammad at UFC 315.
“Belal has much to learn and improve upon from this fight,” Brown stated. “However, I`m unsure if that will ever be enough to defeat Jack based on how that fight went. Sometimes, the matchup itself is the issue. The reality is Jack had a perfect game plan and executed it exceptionally well throughout the fight.”
“I don`t know if there was anything Belal could have done to beat Jack in that fight,” he concluded. “And I`m not sure if there`s anything he can do to beat Jack in the future.”
