Roland Delorme vs. Alex Caceres Added to UFC 165 in Toronto
A bantamweight fight between Roland Delorme and Alex Caceres has been scheduled for UFC 165, which will take place this September 21 (H/T MMA Junkie for reporting the announcement).
The matchup is a very tantalizing one, not because it is particularly meaningful in the scope of the UFC bantamweight title picture, but because both Delorme and Caceres have been known to put on exciting bouts that see the action go everywhere.
Delorme, who will be defending his home turf in Canada, will enter the fight coming off of a competitive decision victory over Edwin Figueroa at UFC 161.
Since joining the UFC via The Ultimate Fighter, Delorme has posted a spotless 3-0 record, including a pair of submissions. He was knocked out in the first round of his UFC 149 match by Francisco Rivera, but the result was overturned when Rivera tested positive for a banned substance.
Like Delorme, Caceres comes into the bout on a winning note. Back in March he defeated Kyung Ho Kang in a back-and-forth affair, but the result was nullified when Caceres tested positive for marijuana after the fact.
Even so, the American is riding an official two-fight win streak, and holds a 3-3 UFC record overall.
Though neither Delorme nor Caceres has lit the MMA world on fire, both guys have shown flashes of tremendous upside, and both have exhibited an eagerness to mix it up with their opponents.
Putting them into the Octagon together should prove to be a good decision, as the fight should be competitive, and has some serious Fight of the Night (and Submission of the Night) potential.
The pairing also represents a terrific opportunity for both guys as the winner should be catapulted into a more high profile contest early next year.
Delorme vs. Caceres is the 13th match to be added to the UFC 165 fight card, which means it is probably the event's last addition. But if that's so, at least it is a good, albeit unheralded final addition.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?