Du Plessis reveals he preferred Chimaev over Strickland as a rival
Current UFC middleweight champion (84 kg), Dricus du Plessis already knows when and against whom he will put his belt on the line again. The South African's next title defense was scheduled for February 9, in the main fight of UFC 312, in Australia, in a rematch against Sean Strickland. However, if it were up to 'DDP' his opponent would be different.
As he had previously indicated, Du Plessis once again mentioned the name of Khamzat Chimaev as his preferred rival for his next UFC commitment. However, it seems that the South African is satisfied with the decision made by Ultimate's top management and understands the appeal of a rematch against the former champion.
“Just to clarify, I preferred the fight with Khamzatbut the rematch is the most anticipated fight before Khamzat vs Whittaker. I'm not unhappy with the UFC's decision. Like I said, I'm going to face the guy that the fans think is second best. They promised him the fight, so it's Strickland”, declared Du Plessis, in a post on his official profile on 'X' (see below or click here).
Rematch
The clash between Dricus du Plessis and Sean Strickland scheduled for UFC 312, in February, will put two of the main stars of the middleweight division face to face again. In their first meeting, in January this year, the South African beat the American, then champion of the category, in a controversial decision by the judges. Since then, 'Tarzan' has campaigned for a rematch which has now been scheduled by the organization.
Just for clarification I preferred the Khamzat fight but the rematch is a fight most wanted before Khamzat vs Withaker. I'm not unhappy with the UFC's decision like I said I'll fight the man fans think is the next best guy he was promised the fight so Strickland it is.
— Dricus Du Plessis (@dricusduplessis) December 10, 2024
Want to see more news like this Du Plessis reveals he preferred Chimaev over Strickland as a rival you can visit our category by clicking here 👉 UFC Today.
Leave a Reply
More: