I think he just matched up well against Whittaker. Till still loses to the guys thay beat him.
Till does well in a tactical kickboxing match, hence his success against Wonderboy, Whittaker, Gastelum, Cowboy.
He had the height and reach to do well in those matchups against guys who weren't going to grapple or really brawl him.
I'm not entirely convinced. Whittaker was better equipped to go tit-for-tat with him in a technical kickboxing match while also adding in an extra layer of offense via takedowns than almost anyone. He shot 13 takedowns against Till in that fight and only secured two with just under 2.5 minutes of control time -- and I'm pretty sure most of that was from him being posted up on top of Till following the knockdown in Round 2.
Now you can argue that Brunson is an overall better wrestler than Whittaker and I'd agree with you, especially when it comes to top game upon getting the fight to the mat. You could maybe even make the same case about Dricus too although I feel we need to see a little bit more of him to really judge. But Whittaker has deceptively good takedowns -- especially his well-timed, explosive blast doubles. He got Izzy down four times and at one point took his back in the rematch. He also badly outwrestled Gastelum. He's shown himself to be a competent albeit not elite offensive grappler following his first loss to Adesanya. The fact that Till was able to stop 85% of his takedowns and immediately scramble up from the other 15% -- especially the eagerness and tenacity he showed in doing so -- makes me think that he wouldn't get ragdolled by Brunson or Dricus as badly as he did IRL. He had similar success against Gastelum's wrestling in the fight just before, snoozefest though it was. Hell, even back in his godawful performance against Woodley he stuffed all four of Tyron's takedown attempts despite T-Wood getting in fairly deep on some of them.
Which brings us to the striking. Darren Till is a bit of a paradox in that he can't decide whether he wants to be a technical sniper/counter-striker or a pressure-fighter because he's had moments of legitimate success doing both... and also gotten knocked out doing both. The guy who fought Whittaker was more of the former and I think that Brunson with his chin-up, rushing in full-speed, herky jerky brawling -- unorthodox though it may be -- would be liable to getting clipped in an exchange. He would have to rely heavily on the threat of the takedown and his power to survive the stand-up IMO. Dricus is the same story; the guy is defensively irresponsible to a fault and relies
heavily on his chin. Both guys took some really honest shots from Till as it stands after all, and I think their style of striking would play right into his hands. I can absolutely see either guy running into a straight left or intercepting elbow like Rob did in Round 1 if they don't outgrapple him immediately.
Mind you, I'm not a Darren Till fan. Like I said I thought he was always overhyped. To me he was just some British guy with a funny accent who boasted about cutting a lot of weight and occasionally posted memes. If anything, I have an active reason to be salty about the guy because of what many people consider his hometown decision over Wonderboy (one of my favorite fighters) and the fact that he permanently fucked up Thompson's leg with oblique kicks in that fight. It's just I feel that there was a perceivable difference in the displayed skill set, motivation, drive -- whatever you want to call it -- between the Darren Till who stepped into the cage against Whittaker and the one who showed up following a lay-off of over a year in the wake of multiple injuries and some personal drama. All this on top of the fact that I think that that version of Till just matches up better against Dricus and Brunson.
Maybe I'm giving Darren too much credit, though.