I gotta think this is a giant gamble. Especially given what happened with Giuliani.

My understanding is that she is not contesting that she said what she said, and that it was defamatory.

Yeah, she is admitting defamation

instead is going straight to the hearing to determine the damages, if any.

This is the gamble. If you defame someone, you are going to pay damages almost assuredly.

because evidence of the election fraud she alleges has been controlled by her adversaries, and she cannot access the information.

But she would be entitled to discovery. She must have made specific claims and not just given a general opinion. She would be able to subpoena documents and emails and any other records.