Prepared by the Pod Index, LLC – a sports statistics company, Raw data provided by CompuBox Inc.
A plethora of data—most of which is unavailable to the public—was loaded into a statistical tool to analyze the fight from a purely quantitative perspective. The analysis is in three parts, looking at basic punch stats, advanced metrics, and performance on the judges’ scorecards.
Jabs
First, we preview some very basic statistics (raw data provided by CompuBox). When analyzing jabs, on (median) average, Pacquiao has the edge over Mayweather in jabs thrown per round (26 to 20). However, landing jabs is different story. Mayweather lands more on average than Pacquiao (6 to 4). As the box plot below indicates, Mayweather has his share of outliers, sometimes landing more than 20 jabs in a single round. Pacquiao rarely lands more than 10 jabs in a round.
Power Punches (non-jabs)
The next quantifiable metric is power punches, defined by CompuBox as any punch other than a jab. In this metric, Pacquiao throws 36 power punches on (median) average per round, as compared to Mayweather’s 19 per round. The gap narrows slightly, however, when looking at landed power punches. Pacquiao lands 16 power punches per round while Mayweather connects on 11 per round.
Accuracy
Here we analyze the total punch connect percentage by round. For this metric, Mayweather enjoys a large advantage, connecting on average 45% of total punches thrown, as compared to 34% for Pacquiao. In fact, Mayweather has one of the highest connect percentages in all of boxing.
Advanced Metrics
Based on the raw CompuBox data, the Pod Index has created metrics that put their numbers into another context. For example, suppose a fighter averages 50 punches landed per round. What if his opponents landed 55 punches in each of those rounds?
Therefore, we have created metrics we call “factors” which look at how well a fighter performed relative to each opponent. A number above 50 indicates they do better than their opponent a majority of the time. Any factor less than 50 means they do worse than their opponent a majority of the time.
Work-Rate Factor
This metric looks at how many punches a fighter throws relative to his opponent in each round. Mayweather scores a work-rate factor of 47. This means he throws slightly fewer punches than his opponents in each round. Pacquiao has a work-rate factor of 58, indicating he throws significantly more punches than his opponents. Pacquiao’s 58-47 advantage over Mayweather in the work-rate factor is significant.
Power Factor
The power factor indicates whether a fighter lands more or less power punches (non-jabs) than his opponent in each round. Mayweather’s power factor is 64, while Pacquiao’s is 70. This indicates both fighters have landed significantly more power punches than their opponents in each round. Pacquiao has a slight advantage for this metric.
Efficiency Factor
This metric calculates a fighter’s connect percentage as compared to his opponent’s connect percentage in each round. In other words, it’s a gauge of both a fighter’s accuracy and his ability to make his opponent miss. Here both fighters enjoy success. Pacquiao’s efficiency factor is 58. However, Mayweather’s efficiency factor of 69 is the highest of all active fighters, besting even Guillermo Rigondeaux and Bernard Hopkins.
The below graph compares the same three factors but only uses data from their three recent common opponents: Juan Manuel Marquez, Miguel Cotto, and Shane Mosley. The results are similar. Pacquiao demonstrates a significant work-rate advantage and a modest power advantage, while Mayweather is much more efficient.
Performance on the Judges’ Scorecards
All the punch stats in the world don’t mean a thing if they do not translate into winning rounds on the judges’ scorecards. Here we analyze Mayweather and Pacquiao’s level of success in swaying the judges, round by round. The graph below indicates that Manny Pacquiao has done a bit better on the judges’ scorecards over the last six years, winning 79% of his 100 rounds fought (100 rounds actually has 300 judge scores because there are three judge scores for each round). Mayweather won 75% of his 87 rounds boxed in the last six years.
The graph below separates out the rounds by opponent. This allows us to review the results and consider the quality of opposition.
Over the last six years, Mayweather and Pacquiao fought three common opponents.
Against Marquez, Pacquiao won 10 of the 17 completed rounds over their last two fights. Of course, the one round that was not completed was a brutal sixth round knockout loss in their most recent fight. On the other hand, Mayweather won 11 of 12 rounds in his unanimous decision victory over Marquez.
Against Shane Mosley, Pacquiao and Mayweather both won near complete shutout decision victories. Pacquiao won 11.3 rounds while Mayweather won 10.7 rounds of the 12 rounds.
Against Miguel Cotto, Pacquiao won 9.3 rounds out of the 11 scored rounds. He TKO’d Cotto in the 12th round. Mayweather won 9.3 rounds en route to a one-sided unanimous decision.
As the graph below indicates, against those three common opponents, Pacquiao won 77% of rounds scored, while Mayweather won 86%.
Summary
If you look at the statistics as a whole, Pacquiao has the advantage in both work-rate and power factors, while Mayweather holds an advantage in efficiency. Also, Pacquiao does a bit better on the judges’ scorecards than Mayweather, round by round. However, when you focus in on the three recent common opponents, Mayweather has the advantage in winning rounds.
Statistically, this fight appears to be very close, assuming there are no knockdowns or knockouts. In fact, this match-up is so uncertain statistically, that if historical trends continue (i.e., Pacquiao is busier and lands slightly more power punches, and Mayweather is more efficient) the style preference of the individual judges will most likely be the determining factor in the final decision.
Consulting
If you are interested in knowing how this analysis translates into a probability prediction for the different outcomes of the match, please contact us at podindex@gmail.com.