By CompuBox

If Mayweather-Marquez was the pay-per-view appetizer, Miguel Cotto vs. Manny Pacquiao may be the main course because unlike the former one can’t easily predict the result of the latter. Pacquiao’s attempting to become just the fifth fighter in history to win five titles in five different weight classes. Oscar de la Hoya (six titles in six different weight classes), Thomas Hearns, Ray Leonard and Floyd Mayweather are the Fantastic Four. Pac’s a 2 ½-to-1 favorite to win Cotto’s WBO welterweight title, but do the CompuBox numbers support that contention? Let’s find out.

Cotto vs. Speed: The last two times Cotto encountered world-class speed was against Shane Mosley and Zab Judah. Against Mosley’s “power boxing,” Cotto’s attack was fairly balanced as he landed 34 percent of his jabs (98 of 288) and 39 percent of his power shots (150 of 387). Against Judah, a solid hitting southpaw who stresses speed like Pacquiao, Cotto’s percentages were similar (38 percent jabs, 45 percent power) but the distribution tilted heavily toward power shots as he went 78 of 202 in jabs and 214 of 481 in power punches. Therefore, look for Cotto to impose his superior size and strength on offense.

That approach carries considerable risk. While Cotto defended well against the jabs of Mosley and Judah (16 percent connects for Mosley, 14 percent for Judah), both landed a high percentage of power shots (53 percent Mosley, 57 percent Judah). Thus, Pacquiao – never a strong jabber – should use his speed to establish a pattern: Dart in, fire flurries, dash out, reset and repeat.

One crucial piece of information could alter Pacquiao’s approach. Mosley had the solid welterweight frame to maintain a high work rate in terms of power shots while Judah, a longtime 140-pounder, couldn’t. Mosley threw 52 less power shots (335 to 387) but managed to land 27 more (177-150) to throw the final result into dispute. Judah, however, attempted just 159 power shots – a paltry 13.25 per round. For Pacquiao, power volume is an absolute must and he must be willing to risk everything to keep up the beat.

The good news for Pacquiao is that Mosley was the first to neutralize Cotto’s vaunted late-round surge. In the final three rounds Mosley was 62 of 201 to Cotto's 52 of 156 overall while out-landing him 49-34 in power shots. Cotto also appeared to be the more weary and disorganized fighter but he navigated through this crisis with the jab, out-landing Mosley 26-15 despite throwing 52 fewer (134-82) in the last three rounds.

In fact, Cotto's jab had been effective throughout the bout as he out-did “Sugar Shane” in eight rounds to Mosley's two and two even while also registering double-digit connects four times, all in the first six rounds. Cotto was similarly dominant with the jab against Judah as he amassed an 8-1-1 round-by-round lead. Therefore, Cotto can’t afford to ignore his jab in his desire to dish out punishment.

Pacquiao vs. Size: Pacquiao has been spectacular in the three fights since moving up from 130. Critics say that lightweight David Diaz was too plodding, welterweight Oscar De La Hoya was an aged shell and junior welterweight Ricky Hatton was overrated. In hindsight, that may have been true but coming in each man presented considerable risks. The numbers Pacquiao produced in each fight was off the charts.

Pacquiao out-landed Diaz 230-90 overall and 180-59 in power shots before producing an emphatic one-punch finish. He was golden against the “Golden Boy” as he piled up a 224-83 overall connect advantage, landed 59 percent of his power shots and out-did him 195-51 in that category before forcing De La Hoya to resign. Finally, Pacquiao out-landed Hatton 73-18 overall and 65-16 in power shots in just 5:59 of action and the fight ended with a crunching left that knocked the “Hit Man” unconscious. In short, Pacquiao did what pound-for-pound kings are supposed to do – dominate and excite.

One Cotto weapon that could trouble Pacquiao is the jab. Erik Morales used it in their 2005 fight to control distance and set up the rest of his offense. “El Terrible’s” 96-34 gap in landed jabs set up his overall 265-217 advantage and helped him inflict Pacquiao’s last defeat. Cotto used the jab well in the Margarito, Mosley and Judah bouts, topping the 30 percent threshold each time.

Recent form: As stated earlier Pacquiao is running on all cylinders offensively but the same can be said concerning his defense. His plus-minus ratio (the percentage difference between hitting and getting hit) in the last three fights was plus-10 against Diaz, plus-17 for De La Hoya and plus-24 for Hatton in terms of overall numbers. When all three fights are averaged the rating is a plus-15 in overall punches and a plus-24 in power shots.

As for Cotto, he earned a somewhat surprising plus-16 in the Margarito fight (43 percent to 27), a plus-35 against Michael Jennings (50-15) but a minus-11 against Clottey (25-36). The Ghanaian appeared to have matters in hand after 10 rounds because Clottey out-landed Cotto 78-45 overall and 66-30 in power shots in rounds seven through 10. But in 11 and 12 Clottey failed to crush Cotto’s windpipe and allowed him back into the fight. Cotto cut his deficit in total connects to 38-36 and out-jabbed Clottey 14-3 to mitigate his shortfall in total power connects to seal a disputed split decision.

The Clottey fight furthered suspicions that Cotto may be in decline and the second half of the Margarito fight certainly didn’t help. In the final five rounds Margarito out-landed Cotto 146-106 overall and 134-70 in power shots. Cotto was beaten, bloodied, battered and broken and few fighters can completely rebound from that sort of trauma.

Prediction: Though the bout will be staged at 145, Cotto will still be the biggest and strongest fighter Pacquiao has faced. But will we see Cotto at his best? One has to wonder since he came so close to losing to Clottey. It is ironic that while Pacquiao is two years older and has had 19 more fights over five more years, he is viewed as the fresher fighter. As long as Pacquiao respects Cotto’s hook, he has the skill set to prevail by unanimous decision.