What Is A Robbery? Devin Haney - Vasyl Lomachenko Scored By Unbaised Artificial Intelligence.

Not even going to read a lowlife's gibberish. :haha::haha::haha::haha:​ {"alt":"Click image for larger version Name:\tmagic-dab-post-malone.gif Views:\t0 Size:\t3.54 MB ID:\t32095084","data-align":"none","data-attachmentid":"32095084","data-size":"full","title":"magic-dab-post-malone.gif"}

Not even going to read a lowlife's gibberish.

Your beliefs, as it can be seen, are pretty limited and naive. Now I add the fact you believe a call centre is an IT domain. The point is you are unable to tell me how all of these problems can be solved by AI so far, but you are quickly able to start insulting and be vulgar which means my size of a pea brain still owns yours. I watched the fight several times and I am not a Haney fan, but coming up with that means you are Loma's fangirl. You are probably even ****, being so aggressive when it comes to your beloved. And when you get exposed, you start bringing quotes out of the context. It's pathetic. ​ Took you two comments to write nonsense? Well, I am managing architecture solutions, but that would be too much for you to understand. And there is nothing civil in the way you reply page after page to people who rightfully criticize your digital deity. Still: you have no idea how an AI operates and what are the boxing rules. People don't want to use voting machines for something so simple as saving your preference when you vote just because it can be manipulated, you talk about something so complex like it is perfect. Glad you wrote back dumbass. Let me guess, you had Devin winning. :lol1: I suppose you found time after taking Devin's nuts out of your mouth. I could care less if you you work at a call center assisting people with netorking problems or if you are working as an "architect solutions" manager, assuming that's true. Neither have anything to do with A.I. I told you to first watch the system being used on an actual fight because that will already answer some of your questions or, rather, eliminate your stupid suppositions. Instead, you come back aggressive. Clear sign that you're another Haney fangirl. You first started off by saying this: One can claim an AI is unbiased and scores it properly when he shows the algorithms behind this AI. It other words, you're asking for transparency. Partial or complete, I have no idea. As I said, you need to watch DeepStrike score fights and validate its accuracy. I do not have information on all of parameters being used, but by simply watching it analyze a fight should give you a summation. But of course you didn't do that, instead bringing up some asinine issue based on nothing but ridiculous presumptions. Tell me, how do you imagine the parameters being used in this system to be biased? What in that smooth brain of yours do you see as being ripe for exploitation? I'm very curious. :lol1::lol1: You then said this: Nor the AI can fully decide if something landed or scratched a fighter, i.e. was it a hard and clean punch or not (which is way different when you are scoring a fight and are next to the ring seeing and hearing closely everything). You claim that it cannot decide if something landed or merely scratched the fight despite evidence to the contrary. DESPITE EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY! This is why I said it is obvious that you have never watched a fight where DeepStrike is being utilized because had you done so, you wouldn't be asking these asinine questions. Simply put, it can determine them because it does. Is it flawless? No. However, it is capable of determining the strength of impact based on various factors from visual cues, usually acquired from numerous video feeds around the ring. From this, it is able to qualify the level of impact and give it a rating. The quality rating is a regression model that funnels various features into a single score, briefly it considers 3 things: Cleanliness: Does the punch land cleanly, or is partially or fully blocked Accuracy: Does the punch land in a way that can transfer power, or is it just grazing the target or being rolled away Effect: Does the target show visible effect when hit, i.e. is the head bumping and how much is it bumping ​ Honestly, I don't have time for shitheads like you. What's weird is that you come on here and make claims that are patently false. I assumed it was simply due to your not having even looked at the videos linked or read the other posts, but apparently that's not the case. When I said you should look at the video first and read some of the previous posts, you told me I'm clueless. I just really don't have the patience for this. I'm just going to be completely blunt with you. You really are a moron. You are a dumbass. You're a jackass. And you suck Haney's nuts, with the latter being the main reason why you're on here. Had it not been Devin but some other fighter, you'd be more than happy to not even comment, but because the thought of Haney makes your ass pucker, you had to come on here. You just could handle it, could you? :lol1::lol1::lol1:

He's still using words like "snowflake" thinking it's a mic drop. On forums you just have to accept the ambient level of intelligence will only allow for a certain depth of analysis, with most people getting caught up on secondary or tertiary points. Rather than get frustrated by it, I prefer to find anthropological interest in it. It's this same pool of people confident sounding charlatans with no relevant qualifications draw upon for fame and money on social media by presenting themselves as "truth seekers", "gurus", etc. Look at you!! Still bothered that I called you a snowflake. :lol1::lol1::lol1: I con't believe you're still crying about this on here. That's pretty pathetic. Glad to know it really bothered you, but here's a heads up: it really makes you look like a "snowflake." :lol1:

He's still using words like "snowflake" thinking it's a mic drop. On forums you just have to accept the ambient level of intelligence will only allow for a certain depth of analysis, with most people getting caught up on secondary or tertiary points. Rather than get frustrated by it, I prefer to find anthropological interest in it. It's this same pool of people confident sounding charlatans with no relevant qualifications draw upon for fame and money on social media by presenting themselves as "truth seekers", "gurus", etc. He probably generates his comments with ChatGPT.

I don't believe you work in IT unless it's in a call center for customer support. You have brought up issues already answered in the thread, but because you have a brain the size of a pea, you didn't even realize that. The criteria used to judge is displayed at the end of each round and mentioned earlier in this thread, but because you haven't even looked at the fight and brought up the criteria (cited it in your post), means you're a complete dumbass and some nut sucker for Devin. That's really what it comes down to. If you start attacking commenter rather than the comment, I'm going to spank you in front of everyone and so everyone can see how much of a lying dumbass you are. Your beliefs, as it can be seen, are pretty limited and naive. Now I add the fact you believe a call centre is an IT domain. The point is you are unable to tell me how all of these problems can be solved by AI so far, but you are quickly able to start insulting and be vulgar which means my size of a pea brain still owns yours. I watched the fight several times and I am not a Haney fan, but coming up with that means you are Loma's fangirl. You are probably even homo, being so aggressive when it comes to your beloved. And when you get exposed, you start bringing quotes out of the context. It's pathetic. ​ By the way, if you indeed work in IT (at a call center), then I imagine you'd be extremely biased toward it because it is about to make you as an employee irrelevant. That's the fear many of you IT guys have. So I suppose your prejudice against the technology is understood. :lol1::lol1::lol1::lol1: Took you two comments to write nonsense? Well, I am managing architecture solutions, but that would be too much for you to understand. And there is nothing civil in the way you reply page after page to people who rightfully criticize your digital deity. Still: you have no idea how an AI operates and what are the boxing rules. People don't want to use voting machines for something so simple as saving your preference when you vote just because it can be manipulated, you talk about something so complex like it is perfect.

Holy hypocrisy, Batman. As seems to be your MO, rather than engage with facts, you just go straight to ad hominem and then gaslight. You must have your life savings invested in this company, because you get CRAZY defensive any time anyone points out the obvious flaws. And that's coming from someone who also agrees both that Loma got robbed and that boxing scoring is corrupt and needs to change. :haha::haha::haha::haha: Here's comes the knight in shining armor :rofl::rofl: If you want to get on your hands and knees for these guys, be my guest. But if I remember right, you came in and attacked the commenter and not the comment, and now you want to play victim? How pathetic. :lol1::lol1: What obvious flaw did the previous poster point out? I'm curious. What is THE OBVIOUS FLAW? That it might be prone to error? That a mistake might be made somewhere? That the paradigm used to assess a match might be skewed to benefit one fighter and not the other (which obviously is not the case)? What is the obvious flaw? And by the way, I did not attack this guy. I just pointed out that it was obvious he hasn't watched it in action or assessed anything. Had he done so, he wouldn't be asking me what criteria are being used to qualify the fight. He responded: You are clueless in both sports and IT area, but you blindly .....​ Once someone go ad hominem, I will come back and spank them publicly. If you keep it civil, then so will I. And I want to just add that there are rules being used for the judges and statisticians already in this sport. These rules are all agreed on. We have been over this before. You have rules and criteria (such as landing a punch with the knuckles with a closed glove) to determine a clean punch. Nobody disputes this. The A.I. implements this in its analysis. If you think some other threshold should be used (because you claimed that a clean punch is disputed when it's not; its' very clear), then you would be chasing the rules of the sport. The real issue is being able to accurately identify, qualify and quantify a specific event, and so far, it has been consistently improved upon. If you want to bring up some technical issue that's valid, I have no issue with that. But when an argument is about presuming that the technology is inherently corrupt, I will have an issue with that when there is no evidence to support such a claim. But do tell me what the "obvious flaw" is in this system.

I don't believe you work in IT unless it's in a call center for customer support. You have brought up issues already answered in the thread, but because you have a brain the size of a pea, you didn't even realize that. The criteria used to judge is displayed at the end of each round and mentioned earlier in this thread, but because you haven't even looked at the fight and brought up the criteria (cited it in your post), means you're a complete dumbass and some nut sucker for Devin. That's really what it comes down to. If you start attacking commenter rather than the comment, I'm going to spank you in front of everyone and so everyone can see how much of a lying dumbass you are. Holy hypocrisy, Batman. As seems to be your MO, rather than engage with facts, you just go straight to ad hominem and then gaslight. You must have your life savings invested in this company, because you get CRAZY defensive any time anyone points out the obvious flaws. And that's coming from someone who also agrees both that Loma got robbed and that boxing scoring is corrupt and needs to change.

You are clueless in both sports and IT area, but you blindly come up with some superficial arguments. And to your surprise I am indeed an IT guy and I explained to you about the rules (and in particular how a fight is scored - show me where the AI analyzes all of the aspects mentioned), the capabilities, the specifics of the sport deep enough and deeper than you ever did so far. By the way, if you indeed work in IT (at a call center), then I imagine you'd be extremely biased toward it because it is about to make you as an employee irrelevant. That's the fear many of you IT guys have. So I suppose your prejudice against the technology is understood. :lol1::lol1::lol1::lol1:

You are clueless in both sports and IT area, but you blindly come up with some superficial arguments. And to your surprise I am indeed an IT guy and I explained to you about the rules (and in particular how a fight is scored - show me where the AI analyzes all of the aspects mentioned), the capabilities, the specifics of the sport deep enough and deeper than you ever did so far. I don't believe you work in IT unless it's in a call center for customer support. You have brought up issues already answered in the thread, but because you have a brain the size of a pea, you didn't even realize that. The criteria used to judge is displayed at the end of each round and mentioned earlier in this thread, but because you haven't even looked at the fight and brought up the criteria (cited it in your post), means you're a complete dumbass and some nut sucker for Devin. That's really what it comes down to. If you start attacking commenter rather than the comment, I'm going to spank you in front of everyone and so everyone can see how much of a lying dumbass you are.

I'm going to just stop you right there. I believe you're in a position where you don't know what it is that you don't know. The only way you can understand the "algorithm" is if you work in the field of A.I. The technical level required to implement this into the sport requires expertise. However, I will tell you what you can do: You can watch the fights while the A.I. is analyzing them. You can verify with your own eyes whether a punch landed or didn't land and how hard of an impact that punch made on the target. This is something YOU CAN DO. What you are doing now is just making presumptions and assumptions on something that you (from my standpoint) haven't even bothered to investigate. I think before you have a knee jerk reaction the the use of A.I. to score fights, you should actually watch several fights with the A.I. in action and then verify whether it made a correct assessment. At this moment, your criticisms are to divorced from reality. You need more support for your arguments, and the only way you can do that is to watch the fights and mark down where the errors were. And on that point, understand too that nothing is perfect and that the A.I. is analyzing these fights from one point of view. In reality, the fight will be analyzed from all angles to create a near perfect assessment. You are clueless in both sports and IT area, but you blindly come up with some superficial arguments. And to your surprise I am indeed an IT guy and I explained to you about the rules (and in particular how a fight is scored - show me where the AI analyzes all of the aspects mentioned), the capabilities, the specifics of the sport deep enough and deeper than you ever did so far.

This still doesn't answer the algorithms and is general blah blah. Nor the AI can fully decide if something landed or scratched a fighter, i.e. was it a hard and clean punch or not (which is way different when you are scoring a fight and are next to the ring seeing and hearing closely everything). AI doesn't understand effective aggression, ring generalship and defence. In case it starts doing it, those algorithms become even more important and can be manipulated to score improperly just as are some of the judges' or the referee's decisions now. At this stage, instant replay is a pretty good decision, but also improving the quality of judges and referees and their understanding of the rules. Not to mention the fact that if you have a corrupted referee or a judge, it is easier to blame and punish it - what do you do in case of a bad AI decision? The AI instance is one, while in the other case, it is harder and more obvious in case more than one judge is corrupt. So I am not against using any kind of technology - on the contrary. It is very important to decide which one and to what extent. Comparing this to football or any game where you need to see where a ball landed or a player was is quite different to implementing it into fights. It's like saying apples are the same as pears because they are fruits anyway. I'm going to just stop you right there. I believe you're in a position where you don't know what it is that you don't know. The only way you can understand the "algorithm" is if you work in the field of A.I. The technical level required to implement this into the sport requires expertise. However, I will tell you what you can do: You can watch the fights while the A.I. is analyzing them. You can verify with your own eyes whether a punch landed or didn't land and how hard of an impact that punch made on the target. This is something YOU CAN DO. What you are doing now is just making presumptions and assumptions on something that you (from my standpoint) haven't even bothered to investigate. I think before you have a knee jerk reaction the the use of A.I. to score fights, you should actually watch several fights with the A.I. in action and then verify whether it made a correct assessment. At this moment, your criticisms are to divorced from reality. You need more support for your arguments, and the only way you can do that is to watch the fights and mark down where the errors were. And on that point, understand too that nothing is perfect and that the A.I. is analyzing these fights from one point of view. In reality, the fight will be analyzed from all angles to create a near perfect assessment.

It's based on the rules of the sport. There is nothing biased in determining whether a punch lands or doesn't land. There is no basis in deterring wither a punch was hard or soft. Are there sometimes mistakes? Of course, nothing is perfect, but the error rate is so much less than what we see with humans, that to not use this new technology would be madness. This similar to being against the use of replays in football. This technology presents and collects data from the fight. It still requires humans to interpret that data and score the fight. Like I said, there is nothing biased in look at a punch and assessing whether it lands or doesn't, whether is was high impact or low impact. It collects all kinds of data. And it has been in the development stage for years already. It has more than 1,000 professionals analyzing it and giving feedback to improve its performance. This is the future. This is a step toward preventing corruption in the sport. All boxers need to get a fair shake because of what's at stake career wise. The next step is to clean up the NSAC. That is the biggest problem in the sport right now. This sport is a niche sport because people just are tired of robberies. I talked to several guys in their 60s and 70s who told me they stopped watching a long time ago because seeing all the robberies made them lose love for the sport. If you talk to anyone who used to watch this sport but no longer do so, you will hear the same reason given: "The sport is too corrupt." This still doesn't answer the algorithms and is general blah blah. Nor the AI can fully decide if something landed or scratched a fighter, i.e. was it a hard and clean punch or not (which is way different when you are scoring a fight and are next to the ring seeing and hearing closely everything). AI doesn't understand effective aggression, ring generalship and defence. In case it starts doing it, those algorithms become even more important and can be manipulated to score improperly just as are some of the judges' or the referee's decisions now. At this stage, instant replay is a pretty good decision, but also improving the quality of judges and referees and their understanding of the rules. Not to mention the fact that if you have a corrupted referee or a judge, it is easier to blame and punish it - what do you do in case of a bad AI decision? The AI instance is one, while in the other case, it is harder and more obvious in case more than one judge is corrupt. So I am not against using any kind of technology - on the contrary. It is very important to decide which one and to what extent. Comparing this to football or any game where you need to see where a ball landed or a player was is quite different to implementing it into fights. It's like saying apples are the same as pears because they are fruits anyway.

One can claim an AI is unbiased and scores it properly when he shows the algorithms behind this AI. It's based on the rules of the sport. There is nothing biased in determining whether a punch lands or doesn't land. There is no basis in deterring wither a punch was hard or soft. Are there sometimes mistakes? Of course, nothing is perfect, but the error rate is so much less than what we see with humans, that to not use this new technology would be madness. This similar to being against the use of replays in football. This technology presents and collects data from the fight. It still requires humans to interpret that data and score the fight. Like I said, there is nothing biased in look at a punch and assessing whether it lands or doesn't, whether is was high impact or low impact. It collects all kinds of data. And it has been in the development stage for years already. It has more than 1,000 professionals analyzing it and giving feedback to improve its performance. This is the future. This is a step toward preventing corruption in the sport. All boxers need to get a fair shake because of what's at stake career wise. The next step is to clean up the NSAC. That is the biggest problem in the sport right now. This sport is a niche sport because people just are tired of robberies. I talked to several guys in their 60s and 70s who told me they stopped watching a long time ago because seeing all the robberies made them lose love for the sport. If you talk to anyone who used to watch this sport but no longer do so, you will hear the same reason given: "The sport is too corrupt."

It doesn’t hurt me in any way. I’m smart enough to know the scoring is driven by the designer of the program. It is in no way unbiased as you claim in the thread title. My scorecard was inline with the Judges on fight night. I thought Haney won. I haven’t wavered from that. You’re the one hurt. That is why You are making this thread months after the fight. I bet you cried like your hero did. Hahahah lmfao. I notice you are avoiding discussing the point I made- Loma isn’t behaving like a winner and fighting Shakur this year, he’s behaving like a loser. Very weak waiting until next year to fight Kambosos, a fight no one cares about, so he can hopefully get back in the win column and look good. This despite Shakur saying he thought Loma beat Haney. Actions speak much louder than words. You and Loma have been behaving like losers since the Haney fight. It isn’t a coincidence. Waaaaaahhhhh!! I made several posts with various fights, showing how the judges mis-scored those fights. However, it is only this fight that triggers clowns like yourself. Why is that? Why this fight and not the others. I know why. It kills you inside to know that none believes Haney is the real undisputed champion. You can go look at all the polls, on YouTube, on Reddit, on every social media platform, and you find that 90 percent of the population do not believe Haney is the real undisputed champion. This thread is not out to prove anything. It's to demontstate how accurate the AI is in analyzing fights. And in regard to fighting Kambosos, Loma said he was not going to fight for a year, that he was taking a year off. The Kambosos fight will be exactly one year since his last fight. Shakur wasn't going to wait a whole year to fight. Furthermore, after Shakur's last performance, that fight is not the most lucrative fight. Loma has a huge fanbase in Australia (according to Kambosos), so that is a massive money generating fight over there. They will be fighting for a belt. Then the winner can fight Shakur to try to unify. That's the plan. But you'r dumb ass just wants to spout absolute shite in this forum again and again. But I would expect nothing less from someone whose brain is the size of a peanut. And yes, this thread is killing you inside, which is why you keep replying to it and overlooking the whole point, which is to display this new technology in action. (Which will be used in pro fights next year. Yes. Various networks have determined that it is so accurate, that it will be using it for their fights come next year. So your hating ass can just sit there and suffer while your favorite fighters no longer get any gifts. :lol1::lol1::lol1:

I don’t know if this is a wind up attempt but obviously Loma thought he won and he very arguably did win. I had him winning. That said though, definitely not a robbery. He lost. If anything he should pursue a rematch with Haney, and I think Haney should give him one. He at least deserves one. Haney will never give Loma a rematch. His father repeatedly stated that the fight wasn't even close. Nobody ever gives Loma a rematch, not matter how hard he tries to get one. Everyone also knows why they won't give him rematches. They know that if they were to do so, he'd beat them by a larger margin. That's really what it is. Devin knows that rematch would generate much more money than his fighting Regis Prograis. The Loma rematch would have the world watching because of the notoriety the first fight received. The PPV buys would definitely exceed that of Regis Progais and Devin. Loma is much more popular than Regis. This was true with Teofimo as well. He would have made so much more money rematching Loma than fighting Kambosos, it's ridiculous. But nope, he wanted to fight Kambosos and duck the rematch. Look where that got him, too. He should have fought Loma, took the L and make much more money. Anyhow, Haney is not never going back down to lightweight. He's going to fight Thurman after this fight, and he might never go back down to junior welterweight. Devin really is huge. He's just as tall as Regis, but he's broader. His head is bigger. There will be no fights against Tank or Shakur unless they move up to 140 or maybe even 147. I can't see that ever happening.

I had the same score live as you, either 8-4 or 9-3, I don't remember. I agree that some people are getting hung up on overall scores when a fight can be close but end up 120-108 because the same fighter did slightly more in each round. It's also funny to see people acting like this is just an AI compubox, when it's much more. Is there any 10-10 scoring by this AI? I think a reasonably wide 10-10 threshold would be good. Yes. Exactly. This is what approximately 90 percent of the world saw that night. I rewatched the Bivol - Canleo fight, where we had pretty much the same judges (and we should stop calling them judges at this point and call them agents) give Canelo five rounds. That fight was arguably 12-0 or 11-1 Bivol at best. AT BEST! It would have been such an overt robbery that they had to make it nearly a draw to justify a rematch, at which point they would have robbed Bivol if Canelo were able to win at least two rounds. Also, going to your 10-10 scoring question, Moretti gave Garcia a 10 in a round where he was knocked down. He justified it by claiming that Garcia was so dominant earlier in the round that it negated the knockdown. But Garcia was only aggressive for 1/3 of that round, and many of his punches were blocked. However, according to him, that justified a 10-10 round because had Gervonta not knocked him down, it would have been a 10-8 round for Ryan, just based on that. So this same judge watched the Loma fight, and based on his on standards, should have give Loma a 10-8 round in the 10th because Haney didn't do anything in return, just ate punches. That's a 10-8 round. But Moretti the NSAC agent scored that as a 10-9 round for Haney. On top of that, he rewatched the fight later and said he would not change his score. I have that from someone who spoke to him after the fight. He literally rewatched that round and said he can't see it any other way than a 10-9 round for Haney, even though he landed practically nothing that round, just ate punches. So this is basically what we are dealing with in Nevada. No one will ever get a fair shake in Nevada if you are not the A-side and an American. The intention too was to rob Tank if it came to the cards. Garcia is more marketable than Tank. I know some will argue this, but Garcia has the potential to be the next Oscar De la Hoya. He can tap into both the American and Mexican market, which is something Tank can't do. Garcia's youth and capabilities and revenue generation exceed Tank's, so the NSAC will favor Garcia in any matchup to maximize profits. Anyway, the AI doesn't score fights. It captures and presents the data necessary to judge a fight. You will still need judges to determine who won the round. But the AI captures all the information necessary to judge and score a round. I think it's brilliant.

This thread is absolutely pathetic. Any doubt that Haney won was removed when Loma decided to avoid fighting Shakur to fight the weak Kambosos instead. If Loma actually believed he won he’d be chomping at the bit to get in with the best LW in the world. Instead he takes a BS tuneup fight just like a true loser would. I don’t know if this is a wind up attempt but obviously Loma thought he won and he very arguably did win. I had him winning. That said though, definitely not a robbery. He lost. If anything he should pursue a rematch with Haney, and I think Haney should give him one. He at least deserves one.

lol:lol1: I know how much this thread hurts you Big Dunce. Why do you not reply to this thread again so everyone can see how much it hurts. :lol1::lol1:âÂÂ:lol1:â It doesn’t hurt me in any way. I’m smart enough to know the scoring is driven by the designer of the program. It is in no way unbiased as you claim in the thread title. My scorecard was inline with the Judges on fight night. I thought Haney won. I haven’t wavered from that. You’re the one hurt. That is why You are making this thread months after the fight. I bet you cried like your hero did. Hahahah lmfao. I notice you are avoiding discussing the point I made- Loma isn’t behaving like a winner and fighting Shakur this year, he’s behaving like a loser. Very weak waiting until next year to fight Kambosos, a fight no one cares about, so he can hopefully get back in the win column and look good. This despite Shakur saying he thought Loma beat Haney. Actions speak much louder than words. You and Loma have been behaving like losers since the Haney fight. It isn’t a coincidence. Waaaaaahhhhh!!

Time to let it go guys