The Legend of Computer Fights

[Anomalocaris]

Yes, because an incredibly primitive calculator predicting a victory for an all American hero like Marciano over a hated (at the time) 'draft dodging' black activist could not possibly be biased could it?

[Marchegiano]

Yes, because an incredibly primitive calculator predicting a victory for an all American hero like Marciano over a hated (at the time) 'draft dodging' black activist could not possibly be biased could it?

Could be, but a lot of time has passed since the NCR tournament.

Heaps more new names to be added. A whole bunch of guys much larger than Marciano with longer careers than Marciano in the pool now.

Likewise, a whole heap of new coders from all sorts of backgrounds and influences have entered their field and became recognized professionals in the interim.

And of course there's the programs themselves, been a long time since NCR but Boxrec exists, uses code to rank, Fight Night/Undisputed etc. Video Games exist. The famed historian Mike Paul's computer ratings can be accounted for, simulations like Title Bout exist.


Marciano never does anything but exceptional in any of these computer driven stat backed systems of hierarchy.


That said, it's a bit hard to believe everyone who ever wrote any kind of boxing algorithm was so bias in Marciano's favor that from the 60s to 2025 there's not been one algorithm written that treats him fairly.



Let me run this by you; I think it's the 49-0 record we fans put little into. At the end of the day it's all just probability math and that's a pretty strong pattern. No losses, mostly KOs, plenty without a T, and quite a lot of his victims didn't stay around very long after. That's a strong claim to break using nothing but numbers. at 49, that's a deep pattern.


I don't think the coders are bias, I think the act is. Computers will always favor Marciano more than consensus.

[Mr Mitts]

A computer cannot be a good judge the way Rock/Ali was done. Computerized judging of live fights probably should and probably will become the norm sometime. Judges never feel the pain, a computer essentially could--employed in the right way, with wireless monitoring of the brain which itself knows of all pain. The sum of pain would not be the only parameter. Too limited and possibly misleading. Also pain from illegal blows would have to be subtracted.

One real advantage of the computerized system is that it can feel the lingering effects of illegal blows throughout the fight if there are any and is programmed to account for that subtlety in its scoring.

Something similar is coming I believe. Probably only a matter of when. Fans will raise hell at first.

[Willie Pep 229]

A computer cannot be a good judge the way Rock/Ali was done. Computerized judging of live fights probably should and probably will become the norm sometime. Judges never feel the pain, a computer essentially could--employed in the right way, with wireless monitoring of the brain which itself knows of all pain. The sum of pain would not be the only parameter. Too limited and possibly misleading. Also pain from illegal blows would have to be subtracted.

One real advantage of the computerized system is that it can feel the lingering effects of illegal blows throughout the fight if there are any and is programmed to account for that subtlety in its scoring.

Something similar is coming I believe. Probably only a matter of when. Fans will raise hell at first.

You figure, when we can monitor brain-pain from a distance, we will still have legal prize fighting.

What would waging war be like?

[Mr Mitts]

You figure, when we can monitor brain-pain from a distance, we will still have legal prize fighting.

What would waging war be like?

Actually I believe we could monitor pain remotely pretty well right now, just not fully enough, and we don't know which other parameters to include or the weights to be assigned to them.

Ask me if a society that can travel to the moon would still have legal boxing.

[Willie Pep 229]

Actually I believe we could monitor pain remotely pretty well right now, just not fully enough, and we don't know which other parameters to include or the weights to be assigned to them.

Ask me if a society that can travel to the moon would still have legal boxing.

Re Bold: Elaborate (Lol)

I don't think you're making a proper comparison. I don't see any reason why technological advancement (the moon) would associate to the recognition of pain and suffering. The two issues don't touch, not even in tangent.

The latter, I suspect would cause a backlash against the fight game.

Technological advancement on the other hand has made us, now and in the past, more aggressive, not more moral.

Will we to have a 'brain' graphic at the bottom of the screen, that flashes various hues of red as we watch pugilistic dementia occur in real time?

[Mr Mitts]

Re Bold: Elaborate! (Lol)

I don't think you're making a proper comparison. I don't see any reason why technological advancement (the moon) would associate to the recognition of pain and suffering. The two issues don't touch, not even in tangent.

The latter, I suspect would cause a backlash against the fight game.

Technological advancement on the other hand has made us, now and in the past, more aggressive, mot more moral.

Will we to have a 'brain' graphic at the bottom of the screen, that flashes various hues of red as we watch pugilistic dementia occur in real time?

Son, you asked me 2 posts ago if a society able to to measure pain remotely would allow boxing, and I answered with a question which already answered your gripe about technological advancement. In other words, I already said it.

Are you then saying that the ability to measure pain would be a powerful new cause for banning boxing? We already know boxers are in pain, it is no secret. We will not feel their pain but read it from a monitor. It could even become part of calling a fight for a guy like Jim Lampley: "His pain level just hit 7 with that shot, Larry."

I don't think the ability to measure pain should affect boxing's legality any more than going to the moon was the idea. But calculating and predicting permanent damage instantaneously would probably be enough. I say probably because everyone already knows boxing causes brain damage, including the boxers.

[Willie Pep 229]

Son, you asked me 2 posts ago if a society able to to measure pain remotely would allow boxing, and I answered with a question which already answered your gripe about technological advancement. In other words, I already said it.

Are you then saying that the ability to measure pain would be a powerful new cause for banning boxing? We already know boxers are in pain, it is no secret. We will not feel their pain but read it from a monitor. It could even become part of calling a fight for a guy like Jim Lampley: "His pain level just hit 7 with that shot, Larry."

I don't think the ability to measure pain should affect boxing's legality any more than going to the moon was the idea. But calculating and predicting permanent damage instantaneously would probably be enough. I say probably because everyone already knows boxing causes brain damage, including the boxers.

I thought we were just screwing around. I'm not concerned with being right.

Yes, announcers can measure pain anecdotally and we are all aware of the news reports.

But denial is a powerful thing and we have more than enough room to employ it.

Put a graphic on screen showing a scientific measure of the brain suffering pain (as a method of scoring) and the avenue for denial will close.

Anyway I did not mean for you to feel challenged. Just thought we were bull shi tting.

P.S. I'm 70 next birthday.

[Mr Mitts]

I thought we were just screwing around. I'm not concerned with being right.

Yes, announcers can measure pain anecdotally and we are all aware of the news reports.

But denial is a powerful thing and we have more than enough room to employ it.

Put a graphic on screen showing a scientific measure of the brain suffering pain (as a method of scoring) and the avenue for denial will close.

Anyway I did not mean for you to feel challenged. Just thought we were bull shi tting.

P.S. I'm 70 next birthday.

Congratulations! I wish I were 70 again. I am not seeing any hostility here, or indeed any major disagreement. We are always screwing around, aren't we?

[Bronson66]

Son, you asked me 2 posts ago if a society able to to measure pain remotely would allow boxing, and I answered with a question which already answered your gripe about technological advancement. In other words, I already said it.

Are you then saying that the ability to measure pain would be a powerful new cause for banning boxing? We already know boxers are in pain, it is no secret. We will not feel their pain but read it from a monitor. It could even become part of calling a fight for a guy like Jim Lampley: "His pain level just hit 7 with that shot, Larry."

I don't think the ability to measure pain should affect boxing's legality any more than going to the moon was the idea. But calculating and predicting permanent damage instantaneously would probably be enough. I say probably because everyone already knows boxing causes brain damage, including the boxers.

Some 30 odd years ago I had my first knee op,inner medial cartilage removal,done the old way,opening the
knee up like cutting an apple in half.The morning after, the surgeon came round and asked me if I had been able to move my leg at all.
I replied I've been down to the toilet,the other end of the Ward.The Surgeon said,you must have a very high pain threshold,I began to look smug,so he pointed out, it has nothing to do with courage.
My rambling point being,if he is right and, if we develop a way of measuring pain via the brain for boxing purposes,[if we haven't already?] would the individual readings be all different?