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

[crimsonfalcon07]

There's no such thing as unbiased. A human is still putting in their unconscious biases when programming the types of things the AI is going to look for. Many observers don't actually have the experience to see some of the features that can define an effective strike. And remember, boxing is scored round by round, not as a whole. So you have to be able to make the call based on what you see in the moment. Could AI do a better job? Maybe. But that's not really the issue. The issue is corruption.

What happens when they have the AI, and someone gets paid a few million to slip in a line of code to "adjust" the outcome of each round? Where there's big money at stake for controlling the outcome, there's always going to be a way to game the system.

Here's an obvious bit. Even just in the US, there's multiple commissions that don't even have the same rulesets. You don't have a standardized ring, standards for how you can wrap hands, glove types aren't standard, etc. There's basically no way to get any accountability for decisions made by judges or refs, and appeals are handled closed door. None of that is technology related. None of it would be particularly hard to make happen if boxing actually wanted to be a real sport. But it's less about what happens in the ring and more about what happens in the books.

[Spray_resistant]

So when Devin and Rigis fight, you're going to count every one of Reigis' punches as worth 10 of Haney's punches? So that's how you'll judge that fight? Bro ... come on now. You don't see how ridiculous that is? I tell you what, why don't you put this up for the forum to answer. You should make a post asking if you give one guy much more credit for every punch landed because he's deemed/believed to be a harder puncher than the other guy. Just put that up there. You can get more feedback that way. I think it deserves to be a post on its own. I'm curious to see what others say

It depends how effective the punches are when they land if he lands. It is not how I judge a fight, I don't make up my own criteria it is literally in judging guidelines and if people don't like it they can watch another sport.

"Simply put fights are won by clean punches landing. Not all punches are created equally. The effect of the punch is very important. Hard punches are certainly considered, as are the number of punches".

This is from ABC's website on judging criteria there is more so feel free to read the link below but by the book I'm fundamentally correct in scoring.

http://www.abcboxing.com/wp-content/...eral-rules.pdf

[_Rexy_]

You are being far too loose with appointing that round 10-8 without a knockdown.

You're telling me that round 11 of Haney-Loma was comparable of round 7 of Pacquiao-De la Hoya, Round 6 of Mayweather-Gatti, round 5 of Serrano-Taylor, round 10 of Khan-Maidana, or round 7 of Josesito Lopez-Keith Thurman?

You're absolutely insane.

It was a dominant round for sure with Loma lighting him up and doing it dominantly enough to win it on all scorecards, but that WASN'T enough of a beatdown for it to be labeled a 10-8 round.

But what do I know? It's not like I spend nearly all my free time re-watching complete boxing broadcasts or jotting down notes on memorable quotes.

10-8 without a knock down seemed far more common in the 15 round era. Back then it would have been a 10-8 round, Today not so much.

[Mooshashi]

Yeah. Here's DeepStrikes Scorecard:

DEEPSTRIKE

	DEVIN HANEY	VASYL LOMACHENKO
1	10	9
2	9	10
3	9	10
4	9	10
5	9	10
6	9	10
7	9	10
8	9	10
9	9	10
10	9	10
11	9	10
12	10	9
TOTAL:	110	118

Was the AI named Adelaide Byrd? That's a ridiculous score. Close fight but Haney won.

[ShoulderRoll]

1118-110 is a horrid scorecard for that fight.

[Cypocryphy]

1118-110 is a horrid scorecard for that fight.

Honestly, you guys just need to watch that fight with the AI judging it. If a punch lands it lands. If it misses, it misses. Just watch it, look at how it's assessed at the end of the round and then come to your own conclusions. If you find some kind of mistake, please time stamp it and share it on here because maybe you found something that I missed. I found a punch from Haney in the ninth round that wasn't counted for some strange reason and that's it. At least I believe it wasn't counted. Other than that, I couldn't find anything else.

You should just watch it because it's more to do with future fights than this fight.

[Cypocryphy]

Was the AI named Adelaide Byrd? That's a ridiculous score. Close fight but Haney won.

Instead of seeing my post and getting triggered, just watch the video. Just seen what I post isn't going to do much. As I mentioned to Shoulderroll, this is important and is much bigger than your own personal feelings about a fight or fighter.

[Cypocryphy]

There's no such thing as unbiased. A human is still putting in their unconscious biases when programming the types of things the AI is going to look for. Many observers don't actually have the experience to see some of the features that can define an effective strike. And remember, boxing is scored round by round, not as a whole. So you have to be able to make the call based on what you see in the moment. Could AI do a better job? Maybe. But that's not really the issue. The issue is corruption.

What happens when they have the AI, and someone gets paid a few million to slip in a line of code to "adjust" the outcome of each round? Where there's big money at stake for controlling the outcome, there's always going to be a way to game the system.

Here's an obvious bit. Even just in the US, there's multiple commissions that don't even have the same rulesets. You don't have a standardized ring, standards for how you can wrap hands, glove types aren't standard, etc. There's basically no way to get any accountability for decisions made by judges or refs, and appeals are handled closed door. None of that is technology related. None of it would be particularly hard to make happen if boxing actually wanted to be a real sport. But it's less about what happens in the ring and more about what happens in the books.

Yes!! And that's the bigger issue. Right now, as DeepStrike is at this moment, extremely unbiased and extremely accurate. For example, I thought that 12th round was pretty close, but according to DeepStrike, that was Haney's best round and a definitive round, believe it or not.

There were a lot of things in this fight that I had personally misjudged or didn't see, and as I tried to find an error, I saw that I was wrong. But what you said is clearly the bigger issue because what is there to prevent or safeguard the AI being augmented to favor certain fighters. As you said, when big money is at stake, it won't matter because corruption has a way of seeping into the most pristine and altruistic endeavors.

However, this is a step in the right direction, if you ask me, because it helps correct the inherent human biases and mistakes. Sometimes I believe a fight is misjudged on a judge's own prejudices rather than a greater conspiracy.

[Cypocryphy]

It depends how effective the punches are when they land if he lands. It is not how I judge a fight, I don't make up my own criteria it is literally in judging guidelines and if people don't like it they can watch another sport.

"Simply put fights are won by clean punches landing. Not all punches are created equally. The effect of the punch is very important. Hard punches are certainly considered, as are the number of punches".

This is from ABC's website on judging criteria there is more so feel free to read the link below but by the book I'm fundamentally correct in scoring.

http://www.abcboxing.com/wp-content/...eral-rules.pdf

Exactly. And that's what I was saying. The effect of the punch. When you see a punch that visible hurts the other fighter, that's called "effect." The effect is "visible." So you can assess that and doesn't require the subjective opinion of who hits harder than the other. The punch will have a visible effect.

That's exactly what I was saying and supports my argument.

[Spray_resistant]

Exactly. And that's what I was saying. The effect of the punch. When you see a punch that visible hurts the other fighter, that's called "effect." The effect is "visible." So you can assess that and doesn't require the subjective opinion of who hits harder than the other. The punch will have a visible effect.

That's exactly what I was saying and supports my argument.

Which was my whole point that we can't discount effectiveness and go by number of punches landed in rounds. We have to observe with our eyes who is doing more damage effecting the other fighter.