Comments Thread For: The Beltline: An interview with the AI judge assigned to Jake Paul vs. Gervonta Davis

[BoxingUpdates]

Is truth stranger than fiction and, if so, where does AI come into it, writes Elliot Worsell
[Click Here To Read More]

[ThePriceOfEggs]

Jake Paul is the first fighter to bring AI to boxing, praise be Jake Paul.

[CPNUTKnockoutFreshMart]

I don't think that AI will ever replace human judges , nor should it. A lot of the complaints about judging come from people who are mad that their guy lost. People who were drinking , getting high , talking with friends , let the dogs out in the middle of a round , on the phone, etc, etc, instead of watching the way that a judge is trained to do. Then they get on the Internet and scream about corruption, this that and the other. I will agree that sometimes I wonder what fight a guy was watching but unless I watched with 100% concentration, keeping track of who was ahead constantly, I'm not going to assume that a person is corrupt. That's a really serious accusation. If one judge consistently is getting scores that don't align with what the other two judges are seeing then they need to be talked to by the commission because although judging boxing is subjective everyone is watching the same fight and should be seeing pretty much the same thing the majority of the time . Even then , I would assume incompetence first before corruption.

[SteveM]

I've criticised Worsell before but this is a brilliant piece

[VislorTurlough]

Thanks for this. It was absolute agony to read

[Butt stuff]

I don't think that AI will ever replace human judges , nor should it. A lot of the complaints about judging come from people who are mad that their guy lost. People who were drinking , getting high , talking with friends , let the dogs out in the middle of a round , on the phone, etc, etc, instead of watching the way that a judge is trained to do. Then they get on the Internet and scream about corruption, this that and the other. I will agree that sometimes I wonder what fight a guy was watching but unless I watched with 100% concentration, keeping track of who was ahead constantly, I'm not going to assume that a person is corrupt. That's a really serious accusation. If one judge consistently is getting scores that don't align with what the other two judges are seeing then they need to be talked to by the commission because although judging boxing is subjective everyone is watching the same fight and should be seeing pretty much the same thing the majority of the time . Even then , I would assume incompetence first before corruption.

CJ Ross and Adelaide Byrd are the first two that spring to mind. Also John Lewis caused a big faff recently with awful judging.

The issue with boxing is that there’s lots of money on the line, it’s very poorly regulated and the human element is always an easy and workable area. Judges know who put the card on and who has influence on them being picked.

If you’re a big promoter, you are absolutely going to try to veto a judge who doesn’t consistently hand in favourable cards for your fighters. And if your fighter is the A-side then it’s very likely that will be the case.

[57Blues]

I don't think that AI will ever replace human judges , nor should it. A lot of the complaints about judging come from people who are mad that their guy lost. People who were drinking , getting high , talking with friends , let the dogs out in the middle of a round , on the phone, etc, etc, instead of watching the way that a judge is trained to do. Then they get on the Internet and scream about corruption, this that and the other. I will agree that sometimes I wonder what fight a guy was watching but unless I watched with 100% concentration, keeping track of who was ahead constantly, I'm not going to assume that a person is corrupt. That's a really serious accusation. If one judge consistently is getting scores that don't align with what the other two judges are seeing then they need to be talked to by the commission because although judging boxing is subjective everyone is watching the same fight and should be seeing pretty much the same thing the majority of the time . Even then , I would assume incompetence first before corruption.

Another thing i notice about those of us who complain about judges and i do sometimes, when they interfere with the action inside the ropes or try to be part of the show then yea i complain but anyhow like i was saying, I notice if an announcer says it was a terrible job on the judges part people go with that flow as if there have never been a biased or prejudiced announcer, certainly not one with motives and designs for certain fighters by way of Promoter....................on another level i could not care less about the spectical that is being called a fight with these two clowns.....................i need no one anywhere to tell me those and that simple fact....

[TintaBoricua]

CJ Ross and Adelaide Byrd are the first two that spring to mind. Also John Lewis caused a big faff recently with awful judging.

The issue with boxing is that there’s lots of money on the line, it’s very poorly regulated and the human element is always an easy and workable area. Judges know who put the card on and who has influence on them being picked.

If you’re a big promoter, you are absolutely going to try to veto a judge who doesn’t consistently hand in favourable cards for your fighters. And if your fighter is the A-side then it’s very likely that will be the case.

This is absolutely the case. A lot of fans that watch the sport are guilty of being favorable to a certain fighter just as judges are. The only difference is that fans will do so with their heart on their sleeve. In close rounds while watching live (casuals especially), they will undoubtedly go for their fighter. Judges will do so the same but for different reasons: they might or might not be hired if the fighter they scored it against was the big time money maker. Other times, it’s just sheer incompetence.

Either way, I’ve always gravitated to what I read by a poster somewhere around here years ago where they said that boxing was more like ice figure-skating rather than an exact, objective, sport such as golf. Strokes and putting the ball in the hole…there’s no need for interpretation on what’s going on. Boxing (PROFESSIONAL boxing) will always be hindered by the subjective nature of scoring despite the ring criteria being in place. Nothing of that matters.

For all people like to complain about bad judging (and imply that they could’ve scored it better), I’ve seldom heard of a fan saying or admitting, “I think…I think I scored it horribly.” No, rarely do people own up to it…but it’s easy as hell to point the finger. Boxing is what it is.

A LOT OF WIGGLE ROOM for subjectivity.

I keep saying if fans were genuinely concerned about bad judging, they could just push for Olympic style scoring where punches are scored on the head and torso and whoever scored most blows (regardless of impact or how strong those blows were), you give it to the fighter who scored most. But no one’s gonna’ do that. Because if you did that, it would suck all the drama of the fight out.

As Larry Merchant once said, “Boxing is show business…with blood.”