Thoughts on computer judging

[Kev]

I was wondering this week what boxing decisions would be like if one of the three judges was a computer?

It could calculate the winner of the round based on punch stats, connect percentages, power punches landed, workrate etc. I'm not sure if a computer can be programmed to calculate things like ring generalship but as time went on surely they would get better at programming a more accurate computer.

Anyway my reasoning is that in virtually every fight you seem to get at least one judge who was practically making up his scorecard or watching the wrong fight and a computer simply could not do a worse job than them.

Of course occasionally a computer might get it wrong, but I'd imagine far less often than human judges who balls up fights every week, and with only one computer judge, the two humans could overule if they both agreed differently.

I know it won't happen but I actually think this could go some way to improving results in practice and making fight results a bit fairer.

Three minds, two human imcompetents and one silican, to me it's better than just three human imcompetents.

Any thoughts?

[ElTerribleMorales]

i get what you're saying, but honestly i don't it'll ever happen, especially when they wont even make instant replay a part of the sport, i think that judges like Adalaide Byrd and Glen Hammada, among others should seriously get penalized for ridiculous scores like Hammada's in the Diaz/Malignaggi fight and well almost every Fernando Vargas fight that Byrd scored, if the commission's would have a fine for favoritism lol maybe they'd get their shit together

[Kev]

i get what you're saying, but honestly i don't it'll ever happen, especially when they wont even make instant replay a part of the sport, i think that judges like Adalaide Byrd and Glen Hammada, among others should seriously get penalized for ridiculous scores like Hammada's in the Diaz/Malignaggi fight and well almost every Fernando Vargas fight that Byrd scored, if the commission's would have a fine for favoritism lol maybe they'd get their shit together

Yeah I agree but I think it would work better than the current situation.

The main thing is, that unlike human judges, computers would get better and more accurate over time as technology improved and those working on it came up with better programming and algorithms.

In the 21st century its inexcusable imo that modern technology such as instant replays and compubox type stats arn't made available to the referee's and judges and used to come to better and fairer decisions.

Boxing insists on living in the early 20th century in so many ways. I know they are not the only sport to do so but it's a problem in boxing because its far and away the worst sport in the world for correctly getting a result.

[ElTerribleMorales]

i get what you're saying, but honestly i don't it'll ever happen, especially when they wont even make instant replay a part of the sport, i think that judges like Adalaide Byrd and Glen Hammada, among others should seriously get penalized for ridiculous scores like Hammada's in the Diaz/Malignaggi fight and well almost every Fernando Vargas fight that Byrd scored, if the commission's would have a fine for favoritism lol maybe they'd get their shit together

Yeah I agree but I think it would work better than the current situation.

The main thing is, that unlike human judges, computers would get better and more accurate over time as technology improved and those working on it came up with better programming and algorithms.

In the 21st century its inexcusable imo that modern technology such as instant replays and compubox type stats arn't made available to the referee's and judges and used to come to better and fairer decisions.

Boxing insists on living in the early 20th century in so many ways. I know they are not the only sport to do so but it's a problem in boxing because its far and away the worst sport in the world for correctly getting a result.

main reason they don't want instant replay is cause then the committee that has to review the tapes won't be necessary, meaning it'd save money lol, instead of spending god knows how long to evaluate a tape then (more times then not) do nothing about the situation, with instant replay the ref would be able to make the call and decide right then and there

[Cortez The Killer]

I've had thoughts about solutions to the judge problem too. I thought of something where the fans could text or call in score cards and they would take the average and the fan vote would account for the 3rd judge.

I don't know though, 3 judges should be able to accurately score a fight. Just like a computer/spectator vote should be able too. Probably will be flaws with any system.

And having a computer rate people's performance sounds freaky. What if the computers gained consciousness. Or learned how to love. Or learned they could control humanity.

My god...I just realized I'm on a computer right now...

[ElTerribleMorales]

I've had thoughts about solutions to the judge problem too. I thought of something where the fans could text or call in score cards and they would take the average and the fan vote would account for the 3rd judge.

I don't know though, 3 judges should be able to accurately score a fight. Just like a computer/spectator vote should be able too. Probably will be flaws with any system.

And having a computer rate people's performance sounds freaky. What if the computers gained consciousness. Or learned how to love. Or learned they could control humanity.

My god...I just realized I'm on a computer right now...

JUDGEMENT DAY!!! lol

[mad_takamura]

i get what you're saying, but honestly i don't it'll ever happen, especially when they wont even make instant replay a part of the sport, i think that judges like Adalaide Byrd and Glen Hammada, among others should seriously get penalized for ridiculous scores like Hammada's in the Diaz/Malignaggi fight and well almost every Fernando Vargas fight that Byrd scored, if the commission's would have a fine for favoritism lol maybe they'd get their shit together

Yeah I agree but I think it would work better than the current situation.

The main thing is, that unlike human judges, computers would get better and more accurate over time as technology improved and those working on it came up with better programming and algorithms.

In the 21st century its inexcusable imo that modern technology such as instant replays and compubox type stats arn't made available to the referee's and judges and used to come to better and fairer decisions.

Boxing insists on living in the early 20th century in so many ways. I know they are not the only sport to do so but it's a problem in boxing because its far and away the worst sport in the world for correctly getting a result.

if a computer would have a really smart a.i. that they can also be considered as thinking organisms that can be done.
however, you can't take away corruption in anything, from this time or in the future. who knows, a corrupt promoter can hire a hacker to reprogram the computer in favor of their own fighter.
when we have solutions to old problems, new problems will surely arise.

[holmcall]

I don't like it and never have. It's totally quantatative and lacks the ability to measure the effectiveness of punches. In a word, it sux!