What's the best way to have fights scored fairly?

[TIC]

could ai scoring be used alongside judges as another scorecard?

[Spicoli]

Saw this too and really has the feel of putting a shine and wax on a car still in need of major engine repairs. Basically it takes the punch stat side of things as gospel to an accurate account of how a round breakdowns. The substance therein and definition of "effective punches" in favor of amateur boxing bean counter. Personally I'll take a single counter uppercut that stuns fighter A rather than 10 flick jabs just scratching the chin of fighter B. May have a few fighters who master the art of jousting from the backseat and corners keeping count and such. It is a consideration that boxing can take from though, an attempt to improve judging and that has to be welcome in many forms.

[Master]

AI should be used for stats and aid the judges but not to decide the round themselves. We need the human element to do that. If that subjectivity means rounds being given to the wrong boxer so be it.

[TIC]

i'm sure i saw something about censors in gloves awhile back, if used together it could some type of indication of how a round played out. i'd be interested to see how the ai scored some controversial fights

[NoSavingByTheBell]

Two referees in the ring and five judges ringside Plus two independent punch counters combined into an algorithm to give an instantaneous logarithmic calculation of which fighter actually won the fight

[Spicoli]

i'm sure i saw something about censors in gloves awhile back, if used together it could some type of indication of how a round played out. i'd be interested to see how the ai scored some controversial fights

Ran across this but not sure how it would be implemented and sounds more for training or bag work. Sensors/chips interesting but could give a whole new meaning to pause for technical difficulties. Have we even settled on a universal glove tape that stays wrapped

[palmerq]

Just have a fight to the death, no judges, no need for opinions...simples.

[TIC]

i'm sure i saw something about censors in gloves awhile back, if used together it could some type of indication of how a round played out. i'd be interested to see how the ai scored some controversial fights

Ran across this but not sure how it would be implemented and sounds more for training or bag work. Sensors/chips interesting but could give a whole new meaning to pause for technical difficulties. Have we even settled on a universal glove tape that stays wrapped

they say they put all that tech in the nfl balls that record a lot of information so the technology is there, just needs to be tweeked. you are right, until there everyone is onboard & are looking to advance the sport nothing will improve, look at instant replay, that should already be in use everywhere

[Spicoli]

Ever score rounds minute to minute? Almost impossible to catch an even round that way, but scoring knockdowns may get complicated. It would be interesting to find out how many judges over the years were-are actually former pro fighters.

[TIC]

Ever score rounds minute to minute? Almost impossible to catch an even round that way, but scoring knockdowns may get complicated. It would be interesting to find out how many judges over the years were-are actually former pro fighters.

i tend to score first half of the round then second half

[TitoFan]

I'd say increase the number of judges from 3 to 5. One on each side of the ring, and maybe one that can move around randomly.

[Master]

In my mind I score the round like a street fighter game.

Each hit causing damage and giving them points. The bigger the punch the greater the green bar in my head gives them.

So I score the full 3 minutes and never forget the impact of the early punches in the round.

[NoSavingByTheBell]

Two referees in the ring and five judges ringside Plus two independent punch counters combined into an algorithm to give an instantaneous logarithmic calculation of which fighter actually won the fight

I will stick with my answer from ONE YEAR ago

[Memphis]

The problem with technology is that you have to have a human build the technology and code the technology and output the resultant data from the technology. If you're in the business of paying people off, you just pay a different person.

I'm in favour of more judges watching from anywhere other than ringside and cards picked at random from a number of the judges. Again though, you'd just pay the judges as normal and pay one more guy to pick the right judges no?

The idea that the judges need to be there and on three of four sides of the ring is nonsense. Enough people watching from a single view point on TV, know bullshit when they see bullshit. It's not rocket surgery.

[TitoFan]

Then why not apply that to other sports that require judging?

Having TV or remote judges might or might not be a good idea... but I don't see that happening anytime soon. So instead, provide the judges that ARE there with the best vantage points. And put more of them. It's painfully obvious in boxing that three judges are many times incapable of arriving at a good decision. Put five, then. THAT... isn't rocket science.

To me it's six of one... half dozen of the other whether the judges watch from ringside... TV... or a platform hanging over the ring. The point really is: NOBODY knows or agrees on HOW to judge. It's a bunch of half-assed, supposed, unwritten rules on which hardly ANYONE agrees. Is it any wonder judging cards are many times all over the place??

Judging in boxing has been given the care and attention that lint traps sometimes get on dryers... which is to say, NONE. Something as critical to the sport as judging gets the occasional casual nod or headshake, but nothing more. We've all complained hundreds of times about shoddy judging... and nothing ever gets done.

So bring all the hair-brained ideas. SOMETHING needs to be done.