The biggest match of the year—a rematch between the legendary Tyson Fury and the unbeaten Oleksandr Usyk—was judged by AI. With rising interest in AI and combat sports, many fans are also turning to platforms like Ufabet to place real-time boxing bets and follow the action more closely. That’s right, Artificial Intelligence. You might be wondering, “How does that even work?” or “Why was this decision made? Will we see AI in more major boxing matches?” This article will explore these questions and how AI could change boxing by tackling questionable scorecards and reducing human error. Let’s dive in.
How are AI Judges Use?
The first-ever AI boxing judge made its debut in the fight between Fury and Usyk. This AI judge analyzes each round, every move, and all the critical moments of the match. For this fight, it was introduced as a fourth judge.
After the controversy surrounding the judges’ decision in their earlier bout this year, adding an AI judge seemed like a smart choice. Unlike human judges, the AI lacks emotional bias and focuses solely on specific metrics. These include aggression, landed punches, and defensive effectiveness. By tracking these in real-time, the AI calculates the score and determines the winner with precision.
Can the AI Judge truly be unbiased?
Fans of the sport often wonder if an AI judge can truly be unbiased. Since computers are preprogrammed, the likelihood of bias is very low, if not zero. Why? Because programming prioritizes specific criteria, such as fighting style—whether defensive or aggressive—when making calculations.
However, in evenly matched situations, these criteria face tough challenges. For instance, if one boxer dominates defensively for most of the rounds but then takes heavy blows from the opponent towards the end, the decision-making becomes more complex. This is where human judgment often plays a key role.
While the organizers might see the introduction of an AI judge as an exciting innovation, fans have mixed reactions. Some view it as a positive step forward, while others see it as the beginning of the end for any sport adopting such strategies. Concerns also arise about whether AI considers the damage caused by punches. To a large extent, it does—it measures factors like fist speed, the snap of the head on impact, and the force of the gloves. However, these technical aspects still leave room for debate among purists of the sport.
| Boxers | Tyson Fury | Oleksander Usyk |
| Human Judge | 112 | 116 |
| Boxers | Tyson Fury | Oleksander Usyk |
| AI Judge | 112 | 118 |
How can an AI Judge be fair?
To ensure fair AI scoring in boxing, time-based scoring and ring control are crucial, alongside clean punching, defense, and effective aggression. This approach involves evaluating performances consistently throughout each round, emphasizing sustained success rather than brief moments of impact. For instance, strong defense and ring control during most of a round would carry more weight, preventing a single late power punch from undoing earlier dominance.
The AI would measure how well a boxer controlled the pace and space of the fight, giving credit for consistent command of the ring. This balanced, time-sensitive method ensures both fighters are judged fairly, with clear and transparent scoring criteria to back up the results.
Conclusion
I think having an AI as a fourth judge is a great addition. The world is changing fast, and it makes sense to embrace technology. However, human judgment should never be completely sidelined. There will always be situations—like scoring outrageous or questionable decisions—where a human judge’s discretion is essential. It reminds me of how VAR is used in football; it supports, but doesn’t replace, human decisions.
Key criteria like the number of punches thrown and landed, punches with visible impact (high impact), aggression, and pressure are crucial for determining the outcome of any bout. Ultimately, the most important factor in a round is who lands the best and most punches, followed by how effective they are (measured by connection ratio). With these metrics, AI might outperform many judges, especially in a sport where questionable decisions happen so often.
Joshua Okeke’s journey in sports writing began with lively debates about football’s greatest players, eventually leading to a career with top publications in the US and India. His work has been featured on the front pages of newspapers like Nordonia Hills, praised for its clarity and engagement. Specializing in SEO, sports analytics, video editing, and digital content management, he crafts articles that resonate with fans, simplifying complex topics. Committed to helping aspiring writers and promoting remote opportunities in journalism, he shares practical advice on LinkedIn while pursuing a master’s in Mining Geophysics.
[…] Boxing is an industry worth billions. Sponsors, broadcasters and pay-per-view audiences demand a product they can trust. Controversies don’t just upset fans, they jeopardise the sport’s business model. To survive and thrive, boxing needs to evolve, and technology offers a way forward. […]
I’ve always preferred a judge score a 10-10 if the round was close to even, rather than flip a coin or use bias to lean one way.
118-112 probably means that two rounds were a 10-10, and the rest were 10-9s.
Not saying I agree with the card.. but I agree that we need more 10-10s.
Great article. You could maybe doing with changing the names on the scoring boxes at the bottom from Tommy to Tyson.
I enjoyed reading the article.
Fixed, thank you.
I personally think the 118-112 score absurd. It implies there were some 10-8 rounds, which is clearly not the case.