WHETHER we like it or not, Artificial Intelligence is set to have a monumental impact on the world of professional boxing.
This cutting edge technology was most notably used for the rematch between Oleksandr Usyk and Tyson Fury last month, when Turki Alalshikh’s AI-powered judge produced a widely lambasted unofficial scorecard of 118-112 in favour of the Ukrainian.
Of course, this was just an experiment on the boxing power broker’s part; a chance for him to showcase the endless possibilities that can emerge from artificial scoring, when bias – at least in theory – is removed from the equation.
In reality, though, there is perhaps little room for impartiality when the technology being used is presented by a state-sponsored brand.
That is not to say that anyone associated with Riyadh Season directly influenced the AI judges’ scorecard on December 21. But still, it is worth remaining sceptical, at least for now, about the application of this new, potentially revolutionary software.
Human judges – as in the officials who sit ringside – have long been kept under the microscope, unable to avoid the inevitable ridicule from fans, fighters, journalists and pretty much whoever chooses to voice an opinion.
Most of whom, it seems, have either been branded as a charlatan or accused of taking a bribe. And yet, whether it be incompetence or corruption, there is rarely an explanation for the truly baffling scorecards that have emerged throughout history.
Adalaide Byrd, who notoriously produced a scorecard of 118-110 in favour of Canelo Alvarez when the Mexican locked horns with Gennady Golovkin for the first time, is a name that will spring to the mind of most boxing aficionados.
But these types of performances from judges are not exactly hard to seek out, either. Nelson Vazquez, for instance, gave arguably the most criminal scorecard of 2024, arriving at 117-111 in favour of Liam Paro after the Australian was undeniably bested by Richardson Hitchins.
Not only that, but Vazquez previously came under fire when he submitted another 117-111 card back in 2021.
That time, the questionable judge saw Jermell Charlo winning a fiercely contested battle with Brian Castano by a concerningly wide margin.
And so, perhaps AI could, in fact, provide the change that boxing so desperately needs. In any case, it would appear that Jabbr, an AI-powered video and stats software for combat sports, is in the process of implementing a new method of scoring fights in 2025.
The company’s Head of Data, Corey Langner, told MMA analyst Luke Thomas in a recent interview on YouTube that he is already in talks with commissions to sanction bouts that are fully scored by AI.
It is important to mention, however, that Jabbr played no role in the artificial scoring of Usyk vs Fury 2 that was introduced by Alalshikh. Rather, their AI-powered judge arrived at a wider scorecard of 117.6-110.4 (rounded to 118-110) in favour of Usyk, which was publicised on their X shortly after the heavyweight showdown.
It would seem, therefore, that the subjectivity of boxing is enough to bring about inconsistencies when even the most sophisticated of technology is being used.
In truth, unless you are an expert in the field, it is difficult to grasp the intricacies and nuances of this new, potentially even job threatening, software.
But what can be said with more certainty is that, while AI-powered judges continue to develop, so must the sport as a whole.
In that sense, more transparent and comprehensive investigations into certain scorecards are perhaps a good place to start.
