Crawford vs Canelo – a draw?
Boxing fans are used to dodgy scorecards. We expect a bit of controversy on fight night. But when an AI system called Terence Crawford’s win over Canelo Álvarez a draw, that raised more eyebrows than any judge’s card.
For me, Crawford won that fight clearly. I gave Canelo three rounds—being generous. So how did a machine, free of bias and emotion, end up calling it even? I’ll be honest: I like the idea of AI in boxing. I like what it promises. But this one left me scratching my head.
The rematch test
This isn’t the first time AI judging has made headlines. It was rolled out in the Fury vs Usyk rematch, and I wrote about it here. Same story: the technology didn’t smooth things over, it just fuelled more arguments.
Instead of fans agreeing, we had Fury supporters pointing to the AI when the judges leaned towards Usyk, and Usyk fans doing the reverse. If AI was supposed to bring boxing judging transparency, it ended up doing the exact opposite.
What AI gets right
Let’s give the tech a fair shake. AI doesn’t care about the roar of the crowd, the promoter at ringside, or which fighter sells more tickets. It just tracks punches, output, and activity. That makes it immune to the kind of bias or incompetence we’ve seen ruin careers.
Think of all the fights where boxers were robbed on the cards—careers cut short, title chances gone, legacies tarnished. If AI can stop that happening, then maybe it deserves a place in the sport.
But boxing isn’t just numbers
Here’s the catch: boxing isn’t maths. One clean counter that snaps a head back is worth more than five half-landed jabs. Ring generalship matters. Pressure matters. Defence matters. These are the things that make boxing the sweet science—and they’re not things a machine can always measure.
AI might be brilliant at counting, but it can’t feel a fight. It doesn’t know when momentum has swung, or when a shot carries that fight-changing weight. That’s why it’s hard to trust when it tells us Crawford vs Canelo was level.
The middle ground
So, should we scrap AI judging altogether? Not necessarily. Maybe the answer is to use it alongside human judges. Let AI provide an extra layer of accountability, a fourth scorecard we can look at when controversy flares up.
That way, we get the best of both worlds—technology to keep judges honest, but humans to capture the emotion, flow, and nuance that machines miss.
Because whether it’s three judges or three machines, boxing’s never going to be free of controversy. Maybe it shouldn’t be. Maybe the debate is part of the magic—infuriating, yes, but still part of why we care so much.
Your call
So what do you reckon—would you trust AI to judge a world title fight, or is boxing just too human for that? Drop a comment, share this with your mates, and head over to CMBoxing for more opinion pieces on the sport we love.