How to improve boxing judging with ‘Deliberate Practice’

Dr. Anders Ericsson’s bestselling book Peak: Secrets From the New Science of Expertise is based on years of rigorous academic study on becoming the very best at anything. It lays out a clear blueprint for mastery, found in what Ericsson calls “Deliberate Practice.” Mastery is available to all of us if we are willing to apply these studied principles. 

Ericsson has spent his life examining the best violinists, ballet prodigies, free-throw shooters, and gymnasts. He has determined that, without exception, expertise comes not from predisposed talent but from years of focused, deliberate practice. 

But can you become a better boxing judge by applying the principles of deliberate practice? 

Defining Deliberate Practice 

It is important to distinguish between practice, purposeful practice, and actual deliberate practice. Practice, loosely defined, could be any activity related to one’s goal. Basketball players may shoot around, baseball players may visit the batting cage, and quarterbacks can play catch with their receivers. Similarly, judges can work more fights, study televised bouts, or dig deep into YouTube. 

Purposeful practice, however, is a particular type of practice that involves focusing intently on the activity and pushing beyond one’s comfort zone. For example, it might mean paying close attention to body movements, positioning, and decision-making. It could involve focused videotape study rather than casually watching fight films. 

Deliberate practice goes a step further. It has the intensity of purposeful practice — intense focus and work beyond the comfort zone — but it also adds feedback from an expert coach. That coach provides continual feedback, usually on one facet of practice at a time, resulting in repetitions until the skill is performed correctly. The best coaches are either exceptional performers themselves or have worked with the best and understand what it takes to excel. It is informed practice guided by the best performers’ accomplishments and an understanding of what these experts do to excel. 

Perhaps the most important component of deliberate practice is the use of feedback and modification from a monitoring expert. Improvement involves constant tinkering and adapting as mistakes are made, reviewed, and corrected through repeated activity. 

The Challenges of Judging Professional Boxing 

Sure, you’re thinking, this is great, and when I want to take up the violin or set out for gold on the pommel horse in the 2028 Olympic Games, I’ll dive right into deliberate practice. Right now, though, I want to be the best possible and most accurate boxing judge. 

Several high-level professional sports come very close to drilling their officials in deliberate practice. An article published in the Journal of Psychology of Sport and Exercise rigorously examined the use of deliberate practice with rugby officials. Using video recordings of challenging calls, referees were asked to make a ruling. The video was slowed down, and participants received feedback on their calls from experienced expert judges. Later, the videos’ speed was increased, and participants were asked to make similarly challenging calls. The participants all showed significant improvement after this training in their on-field experience. 

The Journal of Psychology of Sport and Exercise has reported similar results in studies involving international soccer. 

In the United States, the Professional Referee Organization, which oversees all levels of professional soccer, has developed an extensive internet-based video library. As often as weekly, referees participate in online training sessions, challenging them to make proper calls in difficult situations. The videos are presented, sometimes in slow motion, and officials are asked to make the correct call. Then, they receive feedback on their decision-making process. This type of continual practice helps officials develop the mental representations needed to improve on-field performance. 

Subjective Judging in Athletics 

At first glance, comparing the brutal sport of professional boxing and the beauty of rhythmic gymnastics seems ludicrous. Yet, the mental processing involved in both activities is remarkably similar. Unlike on-field officiating, which relies on clear rules and regulations that can be objectively observed and processed, judges must rely on their own experience, knowledge, and expertise. 

How can that be improved? 

A study published in the Journal of Psychology of Sport and Exercise examined the “Think Aloud” method of training. Expert judges watched videos of gymnasts’ performances and narrated their thinking process regarding scoring. The results showed promising improvements in judges’ ability to note complex movements such as loss of balance, bending of arms and knees, and foot positioning — all important components of scoring. 

Wouldn’t the observation of two boxers competing in clean punching, effective aggressiveness, ring generalship/control, and defense involve a similar mental process? 

Deliberate Practice for Professional Boxing Judges 

In an interview with Dr. Ericsson on the topic of improvement in boxing judging, he suggested the following steps: 

1. Choose challenging rounds of professional fights. Have experienced, respected judges and novices narrate rounds using the Think Aloud method. 

2. Show the round in slow motion, with judges narrating in detail the ebb and flow of the round regarding scoring criteria. 

3. Focus Think Aloud narration on scoring criteria, particularly clean punching. 

4. Provide constructive feedback to less experienced judges where necessary. 

5. Repeat training on different videos and continually provide feedback. 

During the Think Aloud narration judges can comment on actions like: 

1. The body weight being behind the force of a punch 

2. Whether boxers are committing through the neutral zone to get full force of their power 

3. Whether a punch was in the proper form and therefore having maximum power. 

4. Did punches land full or were they blocked or partially blocked? 

5. Is a fighter effectively moving forward? 

6. Is a fighter’s aggression effective or is it merely activity? 

7. Is a fighter’s balance behind her punches indicating maximum power? 

A Practical System for Deliberate Practice 

Thanks to today’s technology and the internet, introducing such continuous training would not be difficult. Much like soccer’s Professional Referee Organization, a bank of rounds could be continually updated and narrated by experienced judges who could score the slow-motion rounds. These videos could be circulated to other officials, with constructive feedback provided via email or platforms like Skype—even in real time. 

Experienced judges could stay sharp between bouts by practicing and receiving feedback from peers and more seasoned officials. By making thought processes transparent, judges could form clearer mental representations of proper scoring, potentially leading to greater consistency among professional judges.