Slashdot Mirror


NBC Thinks Connected Gloves and "Bullet Time" Can Make Boxing Cool

New submitter Lashdots writes with this excerpt from a piece at Fast Company about what may be the future of boxing, at least from the perspective of television audiences. "Right now, millennials turn boxing on and they're like, 'Who's winning? I don't get this,'" said Anthony Bailey. The chief technology officer of NBC's Premier Boxing Champions was watching a pair of fighters spar—each wearing sensor-equipped boxing gloves—in preparation for this weekend's fight, the first to be broadcast on NBC's primetime slot (8:30 pm EST) in 30 years. "These guys are real athletes. It's not just two guys going out in the ring trying to beat the crap out of each other. It's two guys that actually have strategy. They're actually thinking."

In a makeshift television studio here last month, Bailey, a team of engineers, and some of boxing's heaviest hitters were working to make that thinking a little more visible—in HD, with video-game-like graphics and Matrix-like camera angles. It's one part of an ambitious multimillion-dollar effort by NBC and some of boxing's biggest names to gain an edge against popular competitors like mixed martial arts, and to draw in younger, more casual audiences who may never have thought about watching before.

25 of 169 comments (clear)

  1. Sound effects... by drew_92123 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm still not gonna watch until they start using Street Fighter sound effects along with those new graphics... ;-)

  2. Right now I am thinking... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...beating people up for entertainment is something I wouldn't mind society moving on from.

    It's not even like it's a high risk side effect of the sport - physically harming the other person (temporarily is necessary, but permanently is often the result) is the whole aim. For anyone with half an ounce of empathy, watching two people fight is like feeling you are being beaten up. That's not entertainment, but either sadism or masochism.

    1. Re:Right now I am thinking... by geekmux · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ...beating people up for entertainment is something I wouldn't mind society moving on from.

      It's not even like it's a high risk side effect of the sport - physically harming the other person (temporarily is necessary, but permanently is often the result) is the whole aim. For anyone with half an ounce of empathy, watching two people fight is like feeling you are being beaten up. That's not entertainment, but either sadism or masochism.

      Slight correction needed here.

      It's a touch of cruelty to watch two boxers beat the shit out of each other, which is likely why this sport should be considered the one the audience should be moving on from.

      When it's hard to find even a career-ending injury in a sport like MMA, trying to overlay the deadly statistics of boxing on top of all fighting sports is not just short-sighted. It's downright wrong.

      UFC has proven rather soundly for twenty five years that fighting can be done for entertainment and sport and NOT create life-altering damage.

    2. Re:Right now I am thinking... by geekmux · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Post traumatic encephalopathy.

      ...from a fight in 1998 hosted by the Pride organization with considerably different rules that is now closed.

      It's also undetermined if the CTE damage wasn't caused by an even longer career of kickboxing, a related sport to UFC but also with different rules and strategies. (and damage risk)

      The UFC rules have morphed and changed over the years, and more often than not I've seen a fight stopped early (or my interpretation of early) in order to adhere to the overall rule of protecting the fighter.

      I said it was hard to find a career-ending injury. And I was right. You found one in twenty five years of the sport.

      I'm not some huge fan of UFC either, but I am aware of the difference that organization has brought to MMA in the way of safety, as their track record in a violent sport speaks volumes.

    3. Re:Right now I am thinking... by anmre · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So ... you enjoy watching UFC fights because its somehow less barbaric than boxing? Every time I'm at a bar, there is at least one television showing UFC. The only difference I observe from boxing is that it's two barbarians trying to kill each other on the ground, vs standing up.

      But please, do continue parroting Sports Center about the virtues of one blood sport over another.

    4. Re:Right now I am thinking... by Luthair · · Score: 2

      You're conveniently ignoring the long term effects of concussions. Both mma and boxing likely have far more head impacts than football or hockey.

    5. Re:Right now I am thinking... by The+Real+Dr+John · · Score: 2

      It is easily within current capabilities to put accelerometers on helmets and have them record the impact forces, but this would spoil all the fun of people harming each other for sport and profit. Until the public turns away from head-injury sports, they will be with us, and the aftermath of all those head injuries will be with us and our health care system for years to come.

      --
      A brain is a terrible thing to waste... Mind? That's debatable.
    6. Re:Right now I am thinking... by Aighearach · · Score: 2

      You should watch the movie Karate Kid, you might discover that while there are some barbarians in martial arts, (as there are some in all things) there is also a non-barbaric tradition of martial arts, and it generally empowers the defender more than the attacker, and is used to decrease violence, not increase it. Historically, when martial arts is intended to kill, weapons are used. When it is practiced without a weapon, it is almost always regarded as a means to enforce peace.

      It is true that sometimes unskilled competitors get into a ring, and it can be a bit lame, and pointlessly violent. But that is very different than what the UFC most often is; an exposition of valuable martial arts techniques.

      It is also true that if you were hit in the head like that, you'd probably die. But you'd probably die if you went off a ski jump, too. Actual athletes with trained bodies aren't taking the same risk. Their bodies are accustomed to the activity; their brains don't swell up after a single punch the way a person on the street's would. Regular light sparring, and the nervous system will acclimate.

      Shaolin monks kick each other in the balls repeatedly, in order to strengthen their bodies in case they have to defend the temple. MMA is mild, and even timid, compared with many righteous examples of martial arts training.

      True competitive barbarism reached its pinnacle with pistol duels. A good chance for both to die, skill or training would not save you, and (unlike sword dueling) there is not even any military benefit from the training.

  3. Nice by nospam007 · · Score: 5, Funny

    So in a couple of years, we can look back and tell:

    That's the hit that got him Parkinson's.

    1. Re:Nice by nukenerd · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Boxing doesn't cause Parkinson's disease.

      Well, whatever it causes (and they will claim it causes everything), I can see lawers running through the data in 20-30 years time when these guys have become vegetables, to sue the crap out of their opponent, the promoter, the ref, the NBC, the audience, Government, TV companies, you, me, God, and the lost tribes of the Amazon, for not stepping in to stop the freak show before it happened.

    2. Re:Nice by Ieshan · · Score: 3, Informative

      Boxing has long been associated with a form of CTE called 'Dementia Pugilistica' (literally Boxer's Dementia), which manifests as Parkinsonism (and Dementia).

      The etiology of 'Normal' Parkinsons and Dementia Pugilistica are almost certainly different, but at many stages they look similar enough that it's probably fair to say that boxing does essentially cause Parkinsons.

    3. Re:Nice by penguinoid · · Score: 2

      Liar! Everyone knows that [profitable thing] does not cause [expensive health problem].

      --
      Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
  4. Brain damage visualization tools by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Put telelemetry and accelerometers on the boxers and their gloves to see the g forces on heads and brains. Model damage from a physicians perspective in both sports medicineband neurology.

    If we can bullet time boxing gloves, we can also collect valuable information to treat future cases of brain trauma.

  5. Thinking? Not so much. by paiute · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "It's two guys that actually have strategy. They're actually thinking."

    ""Everybody has a plan until they get hit." -- Mike Tyson

    --
    If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
    1. Re:Thinking? Not so much. by Livius · · Score: 2

      Of course the spectators are only watching for the thinking.

  6. Should also have sensors on the head by QuietLagoon · · Score: 2

    To measure the force of each impact. At least that way, in addition to the coolness of "connected gloves," some data on brain concussions can be collected.

  7. Why the hate? by sjbe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I despise sports.

    Why? Sports are merely a game. A diversion played for entertainment. If it isn't your cup of tea that's fine but why should you give a shit one way or the other about it? In practical terms if you don't care about sports it won't affect you one tiny little bit. Find something productive to dislike like war or disease or political corruption. Sports is without question a net benefit to society so it makes little sense to hate sports even if you don't enjoy them personally.

    It's all paying ridiculous amounts of money to millionaire "athletes" to watch them play a game.

    Why is that any worse that paying to watch a movie or a TV show or a stage play? People pay to watch this because they find it entertaining and get what they consider a good value for money. And for the majority of the human population, sports ARE entertaining. If you don't like them fine but that doesn't make it ridiculous. A top level athlete is a beautiful thing to watch just like watching a ballet dancer or a talented musician. Plus in sports there is the drama of competition which is tremendous fun. There is economic value in providing entertainment so what is wrong with charging people who are willing to pay to watch sports?

    Furthermore what's with the condescending quotations around the word athletes? If you play sports then you are an athlete. That is what the word means. You're an athlete if you play sports even if you aren't very good at it and don't get paid a penny which described 99.9999% of the population of people involved in sports.

    I have nothing against playing games -- I have a thing against paying people to watch them do it.

    Again why? Why do you give a shit? I understand if it isn't your thing. I don't find watching interpretive dance to be particularly fulfilling myself but that doesn't mean it's a bad thing that others find it entertaining. If you want to spend your money doing something else, no one will care. But stop looking down your nose at people who find pleasure in watching sports.

    1. Re:Why the hate? by PrimalChrome · · Score: 3

      Rarely do you see such puerile egotism from adult people.

      I've seen it every day that I've ever logged into Slashdot. Odd how it's acceptable here because it is "intellectual" or "high brow" because it deals with tech rather than actually getting up out of your chair, leaving your mother's basement, and exposing your flaccid pasty body to natural light.

  8. Re:Mellinials dont watch boxing because by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 2

    Maybe if it were something they cared about, they'd pay. But it really is just two guys they don't care about beating each other up.

    The "this is a sport, not just two thugs trying to hurt each other" veneer was ripped off the so-called sport when Mike Tyson was allowed to return to the "sport" after being convicted of rape, then bit off Evander Holyfield's ear and was allowed to return (with celebrity status) AGAIN, served time for yet another assault, cheated in another fight...

    And was never banned from the so-called sport. Because it's a blood sport where the worst sort of brutality is not just tolerated, but encouraged.

  9. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  10. Re:And I care about this why? by causality · · Score: 2

    Even _interesting_ sports are not highly regarded among geeks, I'm not sure how this article was even considered "stuff that matters."

    Maybe gladiators would be worth posting about, but boxing is as Neanderthal as it gets.

    Apparently you're not the only one who thinks so. I once bought a pair of boxing gloves to spar with friends. The cardboard box had this big bold warning on the side: "WARNING: Boxing is a contact sport"

    I wish I were joking.

    --
    It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
  11. As one who has followed MMA since the end of the 9 by blind+biker · · Score: 4, Informative

    I must say that your statements are pure BS. Fighting in MMA causes just as much if not more brain injury, as (pure) boxing.
    Right now, almost every veteran MMA fighter suffers from symptoms of brain injury. Here's a partial list:
    Jens Pulver
    Gabriel Gonzaga
    Mirko Filipovic
    Frank Trigg
    Chuck Liddell
    Mark Munoz
    Antonio Silva
    Wanderlei Silva
    Alistair Overeem
    Phil Baroni
    Gary Goodridge
    Andrei Arlovski
    Josh Koscheck
    Cheick Kongo

    and the list goes on. And it doesn't even include the journeymen that get punched in the head for a $300 payout on regional circuits, as a matter of fact for their whole careers.

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
  12. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  13. Wrestling by sjbe · · Score: 3, Informative

    Of course there is, when there's a thousand football players for every MMA fighter. You can find football programs at most colleges and high schools in the U.S. - can you name a school that has one for MMA?

    Sort of. It's called wrestling and yes, lots of schools have wrestling programs. A huge percentage (probably the majority) of MMA fighters these days got much of their early training in wrestling and wrestling is a vital skill in MMA. Serious long term injuries are actually rather rare in wrestling and even MMA despite the very physical nature of the sports. I've been a wrestler and coach of wrestling for over 30 years and I can show you the injury statistics for that sport. I've seen similar statistics for MMA. It's far safer than you might guess as a casual observer. Certainly far safer than football on both an absolute and per-capita basis. That's not to imply there are no dangers or that serious injuries cannot result, just that it's much safer than you might think.

    The reason there are surprising few long term injuries in MMA (and wrestling) is two-fold. 1) the rules are designed such that techniques likely to result in severe injury are illegal. 2) There is one official for two contestants and he is standing just a few feet away and is empowered to stop the match if an injury seems likely. That makes a HUGE difference. The sports are physical and sure there are plenty of bumps and bruises but stuff like broken limbs or torn ligaments simply don't happen often because the match gets stopped most of the time before that becomes possible. In football that isn't the case. In football the rules are designed such that certain injuries (particularly knee injuries and concussions) are ludicrously routine. Go into any sports medicine clinic and I can almost guarantee the majority of the patients there will be football players with serious knee injuries.

  14. Re:As one who has followed MMA since the end of th by geekmux · · Score: 2

    I must say that your statements are pure BS. Fighting in MMA causes just as much if not more brain injury, as (pure) boxing. Right now, almost every veteran MMA fighter suffers from symptoms of brain injury. Here's a partial list: Jens Pulver Gabriel Gonzaga Mirko Filipovic Frank Trigg Chuck Liddell Mark Munoz Antonio Silva Wanderlei Silva Alistair Overeem Phil Baroni Gary Goodridge Andrei Arlovski Josh Koscheck Cheick Kongo

    and the list goes on. And it doesn't even include the journeymen that get punched in the head for a $300 payout on regional circuits, as a matter of fact for their whole careers.

    And yet I just saw Josh Koshcheck fight in the ring a week ago??

    Sorry, but you're going to have to do more than provide a list of fighters whom some are still active in the sport to justify your claim here. Obviously if they're still fighting and able to well, whatever "symptoms" they have are far from even career stopping, much less career ending.

    Deaths have occurred in just about every other violent sport, both during the actual event and after the fact, and when comparing apples to apples here, UFC is still by far one of the safest violent sports running today. I emphasize the term violent here because I am not ignorant as to the class of entertainment this is. There is no denying there is risk of permanent damage to the brain and other parts of the body. You're a trained fighter. Take the risk or leave this class of sport altogether.