Comparative Judgement at the Olympics

By Mark House

The Olympics have long been a stage where the world's best athletes showcase their talents, and the judging systems employed are crucial to ensuring fairness and accuracy. Two sports that exemplify the principles of comparative judgement are boxing and breakdancing. Both sports involve direct competition between two performers, with a panel of judges independently evaluating their performances to determine the winner.

Boxing: A Tradition of Judgement

In Olympic boxing, two competitors face off in the ring, aiming to outscore each other through a series of three-minute rounds. The judging system is based on the 10-point must system, where five judges independently score each round. The boxer deemed to have won the round receives 10 points, while the opponent receives a lesser score, typically between seven and nine points, depending on their performance

Benefits of Comparative Judgement in Boxing

  • Reduction of Bias: With five judges, the impact of any individual bias is minimized, as the highest and lowest scores are often discarded, and the remaining scores are averaged.
  • Fairness: The system ensures that each boxer's performance is assessed multiple times from different perspectives, leading to a more balanced and fair outcome.
  • Transparency: The use of multiple judges and clear scoring criteria enhances the transparency and credibility of the results

Breakdancing: A New Era of Judgement

Breakdancing, or breaking, is making its Olympic debut in Paris 2024. In this sport, B-boys and B-girls compete in one-on-one battles, performing intricate dance moves in response to their opponents. The judging panel typically consists of nine judges who independently compare the performances.

Benefits of Comparative Judgement in Breakdancing

  • Comprehensive Evaluation: Judges assess performances across multiple criteria, ensuring a holistic evaluation of each dancer's skills and creativity.
  • Independent Judgement: Each judge works independently, reducing the likelihood of groupthink or undue influence from other judges.
  • Dynamic Scoring: The scoring system allows for nuanced assessments, with judges able to express the strength of their preference for one dancer over another.

Similarities to Comparative Judgement

Both boxing and breakdancing at the Olympics utilize a form of comparative judgement, where performances are directly compared against each other rather than against a fixed standard. This approach aligns closely with the principles of comparative judgement, which emphasize the relative evaluation of performances to determine quality and excellence.

Key Similarities:

  • Pairwise Comparison: In both sports, athletes are evaluated in pairs, with judges making decisions based on direct comparisons.
  • Independent Assessment: Judges work independently, providing an unbiased and diverse range of perspectives.
  • Aggregation of Scores: The final outcome is determined by aggregating the scores from multiple judges, ensuring a balanced and fair result.

In conclusion

In conclusion, the use of comparative judgement in Olympic sports like boxing and breakdancing enhances the fairness and accuracy of the judging process. By leveraging the insights of multiple independent judges, these sports ensure that the best performers are rightfully recognized, maintaining the integrity and excitement of the Olympic Games.