Did Lennox Lewis beat Evander Holyfield?: methods for analysing small sample interrater agreement problems
2002; Wiley; Volume: 51; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1111/1467-9884.00306
ISSN2517-6153
AutoresHerbert K. H. Lee, Daniel Cork, David J. Algranati,
Tópico(s)Multi-Criteria Decision Making
ResumoSummary. On March 13th, 1999, a highly anticipated prize-fight between heavyweight champions Evander Holyfield and Lennox Lewis was ruled a draw by the three official judges. Many observers of the fight felt that Lewis had clearly outperformed Holyfield; dissatisfaction with the result—particularly the pro-Holyfield score-card of judge Eugenia Williams—fuelled speculation that the fight had been fixed and prompted official investigations. In this paper, we examine whether the official judges scored the fight in a significantly different way from other professional observers of the fight. We do so by analysing the round-by-round scoring within the context of interrater agreement. The literature on interrater agreement typically considers a large number of samples rated by a small number of judges and relies on asymptotic results for tests. In our case, the sample size is too small to rely on asymptotics. Instead, we investigate several techniques that can be applied to small sample interrater agreement problems, including logistic regression, an exact test and some Bayesian approaches. We demonstrate these methods on both the March 1999 Holyfield–Lewis fight, as well as the September 1999 bout between welter-weights Oscar de la Hoya and Felix Trinidad.
Referência(s)