We initiate an investigation of learning tasks in a setting where the learner is given access to two competing provers, only one of which is honest. Specifically, we consider the power of such learners in assessing purported properties of opaque models. Following prior work in complexity theory that considers the power of competing provers in various settings, we call this setting refereed learning. After formulating a general definition of refereed learning tasks, we show refereed learning protocols that obtain a level of accuracy that far exceeds what is obtainable at comparable cost without provers, or even with a single prover. We concentrate on the task of choosing the better one out of two black-box models, with respect to some ground truth. While we consider a range of parameters, perhaps our most notable result is in the high-precision range: For all $\varepsilon>0$ and ambient dimension $d$, our learner makes only one query to the ground truth function, communicates only $(1+\frac{1}{\varepsilon^2})\cdot\text{poly}(d)$ bits with the provers, and outputs a model whose loss is within a multiplicative factor of $(1+\varepsilon)$ of the best model's loss. Obtaining comparable loss with a single prover would require the learner to access the ground truth at almost all of the points in the domain. We also present lower bounds that demonstrate the optimality of our protocols in a number of respects, including prover complexity, number of samples, and need for query access.