judo guy is correct.
judo guy. Interesting post. I had no idea...
Greg
Judo Guy,You always have great points.
In contemporary judo, what I speak of has gone global.The classical "restricting to win" judo sect is not home only to the japanese anymore.So you are correct.
"If there are any rule changes that were originally proposed by the Japanese could you please point it out?"
1925 was the beginning of the end,IMO.
Lets look at some statistics......
Women: 28.1% wins by newaza in 1995 Worlds
17.8% wins in 96 Olympics
9.2% wins in 97 World
9.1% wins in 99 Worlds
Men 26% in 1995 Worlds
4.1% in 1999
This is clearly showing the rule and attitude changes that I talk about.Perhaps now they come from europe or somewhere else,but the message,meaning and reasonings are the same,IMO.It is global,so again you are correct.Rules to win, to the exclusion of reality is my point.
Perhaps I lost you on calling the sentiment "classic japanese".I was only refering to it as japanese because thats where it started and I tend to lump them all together and probably should find a better term to describe these types.
And while I think you have a point on the smaller scores,time limits etc..I do feel that "positive judo" as it is often called is a traditional japanese sentiment and is a flaw in the sport.
You have to stand perfectly erect,take traditional grip or be penalized,attack,attack,attack.....
Well that is not judo.Not as it is defined by jigoro in the beginning.Why did that first definition change?
My oppinion is because people got their butts kicked.
I do not know who instituted the new newaza time parameters, nor do I know who restricted the grips so radically, nor do I know who instituted the passivity and posture rules, but I do know they certainly all favor the Japanese style and the Japanaese physique.
Also, it could be just coincidence but the rules started changing in rapid order with the emergence of
European judo, both eastern and western.
Osaekomi,
Are you moderating it? If so, good luck! I'll check it out, but I doubt I'll spend much time there.
Osaekomi and Quincy,
First of all, I agree that the new rules and interpretations favor the Japanese. I'm saying the Japanese didn't push for those rules.
Rules are continually tweaked for various reasons. Weight classes were put in despite Japanese protests because the IJF felt that the IOC would not accept judo as an Olympic sport without them and that more weight classes would help the sport grow because more players outside of Japan would have the opportunity to win, thereby making it more popular.
The IJF has stated very clearly that they want the sport to become more spectator friendly. The Olympics are driven by television revenue and while judo is one of the most popular events at the Olympics in terms of attendance, the television revenues generated by it are pathetic.
Ever watch the tape 101 Ippons? Great tape right? Ever wonder why they never made a tape called 101 kokas? Well, it doesn't take a genius to know that watching 101 kokas wouldn't be very entertaining.
So, if you wouldn't want to watch 101 kokas on a tape, and you are a fan of the sport, why would a person without knowledge of judo want to watch an event on TV that was dominated by kokas?
The IJF has made an effort to return judo to a sport that has big throws, so that they can be more spectator friendly. The only way to do that is to penalize posture and gripping that discourages big throws.
The complaint about the one side gripping wasn't that great throws couldn't be done by them. The complaint was that too many competitors were using one sided gripping to avoid actually doing anything. So, they decided to give a competitor 3 seconds to do something or be penalized.
The problem with rule changes is while they correct one thing, they usually end up adversely affecting a different aspect of the game.
Personally, I don't like the new rules except for the posture because I think it discourages innovation. I understand the reasoning behind it, but think they are mistaken in thinking they can make the sport spectator friendly. Time will tell who is right.
Oh by the way, I think the next big thing they will be addressing in the rules is the penalty situations.
The argument boils down to this. If 4 kokas do not equal an ippon, why do 4 acts that would be shido equal hansokumake? That is a very legitimate argument.
However, the other side of that argument is if you are up by waza ari, why wouldn't you just keep getting passivity penalties until the match ended if they weren't cumulative?
Seems to me, that if they want to address the penalty situation fairly, they are going to have to make a certain number of kokas = yuko and a certain number of yukos = waza ari. Then make the penalties equivalent. Say 3 shidos = chui and 3 kokas = yuko. Some scheme like that I guess.
But to address this problem, puts us even further away from the ideals of ippon judo.
I forgot to address the comments about Kano. I'm thinking about doing it at the other forum as part of some other thoughts regarding the topic of Olympic judo.
Hey judo guy do you realize that the French pronunciation of your screen name is "judogi"? Lol!
You sure make some good, strong points and they make a lot of sense. 101 kokas, lol! I'll tell ya I think the most potent thing in all of the grappling styles is the big ippon in a judo match, especially when it is a come from behind with time running out.
Hey I'm sorta pumped about the new judo forum that should debut this Monday on this site.
I never heard those claims about 3 points 7 points etc. in a match. In team tournaments the scores are usually ippon 10 points, waza ari is 7 points, all other decisions are 5 points. Some declare hiki wake for any decision less than waza ari.
As far as I've always been taught, judo was never about the most scores, it was about the best score. The current scoring system reflects that. A numeric system would not.
So, is it worth changing? Do the benefits of numeric scoring (easier for spectators to understand) outweigh the concerns about its affects on judo principles (achieving the highest form of victory)?
You are right, no wazaris in this case. You can still have ippon though.
Besides, wouldn't that make the ippon even more special?
You can make a wazari worth 10 points, a yuko worth 4 points, and a koka worth 1 point. That way the 'ladder' scoring system remains intact in a sense, and it is easier to watch.
What's confusing about right now is how they claim that a koka is 3 points, a yuko 7 points, etc. What the hell does that mean?...3 kokas still doesn't beat a yuko but they still claim that it has a point value. Is this for team comp. or something?
Well my gut answer is no since it won't ever be popular with the spectators anyway. However, wouldn't it be easier to ref with a numeric score card? You cited the problem with penalties and how two penalties are currently scored vs. two kokas...with a numeric scoring system this wouldn't be a problem in that you could keep the value of each penalty constant.
Everyone,
Thank you for restoring my faith in this board. I normally just lurk looking for links or news. Most of the threads here have become childish and boring lately.
This is the best stuff Ive read in a long time. Ive gotten a real education here today.
Thanks again
mmacar
Sothy,
It would seem to make the assessment of penalties fairer, but I can give you a devil's advocate answer on that too. :)
Basically, what we've done here is a small exercise in the process of how rule changes are made, how they solve one problem and create another. Thus, the neverending tweaking of rules.
Take Quincy's original post about how the original rules were fairly simple and easy to understand. Fast forward 100 years and taking a look at the system, you think to yourself "How did we get to this place?"
The answer is pretty simple. The rules kept changing to reflect the changes in society as well as to achieve certain milestones in the judo movement.
Each step of the way, the changes made sense. Weight classes, safety precautions, scoring etc. Every time these things happened they were trying to correct a perceived problem that generation faced.
When I look back at what they've done, I've got to admit they did a damn good job in what they were trying to achieve.
The sport of judo is practiced in over 178 countries worldwide with over 2.5 million registered practicioners and probably 2-3 times that many unregistered participants. Kano wanted his discipline practiced throughout the world and the people who took the responsibility for achieving that goal ended up succeeding.
Kano was smart enough to know that judo would change over the course of time. I imagine he would be pleased with the progress the sport has made. It is truly an international sport now. Some of the best techniques, training methods, and strategies have been incorporated into judo over the last 40 years because of the Olympic movement.
No question that the sporting aspects of judo training have become the focus of the training. So what? Same thing happens with every martial discipline that has contests. This was as true in Kano's time as it is in our time. Does anyone remember who the best self defense judo guy was? Nope. Bet you can name the best judo competitors from back then.
Sothy,
What you suggest sounds even more confusing. Combining numeric scoring with waza ari and ippon? I don't think so.
For the sake of argument lets say that koka is 1 point and yuko is two points. The score reads 12-4 yet the guy with 4 has a waza ari and wins the match. How confusing would that be to a spectator? Its gotta be one way or the other.
Judo guy, Thanks for the insight bro.
Judo just needs a point system like sambo or wrestling have. Sambo even has a type of ippon, so you can maintain the integrity of an ippon with a point system...
I'll tell you this, my parents watched all of the Olympic judo matches that Gill was in and the Olympic wrestling matches that Igali was in because the CBC showed them...they had a really hard time figuring out the judo relative to the wrestling (which has a point system that anyone can follow)...so if they are serious about TV, they should address that first IMO as TV watchers are probably going to be like me with speed skating...only watching it during hte Olympics and (hopefully) loving what I see then.
the popularity of judo (in the U.S.) is a lost cause.. don't waste too much brain power on it.
samboboy, Hey thanks for sharing your experiences. I always like your posts because they are always interesting, informative, candid, truthful and accurate.
judo guy, No way am I the moderator! I think it is going to be much the same as the UG, not a Q & A. Hell, I would like to see you, Ben, Dynamo, samboboy, sothy or someone else who makes a lot of sense. I think the Metro boyz shot our wad in running Tripp.
RazorRamon, Judo is here to stay in the U.S. believe me. It is an Olympic sport and the most popular grappling style in the world.
You can still keep the wazari and ippon with a point system. You don't have to eliminate them at all.
Say that one ippon ends the match regardless of score. And that two wazaris ends the match regardless of score.
The yuko and koka weren't always scored (I mean way back), so modifying the scoring format so that they dissappear isn't that bad. Whether or not judo should have a 'technical fall' or something (up by 10 or 15 points) is something that they can tinker with...
Sothy,
A numeric system would help alot. Here's the problem with it. Can any numeric system properly reflect the aspirations of Kodokan judo? I'm not so sure it can.
The concept of ippon isn't some sort of numeric formula. It is about achieving total victory over an opponent. The perfect throw, the complete control of an opponent by pinning them, the submission tap from an opponent all reflect a total victory. Because waza ari is so close to ippon ( though scored as 1/2 of an ippon, Waza ari score is really anywhere from 75-99 percent of an ippon), 2 of them make sense for total victory.
But does the number 15 or 20 or 25 mean total victory? That's really debatable.
So, lets take the number 25 randomly. If 25 reflects ippon, does that make waza ari 12 1/2 points? Could 25 points scored through kokas end a match? Does that really reflect total victory?
There is a reason that 10 kokas don't equal yuko and 10 yuko don't equal waza ari.
So the question really is do you want to replace the ideals of ippon for a spectator friendly scoring system? Better yet, can anybody come up with a numeric system that maintains the integrity of Ippon judo?