After the olympics is there a chance that double legs, single legs, etc will make a come back?
They have not been banned in the first place.
The Kodokan, Judo's birthplace, has not made any changes in that department.
It's just that practitioners don't need to follow the IJF rules.
Sorry, to answer your questions, of course it's possible for the IJF to bring back ITS old rules. I didn't care for them either, though, because of too much ref involvement.
Judo popularity world wide is at its highest due to IJF. They could modify the rules where you do not get disqualified for a leg attack/block but I don't seeing them allowing a score from them. The biggest challenge I see is scoring by penalties and winning by penalties. This is not enjoyable to watch. I still see too much grip fighting going on and no penalties given to encourage more attacks. So the players exploit this by defensive tactics until a shito is given to one of the players. You this in close competition/skills. Watch the Japanese/Koreans/Mongolians/Russians/Georgians/French men and women. They win by scoring, especially the Japanese. They go for the ippon.
judoblackbelt I see a lot of guys where the leg rules being banned hurt thier game. I know guys that have had to relearn Suki Nage or Kouchi Gari without grabbing the pants. The banning screwed up some people's game. Once in awhile I still grab the pants just from musicle memory as I was taught that way.
Neil Adams just put up a video on his thoughts regarding leg grabs and if they are coming back. It is at the top of his facebook page right now.
https://www.facebook.com/NeilAdamsJudo/
Outkaster- I have watched modified versions of kata garuma without grabbing the leg. Not as much as before. They still do the kouchi gari after a fake forward throw but have to be careful not to touch the leg. Kayla Harrison like this throw. But I have to agree with you it required a change in technique. At the lower weights there was to much bent over styles preventing the other throws.
Outkaster,
The rules impacted Iliadis and Zantaraia as much as anyone. I've had the distinct pleasure to be able to address the rule changes with both of them in person. Neither one of them complained about it. Just part of the job. They adjust.
You will hear the complaints mostly from lower level competitors. They don't do it for a living. Athletes DO complain about the frequent rule changes etc. but most realize it just comes with the gig.
Why not just allow any relatively safe way to throw someone on their back? The only measure of truth is effectiveness. If it works, let it in. If you feel standing up straight judo is superior then you can can teach your students that way and the results will speak for themselves.
FatBuddha,
A couple of points.
a) Judo is an Olympic Sport. Therefore, judo is in the sport entertainment business. Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing is not relevant to the discussion. Throughout the world, significant money flows to the sport because of the Olympic association.
b) In order to maintain that association, the IJF must play nice with the IOC. The Olympic movement itself is being challenged by the extreme sports. That is where the youth market plays. Check out how many people and their ages like the Facebook page of the X Games vs the Olympics Facebook page.This is why you now see some of the newer sports being added appealing to that market.
c) The leg grab rule as Neil stated caused judo to look more like wrestling. I agree with that. I also believe that it led to horrendous looking judo. There is nobody on this forum who watches more IJF judo than I do. The 2008 Olympics were gawd awful to watch. I watch judo to be entertained. I was not entertained, and I image audiences worldwide weren't either.
d) the rule changes have been positive for the aesthetics of a judo match. There is no doubt about that from this spectator's point of view. That said, it did come at a cost. What was the cost? 1) the penalty of hansoku make is an extreme penalty..and counter to the spirit of the sport for such an inconsequential act. Direct hansoku make should be reserved for behavior so abhorrent or action taken so dangerous that there is little choice for the referee and the judges to make any other decision. 2) It penalized times when leg grabs were "dynamic judo".
e) the only solution that makes sense is to allow lower body attacks IF they score yuko or higher. If an attack is a scoring attack that is dynamic judo. IF the lower body attack does not score, penalize it with shido. That will eliminate the horrible flop and drop judo or at least minimize it.
That said, the IJF will not be bold and take the correct steps. It is a shame because it could have led to dynamic judo.
OCJTC- I you are #1 in watching IJF judo then I am #2. Excellent points you make.
OCJudoTrngCtr -
FatBuddha,
A couple of points.
a) Judo is an Olympic Sport. Therefore, judo is in the sport entertainment business. Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing is not relevant to the discussion. Throughout the world, significant money flows to the sport because of the Olympic association.
b) In order to maintain that association, the IJF must play nice with the IOC. The Olympic movement itself is being challenged by the extreme sports. That is where the youth market plays. Check out how many people and their ages like the Facebook page of the X Games vs the Olympics Facebook page.This is why you now see some of the newer sports being added appealing to that market.
c) The leg grab rule as Neil stated caused judo to look more like wrestling. I agree with that. I also believe that it led to horrendous looking judo. There is nobody on this forum who watches more IJF judo than I do. The 2008 Olympics were gawd awful to watch. I watch judo to be entertained. I was not entertained, and I image audiences worldwide weren't either.
d) the rule changes have been positive for the aesthetics of a judo match. There is no doubt about that from this spectator's point of view. That said, it did come at a cost. What was the cost? 1) the penalty of hansoku make is an extreme penalty..and counter to the spirit of the sport for such an inconsequential act. Direct hansoku make should be reserved for behavior so abhorrent or action taken so dangerous that there is little choice for the referee and the judges to make any other decision. 2) It penalized times when leg grabs were "dynamic judo".
e) the only solution that makes sense is to allow lower body attacks IF they score yuko or higher. If an attack is a scoring attack that is dynamic judo. IF the lower body attack does not score, penalize it with shido. That will eliminate the horrible flop and drop judo or at least minimize it.
That said, the IJF will not be bold and take the correct steps. It is a shame because it could have led to dynamic judo.
Hello -
I respectfully disagree because of the following:
I believe it is prostituting the art/sport to change what it is solely for the sake of entertainment and money. Strikes would make it more entertaining too, so why don't we add in some mma rules? I believe it is audacious of the IJF to disregard the techniques approved by pioneers such as Kano and Mifune for sport judo in favor of extreme rule changes and limitations in the name of increased entertainment. I believe they would favor the continued quest for techniques that are maximally efficient regardless of their entertainment value.
Second, I believe it is a serious error in judgment to kowtow to the opinion of current administrators who think that judo is too similar looking to wrestling. With the dynamic throws, use of the gi, joint locks, chokes, etc., it is simply a different animal and always has been, even with the allowance of wrestling based techniques into judo. Why cater to the uneducated by completely changing our art/sport instead of educating the uneducated on the extreme differences?
Third, I have yet to have seen compelling evidence from the business geniuses at the IJF that the new rules have made judo significantly more exciting. Was judo not exciting before? Were Koga, Jeon, Yamashita, Yoshida, Jimmy Pedro's, etc. etc. etc.'s matches not exciting? Is kata guruma, pick ups in general, pick ups of one leg combined with o uchi gari etc. not exciting? Do they truly believe that these rule changes are the answer to judo's promotion problem?
Fourth, the sport of judo affects how judo is practiced around the world. I cringed when Neil Adam's said that it's a good thing that this new generation won't know what a pick up is. As a combative sport should retain some of its combative origins for self defense purposes, is it really a good thing that this new generation of judo practitioners will never encounter the most common ways that someone would attempt to take them down in a self defense situation?
I don't think there is a logical progression of thought behind the rule change, especially how Adams described the dialogue back and forth which led to the extreme changes.
Judoka, while sportive athletes, come from a martial tradition with a core set of throws. To eliminate many of these throws and their variations not based on safety but for entertainment purposes, takes judo on a troubling path.
I also feel that your solution is impractical: in what sport does an attempted technique that succeeds score a win, but an attempted technique that fails scores a penalty? Obviously, there are many problems with this.
When the IJF made that leg grab decision, they had forgotten that techniques go in cycles in Judo. Here is an example.
There was a time when seoi nage was more effective than tomoe nage, but that gradually changed. Because players started bending their back more to defend.
Next came a time when tomo nage became more successful because it worked well against players with their back deeply bent. So, after a while, players began to take a more upright posture to defend tomoe.
However, when there were more judoka taking an upright posture, then we started to see more of successful seoi nage.
Techniques go in cycles. When one thing is working, players adjust their game to beat it. However, that adjustment is always a double-edge sword.
Judo players have always adapted. When the IJF banned the leg grab rule, the "shoot for a leg and belly flop to wait for a matte if it fails" strategy was somewhat working.
If the IJF had been more patient, those silly moves would have been eliminated anyway because first-class players would have adapted themselves to win with legit techniques.
But again, dojo owners and instructors teaching recreational players can just follow the Kodokan rules. Like I said, nothing has been changed at Judo's birthplace.
I don't see any reason to follow the IJF rules if you are not planning to compete internationally. Hopefully, most Judo instructors are feeling the same way.
FatBuddha wrote,
"I also feel that your solution is impractical: in what sport does an attempted technique that succeeds score a win, but an attempted technique that fails scores a penalty? Obviously, there are many problems with this."
Do you mean to tell me you've never seen a drop knee seoinage be penalized by shido and successful one score? There hasn't been any problem that I see.
FatBuddha,
Sorry I missed the big post first time around.
I don't make determinations of what is right or what is wrong. I just tell you what is. It is a fact that the Olympics are about sports entertainment. You might not like it. You might not agree with it. It is a fact that the proliferation of judo began with the Olympics. I have the figures. It is not in dispute. The IJF has a mandate to keep judo in the Olympics. That means they are accountable to the IOC. You may not like it. You might not agree with it. But that is the function of the IJF.
You don't have to hear opinions from administrators. You heard two opinions on this thread from the two people who watch more IJF World Tour matches than anyone. I have a posting history here. I was very much against the rule changes. The posts are there to see. But guess what? Thousands of hours of watching matches convinced me my opinion was wrong. I always knew the 2008 Olympics sucked to watch. I just thought the suggested changes would not help and could have an adverse effect on marketing judo in the USA. The rule changes did help the aesthetics and rule changes had next to no impact on marketing.
IF the IJF determined the judo that you teach in your club, I would agree with you about the troubling path. But nothing stops you from teaching judo anyway you see fit in your own club. We are talking two completely different topics. One is judo as entertainment. The other is judo as a life study, fitness regimen, etc. I separate them.
Yes, I know there are clubs that IJF rules will determine the direction. I can't help that. That is a determination those clubs have made and which they feel is in their own best interests. I only care about what is in the best interests of my club and secondarily, my country.
OCJudoTrngCtr -
FatBuddha,
Sorry I missed the big post first time around.
I don't make determinations of what is right or what is wrong. I just tell you what is. It is a fact that the Olympics are about sports entertainment. You might not like it. You might not agree with it. It is a fact that the proliferation of judo began with the Olympics. I have the figures. It is not in dispute. The IJF has a mandate to keep judo in the Olympics. That means they are accountable to the IOC. You may not like it. You might not agree with it. But that is the function of the IJF.
You don't have to hear opinions from administrators. You heard two opinions on this thread from the two people who watch more IJF World Tour matches than anyone. I have a posting history here. I was very much against the rule changes. The posts are there to see. But guess what? Thousands of hours of watching matches convinced me my opinion was wrong. I always knew the 2008 Olympics sucked to watch. I just thought the suggested changes would not help and could have an adverse effect on marketing judo in the USA. The rule changes did help the aesthetics and rule changes had next to no impact on marketing.
IF the IJF determined the judo that you teach in your club, I would agree with you about the troubling path. But nothing stops you from teaching judo anyway you see fit in your own club. We are talking two completely different topics. One is judo as entertainment. The other is judo as a life study, fitness regimen, etc. I separate them.
Yes, I know there are clubs that IJF rules will determine the direction. I can't help that. That is a determination those clubs have made and which they feel is in their own best interests. I only care about what is in the best interests of my club and secondarily, my country.
Hello OCJudoTrngCtr - thanks for responding and for giving your point of view.
FatBuddha,
Thanks for bringing up the points you did. It helps me to clarify my thinking on issues.
OCJudoTrngCtr -
FatBuddha,
Thanks for bringing up the points you did. It helps me to clarify my thinking on issues.
OCJudoTrngCtr - Same to you. I always benefit from your perspective even if we see some things differently at times.