two throws to name

Enjoyed this vid shows why you need to defend in both "turtle and belly down"

So what do you call the throw at 30sec and the final Ippon throw.

Think there may be some interesting ideas  

It looked like tanio toshi and Uchimata to me.

Why would it not be Uchimata? It seems obvious to me!

medo wrote:

Enjoyed this vid shows why you need to defend in both "turtle and belly down"

So what do you call the throw at 30sec and the final Ippon throw.

Think there may be some interesting ideas   

He, he, he, identifying the first throw is not novice work, as it is not a throw from the gokyô and it is specific henka most people would not be familiar with. It's easy to see why people would come up with many likely scenarios like tani-otoshi, ko-soto-gake or yoko-otoshi, etc, but it's none of these. It is in fact a specific and known henka of kuchiki-taoshi.

The final throw is neither uchi-mata, nor hane-goshi. Clearly uchi-mata is an obvious choice, but it isn't. It's would virtually be impossible to throw like that with uchi-mata. Why ?  Because the throw is way off. Tori's center of mass is way above that of uke which is problematic to effect uchi-mata. He compensates for that using all the possible force of his tsurite, but that is enough. He can only really effect the throw despite the initial lift with his strong leg, thanks to the work and rotation of his upper body after that life. It's hidari-uchi-mata-makikomi.

Cichorei Kano wrote:

medo wrote:

Enjoyed this vid shows why you need to defend in both "turtle and belly down"

So what do you call the throw at 30sec and the final Ippon throw.

Think there may be some interesting ideas   

He, he, he, identifying the first throw is not novice work, as it is not a throw from the gokyô and it is specific henka most people would not be familiar with. It's easy to see why people would come up with many likely scenarios like tani-otoshi, ko-soto-gake or yoko-otoshi, etc, but it's none of these. It is in fact a specific and known henka of kuchiki-taoshi.

The final throw is neither uchi-mata, nor hane-goshi. Clearly uchi-mata is an obvious choice, but it isn't. It's would virtually be impossible to throw like that with uchi-mata. Why ?  Because the throw is way off. Tori's center of mass is way above that of uke which is problematic to effect uchi-mata. He compensates for that using all the possible force of his tsurite, but that is enough. He can only really effect the throw despite the initial lift with his strong leg, thanks to the work and rotation of his upper body after that life. It's hidari-uchi-mata-makikomi.

Oh CK, you came in a little early thought we would get a lot of tani's and ko soto gaki's and was not to sure myself with my thoughts of a ko uchimata having stopped it at 1;02

medo wrote:
Oh CK, you came in a little early thought we would get a lot of tani's and ko soto gaki's and was not to sure myself with my thoughts of a ko uchimata having stopped it at 1;02

Sorry. Shall I delete my post ?

You have to admit though it's not that unexpected. Who would be on the JudoForum on Christmas eve ? So I thought: only sociopaths and idiots like me.

Cichorei Kano wrote:

medo wrote:
Oh CK, you came in a little early thought we would get a lot of tani's and ko soto gaki's and was not to sure myself with my thoughts of a ko uchimata having stopped it at 1;02

Sorry. Shall I delete my post ?

You have to admit though it's not that unexpected. Who  would be on the JudoForum on Christmas eve ?  So I thought: only sociopaths and idiots like me.

Nowt on the tele and cannot drink due to medication so amusing myself watching Judo vids while the mrs raps the pressies.

I spotted some old judo mags on ebay 1959/1960 my xmas pressie to myself should be some good stuff to share on the forum one article is entitled judo and the occult!? should have them friday.

medo wrote: one article is entitled judo and the occult!? should have them friday.

Yes, we just love wooshiwooshi stuff in judo

Interested to know how the first throw can be a henka of kuchiki-taoshi ?

Both of tori's hand are on uke's lapel, there was no grab of uke's leg from either the inside or outside.

http://www.kodokan.org/e_waza/12kuchikitaoshi.html

Mountain Storm wrote:Interested to know how the first throw can be a henka of kuchiki-taoshi ?

Both of tori's hand are on uke's lapel, there was no grab of uke's leg from either the inside or outside.

http://www.kodokan.org/e_waza/12kuchikitaoshi.html

'Henka' not fundamental.

There are two parts to Kuchiki-taoshi, the kuchiki part and the taosu (in kun pronunciation, tô in on pronunciation) part.

The action requires uke to become fixed in position, whilst the stem of tree is pushed over. This action is usually accompanied by leg action. Essential though is the "pushing over", not the "pulling away". Taosu (also pronounced 'kokasu') means "to knock over", not to pull away. This is one of the essential differences with kibisu-gaeshi, although in kibisu-gaeshi, per the name, preferably the heel is grabbed; however, more specifically, in kibisu-gaeshi the action is quite different as then the heel/foot/leg must be pulled away. In kuchiki-taoshi pulling, certainly in randori or shiai is often seen/done to produce more effect, but is not really the mechanism of the throw.

In the text quoted by you, last paragraph, in the nagasute-variation the leg isn't grabbed either. The arm is typcally used like the reaping leg in ô-soto-gari. This action by the arm can be on uke's right leg, but also in between.

In the action as shown, the force normally applied on the leg at the location of the leg is somewhat shifted as it is effected by contact elsewhere that is brought closely to the same point. This contact elsewhere can be the lapel, or even the belt. In a street fight scenario it could even be the hair of the attacker if long enough.

There are many other throws in jûdô where one can totally change the outside appearance while maintaining the same principle. A couple of examples:

- it is possible to perform koshi-guruma with the hand under uke's armpit on the back as in ô-goshi.
- it is possible to perform ô-goshi with the hand along uke's shoulders like in koshi-guruma
- it is possible to perform ô-goshi while grabbing the belt
- it is possible to perform tsuri-goshi without grabbing the belt
- it is possible to perform sasae-tsuri-komi-ashi with the foot blocking right under the knee
- it is possible to perform hiza-guruma with the foot blocking just above the foot

Why is this possible ?  Because the essence of the throw is the mechanism of throwing not the location where the forces are applied or the fulcrum is created. In the same way it becomes possible to perform kuchiki-taoshi where instead of actual grabbing the leg you grab an entirely different body part or none at all.

In this case, tori 'fixates" uke's right foot by using his own left foot instead of his hand. This is essential for the kuchiki part. The second part he completes by pulling on the lapel. So the normal action of the hand is split up here into two different locations and ways to achieve it.

Another henka of kuchiki-taoshi, quite unusual, and which would not involve touching the legs of the opponent at all, would be to go stand with both your feet on the toes of your opponent so that he can't move and push him with both hands on the chest.

Certainly our NGB refers naming of techniques as a "minefield" which to me indicates perhaps the level of actual judo knowledge they have on the technical board.


I have an old syllabus of 1962 which has surprised me hopefully post later this evening.

Thanks CK, great post very informative

Medo, are you referring to a post of mine on the BJA forum, I do not work for the BJA, I'm just a member

Mountain Storm wrote:Medo, are you referring to a post of mine on the BJA forum, I do not work for the BJA, I'm just a member

Im sorry "Yama"(sorry   ) I have picked up the "minefield" from somewhere thought it was from page 32 from below, but it may be from something you wrote.....
http://issuu.com/britishjudocomms/docs/matside_autumn_2013_medium__1_?e=4469862/5166022 "Whats in a name" basically author guessing instead of finding exactly what the difference is and passing of a near enough is good enough approach which is epidemic in our governing body.

I agree Medo (you meant p35 not 32 ) I also was confused when the technique on p36 was called sumi gaeshi (I thought if you grabbed the belt this technique became a version of hikikomi gaeshi - unless CK tells me otherwise )

Mountain Storm wrote:I agree Medo (you meant p35 not 32 ) I also was confused when the technique on p36 was called sumi gaeshi (I thought if you grabbed the belt this technique became a version of hikikomi gaeshi - unless CK tells me otherwise )

I was looking more at ushirokesa on p32 and refering to "whats in a name", implies a near enough approach which is a pet hate of mine.

Ck will give you the low down i'm sure on hikikomi/sumi I have been wrong in the past and learnt from him and love the thoroughness of his wonderful replies.

Mountain Storm wrote:I agree Medo (you meant p35 not 32 ) I also was confused when the technique on p36 was called sumi gaeshi (I thought if you grabbed the belt this technique became a version of hikikomi gaeshi - unless CK tells me otherwise )

No, it is incorrect, but it is an "easy way of putting it", just like saying "sasae is blocking just above the foot, and hiza-guruma on the knee area (just up/under/right on). This works for when someone needs an easy mnemonic, but it is incorrect. It is possible to perform sumi-gaeshi while grabbing the belt, just like it is possible to perform hikkomi-gaeshi without grabbing the belt. A classical example of sumi-gaeshi with belt grabbing is when using sumi-gaeshi as a kaeshi-waza to tai-otoshi; in that case, grabbing the belt is recommended.

I am not making any statement though about exactly as which the technique shown in the magazine should be identified. Pictures do not always tell the whole story

medo wrote:

Mountain Storm wrote:I agree Medo (you meant p35 not 32 ) I also was confused when the technique on p36 was called sumi gaeshi (I thought if you grabbed the belt this technique became a version of hikikomi gaeshi - unless CK tells me otherwise )

I was looking more at ushirokesa on p32 and refering to  "whats in a name",  implies a near enough approach which is a pet hate of mine.

Ck will give you the low down i'm sure on hikikomi/sumi I have been wrong in the past and learnt from him and love the thoroughness of his wonderful replies.

yes that's what I thought you meant - that's on p35 (p32 is a events page) ?

Mountain Storm wrote:

medo wrote:

Mountain Storm wrote:I agree Medo (you meant p35 not 32 ) I also was confused when the technique on p36 was called sumi gaeshi (I thought if you grabbed the belt this technique became a version of hikikomi gaeshi - unless CK tells me otherwise )

I was looking more at ushirokesa on p32 and refering to  "whats in a name",  implies a near enough approach which is a pet hate of mine.

Ck will give you the low down i'm sure on hikikomi/sumi I have been wrong in the past and learnt from him and love the thoroughness of his wonderful replies.

yes that's what I thought you meant - that's on p35 (p32 is a events page) ?

that dont bode well with my "near enough" pet hate does it! Thanks for putting me straight.......

Cichorei Kano wrote:

Mountain Storm wrote:I agree Medo (you meant p35 not 32 ) I also was confused when the technique on p36 was called sumi gaeshi (I thought if you grabbed the belt this technique became a version of hikikomi gaeshi - unless CK tells me otherwise )

No, it is incorrect, but it is an "easy way of putting it", just like saying "sasae is blocking just above the foot, and hiza-guruma on the knee area (just up/under/right on). This works for when someone needs an easy mnemonic, but it is incorrect. It is possible to perform sumi-gaeshi while grabbing the belt, just like it is possible to perform hikkomi-gaeshi without grabbing the belt. A classical example of sumi-gaeshi with belt grabbing is when using sumi-gaeshi as a kaeshi-waza to tai-otoshi; in that case, grabbing the belt is recommended.

I am not making any statement though about exactly as which the technique shown in the magazine should be identified. Pictures do not always tell the whole story

I was going by "Kodokan Judo Throwing Techniques" by Toshiro Daigo - "The key point for telling these techniques apart lies in whether tori grips uke's back (sumi-gaeshi) or whether he grips the back of uke's belt (hikikomi-gaeshi)...

Mountain Storm wrote:

Cichorei Kano wrote:

Mountain Storm wrote:I agree Medo (you meant p35 not 32 ) I also was confused when the technique on p36 was called sumi gaeshi (I thought if you grabbed the belt this technique became a version of hikikomi gaeshi - unless CK tells me otherwise )

No, it is incorrect, but it is an "easy way of putting it", just like saying "sasae is blocking just above the foot, and hiza-guruma on the knee area (just up/under/right on). This works for when someone needs an easy mnemonic, but it is incorrect. It is possible to perform sumi-gaeshi while grabbing the belt, just like it is possible to perform hikkomi-gaeshi without grabbing the belt. A classical example of sumi-gaeshi with belt grabbing is when using sumi-gaeshi as a kaeshi-waza to tai-otoshi; in that case, grabbing the belt is recommended.

I am not making any statement though about exactly as which the technique shown in the magazine should be identified. Pictures do not always tell the whole story

I was going by "Kodokan Judo Throwing Techniques" by Toshiro Daigo - "The key point for telling these techniques apart lies in whether tori grips uke's back (sumi-gaeshi) or whether he grips the back of uke's belt (hikikomi-gaeshi)...

Yes, and I am sure that is also correct in "most cases", just like it is correct in most cases to say that in tsuri-goshi you lift uke by the belt on your hip. But neither statement covers 100% of the cases, and it is very difficult to pour things in a statement that is so precise that there is not a single exception to it. Besides, also do not forget that the English translation of Daigo's book is not so accurate, without me implying that there has been an error in this case.

Cichorei Kano wrote:
The final throw is neither uchi-mata, nor hane-goshi. Clearly uchi-mata is an obvious choice, but it isn't. It's would virtually be impossible to throw like that with uchi-mata. Why ?  Because the throw is way off. Tori's center of mass is way above that of uke which is problematic to effect uchi-mata. He compensates for that using all the possible force of his tsurite, but that is enough. He can only really effect the throw despite the initial lift with his strong leg, thanks to the work and rotation of his upper body after that life. It's hidari-uchi-mata-makikomi.

why do you call it makikomi? doesn't makikomi imply that the winding causing the offbalance (which does not looke like the case to me, the turn clearly aids, but when uke lands flat, tori is in mid rotation (chest faccing chest, you have to stop-go to see it) whereas i see makikomi landing as the players in full contact because of winding).

(i'm not criticizing, i am sticking my neck out to try for my own education)