Now that leg grabs are completely disallowed...

What is going to happen with the BJA 2nd Kyu syllabus!? There are loads of leg attacks in there.

Please remember that the syllabus does not = Shiai

Contact with the legs is exclusively dissalowed in competition. IJF competition.

This point gets brought up a lot and has really been debated to death. Some unions will without doubt change their syllibi to accomodate this but then they are playing their part in destroying Judo. Just because some aspects are no longer allowed in official Judo competition, it does not mean they should no longer be taught in the dojo.

Davaro wrote:Please remember that the syllabus does not = Shiai

Contact with the legs is exclusively dissalowed in competition. IJF competition.

This point gets brought up a lot and has really been debated to death. Some unions will without doubt change their syllibi to accomodate this but then they are playing their part in destroying Judo. Just because some aspects are no longer allowed in official Judo competition, it does not mean they should no longer be taught in the dojo.

I understand that the rules are for competition, but what is the point making it compulsery to learn, knowing that you can't use the techniques?

My apologies if this had been debated before, I'm new

sydvicious wrote:

I understand that the rules are for competition, but what is the point making it compulsery to learn, knowing that you can't use the techniques?

My apologies if this had been debated before, I'm new

To my understanding this is because competition and the associated regulations imposed by organizations, far from being the purpose of practicing Judo are only one small part thereof; and thus techniques like the newly banned leg-grabs despite no longer being allowed in competition under IJF rules (which continually change anyway) remain a part of Judo and so are taught and practiced as part of the syllabus as any other techniques are. Not that such ideas always translate smoothly to the actuality, but there you go.

Regards,


-Q

sydvicious wrote:I understand that the rules are for competition, but what is the point making it compulsery to learn, knowing that you can't use the techniques?

My apologies if this had been debated before, I'm new

Judo is much more than what is or isn't allowed in competition. Atemi-waza is not allowed in shiai but it is part of the Judo cirriculum. Sadly, for a lot of clubs Judo is not much more than competitions and winning medals for your club. As a result I find myself struggling to find a place in Judo as a student.

sydvicious wrote:

Davaro wrote:Please remember that the syllabus does not = Shiai

Contact with the legs is exclusively dissalowed in competition. IJF competition.

This point gets brought up a lot and has really been debated to death. Some unions will without doubt change their syllibi to accomodate this but then they are playing their part in destroying Judo. Just because some aspects are no longer allowed in official Judo competition, it does not mean they should no longer be taught in the dojo.

I understand that the rules are for competition, but what is the point making it compulsery to learn, knowing that you can't use the techniques?

My apologies if this had been debated before, I'm new

Its no problem Syd, I was not taking a shot at you at all and apologise if I came across that way...

As previous posters have said, competition is but a small part of Judo. Some see Judo as a self-defence art? While its again not the intention of Judo, one wont, if confronted in the street with a chance to do some sort of leg-grab, tell the other guy "hang on, this is not allowed" or something like that?

Try to learn as much of Judo as you can, and this includes its history and Kano's intentions so much as the actual techniques are concerned, and treat competition as but a part thereof where you compete within a certain rule-set. Sure, you may not grab a leg, or do a leg-lock in newaza, but that does not mean you dont have to learn HOW to do them as part of a syllabus.

Most of all, have fun learning, get your body and mind "judo-fit", take care of your partners, and you would have done most of what Judo intended for you when it was created.

sydvicious wrote:
I understand that the rules are for competition, but what is the point making it compulsery to learn, knowing that you can't use the techniques?

My apologies if this had been debated before, I'm new

I'm gonna use the quote feature to illustrate a point:

TOTAL JUDO
this contains everything that can be considered judo. a very broad term

COMPETITION JUDO
this contains all the techniques that can safely be practiced on a resisting opponent. atemi waza, leg locks, wrist locks, finger locks, etc. are forbidden.

OLDER RULES COMPETITION JUDO
this contains all the things that were legal when many of our sensei were younger. it is similar to the above but with limited restrictions on grips (I can't take a 2 on 1 grip and hold it the whole match, etc.).

COMPETITION RULES AS OF 2009
this is much the same as the above but the definition of kansetsu waza limits attacks exclusively to the elbow, newaza is not as emphasized, leg grabs are restricted to limited situations such as combinations and counters.

PSEUDO JAPANESE JACKET WRESTLING IMPLEMENTED IN 2013
this is the only category to which a syllabus that includes leg grabs does not apply to.

I would like to believe that it's only a matter of time before our evil overlords at the IJF get overthrown, and we can create a new organization that ignores the core of that really ugly onion above. when that day comes, those who did not leave the judo of their fathers at the wayside because they couldn't use it to get a gold medal anymore will be at a distinct advantage.

You gots the onion inside out Bluto.

In Draeger's book he complains that the mixed up world of his time had randori at the center and shiai at the outside with kata as something else entirely ... the core popped out from the onion so to speak.

The possibility exists ... if we are collectively wise ... to reconstruct an onion with kata at the core, randori around that, local/traditional/alternative layers on top of that ... with a nice, smooth, attractive Olympic outer skin which will make housewives want to take us home, peel us, and put us in a nice warm pot of soup. Errr .. or something like that.

Again, I remind you that the IJF is not "evil" ... just a bunch of guys doing their jobs in the sports entertainment business of the 21st century.

Is this one of your wedding pictures BTW ... my image files are all mixed up.

H. Irving Hancock and Katsukuma Higashi, The Complete Kano Jiu-Jitsu (Judo), (New York: Dover Publications, 1905)

1. Each contestant shall wear coat and belt.

2. A contestant shall be deemed to have been defeated when his two shoulders and hips shall have touched the floor, provided that said contestant shall have reached this position on the floor through having been thrown down.

3. A contestant shall be deemed to have been defeated when in such position on the floor, if said combatant cannot free himself from his opponent's arms within two seconds' time.

4. A contestant shall be deemed to have been defeated when from any cause or causes he may become unconscious. But it is not permitted to use serious tricks when the wrestling bout is between friends. Such tricks as kicking and the breaking of arms, legs, and neck are barred.

5. A combatant shall be deemed to have been defeated when he has been reduced to submission through the employment by his opponent of any hold or trick.

6. When a defeated combatant finds himself obliged to acknowledge his submission, he must pat or hit the floor or his antagonist's body, or somewhere, with his hand or foot. This patting with foot or hand is to be regarded as a token of surrender.

7. When a defeated combatant pats or hits the floor, or anywhere, in token of submission, the victor must at once let go his hold.

8. It is understood and agreed that the Jiu-Jitsu man, whether he fights a boxer or contests with a wrestler, shall be allowed to use in his defense any of the tricks that belong to the art of Jiu-Jitsu.

9. It is further understood and agreed that the Jiu-Jitsu man assumes no responsibility for any injury or injuries caused by any act or thing done during the contest, and that the Jiu-Jitsu man shall be held free and blameless for any such ill effect or injury that may be received during the contest.

10. Two competent witnesses representing each side, or four in all, shall see to it that these articles of agreement are properly drawn, signed, and witnessed, to the end that neither contestant or other participant in the match shall have cause for action on any ground or grounds resulting from any injury or injuries, or death, caused during the contest.

It was all so easy back in 1905

Glad to see the "breaking of neck" was barred at the time. Its almost as bad as a leg-grab....

Davaro wrote:It was all so easy back in 1905

Glad to see the "breaking of neck" was barred at the time. Its almost as bad as a leg-grab....

And, the use of pants was not a requirement!

Davaro wrote:
Glad to see the "breaking of neck" was barred at the time.

but only when said "wrestling bout was between friends"

sydvicious wrote:

Davaro wrote:Please remember that the syllabus does not = Shiai

Contact with the legs is exclusively dissalowed in competition. IJF competition.

This point gets brought up a lot and has really been debated to death. Some unions will without doubt change their syllibi to accomodate this but then they are playing their part in destroying Judo. Just because some aspects are no longer allowed in official Judo competition, it does not mean they should no longer be taught in the dojo.

I understand that the rules are for competition, but what is the point making it compulsery to learn, knowing that you can't use the techniques?

My apologies if this had been debated before, I'm new

IJF continuously changes its rules these days. What if tomorrow it allows leg grabs and you have never learnt them . Also, if you are remotely interested in using judo as self-defense either now or after your competitive career has ended, you might find it worthwhile to also have studied things beyond that which is allowed by competition.

What there are self defence kata in the syllabus? .. and those moves are not used in the competition?

Here goes the broken record. The "below the belt" rule in particular is bad for a lot of people. The "no two hand grip break" similarly so. There is no serious consideration in the US to ignore or even roll back recent rule changes to make judo a more inclusive activity.

Arguments ... as USA Judo just formally published ... along the lines of "just don't do it is tournament" are ridiculous. You can't train one reaction for randori and then expect people to react in a split second with a different move in shiai. There are people much younger than me who enjoy the occasional local or regional tournament who have spent literally a lifetime blocking the hip with the hands or pulling off the high grip with two. Unlike professional judo players they do not have the time or inclination to un-train. Are they somehow going to re-train to avoid these or are they going to stop enjoying the "doing" of judo entirely?

Worse, and I hadn't seen it before ... are new requirements for mat size which USA Judo apparently intends to mandate at even local tournaments ... and their statement says they expect the USJF and USJA to follow along. My initial assessment there are now no venues ... at least affordable ones ... in a county the size of San Diego in which we can hold a legal tournament of more than about 4 tatami. So the CJI State Championships in 2014? Good luck with that.

Again ... for the life of me I don't understand the necessity to "roll out" these rules at even a national level for the vast majority of judoka and to make it very difficult for anyone with other ideas to hold a sanctioned local event.

Basically it means teaching 2 syllabi, one for competition and one for non competitive players.
I like a lot of the new competition rules as it will make for a cleaner more competitive judo. Although I do feel that removal of leg grab once on the ground so that you can turnover into ne waza is a bit too much. I just feel for the refs who have to make the split second decision as to whether it is leg grab or not. Might have been nice to have 1 shido and then hansukemake but there we are....competition rules are just that.

BillC wrote:Here goes the broken record. The "below the belt" rule in particular is bad for a lot of people. The "no two hand grip break" similarly so. There is no serious consideration in the US to ignore or even roll back recent rule changes to make judo a more inclusive activity.

Arguments ... as USA Judo just formally published ... along the lines of "just don't do it is tournament" are ridiculous. You can't train one reaction for randori and then expect people to react in a split second with a different move in shiai. There are people much younger than me who enjoy the occasional local or regional tournament who have spent literally a lifetime blocking the hip with the hands or pulling off the high grip with two. Unlike professional judo players they do not have the time or inclination to un-train. Are they somehow going to re-train to avoid these or are they going to stop enjoying the "doing" of judo entirely?

Worse, and I hadn't seen it before ... are new requirements for mat size which USA Judo apparently intends to mandate at even local tournaments ... and their statement says they expect the USJF and USJA to follow along. My initial assessment there are now no venues ... at least affordable ones ... in a county the size of San Diego in which we can hold a legal tournament of more than about 4 tatami. So the CJI State Championships in 2014? Good luck with that.

Again ... for the life of me I don't understand the necessity to "roll out" these rules at even a national level for the vast majority of judoka and to make it very difficult for anyone with other ideas to hold a sanctioned local event.

Hi BillC.

I agree entirely. The situation is absurd. Reminds me of the troops in WW1, "Lions lead by Donkeys". How can these situations develop and why do we, the judoka, tolerate them?

Regards,

Mike

Peahen wrote:Basically it means teaching 2 syllabi, one for competition and one for non competitive players.
I like a lot of the new competition rules as it will make for a cleaner more competitive judo.

You can't say this. EVERY SINGLE RULE CHANGE the IJF has ever implemented has been proposed as an IMPROVEMENT. Never has the IJF changed anything saying that the change will make things better. The strange thing is ... if every change has been an improvement, then why keep changing ? Oh yes, because every new change supposedly is an improvement of the last improvement !!

How after so many years does one not realize that an IJF change means one thing: the jûdôka will have to start experimenting with new ways to circumvent the latest 'improvement', which guarantee they will do. Despite all these improvements one wonders why no world championship today comes close to the jûdô quality of, let's say, the 1981 Maastricht Judo Championships when none of those 'improvements' were in place. Thus strangely jûdôka were able under those "VERY BAD RULES" to present beautiful and clean jûdô, yet today with all the "improvements" and wisdom which the IJF so diligently has poured into forum, they can't to the extent that they have to go make more changes. You know what a really improvement would be ? To take a pair of scissors and start cutting out all the 'improvements' the IJF has made since 1981 ...

CK, I respect you a lot. I agree with you that around 1981 one saw Judo and often beautiful Judo. But can you with straight face state that none of the rule changes were needed?

Are you claiming that 1981 rules were the pinnacle and after that there has been nothing but bad rule changes?

finarashi wrote:CK, I respect you a lot. I agree with you that around 1981 one saw Judo and often beautiful Judo. But can you with straight face state that none of the rule changes were needed?

Are you claiming that 1981 rules were the pinnacle and after that there has been nothing but bad rule changes?

No, not if you mean your question in a mathematical way, since the 1981 rules itself already contained some changes which were not so good. However, it is around that time that the IJF started overregulating judo, and probably also diminish the Japanese character of judo moving towards a Western jacket-wrestling kind of thing.

Let's take something that does not involve any discussion about technique or quality of jûdô, let's take the keikoku. Keikoku used to require the person receiving it to first go humbly sit on his knees while almost being publicly admonished for his violation. There was a "moral component" there when no person today thinks of shidô or even hansoku-make as having any moral component; they have evolved to nothing but mathematically negative scores. I received only a single keikoku in my entire life, which happened after the rules were already changes, but there still was a strong connotation of never wanting to receive that again, even though it was just for a technical reason. I don't think that in a time period of 5 years I would see more than 2 hansoku-make being given. That was an extremely rare occurrence. Hansoku-make required offenses that were considered so heinous that you simply would not commit those in jûdô. Today, referees throw hansoku-make around as if it were nothing, just a few shidô. Conceptually, that simply is not right in the scope of jûdô. The optimal IJF rules were probably attained around 1978. A few amendments from later are worth considering as improvements, but I am hard-pressed to identify them. One of them is the option of video-replay, but not in the way they are implementing it now. This would have prevented the severe travesty of justice which was bestowed on Shinohara in Sydney 2000.

I never said that the IJF said it would be better but as so done who watches judo I think it will make for more interesting bouts that's all. Check out the BJA website for some good videos of what is allowed and what is not

Peahen wrote:I never said that the IJF said it would be better but as so done who watches judo I think it will make for more interesting bouts that's all. Check out the BJA website for some good videos of what is allowed and what is not

I did not say you said that the IJF said it would be better. What I said you said, were the sentences I quoted at the start of my post, so that I would not introduce my own mistakes in paraphrasing you. However, material in your or other posts may trigger me to shed light on aspects that I find important or feel that they merit attention. The point I feel merits the most attention is that the rules changes would improve judo. It does not really matter whether the IJF literally says that or not. Either a rule improves judo or worsens judo or leaves it unaffected. That improvement is open to interpretation as to exactly what it constitutes, whether it be a "a cleaner more competitive judo" or whatever. In any case I would hope that the attribution of the predicate "a cleaner more competitive judo" wasn't meant to suggest a worse judo, especially since from the rest of the context it appears you offer support for a several of those changes as expressed in the sentence "I like a lot of the new competition rules"; if you felt that those changes would judo worse, presumably you would not offer support of them. However, that's further besides the point as the purpose of my post was not to discuss your opinions, but my concerns with the IJF changes, not just limited to the last ones.

Irrespective of whether you say or feel that IJF changes are improvements, the point is that the IJF feels they are 'improvements'. If they feel they wouldn't be or would make judo worse, then likely they would not propose those changes as the IJF is not part.

I do not disagree at all with a judo that is "a cleaner more competitive judo". But why is this "a cleaner more competitive judo" even necessary ? It only would be necessary if there is a need for our judo to become cleaner more negative. What I do know is that the judo was a lot more "a cleaner more competitive judo" in 1981, thus why and how did it start evolving towards a judo that now is way removed from that to such extent that a desire fo "a cleaner more competitive judo" has become necessary ? Mostly because of all the changes and "supposed improvements" which the IJF has made since 1981. It wasn't because the judoka though "oh judo is really clean competitive today in 1981, lets make it uglier and less competitive". It happened, and it happened largely due to the IJF. Apart from several technical changes, the shortening of the duration of finals from 7' to 5' and the introduction of encho-sen, today more commonly known under it populist term "golden score" are some of the worst changes that the judo contests have seen. That doesn't mean that before it was ideal. Referee decisions in a number of cases led to wrong decisions, offered room for politics in a fight; nevertheless that not all decisions were wrong or borderline, and many fights did not end in decision. Very few decisions in really open and offensive fights led to problems, whereas encho-sen now hangs over every contest allowing the judoka to manipulate many contests just to enforce no score and then quickly during encho-sen do whatever thing that causes a minimal score. Such strategy simply was impossible under the old system and only became possible due to the creation of encho-sen. This is an example of something that only has arisen due to the IJF's change, just like there are many problems that would not have existed without IJF changes. These things continue to be created because the IJF cannot properly anticipate what the impact will be of its change, since judoka always will continue searching for ways to play the rules or restrictions and focus on ways to circumvent the problems or restrictions of a new rule. Those solutions found by the competitors then often create a new evil, one that did not exist before the rule change since there was no reason for such evil to even exist. The 1981 rules did not state "when starting a judo contest don't engage in patty-cake", yet people in 1981 when starting a judo contest did not engage in patty-cake. Not everything in judo needs to be solves by changing the rules; much of it can be changed by training the referees. Has the ippon rule really changed since 1981 (apart from one term) ? And yet ippon is completely interpreted different today. Things that were no score today are ippon. How can such changes have occurred when the rule has not been changed ? Clearly by the training of the referees and what they are being told that something means. How is this possible ? Because of the whole sick system of retaliation that is so pervasive in judo. I as IJF Committee can have you as referee do exactly as I want ? If you don't do what I want, I will not promote you or not select you, or if you were selected, take you off the mat. For you that will mean no selections, not visits to foreign countries, not things you would be looking forward as a referee i.e. refereeing a world championship or Olympics and in this way be the pride of your family and country. The rules are one thing, the rest is referee training and how the whole judo framework functions, particularly the hierarchical power formation. Obviously it is easier said than done. Having rogue referees just interpreting rules totally different from the rest wouldn't be a solution either. Thus where does the problem come from ? It comes from its power structure. How is the IJF ruled ? You don't have a critical parliamentary structure. The structure has grown around the persona of Vizer, the entire election of the IJF president and then the building out of a power structure relying on loyals, which has now grown to a strongly European-dominated structure. The IJF is not a democratic process. When it was still Japanese-dominated there were abuses to and manipulations even though the understanding of judo was greater than within the IJF. Nevertheless, would Japan have introduced weight classes before the 1964 Olympics if Geessink wouldn't have wiped the tatami with the Japanese in 1961 ? No. So the Japanese have been guilty of manipulation with the sole purpose of attempting to secure advantages for them too. As long as judo will have these kind of daimyo structures instead of modern parliamentary structures these problems will keep occurring although depending on who is in charge, the problems may be different. I do not think we will see a thorough change until an end comes to the Vizer tenure, and we don't see that happen quickly, with others of his liking (like Barros) being in close proximity to continue the same kind of policies we now have. Unless the Japanese with support from other Continental Unions are able win the next IJF Presidential elections, I see no hope. The numerous committees that exist now under Vizer, the injection of huge commericial aspects, have made the current IJF tenure into one from which many people have some material benefit they would not just want to give up to get a Japanese-dominated IJF back.

^^^ Ref Above:

Why do the Japanese not withdraw themselves from the travesty that has become their art? Is it a sense of pride? It is their creation and they still want to show/prove how it should be done. Is it a sense of guilt? They loosened their strings of control and 'gave it to the world' and now their product is unrecognizable. Do they believe someday it will revert to what it was. A sense of inertia and corruption derived from the division between the kodokan and their national federation?
Any insight into their thinking? Into why they believe, as judged by their adherence to whatever passes as 'rules', that sticking with it is the best course of action?
The IJF is an easy target. But in a certain way they have my sympathy. They see it as a sport and are doing they best to make it so.
But why is there no backlash from the japanese. Are they taking the slow and steady, wait and see, everythings for the best, approach?
Bah! sometimes a problem is best solved by a quick stroke of the blade. Show some mettle and withdraw from this and possibly a large part of the judo world will actually fall behind them!!

nomoremondays wrote:^^^ Ref Above:

Why do the Japanese not withdraw themselves from the travesty that has become their art? Is it a sense of pride? It is their creation and they still want to show/prove how it should be done. Is it a sense of guilt? They loosened their strings of control and 'gave it to the world' and now their product is unrecognizable. Do they believe someday it will revert to what it was. A sense of inertia and corruption derived from the division between the kodokan and their national federation?
Any insight into their thinking? Into why they believe, as judged by their adherence to whatever passes as 'rules', that sticking with it is the best course of action?
The IJF is an easy target. But in a certain way they have my sympathy. They see it as a sport and are doing they best to make it so.
But why is there no backlash from the japanese. Are they taking the slow and steady, wait and see, everythings for the best, approach?
Bah! sometimes a problem is best solved by a quick stroke of the blade. Show some mettle and withdraw from this and possibly a large part of the judo world will actually fall behind them!!

That's an excellent question. I talked about this a couple of years ago with some people involved in the All Japan Jûdô Federation. The conversation was not started off by Olympics or so but by kata contests as the IJF started developing its own kata competition rules. I was told that the Japanese increasingly took the position that they did not care what the Japanese, and just did their own thing. They were very decisive in expressing this opinion. However, I must add to caveats. One, this was before Uemura was named kanchô, and some believe that Uemura made a choice that was not completely as expected, such as the evolution towards using dynamic border tatami in the All Japan Championships or the blue gi. In other words, it seems to me that those impactful words that I was told are not as solid as suggested and the Japanese resistance against the IJF has started crumbling. Secondly, there is a consensus in Japan that the single most important championship in jûdô is the Olympics. The Japanese know they can't circumvent the IJF, thus the only alternative is to give up on Olympic jûdô medals which before last Olympics was unimaginable, probably still is, but at least the man's team were forced this time to return without a single gold medal. My impression is that Japan is too afraid to cut ties with the IJF and emerge on a parallel pathway with a new federation or through the World Judo Federation and first accumulate world support before growing large enough to challenge the IJF hegemony within the IOC.

Personally I think that IF Sambo becomes sanctioned by the IOC, then a lot of judo players will jump ship over to Sambo. And we may find that Sambo looks like what judo looked like 10-15 years ago (rules wise).

Just my opinion.