Updated IJF Rules for 2018

Wazari-awasette-ippon returns....

https://www.ijf.org/news/show/detailed-explanation-of-the-ijf-judo-refereeing-rules

Thank goodness...........slowly, we are returning to sanity !!

I thought the previous (current?) scheme interesting but tis is probably better

Yes. In new rules in old view (two yuko's in old ) now two wazaari's are ippon.

Interesting how IJF introduced maximum efficiency now in 2017-10-26_Explanatory guide of the judo refereeing rules Oct Abu Dhabi_v5:

from IJF rules explanatory wrote:• Ippon will be given when the contestant throws his opponent on the back, applying a technique or
countering his opponent’s attacking technique, with considerable ability with maximum efficiency (*).
(*)
“ikioi” = momentum with both force and speed.
“hazumi” = skillfulness with impetus, sharpness or rhythm.

• Criteria for ippon:
1. Speed;
2. Force;
3. On the back;
4. Skilfully control until the end of the landing.

noboru wrote:Yes. In new rules in old view (two yuko's in old ) now two wazaari's are ippon.

And in a little bit older view: two Koka are Ippon,

(we remember, the "better" Koka became Yuko)
;-)

I am pleased that awaseti ippon is being reinstated but a bit concerned that ippon can now mean two (old-money) Yukos.

justcurious wrote:I am pleased that awaseti ippon is being reinstated but a bit concerned that ippon can now mean two (old-money) Yukos.

That is perhaps the greatest weakness, indeed.

NBK wrote:

justcurious wrote:I am pleased that awaseti ippon is being reinstated but a bit concerned that ippon can now mean two (old-money) Yukos.

That is perhaps the greatest weakness, indeed.

It's a huge weakness as it means two old-style Yukos will defeat a proper old-style waza-ari. That makes no sense!

justcurious wrote:

NBK wrote:

justcurious wrote:I am pleased that awaseti ippon is being reinstated but a bit concerned that ippon can now mean two (old-money) Yukos.

That is perhaps the greatest weakness, indeed.

It's a huge weakness as it means two old-style Yukos will defeat a proper old-style waza-ari. That makes no sense!

I'm not sure how it could play out otherwise.

Two waza-ari don't win immediately but do at end of normal time?

That's pretty much back to the current system.

I share the concerns of two yukos adding up to ippon.
They sold the previous change as eliminating yuko, but what they really did was eliminate waza-ari and rename yuko as the "new" waza-ari.

In that light this doesn't make sense unless award of the "new" waza-ari become near equal to what it used to be, ie. just shy of ippon.

My bigger concern is the normalisation of frequent rule changes. ultimately it just leads to confusion, frustration and a feeling that none of means anything because it can, indeed will change tomorrow.

You're going to have people competing in their twenties under rules that are markedly different from those they internalised as small children, and then coaching in their thirties and forties under rules that aren't the same as they competed under and completely different from they first learned.

I am getting more and more worried about this "Greco-Roman Jujutsu" we're creating.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZNBi2iTo2U

The fight is the finale of the championship open weight Netherlands in 1979.

Peter Adelaar was about 6 feet 11 inches and european champion open weight, his opponent was Wil Peters, not small but maybe only 230lbs and 6 feet.

What I like watching this video is the spectators going crazy, the old style Judo with leg grabs but also the well timed and executed Seoi nage by Peters as the ashi waza combination at the very end. Hard to get an Ippon back then wasn't it ? ...


I think the reasons about changing the rules from the point of JIF are:

- fine tuning the rules for high level competition to have matches decided by spectacular Ippons to please the spectators.

- to make the rules spectators friendly that all spectators understand the rules easily and all matches are finished by Ippon or at least by a clear score.

- to separate Judo from other martial arts like Wrestling (strangles, chokes and armlocks)  and MMA and BJJ.

- to keep Judo an olympic sport because that's where the money is - not made - but given by IOC and the money is very important to run the national elite clubs and coaches and camps and competitors and also to have recognition as a worldwide olympic sport to be part of education programs.

- to develope high level Judo into a well respected and followed  and on all media reported international circus like Tennis (just to speculate about the wet dreams of IJF officials)

Y-Chromosome wrote: ... My bigger concern is the normalisation of frequent rule changes. ultimately it just leads to confusion, frustration and a feeling that none of means anything because it can, indeed will change tomorrow.

You're going to have people competing in their twenties under rules that are markedly different from those they internalised as small children, and then coaching in their thirties and forties under rules that aren't the same as they competed under and completely different from they first learned. ...

That's exactly the biggest problem of frequent rule changes in this type of competition, IMHO.

Moreover, you omitted to address another, very important group that is concerned by them: the shinpan. To become an excellent referee, it's necessary to compile extensive experience through praxis. You have to decide immediately, on the spot. Like from a certain, rather low level on, a competitor has to execute the correct technique at the correct moment instantly, a good referee also has to act at once, quasi automatically. There's no time to think over or to consider anything (i. e. rule-changes), as then your actions will be to late. The fighter's technique will not work, and the shinpan will loose trust and respect from the competitors, and perhaps even regarding self-confidence, which is absolutely necessary to do this job good. Therefore, if you want to achieve or maintain quality-refereeing, keep changing of rules as rare as possible.

Reinberger wrote:
Moreover, you omitted to address another, very important group that is concerned by them: the shinpan. To become an excellent referee, it's necessary to compile extensive experience through praxis. You have to decide immediately, on the spot. Like from a certain, rather low level on, a competitor has to execute the correct technique at the correct moment instantly, a good referee also has to act at once, quasi automatically. There's no time to think over or to consider anything (i. e. rule-changes), as then your actions will be to late. The fighter's technique will not work, and the shinpan will loose trust and respect from the competitors, and perhaps even regarding self-confidence, which is absolutely necessary to do this job good. Therefore, if you want to achieve or maintain quality-refereeing, keep changing of rules as rare as possible.

I absolutely agree. Every time they do this, a cascade of activity is put into motion. Teaching materials need to be produced, clinics need to be held, a communication plan needs to be put into effect. Often subtle and difficult to interpret situations need to be explained at World, Continental, National, Regional and local levels. It takes time, it takes money and it's all a waste if there's not a VERY compelling reason.

Anatol wrote:I think the reasons about changing the rules from the point of JIF are:
- fine tuning the rules for high level competition to have matches decided by spectacular Ippons to please the spectators.
- to make the rules spectators friendly that all spectators understand the rules easily and all matches are finished by Ippon or at least by a clear score.
- to separate Judo from other martial arts like Wrestling (strangles, chokes and armlocks)  and MMA and BJJ.
- to keep Judo an olympic sport because that's where the money is - not made - but given by IOC and the money is very important to run the national elite clubs and coaches and camps and competitors and also to have recognition as a worldwide olympic sport to be part of education programs.
- to develope high level Judo into a well respected and followed  and on all media reported international circus like Tennis (just to speculate about the wet dreams of IJF officials)

I understand all that and I thinks it's mostly misguided nonsense.
Point by point:
- No high level competitor is going to compete in a manner that get's them thrown for ippon for the benefit of the spectators. Regardless of the rules there will be close matches which will seem boring to the uniformed viewer because the opponents are wary of each other's considerable skill and are both cautious in attack and skillful in defence. There IS NO SECRET SAUCE to fix this and the IJF should stop trying.
-Judo is Judo and if we keep trying to change it so it doesn't resemble activities which have HUGE technical overlaps with Judo for very good technical and historical reasons it won't be Judo anymore.
- Judo power countries like Japan and France as well as the IJF need to do a better job at defending Judo interests to the IOC. Judo needs to make decisions based on what's good for Judo, not what some non-judoka IOC bureaucrat thinks.
- The ONLY way to increase Judo's fan base is to improve Judo's grass roots participation. That's how it is with some sports. Judo will NEVER be like Women's Gymnastics or Figure Skating which bring in huge numbers of non-participants as viewers. They need to just drop that and focus on getting people involved DOING judo. I guarantee you, the more people who DO judo, the more people will watch judo. Soccer/Football is the same. If you don't play (like me) it's painfully boring to watch. It's the world's biggest spectator sport NOT because it's inherently exciting (I would argue Judo at its WORST is more exciting than soccer...) but because it's the world's biggest participation sport. Billions of kids grow up kicking that d@mned ball around and they grow up to be fans. Simple as that. (wet dreams was an apt turn of phrase...) In my opinion, all the rule changes hurt, rather than help recruiting.

Here is interesting interview with Yasuhiro Yamashita from 2006. He speaks about his view of judo rules and about popularity of judo in USA / problem with rules understanding . He speaks about opinion of vice-president NBC....

Japan/Pacific INTERVIEW
YASUHIRO YAMASHITA
http://www.yamashitayasuhiro.com/kouenroku/060308/english.html

And yet, I understand that judo is not so popular in the United States, which is the most powerful nation in the world of sport. Is this really so?
In the United States, karate and taekwondo are more popular than judo. It seems that there has not been any live television coverage of judo from the Olympic Games since the Los Angeles games of 1984, which was when I won a gold medal. This means that judo is considered a minor sport in the United States.
How can this situation be changed, and what is required to make the sport of judo more popular in the US? I once put these questions to a vice-president of the giant media corporation, NBC. The answers that I got at that time included the need for the terminology of judo to be changed to English, that the competitors should show their emotions more, and that the nagewaza throwing techniques should have a points system.
In recent years, judo has been taking steps to make itself more easily understood by a global audience. These steps include the introduction of colored judo suits and the extension of matches. However, there is no need to suggest that English is better than Japanese in order for Americans to understand the sport more easily, although it I think it may be better to use a mat rather than tatami.
I believe that the essence of judo should be protected at all costs. This essence is composed of, “Japanese language,” “courtesy and respect toward one’s opponent” and an “attitude that sets great value on the Ippon technique.” If these vital aspects of judo are lost, then the sport loses all the values that it has come to represent. In particular, I believe that the values of courtesy and respect are a most important foundation of the sport. In judo, even if you are victorious, you should avoid all temptation to show off, or to celebrate, and should maintain self-restraint and composure.

The opinion of NBC vicepresident is way how the IJF rules changing go.

Yamashita is a smart/wise man. Protecting the essence of Judo must take precedence over the goals of the IJF, which seem to be turning Judo into sports entertainment ( money ).

Y-Chromosome wrote:I share the concerns of two yukos adding up to ippon.
They sold the previous change as eliminating yuko, but what they really did was eliminate waza-ari and rename yuko as the "new" waza-ari.

In that light this doesn't make sense unless award of the "new" waza-ari become near equal to what it used to be, ie. just shy of ippon.

My bigger concern is the normalisation of frequent rule changes. ultimately it just leads to confusion, frustration and a feeling that none of means anything because it can, indeed will change tomorrow.

You're going to have people competing in their twenties under rules that are markedly different from those they internalised as small children, and then coaching in their thirties and forties under rules that aren't the same as they competed under and completely different from they first learned.

I am getting more and more worried about this "Greco-Roman Jujutsu" we're creating.

Reinberger wrote:
That's exactly the biggest problem of frequent rule changes in this type of competition, IMHO.

Moreover, you omitted to address another, very important group that is concerned by them: the shinpan. To become an excellent referee, it's necessary to compile extensive experience through praxis. You have to decide immediately, on the spot. Like from a certain, rather low level on, a competitor has to execute the correct technique at the correct moment instantly, a good referee also has to act at once, quasi automatically. There's no time to think over or to consider anything (i. e. rule-changes), as then your actions will be to late. The fighter's technique will not work, and the shinpan will loose trust and respect from the competitors, and perhaps even regarding self-confidence, which is absolutely necessary to do this job good. Therefore, if you want to achieve or maintain quality-refereeing, keep changing of rules as rare as possible.

I completely agree to both these comments. For me the change started from introducing the blue judogi with yellow and blue mats (looks better on TV); then to allowing more labels on the judogi (look at Riner's dogi); and then when the changes in rules came about so frequently it became quite ridiculous. And yes, as a referee I also agree that it makes it quite challenging to perform the duties expected of us effectively, when rules are changed so frequently and regional seminars need to be run to clarify doubts.

Not quite sure why they changed the bowing rules .....