is there a difference between being good at judo, and being good at winning judo tournaments?

is there a difference between being good at judo, and being good at winning judo tournaments?

why do you feel the way you do? of course it's a tricky subject. that's the point of the thread!

the purpose of this thread is discussion, not one sentence snarky answers.

I think we all already know the answer but I would be interested to hear peoples opinions, I think we all know at least one solo waza medal/grade hunter. I still don't think its easy by any stretch of the imagination to win tournaments, there still has to be a great deal of other attributes, I suppose it depends on what you mean by good at judo?

Yes, i think there is.

I've seen people who are good at turning out of throws/ not being thrown and are scrappers who win tournaments and matches due to strength and strategy.

I've seen people with great technique that have never entered a tournament or competed or lost every match.

heikojr

heikojr wrote:Yes, i think there is.

I've seen people who are good at turning out of throws/ not being thrown and are scrappers who win tournaments and matches due to strength and strategy.

I've seen people with great technique that have never entered a tournament or competed or lost every match.

heikojr

now to play the devil's advocate: if they do compete but never win a match, how can one honestly say that they have great technique? after all, what is the definition of being good at judo, if not the ability to apply your judo knowledge against someone that's resisting?

yes, the point of this thread is to start a lively debate. so I will be trying to fan the flames as much as possible.

genetic judoka wrote:
now to play the devil's advocate: if they do compete but never win a match, how can one honestly say that they have great technique? after all, what is the definition of being good at judo, if not the ability to apply your judo knowledge against someone that's resisting?

What is YOUR definition of being good at judo? I've already stated that i've seen good judoka that have never entered a tournament or competed or lost every match.

This is where we'll have the issue. Is being good at judo somewhere between good technique, good at randori, winning tournaments, ect?

Man, Genetic Judoka, you know i don't like writting, explaining or defending my position too much!

heikojr
heikojr

trying to turn it around on me huh? alright, I'll bite. in my opinion the definition of good at judo hinges on how one interacts with a partner/opponent who may not be playing along. my definition of "good at judo" is the ability to efficiently (with regards to physical strength used) apply the appropriate technique at the appropriate time (or the technique of your choosing, as the definition of appropriate is difficult here) on one's partner/opponent regardless of if they want you to apply it or not.

you do know this is a forum, right? writing, explaining, and defending ones position is normal fare.

I think there is a difference. I have gone to lengths to win which in my own eyes don't qualify as judo. Hold on, I'm not talking of doing illegal things :-)

I mean I have game planned, played negative judo, grip fought, strategized and avoided certain aspects of judo in a match to better suit my goal to win. None of that in my view is good judo. But when I go to shiai and I have spent time doing an agonizing weight cut you better believe I will be pulling out all stops.

A person can win via power and athleticism in many cases, even overcome people with better technique. I don't call this good Judo it's good winning. It has a lot to do with conditioning and youth.

I think a balance is necessary, as in being able to have demonstrated technical application in matches as well being able to perform a good range of judo things in a goodly fashion.

genetic judoka wrote:in my opinion the definition of good at judo hinges on how one interacts with a partner/opponent who may not be playing along. my definition of "good at judo" is the ability to efficiently (with regards to physical strength used) apply the appropriate technique at the appropriate time (or the technique of your choosing, as the definition of appropriate is difficult here) on one's partner/opponent regardless of if they want you to apply it or not.

But just because someone fits your definition of "good at judo" does not mean that they are good at winning tournaments. And one does not need to be "good at judo" to win a tournament, either.

Also, i think that having good judo is much deeper than your definition.

heikojr

I think tournaments help provide an assessment of how good you are at judo. It is not the only indicator, but it does a fair job of weeding out those who are not good at judo from getting to the winner's stand. By continuing to compete one usually gets better at judo by facing and overcoming obstacles. However, most people also get better at judo once their competitive years are over if they continue studying.

I believe that tournaments usually make a student better at judo, and establish a strong foundation for additional learning. There is a difference between winning at tournaments and being good at judo, as others have pointed out, but they are in sync more often than the cited exceptions.

Being good at judo will help you win judo tournaments. But you do not have to have good judo to win judo tournamets.

Yes, winning matches and tournaments involve the application of tactics, techniques and strategies by coaches and judoka… Whereas the application of tournament type tactics and strategies are NOT necessarily prevalent in the application of good judo techniques exercised during randori.

Tactics – contribute to scoring, which lead to winning matches that lead to winning tournaments. Tactics involve your ability to apply your specific judo skills (techniques) at the time and place of your choosing to seize a position of advantage over your opponent. Similarly, tactics are applied during a match in a manner to optimize your scoring potential, while minimizing your opponents scoring potential. Tactics also involve minimizing your penalties relative to your ability to create conditions to enable stalling penalties against your opponent.

Strategies – Involve applying such tactics at the time and place of your choosing, with respective to a game plan for winning each respective match given the specific opponent, referees, scenario-situation, clock-time, or match number. You may have a different strategy (game plan) to win against different opponents relative to matching up your strengths and weaknesses against their known strengths and/or weaknesses. You may have a different strategy for opponents in your first match, then in your semi-finals or finals match.

Being good at judo tournaments also involves planning for and having the ability to smartly sustain yourself over a longer period of time over the course of a day. Requires creating conditions for sustaining mental and physical endurance (proactively avoiding mental/physical fatigue); which involves maintaining ones health thru the appropriate replenishment for the available recovery time to include treating any sore muscles, or injuries and being mentally and physically prepared to fight on when your number is next called…

Also Yes, if one prescribes to the Rhadi Ferguson school of thought where ‘Ugly Judo’ can be very effective for enabling great athletes with the means to win judo tournaments.
Rhadi’s most recent take on providing a coaches perspective on how to coach within the ‘New Rules’ provides at least one good example for how tactics and strategy (vs techniques) can come into play for purpose of winning matches, which lead to winning tournaments. His coaches perspective is to find the angle to game the system to ensure his judoka have an advantage to win matches within the given rules...

[url=Rhadi Ferguson breaks-down New Rules 2013-2016:]http://www.firstpost.com/topic/person/the-game-new-ijf-rules-2013-2016-grip-fighting-armbars-and-more-video-UQm2788luoc-48466-5.html[/url]

genetic judoka wrote:

now to play the devil's advocate: if they do compete but never win a match, how can one honestly say that they have great technique? after all, what is the definition of being good at judo, if not the ability to apply your judo knowledge against someone that's resisting?

This is an interesting question but there are too many variables to consider that I don't think your questions could be adequately answered. For instance, the Mifune of old would not be able to beat Teddy Riner in modern shiai but I don't think that means Teddy Riner has better Judo than Mifune.

I think it's a fairly simple and straightforward question.

Yes, there is a difference between being good at judo, and being good at winning judo tournaments, just like there is a difference between being good at randori and being good at kata. However, that does not mean that people cannot be good at both, and neither does it mean that being good at one aspect would not exert positive influences and allow one to improve in the other aspect. In fact such mutual influences are desired and intentional and are part of the rationale why these activities exist. When such mutual influence insufficiently takes place it is partly or wholly a failure of instruction, although I am not and have not implied that such mutual influence would need to take place promptly or immediately. 'Influences' is a a process that takes place over time. One's preoccupation as determined by age, activity, success will logically affect the components one logically will devote most attention to at a given time and place.

Really depends how you define "Judo." What happens on the tatami vs what happens in the Dojo.

I had the pleasure of meeting and talking with a past Olympian Silver medalist. He participated on an elite level and was very successful. No doubt, you can consider him good at tournaments. Ok that's one way you can define Judo.

But more so, I also noted how committed he was to his students and in doing so passed on incredible values. Judo's philosophy became a part of who he is. In turn he wishes to pass on what had guided him successfully through life on to his students, especially the younger ones. Ok this can be another way of defining Judo.

In talking only briefly with this gentleman one is impressed by his humble, sincere caring demeanor. He is the kind of person that does not need to shout to be heard.

I would say that there is a difference between being good at Judo and being good at winning in tournaments. However in some rare instances you can find both differences in the same person.

My most sincerest regards,

Kurobi

I personally think the best metric for someone's judo is how well they can teach judo because you need to really understand something before you can teach it. Especially something as esoteric as judo. Not generating champions per se but teaching students how to apply their judo whether it's in shiai or life in general.

gaijin_judoka wrote:I personally think the best metric for someone's judo is how well they can teach judo because you need to really understand something before you can teach it. Especially something as esoteric as judo. Not generating champions per se but teaching students how to apply their judo whether it's in shiai or life in general.

Well said.+++

When I think about this....
Mike Swain had very good judo and....
Jim Pedro was very good at judo.
Both were as good as it gets.

It seems to me that the two are neither nessecarily mutually inclusive nor mutually exclusive; though it does of course depend on ones precise definition of Judo.

gaijin_judoka wrote:I personally think the best metric for someone's judo is how well they can teach judo because you need to really understand something before you can teach it. Especially something as esoteric as judo. Not generating champions per se but teaching students how to apply their judo whether it's in shiai or life in general.

By the way, Happy Birthday, Gaijin_judoka !!

Thanks CK.

Can one say that one can be brilliant at shiai but pathetic at "good judo"? Yes... think of the steriotypical Georgian from the 90's who wins doing essentially rugby tackles...

However, one can easily find someone who simply does not care for shiai who is a brilliant "Judo person", who lives his life with Judo values, teaches correct Judo, and the values thereof.

Is there, and should there be a comparison?

judoratt wrote: Being good at judo will help you win judo tournaments. But you do not have to have good judo to win judo tournamets.

What he said!

I think as well it has to do with what stage one is in their Judo career. I can watch a guy/gal who is past their prime competing with or doing randori with younger, stronger, etc judoka and still see that the older person has/does good Judo, even if they are getting their butts kicked.

Ben

Depends what age we are talking about too ... I can remember one of my children being ok but when they were entering red belt type comps as youngsters they were always thrown within 3 seconds when coming up against certain people

One of the most bizarre Judo related conversations I ever heard was amongst some fairly high level Judoka and went as follows :

"He was one of the best strategists I ever knew, he'd often win a tournament with his knowledge of how to findloopholes in the rules, playing to the edge of the mat, convincing yet false attacks etc etc - then one day someone taught the bastard to throw and he became unstoppable"

These werent just local tournaments mind - I remember being surprised to hear someone could get quite high in Judo without actually having an excellent throwing technique already in place .
Hopefully the new rules will make this less likely.