The IJF are destroying judo

NBK wrote:

Cichorei Kano wrote:

Udon wrote:Jonesy, I am in complete agreement with your post re the scope of Kodokan judo not being determined by the IJF. I wish someone from the Kodokan would step up and say the same thing.

Not wanting to kick in any open doors, but the Kôdôkan these days is hardly in pursuit Kôdôkan jûdô. They already let that slip as soon as they started brokering deals with the SCAP post World War-II. Many distinguished Japanese sensei who are not employees of the Kôdôkan and even some of the nonagenarian sensei at the Kôdôkan who can't perform anymore themselves feel pretty desperate about their successors. These "young people" ('young' includes some who are past 60 !)  obviously still know how to perform this and that throw very decently, but for the rest they no no longer have the intellectual knowledge and insights that someone like Daigo does. When the current generation of 10th dan-holders passes away, the Kôdôkan would better change its name into 'Kareki' 枯木. 'Kareki' means 'Deadwood'.

You're unlikely to kick any doors in with that - perhaps you meant 'close any doors'.

The Kodokan never negotiated with SCAP.  Unlike the nuttiness of the Iraq invasion, when the entire government was dismantled, SCAP left the Japanese government largely intact.  The Japanese ran the country with close scrutiny from SCAP, so the Kodokan appealed to the Ministry of Education.  I do have a copy of the letter sent SCAP asking to allow judo training in school; while kendo organized a huge writing campaign with lots of senior support, judo seemingly only had a small one.  

It will survive but not as Kano shihan envisioned it.  It has never become what he really wanted, but gets farther away by the year.

There is a relatively steady state of a type of jacketed stand up wrestling that was enacted post WWII that chugs along.  The relatively small changes since then pale in comparison to the changes made from the early 1900's through 1945.

As for the next generation, didn't Daigo sensei himself admit he had not much interest in kata and history when younger?  One hopes that some will step up.

NBK

I think I meant "kick in open doors" as I would image, would hope even, that what I am saying is not unknown. (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20091125194718AAiPsIG)

I was mainly referring to the Kôdôkan's increasing sportification and loss of martial arts character to avoid provoking the SCAP. Much of the news and relevant correspondence has been retained by Joe Svinth in some of his articles, such as:

http://ejmas.com/jcs/jcsart_svinth_1202.htm

He also addresses some of that in the martial arts encyclopedia to which you contributed, I believe.

No doubt the changes in judo were large between 1900 and 1945, and probably even larger between 1882-1918 largely because in the beginning years unlike what is often suggested there really did not exist any judo. Thus the thing was still in its creation phase with building out the curriculum and the many changes of location of the Kôdôkan dôjô, the initiation of a women's program, etc, etc.  But much of what happened, happened in an environment of people who were rooted in martial arts. Many of the big names of the Kôdôkan had extensive roots in koryû. If jûdô today was mostly practiced by people with koryû past I bet it would be quite different. For one, they would know how to hold a sword and how to walk. How many people in the IJF have a koryû past ?  Do they even know what the word means ?  How many people at the current Kôdôkan have a koryû past ?

Daigo had admitted what I think is logical, namely that he did not have a lot of interest in the deeper things of judo when he was preparing for the All Japan Champions. We are speaking 1948-1952 when he was was 22-26 years old. This was mostly in reference to Nagaoka who died in 1952, when Daigo was 26 years old. Let's not forget though that for the next 30 years he was still surrounded by people like Samura, Mifune, Kudô, Kotani, Takata and some of the greatest jûdô historians like Kuhara and Oimatsu. There is extensive documentation of Daigo performing as uke in numerous displays. Today, even if you sleep, eat, drink, and shit at the Kôdôkan you are hardly going to be immersed in historic knowhow and okuden. The lecturing part of jûdô today is nonexistent, and apart from some elderly gentlemen you don't exactly see youngsters or Kôdôkan instructors sitting down with Daigo discussing things beyond the mechanics of jûdô.

The living resources at the Kôdôkan are not 'used' in an academic sense. At best, they are 'worshiped' or revered from a distance, but not used. One's understanding of jûdô is not going to improve from giving presents to Daigo and Cie, from making spring-knife like bows and from posing on pictures with Daigo. If anything, it is going to improve from having heated discussions, from asking for corrections, from challenging views, from scrutinizing and offering counter-evidence, basically from everything that reflects true academic discourse. This evidently applies to both Japanese and Westerners, but if one's Japanese vocabulary barely exceeds 'konnichi wa' and 'arigato' then that isn't the best way to start although nothing prevents anyone from summoning Matsumoto or Murata as 同輩中の首 or Kodokan Google Translate v. 1.0. It's all possible, but one has to grab the bull by the horns and actually do it. One isn't going to get there by in 10 years showing a picture to others and saying "look, this is me with Daigo-sensei". The problem is even more tangible with the other 10th dan-holders. Daigo-sensei still teaches a kuden-group and has a couple of faithfuls following him here and there, albeit for a variety of reasons. With regard to Abe, he is completely alone, and Ôsawa according to himself has mentally quit jûdô a long time (= meaning, he says he is continuously suffering from pain and doesn't really want to be there). It is not the same by far as it was 55 years ago.

There are still pockets of serious jûdô spread throughout Japan, people with very deep understanding, but the average jûdôka has no way to know or locate these people, and unlike you, the average Western jûdô person isn't a member of the Nippon Kobudô Kyôkai. How many Western jûdôka do you know who, for example, went to study with Professor Tôdô to enhance their understanding of budô background ?  They don't know or have no ambition or a're not interested in that. The mechanics, a piece of paper from the Kôdôkan with kanji scribbled on it it and a couple of pictures with someone wearing a red belt is all that is necessary to impress peers and low-ranks at the home front.

The Cosmic irony of this is apparent to me.

Judo comes to Europe from Japan and displaces domestic jacket wrestling styles

Europeans take over Judo from the Japanese

Judo becomes jacket wrestling

Cheers

While i'm sympathetic to the goals of anyone who says "you don't have to do judo like the IJF rules! Go ahead and practice pickups at your dojo!", that solution strikes me as inadequate. There's more to the technique than the technique, as they say. It's embedded in a matrix of combinations, counters, setups, variations, etc. The business of embedding the technique within these things is a collective job. That's why we have so many different setups, combinations, counters, etc for uchi-mata, because it's used in competition. Remove the techniques from competition and you remove those as well.

hedgehogey wrote:While i'm sympathetic to the goals of anyone who says "you don't have to do judo like the IJF rules! Go ahead and practice pickups at your dojo!", that solution strikes me as inadequate. There's more to the technique than the technique, as they say. It's embedded in a matrix of combinations, counters, setups, variations, etc. The business of embedding the technique within these things is a collective job. That's why we have so many different setups, combinations, counters, etc for uchi-mata, because it's used in competition. Remove the techniques from competition and you remove those as well.

That is a realistic concern, even though the proportion of judoka over 32 years old who still compete is minor. Then again, the youngsters are the future, and espec children often make up the proportionally largest population within a club.

Really, the only contests that HAVE to be conducted according to IJF rules are IJF or Continental international contests. So, national IJF-member federations have the option to follow different rule sets, and so do clubs or non-IJF federations who organize contests. It then depends on both local rules whether participating in cross-federation contests is allowed or not. In the US it is not prohibited for a judoka to participate in contests of different federations (USJA, USJF, USJI), and I believe it isn't prohibited in the UK (BJA, BJC), but some national federations do prohibit it and some will summarily suspend members just for doing that. Even with the World Masters Judo Federation before the IJF had any master's competitions people and officials from IJF and other federations would participate but then the muscle flexing started when the IJF saw money and started threatening IJF referees if they participated. Finally the IJF developed its own masters contests essentially killing off the WMJA. But I realize that the options I present are the result of theoretical reasoning, but practice develops in its own way, and for the large majority indeed there is a tangible risk things will develop exactly as you suggest. After all it's the same reason jûdôka today no longer know leglocks and neck cranks, and many other parts of the total jûdô curriculum.

hedgehogey wrote:While i'm sympathetic to the goals of anyone who says "you don't have to do judo like the IJF rules! Go ahead and practice pickups at your dojo!", that solution strikes me as inadequate. There's more to the technique than the technique, as they say. It's embedded in a matrix of combinations, counters, setups, variations, etc. The business of embedding the technique within these things is a collective job. That's why we have so many different setups, combinations, counters, etc for uchi-mata, because it's used in competition. Remove the techniques from competition and you remove those as well.

ahhh füüüüüch! !!!

for once I have to wholeheartedly agree, it hurts but I am man enough  

That is why it is not just training should diverge from IJF judo but also rules for local competitions should be a bit more flexible.

Just look at the BJC rules in the UK.

atb

sodo

It seems like most clubs are already infected with this disease. If you start doing any of these now illegal techniques (which aren't dangerous) or touching below the obi in randori then it's "penalty", "hansokumaki", "you can't do that anymore" or other similar comments. So you can't really hope to continue training in these techniques without the contest rules changing back to what they were.

machine wrote:It seems like most clubs are already infected with this disease. If you start doing any of these now illegal techniques (which aren't dangerous) or touching below the obi in randori then it's "penalty", "hansokumaki", "you can't do that anymore" or other similar comments. So you can't really hope to continue training in these techniques without the contest rules changing back to what they were.

Absolutely - an inevitable consequence.....

These so-called "Illegal" techniques are only forbidden in competition,
they are still part of the curriculum.

Steve Leadbeater wrote:These  so-called "Illegal" techniques are only forbidden in competition,
they are still part of the curriculum.

The question is ... "whose curriculum?" And for what reason?

machine wrote:It seems like most clubs are already infected with this disease. If you start doing any of these now illegal techniques (which aren't dangerous) or touching below the obi in randori then it's "penalty", "hansokumaki", "you can't do that anymore" or other similar comments. So you can't really hope to continue training in these techniques without the contest rules changing back to what they were.

I don't blame clubs. They are stuck in between a rock and a hard spot. Most clubs want to do right for their members and hence the coaches need to know the rules of competition and prepare the judoka for those rules. Anything else would be a disservice to those students who want to participate in the current structure.

The only thing judoka can do on their own is to either: (1) form a group of like minded judoka or (2) cross train in other grappling arts to keep the skills honed. Its unfortunately a sad implication of your current situation.

I blame the IJF leadership for the changes, I blame the Continental Unions for the IJF leadership, I blame the NGBs for the Continental Union leadership and I blame the clubs for the NGB leadership. In some places it is better than others, but what I see as "success" and"good" in judo is about as far removed from what the IJF does as it can be.

afulldeck wrote:
I don't blame clubs. They are stuck in between a rock and a hard spot. Most clubs want to do right for their members and hence the coaches need to know the rules of competition and prepare the judoka for those rules. Anything else would be a disservice  to those students who want to participate in the current structure.

clubs don't exist for shiai.
shiai exists for the clubs.
Is the greater disservice to students who want to compete or to students who want to learn all of judo?
Most competitors are best served by focused competition classes anyways. Many of the tricks needed for matches like gripping for the opening, timing of attacks, timing the clock between tachiwaza and newaza, understanding when you are behind and when ahead and thus altering your game, understanding when you are pressured and making false attacks etc. are best served in specialized sessions.

nomoremondays wrote:

afulldeck wrote:
I don't blame clubs. They are stuck in between a rock and a hard spot. Most clubs want to do right for their members and hence the coaches need to know the rules of competition and prepare the judoka for those rules. Anything else would be a disservice  to those students who want to participate in the current structure.

clubs don't exist for shiai.
shiai exists for the clubs.

Neither is correct. Shiai was created for jûdôka to obtain a practical assessment of the effectiveness of technique, and because Kanô believes that if a person has to compete for something that he will more do his best than if the does not have to compete (this is actually questionnable, espec. when it comes to moral values).

nomoremondays wrote:
Is the greater disservice to students who want to compete or to students who want to learn all of judo?
Most competitors are best served by focused competition classes anyways. Many of the tricks needed for matches like gripping for the opening, timing of attacks, timing the clock between tachiwaza and newaza, understanding when you are behind and when ahead and thus altering your game, understanding when you are pressured and making false attacks etc. are best served in specialized sessions.

I am sorry, but I need to suggest a different view.

That there would need to be or even exist specialized sessions for people competing is a modern evolution that dates back to the second half of the 1970s, just like special sessions were created for kata. If one thinks about it, this is very strange. Since kata and competing should be part of standard judo. Unfortunately in the absence of a standardized teaching curriculum, most judo instructors do not know ALL of judo, do not know ALL kata in every aspect, do not know ALL refereeing rules, etc. For that reason it might be in the best interest of the student who has to master one of these aspects and whose instructor can't teach him or her to seek help elsewere. This should not be the case if the teacher knows all these things and can properly teach them.

There is currently a general dilution of judo that provokes people to know less and less. When I did my black belt 5 series nage-no-kata were mandatory, just as they were for 1st kyu, and 3 series for 2nd kyu. I remember at the time when we were lower kyu ranks all in fear for higher kyû ranks since we had heard the kata but no one knew exactly what it was !

Katame-no-kata was mandatory for 2nd dan. Then programs stared to become lighter and lighter. Before, exam for 5th dan required refereeing skills. Today, refereeing is completely separated from standard judo techniques.

In my view, all aspects of judo whether it is technique, kata, kappô, grips, matches should be included in standard training so that everyone is exposed to them. There is little sense in only teaching de-ashi-barai and uki-goshi in your club and keep the secret handshake, and secret tricks for closed-door sessions. It is the process of being exposed that is the process of preparation of judoka, something that is very necessary and would prevent people who are not ready for it showing up in competition.

With the exception of kata, no parts of judo are separated in Japan either. However, it is logical that there is a separation of level for safety reasons. You don't really want the nationale elite going all the way in randori with their opponents being lower kyu ranks.

In my opinion, it is especially separating certain parts from standard judo classes that creates the kind of judo caricature which is mocked (and justifiably) by people from other arts, the kind of judoka who from the moment he ends up in a real fight in the street is useless because the only thing he has been taught and has practices is some unrealistic stuff, as just turtling up or lying on his belly, assuming that because such worked on the tatami it will work on the street too. Instructors have a responsibility to teach ALL of judo to their students, and place what they teach in a realistic daylight. They are teaching a martial art and they have an obligation to fairly and realistically point out the strong and weaker points instead of installing a false sense of confidence in their students.

I realize that you are talking about "most competitors" thus not all, but I don't agree with that either. I think it largely depends on the qualities of the teacher. I think that any judo class can have a team just like any class of anything can have a theme. "Most competitors" certainly can't be referring to "Olympic elite" since most the Olympic elite is only a very small part of the judo population. Obviously the elite Olympic elite needs special classes and attention for about everything including nutrition, diet, body composition, weight control, power training, and all kinds of aspects of technical judo. But, this is obviously because they already should be accomplished judoka who already master most of the stuff that is taught in an average judo club.

With the approach you suggest your efforts are often going to result in creating maybe not exactly a "one-trick monkey"-like judoka but still a judoka who will win matches but who has limited judo technical skills, and judoka trained for the current refereeing rules instead of having been trained for judo. He'll know 2 or 3 techniques, may win even medals due to strength and condition, but has a very limited judo.

Cichorei Kano wrote:

nomoremondays wrote:
clubs don't exist for shiai.
shiai exists for the clubs.

Neither is correct. Shiai was created for jûdôka to obtain a practical assessment of the effectiveness of technique, and because Kanô believes that if a person has to compete for something that he will more do his best than if the does not have to compete (this is actually questionnable, espec. when it comes to moral values).

Yes, it is a bit of an exaggeration but my point was more to the fact that 'your' club and 'my' club could get together and hold a shiai for us and we could use whatever ruleset we decided was appropriate for our students - 1884 rules, 2013 rules whatever. The original point seemed to imply that club owners are hard pressed because they get shiai and its rules handed down to them and they have to toe the line accordingly. I see no reason why afulldeck's dojo, CichoreiKano's dojo and NoMoreMonday's dojo couldn't get together and form a shiai for us and our students outside of the purview of what the ivory-tower bureaucrats dictate. However, not sure how your federation and your insurers would react  , but probably a different topic.
There seems to be a 'victim' mentality amongst club owners - "they made the rules, what can we do". Thats pretty much what my statement was aimed for- that the organizations are using the clubs as feeder chains for its 'competitions', while it is us actually that give power to these organizations and their brand of 'shiai'.

nomoremondays wrote:
Is the greater disservice to students who want to compete or to students who want to learn all of judo?
Most competitors are best served by focused competition classes anyways. Many of the tricks needed for matches like gripping for the opening, timing of attacks, timing the clock between tachiwaza and newaza, understanding when you are behind and when ahead and thus altering your game, understanding when you are pressured and making false attacks etc. are best served in specialized sessions.

I am sorry, but I need to suggest a different view.

I'm sure you're being polite, but no need to be sorry.

That there would need to be or even exist specialized sessions for people competing is a modern evolution that dates back to the second half of the 1970s, just like special sessions were created for kata. If one thinks about it, this is very strange. Since kata and competing should be part of standard judo. Unfortunately in the absence of a standardized teaching curriculum, most judo instructors do not know ALL of judo, do not know ALL kata in every aspect, do not know ALL refereeing rules, etc.  For that reason it might be in the best interest of the student who has to master one of these aspects and whose instructor can't teach him or her to seek help elsewere. This should not be the case if the teacher knows all these things and can properly teach them.

There is currently a general dilution of judo that provokes people to know less and less. When I did my black belt 5 series nage-no-kata were mandatory, just as they were for 1st kyu, and 3 series for 2nd kyu. I remember at the time when we were lower kyu ranks all in fear for higher kyû ranks since we had heard the kata but no one knew exactly what it was !

Katame-no-kata was mandatory for 2nd dan. Then programs stared to become lighter and lighter. Before, exam for 5th dan required refereeing skills. Today, refereeing is completely separated from standard judo techniques.

In my view, all aspects of judo whether it is technique, kata, kappô, grips, matches should be included in standard training so that everyone is exposed to them. There is little sense in only teaching de-ashi-barai and uki-goshi in your club and keep the secret handshake, and secret tricks for closed-door sessions. It is the process of being exposed that is the process of preparation of judoka, something that is very necessary and would prevent people who are not ready for it showing up in competition.

With the exception of kata, no parts of judo are separated in Japan either. However, it is logical that there is a separation of level for safety reasons. You don't really want the nationale elite going all the way in randori with their opponents being lower kyu ranks.

In my opinion, it is especially separating certain parts from standard judo classes that creates the kind of judo caricature which is mocked (and justifiably) by people from other arts, the kind of judoka who from the moment he ends up in a real fight in the street is useless because the only thing he has been taught and has practices is some unrealistic stuff, as just turtling up or lying on his belly, assuming that because such worked on the tatami it will work on the street too. Instructors have a responsibility to teach ALL of judo to their students, and place what they teach in a realistic daylight. They are teaching a martial art and they have an obligation to fairly and realistically point out the strong and weaker points instead of installing a false sense of confidence in their students.

I realize that you are talking about "most competitors" thus not all, but I don't agree with that either. I think it largely depends on the qualities of the teacher. I think that any judo class can have a team just like any class of anything can have a theme. "Most competitors" certainly can't be referring to "Olympic elite" since most the Olympic elite is only a very small part of the judo population. Obviously the elite Olympic elite needs special classes and attention for about everything including nutrition, diet, body composition, weight control, power training, and all kinds of aspects of technical judo. But, this is obviously because they already should be accomplished judoka who already master most of the stuff that is taught in an average judo club.

With the approach you suggest your efforts are often going to result in creating maybe not exactly a "one-trick monkey"-like judoka but still a judoka who will win matches but who has limited judo technical skills, and judoka trained for the current refereeing rules instead of having been trained for judo. He'll know 2 or 3 techniques, may win even medals due to strength and condition, but has a very limited judo.

Yes I agree that all judo should be taught together in a sense but there should be a sense of progression no? Does kappo really need to be taught at the yellow belt level? I personally think not. Or does ashi garami need to be taught to an orange belt who can barely move around the mat? Again probably not I would think.
But kata, yes it should be taught but I think the approach of teaching it for only grading purposes is wrong - regardless of whether it was for 3rd kyu back then or 1st dan for now. I mean what good is showing nage-no-kata uchimata to a 2nd kyu for the first time, when all along, for the last three years (made up number for a 2nd kyu) he has already been honing uchimata as a tokuiwaza. He should have been shown it through the kata long back. The problem with kata teaching has been that it is used for grading only, not for teaching a skill from the first day onwards. If a 1st kyu has a fantastic ashi-barai, but no knowledge of nage no kata, how did that even come to pass!?!! After all the sweep is there in the kata, so why wasn't he shown the sweep through the kata a long time back?!? No wonder kata training becomes a chore for most.

I agree that there is skill dilution in judo players. But to win and to win using judo are different right? So why show match tricks to judoka along with everything else?  I am surprised you think that specialization of classes leads to skill dilution. I would think it is having a general class for all where you show how to do a sloppy makikomi, break some grips and send off folks as 'competitors' is what leads to skill dilution. But if you rather taught 'regular judo' for most of your classes and once a month (or whatever is adequate) 'competition tricks' class you can develop guys with rounded skills but also have the ability to mold them for specialized rule sets like IJF etc later on. Or maybe skill dilution through specialization occurred because everyone only wanted to go to the special classes to learn how to win and not to the general classes?!? So a cause vs correlation issue there, I don't know just guessing here.

But maybe you and I are saying the same thing, but the difference is what we consider a competitor? A green belt going to a 'competition' is not really what I consider a competitor. Maybe that comes across a bit arrogant, but I think a competitor is one who cuts weight, focuses on his diet, hones just one or three special skills, does multiple sessions a day, travels everywhere etc only for the purpose of getting on the podium. Such a person could exist at the state level, national level or elite level, but I don't think such a person exists below the black belt level and if some middling kyu grade thinks he is such then I think he was misguided by his coach somewhere.

Specialized classes for competitors are definitely necessary. A few of my students compete in AAU Judo competitions exclusively, and a few students participate in USJA events. Leading up to competitions, I always hold special (separate) classes for the competitors to cover the specifics of each type of competition.

nomoremondays wrote:
Is the greater disservice to students who want to compete or to students who want to learn all of judo?
Most competitors are best served by focused competition classes anyways. Many of the tricks needed for matches like gripping for the opening, timing of attacks, timing the clock between tachiwaza and newaza, understanding when you are behind and when ahead and thus altering your game, understanding when you are pressured and making false attacks etc. are best served in specialized sessions.

I wrote a response, but then my screen froze and I lost it.

Anyhow, there is the issue: "students who want to compete vs. students who want to learn all of judo"

Don't you think that it is very odd that there would be people who want to compete but who are not interested in learning all of judo ?  If so, their teacher did not do a very good job in developing their attitude towards judo. The fact that someone does well in competition should normally imply that he or she is gifted and therefore ideally placed to learn all of judo. However, if as a teacher you educate ('educate' is probably a very wrong word here) in such a way that there is a different judo, namely one where you don't really have to work towards mastering as much as possible but only towards winning medals, there there is a problem indeed. This is exactly what is fed by sending white belts  to competitions. Competition was created as a natural progression from a stage where a judoka is really ready for competition, which in my opinion is 3rd kyu for the best students.

Now, if you have white belts and you are going to send those to competition and then start teaching special sessions on grips at that level, then what the heck is that teacher doing ?!  There is a serious problem there, which is reflected in the poor state of judo.

Interesting anecdote. I was at one point being interviewed for a position of national coach for relatiively strong IJF country, and while the interview was going well, at one point someone asked me who I thought among their elite I thought of as a really good judoka. I tried to put it diplomatically but in the end had to say what I thought which was 'none'.  They had in the past, but no at this moment despite the fact that they still won medals and titles. What they had were strong elites well trained in terms of endurance, power and physical capacities, but their judo was poor. The athletes did not know what tai-sabaki was, had poor use of their hara, couldn't properly perform tsurikkomi movements, had no clue clue of action and reaction. Medals were the result a competition betweteen physyical prowess. If any of these athletes had however been trained towards skillful judo that would lead to medals in stead of towards just getting medals, it would have been different.

As I explained before, most things like gripfighting are a part of normal judo, so that a person understand the principle rather than copying something. So anyone moving through the kyu and dan-ranks should increasingly understand what they are and how to apply them, but not everyone should be appying that in practice during an Olympic s of course.

But ultimately it boils down to the teaching skills of the teacher, and unfortunately there aren't too many really good judo teachers around (note: a good judo teacher is not the same as someone you immensely admire because of all the medals he won when he was young or because he can wipe the tatami with anyone on it, nor is a good teacher the same as someone you really like because he is such a nice guy/gal or is very old).

Yes I agree that all judo should be taught together in a sense but there should be a sense of progression no? Does kappo really need to be taught at the yellow belt level? I personally think not. Or does ashi garami need to be taught to an orange belt who can barely move around the mat? Again probably not I would think.
But kata, yes it should be taught but I think the approach of teaching it for only grading purposes is wrong - regardless of whether it was for 3rd kyu back then or 1st dan for now. I mean what good is showing nage-no-kata uchimata to a 2nd kyu for the first time, when all along, for the last three years (made up number for a 2nd kyu) he has already been honing uchimata as a tokuiwaza. He should have been shown it through the kata long back. The problem with kata teaching has been that it is used for grading only, not for teaching a skill from the first day onwards. If a 1st kyu has a fantastic ashi-barai, but no knowledge of nage no kata, how did that even come to pass!?!! After all the sweep is there in the kata, so why wasn't he shown the sweep through the kata a long time back?!? No wonder kata training becomes a chore for most.

I agree that there is skill dilution in judo players. But to win and to win using judo are different right? So why show match tricks to judoka along with everything else?  I am surprised you think that specialization of classes leads to skill dilution. I would think it is having a general class for all where you show how to do a sloppy makikomi, break some grips and send off folks as 'competitors' is what leads to skill dilution. But if you rather taught 'regular judo' for most of your classes and once a month (or whatever is adequate) 'competition tricks' class you can develop guys with rounded skills but also have the ability to mold them for specialized rule sets like IJF etc later on. Or maybe skill dilution through specialization occurred because everyone only wanted to go to the special classes to learn how to win and not to the general classes?!? So a cause vs correlation issue there, I don't know just guessing here.

But maybe you and I are saying the same thing, but the difference is what we consider a competitor? A green belt going to a 'competition' is not really what I consider a competitor. Maybe that comes across a bit arrogant, but I think a competitor is one who cuts weight, focuses on his diet, hones just one or three special skills, does multiple sessions a day, travels everywhere etc only for the purpose of getting on the podium. Such a person could exist at the state level, national level or elite level, but I don't think such a person exists below the black belt level and if some middling kyu grade thinks he is such then I think he was misguided by his coach somewhere.

I agree. I did not say that everything needs to be taught at white or yellow belt. Central in my posts was the word 'progressive'. I still think that in what judoka learn there should not be any difference AS THEY PROGRESS THROUGH THE RANKS.

I want to avoid talking about kata so that we don't get on a tangent, but it really depends there too who is your teacher. If you have yet again another "kata mechanics teacher" instead of a teacher who masters kata, that is unavoidable.

In my case, my competitive fighting benefited greatly from studying nage-no-kata. Before, I was winning with kôka and yûko and with osae-komi. Nage-no-kata contributed significantly towards me starting to win with waza-ari and ippon throws, mostly due to deepened understanding in kuzushi, and being forced to learn techniques bilaterally, and appreciating action/reaction. Obvoiusly one should not make a caricature out of it. I did not at all say or suggest that when preparing for a national championship I focused on nage-no-kata and recommend that approach to all competitive judoka. I did not say any such thing, and it would be intellectually dishonest to ridicule it in that way. In those days I had one 2-hour monthly session of kata, and one weekly 45-minute session of kata. All the rest obviously went to uchi-komi and randori and kihon training.  I am just really glad that I never dropped those 45 weekly minutes hiding behind the excuse that this was useless for my competitive results I was aiming to achieve. The signfiicant factor really was the quality of my teacher. He had won a continental championship and my original plan was to just attend his kata class twice and then quit. That had also been the suggestion of my home club teacher. So the original purpose really was more to make sure "important people had seen me" so that they would remember me if I showed up for my black belt test. That's the kind of thinking our teachers were installing in us in those days, probably because the failing rates were so high. 60-70% Fails for a black belt exam were not unusual. What changed it for me is when he demonstrated a throw on me. I had never experienced anything before, not from my teacher in my club not from anyone else, namely a person who threw you without moving his feet, just using nothing but kuzushi and with an ease and speed that was beyond my understanding. If such a person found it worthwhile to do kata then probably he knew all kinds of things I had no idea of they existed, so I stayed and followed all of his classes for the next 14 years. Who were the leading teachers for kata in France ?  They were Courtine and Pariset who together with Geesink dominated the European and Western world judo between 1955 and 1964 as competitors. The best kata is usually by judoka who were excellent in competition (in terms of quality of their judo; that doesn't mean they were necessarily the absolute champions and they might have come short in endurance or force but they will have been noticed by people watching them). People who were excellent in competition don't typically fake kata. Why would they ?

I strongly believe that judoka, any judoka should learn and focus on judo, rather than focus on grips, or on newaza or on tachi-waza, or on pick-ups (old IJF) or on grips or on ear biting. What people especially competitive judoka need to focus on is what I would like to call "Integrative Judo" . I am not sure if anyone has used this term before

Perhaps if students were allowed to, and actively encouraged by their coaches and clubs to enter freestyle judo tournaments as well as IJF rules tournaments on a regular basis we can get back to doing more complete judo. Although having two different rule sets for tournaments would be a little confusing to some, this would be better than having a complete split between freestyle and IJF judo, considering the already low number of participants in each. It would also be far better than allowing these now-illegal-in-competition techniques to slide into obscurity. I think it would also create more participation in judo.

Cichorei Kano wrote:

nomoremondays wrote:
Is the greater disservice
(...)
served in specialized sessions.

I wrote a response, but then my screen froze and I lost it.

Anyhow, there is the issue: "students who want to compete vs. students who want to learn all of judo"

Don't you think that it is very odd that there would be people who want to compete but who are not interested in learning all of judo ?  If so, their teacher did not do a very good job in developing their attitude towards judo. The fact that someone does well in competition should normally imply that he or she is gifted and therefore ideally placed to learn all of judo. However, if as a teacher you educate ('educate' is probably a very wrong word here) in such a way that there is a different judo, namely one where you don't really have to work towards mastering as much as possible but only towards winning medals, there there is a problem indeed. This is exactly what is fed by sending white belts  to competitions. Competition was created as a natural progression from a stage where a judoka is really ready for competition, which in my opinion is 3rd kyu for the best students.

Now, if you have white belts and you are going to send those to competition and then start teaching special sessions on grips at that level, then what the heck is that teacher doing ?!  There is a serious problem there, which is reflected in the poor state of judo.

Interesting anecdote. I was at one point being interviewed for a position of national coach for relatiively strong IJF country, and while the interview was going well, at one point someone asked me who I thought among their elite I thought of as a really good judoka. I tried to put it diplomatically but in the end had to say what I thought which was 'none'.  They had in the past, but no at this moment despite the fact that they still won medals and titles. What they had were strong elites well trained in terms of endurance, power and physical capacities, but their judo was poor. The athletes did not know what tai-sabaki was, had poor use of their hara, couldn't properly perform tsurikkomi movements, had no clue clue of action and reaction. Medals were the result a competition betweteen physyical prowess. If any of these athletes had however been trained towards skillful judo that would lead to medals in stead of towards just getting medals, it would have been different.

As I explained before, most things like gripfighting are a part of normal judo, so that a person understand the principle rather than copying something. So anyone moving through the kyu and dan-ranks should increasingly understand what they are and how to apply them, but not everyone should be appying that in practice during an Olympic s of course.

But ultimately it boils down to the teaching skills of the teacher, and unfortunately there aren't too many really good judo teachers around (note: a good judo teacher is not the same as someone you immensely admire because of all the medals he won when he was young or because he can wipe the tatami with anyone on it, nor is a good teacher the same as someone you really like because he is such a nice guy/gal or is very old).

Thanks not much to disagree here. Indeed its the teachers shortcoming if his pupils want to compete/win vs learn all of judo. But I don't think it is necessarily "odd" from the students viewpoint. I mean don't most people, in general, choose short term gains anyways over longer term benefits (long term benefit of judo is probably another debate on the other hand)?
Yes we do need good teachers but where would they come from? The national federations seem to be more focused on building either referrees or competitiors not teachers. I have seen some of the certification programs from continental unions like the EJU or out of colleges like yongin from a superficial level. What is your opinion on the usefulness of them in building good judo educators?

nomoremondays wrote:
Yes I agree that all judo should be taught together in a sense but there should be a sense of progression no?
(...)
if some middling kyu grade thinks he is such then I think he was misguided by his coach somewhere.

Cichorei Kano wrote:
I agree. I did not say that everything needs to be taught at white or yellow belt. Central in my posts was the word 'progressive'. I still think that in what judoka learn there should not be any difference AS THEY PROGRESS THROUGH THE RANKS.

I want to avoid talking about kata so that we don't get on a tangent, but it really depends there too who is your teacher. If you have yet again another "kata mechanics teacher" instead of a teacher who masters kata, that is unavoidable.

In my case, my competitive fighting benefited greatly from studying nage-no-kata. Before, I was winning with kôka and yûko and with osae-komi. Nage-no-kata contributed significantly towards me starting to win with waza-ari and ippon throws, mostly due to deepened understanding in kuzushi, and being forced to learn techniques bilaterally, and appreciating action/reaction. Obvoiusly one should not make a caricature out of it. I did not at all say or suggest that when preparing for a national championship I focused on nage-no-kata and recommend that approach to all competitive judoka. I did not say any such thing, and it would be intellectually dishonest to ridicule it in that way. In those days I had one 2-hour monthly session of kata, and one weekly 45-minute session of kata. All the rest obviously went to uchi-komi and randori and kihon training.  I am just really glad that I never dropped those 45 weekly minutes hiding behind the excuse that this was useless for my competitive results I was aiming to achieve. The signfiicant factor really was the quality of my teacher. He had won a continental championship and my original plan was to just attend his kata class twice and then quit. That had also been the suggestion of my home club teacher. So the original purpose really was more to make sure "important people had seen me" so that they would remember me if I showed up for my black belt test. That's the kind of thinking our teachers were installing in us in those days, probably because the failing rates were so high. 60-70% Fails for a black belt exam were not unusual. What changed it for me is when he demonstrated a throw on me. I had never experienced anything before, not from my teacher in my club not from anyone else, namely a person who threw you without moving his feet, just using nothing but kuzushi and with an ease and speed that was beyond my understanding. If such a person found it worthwhile to do kata then probably he knew all kinds of things I had no idea of they existed, so I stayed and followed all of his classes for the next 14 years. Who were the leading teachers for kata in France ?  They were Courtine and Pariset who together with Geesink dominated the European and Western world judo between 1955 and 1964 as competitors. The best kata is usually by judoka who were excellent in competition (in terms of quality of their judo; that doesn't mean they were necessarily the absolute champions and they might have come short in endurance or force but they will have been noticed by people watching them). People who were excellent in competition don't typically fake kata. Why would they ?

I strongly believe that judoka, any judoka should learn and focus on judo, rather than focus on grips, or on newaza or on tachi-waza, or on pick-ups (old IJF) or on grips or on ear biting. What people especially competitive judoka need to focus on is what I would like to call "Integrative Judo" . I am not sure if anyone has used this term before

'Integrative Judo' !! Well said.

I was at a judo-seminar this weekend which focused on learning kata through fun exercises. It turns out we can teach the entire osaekomi-series of the katame-no-kata to children without problem, only without the kyoshi finesse the escapes are very relevant. I thought that was very fun. We also tried some warmup exercises using atemi-waza, which she, the sensei later revealed was techniques for both goshin-jutsu and kime-no-kata. This just prooved that kata training can be fun, even if you dont like kata that much and that we can learn kata to the children. When they grow up, the movements are built-in and taking the step to train kata will be much easier what do you guys think?

What is judo if the IJF is destroying it?

Ryvai wrote:I was at a judo-seminar this weekend which focused on learning kata through fun exercises. It turns out we can teach the entire osaekomi-series of the katame-no-kata to children without problem, only without the kyoshi finesse :)the escapes are very relevant. I thought that was very fun. We also tried some warmup exercises using atemi-waza, which she, the sensei later revealed was techniques for both goshin-jutsu and kime-no-kata. This just prooved that kata training can be fun, even if you dont like kata that much and that we can learn kata to the children. When they grow up, the movements are built-in and taking the step to train kata will be much easier :)what do you guys think?

Makes sense to me. Tomiki sensei supposedly taught elements of Koshiki-no-kata to children to introduce the advanced techniques as early as possible.

I once hosted a karate group visiting our judo dojo, and the focus of the day was newaza. the looks on their faces when they realized I expected them to do newaza along with the club was priceless - most folks don't join karatedo to get ground into the mat.

We spent about an hour running through a number osae, shime, and kansetsu waza techniques from katame-no-kata - basic positions, basic escapes - and they loved it. And some of them very clearly enjoyed chokes - almost scarily so, as they applied them with a lot of gusto. I think one element was the group, men and women, trained together a lot, for years, and they were working with folks they knew, not being crushed by strangers, so it was not as threatening.

At the end of the day some even volunteered for randori, and did a credible job with a bit of handicapping.

More directly to your point, I tried to make their experience fun and ensure that everyone got something out of it, which is pretty much the approach the club uses with kids. More as a recruiting / PR tool rather than the typical overkill, and sneaking in a good dose of techniques.

I wasn't even interested in watching most matches at the World's this year, even though they were streamed live for free! What bugs me most is the constant stoppages. How are we do see real uses of judo and ingenuity if the fighters get to restart and reboot after every single attack? And, they have to go through another round of patty cake with each matte. Thanks to the ref 80% of the match is patty cake + plop to the ground.

Ranma wrote:I wasn't even interested in watching most matches at the World's this year, even though they were streamed live for free!  What bugs me most is the constant stoppages.  How are we do see real uses of judo and ingenuity if the fighters get to restart and reboot after every single attack?  And, they have to go through another round of patty cake with each matte.  Thanks to the ref 80% of the match is patty cake + plop to the ground.

That's been standard operating procedure for like 20 years or more (read: a very long time)
It's just more in the open now with streaming of full championships rather than a match or two.

nomoremondays wrote:

Ranma wrote:I wasn't even interested in watching most matches at the World's this year, even though they were streamed live for free!  What bugs me most is the constant stoppages.  How are we do see real uses of judo and ingenuity if the fighters get to restart and reboot after every single attack?  And, they have to go through another round of patty cake with each matte.  Thanks to the ref 80% of the match is patty cake + plop to the ground.

That's been standard operating procedure for like 20 years or more (read: a very long time)
It's just more in the open now with streaming of full championships rather than a match or two.

You are putting into words what many people feel. You are talking about watching livestream. However, it's worse. I have actually attended world championships myself, paid for the trip, and while there being so bored by it that I preferred staying in my hotel room or going elsewhere and do other things. These days one wants to be there only really to support someone from your own country just to do the right thing but for the rest it's all deadwood, IJF Disco Judo. Luckily there exists video so one can in the luxury of one's home if necessary watch hours and of judo from the days judo was still judo, and this all for free, or just attend one of numerous shiai or school championships that are held at the Kodokan, soooooo much more exciting, real judo in white gi not on disco tatami, open fights, newaza, everything.

Excuse me, just a question: has new rules been approved? Because last December IJF said new rules would have been ad experimentum until World Championship.
Wolrd Championship has passed, and so?