SoCal Judo is coached by Valerie Lafon Gotay and her husband Israel Hernandez.  Both are Olympians, but don’t let that fact discourage you from trying to start a club the same way.  Anyone with a good program who understands the nuts and bolts of running a business can succeed, Olympian or not.

Israel Hernandez and Valerie Lafon Gotay

After the Beijing Olympics in 2008 Valerie started a personal training company called Fitness by Val.  Israel, who had stepped away from his coaching duties with USA Judo, had become a consultant to several international sports organizations.

Once the economy started tanking, many of Valerie’s clients could no longer afford the private lessons.  Israel was getting tired of the travel that would take him away for weeks at a time.  I suggested that while adults were curtailing their activities, parents weren’t cutting back on their children’s programs.  Thus, it would make more sense to start teaching Judo as the main course, with personal training and consulting as a side dish.

Since Valerie was already working out of her garage, she got rid of some equipment, moved things around, and built a 16 x 20 ft spring-loaded platform for her mats.  Fortunately, I had some used mats that I was no longer using, so start-up costs were kept to a minimum.

From the garage...

Through word of mouth, school flyers, and her web site, membership grew slowly but surely.  It didn’t take long to figure out that many potential new members were not comfortable with the club being in someone’s house.  Even some of the members intimated that they would bring in friends once the club moved to permanent facilities.  After about fifteen months, it was obvious that membership would not grow any further until the club had larger, permanent facilities.  So, it was time to look for a permanent site.  Three months later, SoCal Judo moved into a commercial building off one of the main drags.

...to this!

Besides a small kids class, most of the SoCal Judo members had been taking private lessons from Valerie and Israel.  Private lessons offered good income, and Valerie and Israel enjoyed working one-on-one with their clients in the garage.  However, privates are labor intensive and the wear and tear for uke is substantial.  It finally dawned on both of them that they would need to wean their students off the privates and focus on larger group classes, which ultimately would generate more income.

As predicted, once SoCal Judo moved into permanent facilities, members brought in friends, prospective new members had better “attitudes” when they came to check the club out, and membership double in just three months.

With the permanent facilities, there is room for spectators and family members to watch. The garage offered no such thing.  It’s palpable that some of the parents and non-Judo playing siblings are now showing interest in doing Judo.  Parents have become more involved in the program whether they do Judo or not.  They’re ready to help run tournaments, and spread the word.  They’ve taken ownership of the club.

Kids at work!

Initially, besides offering fitness classes and Judo, the schedule was going to include no-gi classes.  That idea has been shelved for now.  Why?  Because Valerie discovered that there was a great interest in just Judo, and that she wanted to showcase straight Judo.  She told me, “There’s no shame in just teaching Judo.”  I couldn’t agree with her more.  She did admit that perhaps down the road, she might hire a coach to teach something that complements Judo, like yoga or Olympic weightlifting.  What she’s not going to be involved with is the MMA type gym.

Dojo Entrance

Road Sign

SoCal Judo is open six days a week, and offers morning, afternoon, and evening classes.  She and Israel spend more time at the club now than before, but that’s what it takes to grow the membership.  The more classes you offer, the more likely someone will join.

Her future projects include training assistant coaches for private and group lessons, developing social events for SoCal Judo families, hosting in-house tournaments and inter-club workouts, and creating a youth leadership program.

If she had to do it over, she would have left the garage sooner.  I’m just glad she finally pulled the trigger and moved.  The survival of Judo just got a decent shot in the arm.

The Grand Opening of the club is on February 25, from 1-4pm.  If you are in the neighborhood, please stop by.  Let your friends in Temecula know about it.

The IFJA is appropriately named “alliance” rather than federation or association because we don’t seek to politically control any person or entity.  We’re a support group of like-minded coaches, players and clubs.  We’re interested in making it easier for you to transition from IJF to Freestyle rules.  We want you to know that others share your IJF-generated misery.  And we definitely want Mr. Referee to see the evidence that we’re fed up with the IJF and we’re doing something about it.   Finally, we seek to empower you to take the first steps towards a more meaningful approach to Judo competition.

Steve and I have also discussed the idea that while the AAU Freestyle rules serve as the springboard for the IFJA, there’s room for other ideas.  I’m personally in favor of ippon not terminating a match.  This has historical precedence.  Syd Hoare states in A History of Judo:

One noteworthy fact about these Butokukai and Kodokan rules is the absence of any reference to Kime-waza or decisive technique.  The ippon throw is usually thought of as a real combat deciding technique, but clearly fighting for the best of three ippons sidesteps that definition.  Kano said that competition and randori rules were to test the ability of the contestants in standing and groundwork.

I’m sure that many of you have good ideas as well.  Share them with us on Facebook.  If you have run tournaments (no matter how big) with alternative rules, tell us what your players and parents think about them. Let us know how your rules are helping develop sound combative skills.

I’m sure that our efforts will succeed in making Judo relevant once again.

Well, the evidence is all around us if we are willing to take off the blinders.  Mr. Referee has a problem understanding the demise of Judo in the U.S. because he doesn’t step outside his comfort zone, which is his little world of sanctioned tournaments and referee colleagues.  He can’t hear the disgruntled voices on the martial arts discussion lists.  He doesn’t field the phone calls from prospective members who inquire whether my dojo’s curriculum is IJF rules-based.

He is not aware of the clubs that have switched over to Freestyle or AAU rules, or left Judo for submission grappling or BJJ because he doesn’t interact on Facebook.  Since he’s not the person responsible for the financial welfare of the club, he hasn’t bothered to look around to see that for every Judo club in a community, there are 4-6 BJJ and MMA clubs, not to mention the still large number of taekwondo studios.  No, all he cares about is the next sanctioned event he can referee.

What about the evidence of disenchantment within the international community?  Even if you search casually on the Internet, you’ll find that there are many international organizations that are dedicated to a Judo that is other than IJF Judo.  If you are a reader of my blog you know that the World Judo Federation was founded in August 2011.

Many of us were rooting for the WJF to adopt different competition rules, but so far we have been disappointed.  That may be changing though.  WJF is a member of The Association For International Sport for All (TAFISA), which is going to hold the TAFISA Games in July 2012.  WJF has queried its national organizations to see if there’s support for participating in these Games.  I don’t know whether Judo will participate, but one thing is certain: according to Dr. Hoglund, the WJF Vice-President, “the demonstration/competition should be for a “different Judo” than the “Olympic Judo” administrated by the IJF.”

Steve Scott from the AAU and I have been lobbying the WJF to discard the IJF rules and adopt AAU Freestyle rules or something similar.  I’ve received support from Dr. Ivica Zdravkovic from Serbia who writes:

My full support to this suggestion- freestyle judo or any similar form of FREE Judo, with more groundfight, which will attract BJJ people. I am afraid that leaders of WJF have forgotten that the initial Kodokan rules were actually “free style” rules. I run “maybe-soon-to-become” a member organization of WJF on behalf of Serbia, but we still hesitate in here, because if WJF insists on using the same rules like IJF, then it makes no sense founding new organization. I also run International Shinbudo Association (ISA) where we have large international championships and we already use rules that we call “JUDO GRAPPLING” – which is similar to freestyle judo and is a mixture of judo and BJJ.

Still not enough evidence?  Here’s another distressing clue.  Since 1970, the population of the U.S. has grown by 100 million- a 50% increase!- yet the number of registered members in our three national organizations has not budged.  In fact, the numbers are so low that these organizations are enrolling members who do other arts.

How do you explain the lack of Judo’s growth?  Either Judo is no longer appealing to Americans, or Americans are doing Judo in clubs that no longer belong to the establishment.  My vote is for both.  Judo is becoming unappealing and irrelevant mainly because it has been sissified, and many of us operate “underground.”

The cure to our irrelevance and slow death is to put back the Judo that was taken out, and do Judo the way it was intended to be played.  Have the courage to make the change within your club, and to unite with us on the national and international scene.  Let’s show Mr. Referee the evidence!

In leafing through several Marine Corps training manuals, I came across the following Judo-pertinent question which appears in Values: A User’s Guide for Discussion Leaders (MCRP 6-11B). What are some of the qualities that experts consider necessary prerequisites for an occupation to be considered a profession?  Good question, indeed.  So what makes a Marine or a Judo coach a professional?  According to the manual, this is what’s needed:

Renders a unique social service:  regardless of whether we call ourselves coaches, sensei or instructors, we are above all educators.

Relies upon intellectual skills: while we deal primarily with a physical field, ultimately it takes great skills and knowledge to develop an educational program, and business acumen to make it financially profitable.

Involves long periods of specialized training and experience:  after 4-5 years we obtain our black belt, but what happens after that is what makes or breaks the deal of professionalism.  Our goal is to have 20-40 years of experience during which we are constantly improving our technical knowledge and teaching skills.  What we shouldn’t tolerate is one year of experience 20-40 times.

Has considerable autonomy and decision making authority:  we are, or should be, the master of our dojo.  The buck starts and stops with us.

Are held personally responsible for their actions and decisions: see above.

Service is emphasized over financial reward: this is obvious when it comes to Judo.  In fact, to our detriment, we excel at distancing ourselves from financial reward.  To grow as a profession, we must not shy away from charging what we are worth.

A profession is self-governing and responsible for policing its own ranks: sadly, too many of us turn a blind eye toward improper behavior on the part of our colleagues.  We can and must do better.

Professions have their own codes of ethics which establish acceptable standards of conduct for members: while we do have a code of ethics and our national organizations pursue acts of misconduct, more could be done to preempt such acts.

So there you have it folks. Judo coaches appear to be professionals.  So, act accordingly.

Freestyle Judo uses a numerical point system, awards points for ne waza skills that receive no score under IJF rules, doesn’t ban leg grabs or Kata guruma, returns Ippon to its real hard value, and minimizes penalties by empowering referees to be more proactive.  If only these were the norms for all Judo tournaments, we wouldn’t be fighting for our survival!

Included in this year’s tournament is the National AAU Technique Tournament that will be held on Friday, March 23.  Competitors will perform ten different techniques. Scoring will be based on kuzushi, tsukuri, kake, and kime.  Sounds like a wonderful idea.

For more information about the tournament, please contact the tournament director, Ken Brink, at kbrink8952@aol.com.

In conjunction with the announcement of the National AAU Freestyle Judo Championships, Steve Scott, the main mover and shaker for AAU Freestyle Judo, just published an article, Legislating the Judo out of Judo, in his Welcome Mat Online Newsletter.  With his permission, I’m including excerpts that make a case for the AAU Freestyle rules.

What is also happening is that there are more and more judo people who are seeking alternative ways to be able to compete and not having to use the IJF rules.  That’s a big reason why AAU Judo and AAU Freestyle Judo have become popular.  Judo people want to do the full range of judo and not be limited to what some judo bureaucrat decides judo should look like.

When the IJF “banned” specific techniques such as kata guruma, etc., more than only the contest rules were changed for judo.  Obviously there are people out there who think they can’t teach what were legitimate, skillful techniques simply because a judo organization no longer allows them for competition. Instructors, in many places, have stopped teaching viable, skillful throwing techniques.  That’s something that needs to be commented on, and that’s why I’m commenting on it.

One of judo’s strengths through the years has been its ability to absorb the influences and techniques from other combat sports.  In the early days of the Kodokan, judo was known for its ability to include the skills and techniques of other jujutsu styles.  As judo progressed as an international sport, judo absorbed sambo, freestyle wrestling and a variety of national and cultural folk styles of grappling; all of which made judo the most technically advanced form of sport combat on the planet.  Now, the powers-that-be have taken judo in a new direction, technically, educationally and as a sport.  If millions of people stop doing kata guruma, morote gari and other viable judo skills (including newaza), then judo, as a whole, will suffer and suffer on a permanent basis.  If no one bothers to teach these skills, then no one will learn them and they will be lost.  Sure, there will be hold-outs who continue to teach these skills, but the mainstream of the judo community won’t and that’s bad for judo.

Then, there are those folks who actually like the way judo has evolved (or devolved) and have nothing but bad things to say about people like me who don’t do “pure judo” (to quote someone who said this recently).  To these people, “pure judo” is what is now permitted in IJF contests and any deviation from it is not to be tolerated.  If that’s the case, I contend that Prof. Kano (based on what he wrote over the years) would also be accused on not doing “pure judo” if he were alive today.

While freestyle judo isn’t perfect, we’ve tried to learn from what other groups are doing and are trying to turn judo back into the combat sport is once was, that is, before the bureaucrats legislated the judo out of judo.

To read the entire article, and to receive future articles from Steve Scott’s Welcome Mat Online Newsletter, email him at stevescottjudo@yahoo.com, and ask to be put on his mailing list.  Like me, he tells it like it is.

If you’ve followed my blog you know that I take notes from every book I read.  I’m anal about not marking up the books I read.  Instead, I note the sections I want to remember, then I type them out on my computer for easy reference later on.  It’s time consuming but well worth the effort.  Usually, notes for an enlightening book might result in 2-4 pages.  A History of Judo came in at eight pages!  A record.

In the foreword of the book the author states:

Judo still has unresolved problems such as the balance of standing work (throws) and groundwork (restraints and submission techniques).  It is useful to know about Japan’s past experience especially when trying new solutions for these old problems.

Or to paraphrase George Santayana, those who can’t remember or never knew the past history of Judo are bound to repeat it.

Thus, A History of Judo sets out to cover Kano’s battles to make Judo supreme, his take on why Judo should be primarily a standing art, the Kodokan’s efforts to become more groundwork competent, the march toward rule changes, the technical make-up of several of the jujitsu styles and early Kodokan, and how a redesigned gi transformed Judo’s inventory of techniques.

Here are some interesting facts in A History of Judo:

• Why Kano thought the real battle was not against the various jujitsu styles but against the Butokukai, a national martial arts umbrella group
• Kano’s invention of the black belt
• Initial Butokukai and Kodokan rules required two ippons to win a match
• That a second waza ari didn’t instantly add up to a full ippon and how this approached the logic of the koka (3 points), yuko (5 points), waza-ari (7 points), and ippon (10 points) scoring system introduced by the International Judo Federation in 1967
• Why Kano was against atemi waza in randori and shiai
• Why Kano adopted the face-up pin and throw while most jujitsu systems had face-down holding and throwing techniques
• There were many different sets of rules besides the Butokukai and Kodokan rules
• Most jujitsu styles had only one good throw per school
• How Kodokan Judo went from small throws to big throws
• Why kinsa was put on the scoreboard
• Kano’s “broad church” view of Judo

In closing A History of Judo, the author suggests that because of the rules a gap is emerging between the competitor and the dojo judoka, and that Judo is being led and changed by a minority- the competitors.  I think he has that almost right.  His only error is that the minority in question is not the competitors but the bureaucrats of the IJF and any national or continental organization that seeks to control Judo competition.

The author also notes that Judo is slipping away.  He suggests that rules need to be logical, well-written, and understood by the general public, which currently they are not.  Furthermore, Judo has to ensure that it is regarded as an effective martial art, and that more time is allotted to ne waza.  Unfortunately, we all know what the IJF thinks of that.  Finally, a drive is needed:

to foster spectacular high throws.  Every judoka knows that it is the big throw that excites the crowd, and yet nobody seems to use the rules to stimulate such spectacular action.  Writing in height as one of the necessary ippon throw criteria might achieve that.

By height, the author means high amplitude, which is a criterion used in wrestling.  This is something that I also have suggested.  To achieve more high amplitude throws in competitions, give them higher scores than the ‘flop and drop’ throws, which are caused by the referees’ redefining ippon and awarding soft ippons.  Eventually, a numerical scoring system will make this more feasible than our current one.

Lastly, the author encourages us to return to Kano’s three objectives of Judo: physical education, combat training, and moral training.  Amen to that!

By understanding the trials and tribulations of Judo throughout its history, we can do a better job at fixing Judo’s modern problems.  A History of Judo will undoubtedly fill in many blanks, and resolve many of the conflicts we have about our Judo.

Note: Syd Hoare’s website can be found at http://www.sydhoare.com/.  In addition to A History of Judo, he has also written the very worthy A Slow Boat to Yokohama, which chronicles his time in Japan prior to the 1964 Olympics.

If you’re like me, you’ve probably been asked many times in class or at tournaments who scored after a throw when at first glance it isn’t obvious who did what to whom.  These “gee, what just happened?” moments almost always involve a counter- I really want to say “always” involve a counter, but I may be overlooking other situations.  And they produce controversial referee decisions, none more so than the one during the Douillet-Shinohara final at the 2000 Olympics in Sydney.

The IJF rules as written are not very helpful: too little information to really understand what a counter is.  The commentaries to the rules are more useful, but they differ from referee to referee.  The upshot of the lack of clarity within the rules is that many counter techniques have been abandoned by players who fear being on the wrong end of the decision.  My own daughter Valerie abandoned her pretty awesome Ura nage counter after seeing a few wrong decisions at the international level.

Look at the controversial Douillet-Shinohara throw/counter at normal speed, and you have to admit that the referee has an almost unmanageable task.  It’s a blur with lots of action going on.  Even at slow speed, you can interpret the action to reflect your own preferences and assumptions.  Here’s a good analysis of what transpired during this fight.  The Japanese author makes a good case for Shinohara.  In his opinion, Shinohara executed a counter to Douillet’s Uchi mata, which is called Uchi mata sukashi.  That counter put Douillet clearly on his back.  Unfortunately, Shinohara also fell on his side where Douillet was throwing him.

The author suggests that Douillet’s summersault onto his back was due to Shinohara’s actions, and not Douillet’s.  I buy that.  On the other hand, he gives little credit to Douillet for putting Shinohara on his side.  I don’t believe for one moment that Shinohara on his own volition decided to land on his side.  That is not how Uchi mata sukashi is done.  Douillet put him there.  And while Douillet was knocking Shinohara down, Shinohara managed an incredible feat to turn Douillet.  Thus, I believe that Douillet threw Shinohara, but that Shinohara also threw Douillet.

It’s interesting to note that the IJF Referee Commission ultimately ruled weeks later that neither contestant should have scored as both had lost control.  Folks,  I’m at a total loss to understand how control was lost.  I guess I don’t define control the same way the IJF does.  In my opinion, both players had enough control over each other to create a throw and a counter to the throw.  The real question is what do we do with this type of a situation where it appears that both players scored?

This type of throw-counter controversy will continue if the IJF doesn’t change the rules.  It needs to better define the parameters of counters.  In addition, there are two options that should be considered.  The first one is that if it takes a whole conference of officials (referee team plus referee jury) to make a decision, then perhaps the best thing is to not award a score to any of the players.  Even with the use of video replay, the right decision is not necessarily attained.  Maybe the IJF can take a look at the Instant Replay Rule in the U.S. National Football League, where the evidence must be indisputable.  The NFL has many cameras shooting from different angles and locations- many more than what the IJF uses for international events.  Even with all the cameras employed by the NFL, the video doesn’t always get the best view of the action to give a sound and fair decision.

The second option is to consider awarding two scores, which is not something that has been discussed much, if ever, as far as I know.  Judo loves the idea of only one player getting a score, even if it turns out to be the wrong player.  I believe a two-score decision is more fair than awarding a score to the wrong person.  In the Douillet-Shinohara case, Douillet gets a yuko and Shinohara gets an ippon.  And this is precisely how the referee team on the mat split the scores.

The other benefit of the two-score option is that, as we try to live up to the self-defense aspect of Judo, it compels players to pay more attention to the landing after a throw.  Case in point: you threw me with O uchi gari for a score, maybe even an ippon.  I countered you, slammed you on your back as I was landing, and then had the audacity to pin you.  Because of the terminal ippon in Judo, the reality of a fight vanishes.  Why don’t I get a score for the counter?  You should have been able to throw me and remain in a stable, dominating position so I couldn’t turn you to your back.

Now, you tell me.  Who is the better fighter?  The one who pulled the trigger first or the one who wound up at the end in the better position?  The reasonable man might suggest that latter.

On the occasions that I have talked to or emailed coaches about running tournaments, I always offer up the idea of running smaller, in-house tournaments rather than trying to rent a facility and hope for the best.  Their first reaction is to spout all the reasons why they can’t run a tournament within their club.  What about the safety area? What about referees?  What about this, what about that?  Good grief!

Then, I get the impression that an in-house tournament really isn’t a real tournament. Perhaps it’s even beyond their dignity to run an in-house event while other coaches are running “real” tournaments.

Finally, the last reason for not doing an in-house tournament is the suggestion that there’s more money to be made with a larger tournament, which is true most of the time.  It’s also true is that you can lose your shirt if attendance is not great.

While I’m absolutely not against making money by hosting tournaments, it’s more important that tournaments serve the welfare of the athletes, and aid in their development as good players and citizens.  Therefore, you get a bigger return on your investment by hosting 3-4 in-house tournaments a year than one big annual event.

For many of us, the dream of running a large tournament is not realistic.  But if you really do want to run a large tournament, then you should use the same business model I suggest to coaches who want a permanent facility for their Judo program: start small, develop a clientele, then expand like any other business would. Starting small implies starting with an in-house event.

Most clubs are large enough to host small, in-house tournaments.  The mat in my facility is 33 x 42ft or 10 x 13m, which is large enough to run two competition areas.  The facility itself is large enough to have three- and four-tier bleachers inside, and a 3-tier outside the roll-up door.  My largest event had 125 competitors, and more spectators than competitors.  Needless to say that when you pack that many people into 2,400 sq ft, the atmosphere is awesome.  Naturally, tournaments can be run on smaller mats that might only allow for one competition area.  But if you run a ne waza tournament, more competition areas can be used.

Jim Hrbek, my good friend from San Antonio, Texas is running two in-house tournaments on the same day.   He’s calling it a “doubleheader.”  The first event is Rapid Fire, which features 1-minute matches and only standing techniques.  The second event is Mat Madness, which is a ne waza only tournament.  Great idea, isn’t it?

I’ve seen a photo taken in the 1920s of a group of players standing around a small mat outdoors at the occasion of a Judo “tournament”  in San Diego, California.  I can remember Murakami sensei from Los Angeles reminiscing about traveling down to San Diego, about 110 miles away from Los Angeles, in order to compete against Kawaishi’s club on a canvass-covered mat filled with Lord knows what.  It worked back then, why snub the idea today?  By the way, Kawaishi soon departed California and headed to Europe where he became the father of French Judo.

The benefits of in-house tournaments are staggering if you take a few moments to think about them.

• Little to no start-up costs
• Not labor intensive to set up since the mats are already there
• No extra cost to rent a gym
• Cheaper entry fees (I hope) because you have no extra overhead
• Smaller area creates a more exciting ambience
• Smaller turnout allows you to provide more matches per player
• Generally takes less time to run an in-house event: everyone likes this!
• Great opportunity to experiment with different rules to increase experience
• Can provide tournaments more often for your own players
• You’re assured that more of your players will compete since it’s at home

In Southern California, I have developed a small tournament circuit.  My club hosts four tournaments a year.  My daughter, whose club just moved from her garage, now has a permanent facility large enough to host in-house tournaments.  Another club about two hours away can also host in-house tournaments. The coach has suggested we run a ne waza tournament since her area is slightly smaller than mine and my daughter’s.  We all have spring-loaded mats.  None of us will use IJF rules.

I’d like to see us compete once a month.  In-house development tournaments are the way to go from every perspective: cost, rules, enthusiasm, ease of operation, and greater skill development.  I don’t understand why coaches are so wrapped up in thinking big, when the better option is thinking small.

The new rule was made first of all due to the behavior of coaches in the last period, who seem not to understand that like in any sport, in judo too, the athletes are the main actors, not the coaches, with all due respect for coaches, as I also used to be one of them. Also, at the basis of this decision is the IJF strategy, according to which we want to promote the image of elite athletes and to develop and free the creativity of all the athletes on the tatami.

The athletes are not slaves or robots and many times, we have noticed that they were dominated by their coaches in a way that is not in accordance with what the relationships between athletes and coaches should be. Moreover, we took the initiative to develop the personality of the athletes on the tatami and outside the tatami, according to the principles of our sport.

Best regards,

Mr. Barta’s response was much longer and even included a video clip featuring a Czech coach swearing bloody murder at his athlete, who also happened to be his daughter.  Even with my limited knowledge of Slovak, which is similar to Czech, I could make out the word for “prostitute” which apparently is also used for the f-word in Czech.  A friend of mine was nice enough to translate the minute and a half clip.  It was the most foul language that I had ever heard from any other coach in any language that I know.  Since I can only handle three, maybe this foul language is more prevalent than I would think.

Messrs. Vizer and Barta are concerned about Judo’s image within the international sporting community and the general public at large.  Huge sums of money are being spent to publicize the educational benefits of Judo and to project a global image of our sport that is distinct from other combat sports.  We should all be thankful that the IJF has assumed this responsibility.

It’s apparent the IJF wants to redefine what coaching is, and what support athletes should receive during matches.  Mr. Barta goes to great lengths to note that athletes in other sports- swimming, tennis, cycling, golf, figure skating, skiing and gymnastics- seem to perform well without the benefit of match/contest coaching. “I strongly believe that coaching is to prepare the athlete during the training period, before the competition and finally before the contest,” he states.

Concentration is a word that is creeping into the conversation more and more.  Mr. Barta further explains his position:

And finally to give the advice during the contest when there is time to listen and to concentrate for very easy and direct important message. This is exactly the messages which should be transmitted when there is relatively quiet part of the contest.

The fight itself is not only the moment of maximum concentration for the athlete but also for coach to know what to say and how to advise when next MATE.

Lastly, the IJF Sports Director rages against what he perceives, often rightfully so, of negative coaching and attempts to influence the outcome of matches.  Specifically, he cites the following instances of infringement to the coaches’ Code of Conduct:

• Calling for the opponent to be penalized for passivity
• Announcing the score even before the referee does so
• Calling for a lower score for the opponent
• Trying to influence a decision already taken by the referee

If you’re like me, you’re probably fed up with coaches who scream shido blue/white for no apparent reason other than to influence without merit the referee.  On the other hand, at times, more often than should be accepted, when shido is not called, the referee team needs to be prompted.  It goes without saying that this “shido blue” tactic wouldn’t have to be used if shido for stalling weren’t such a big factor in winning matches, or if referees could issue verbal feedback on the fly during the match to prevent having to penalize players.  Proactive refereeing is what AAU and Freestyle Judo rules allow for, and it makes for a wonderful flow of technical Judo rather than the ugly tactical Judo we are subjected to.

All coaches are being punished for what the ten percent of uneducated rogue coaches do.  Will the new rules solve the bad behavior, or will all coaching eventually be disallowed because some coaches still don’t get it?  If verbal communication is forbidden, will coaches resort to creating non-verbal communication codes with their athletes?  Could the IJF also ban this non-verbal communication if it occurs between hajime and matte?

Maybe what needs to happen is simply to expand the Code of Conduct and make it more specific.  The current document is rather generic and vague. A list of examples of inappropriate comments would go a long way to solving the “coaching” problem.  Of course, better refereeing and simplified rules with fewer “grey areas” subject to interpretation would result in fewer outbursts from coaches.

A final word on the subject.  In the past, we have used coach liaisons at U.S. tournaments with great success, although the idea has been dropped from our major events because we now have referee juries.  I had the privilege of acting as a coach liaison during both the U.S. Senior Nationals and the U.S. Open.  The role of the liaison was to keep coaches in check and to approach the head referee when coaches had problems with decisions on the mat.  We found out that when coaches are directed to tone down their behavior by their peers- active coaches, not federation officials who were once coaches- there is less backlash and things run more smoothly.

While I really don’t care what the IJF does at the international level, I must voice my concerns because things roll downhill pretty quickly from the international level, immersing us at the local level with bans and restrictions that hamper the national development of Judo.  I can’t get USA Judo to confirm in writing what it will do, but so far it appears that the matside ban will only be enforced at international events held in the U.S.  Nonetheless, to prevent even the thought of implementing the ban at all levels, I suggest that we revive the coach liaison position at most events.  Come to think of it, since my players no longer attend tournaments with IJF rules, I’d be a prime candidate for being the coach liaison since I would have no coaching conflicts!

We take it for granted that a student knows how to “cut it out”, or “focus”, or “pay attention.”  Sometimes he does, but sometimes he doesn’t.  The truth is that he’s probably not been taught how to pay attention or focus.  In this case, the teacher is partly responsible for the student’s being incompetent.  While we have exhorted our students to not do this and not do that, often we have failed to provide them with specific, concrete, sequential, and observable directions that will enable them to overcome their incompetence.

If your junior class is anything like mine, you have kids who stare out at space, play with their toes making sure all ten are still there, pick their nose, or talk and play grab-ass with their next door neighbor.  Although we are told kids are capable of multi-tasking- kids can apparently read, watch TV or listen to music, and do homework all at the same time- my experience indicates that they suck at learning Judo when they are multi-tasking: in other words, when they are not paying attention because they are counting toes, picking their nose, or messing around with another child.

While I have good control over my kids when I’m demonstrating and talking, there’s always room for improvement.  I’ll admit that I have failed to directly teach them how to pay attention.  That’s about to change.  “Sit up straight in seiza, hands on your thighs.”  This should prevent counting toes, picking noses, and messing around.  “Eyes on me no matter where I move.”  That’s helps junior focus on the actual Judo demonstration. “No talking while I’m demonstrating.”  It’s hard to listen to someone, and more importantly hard to comprehend what he is saying, when you are talking at the same time, right?

While we are on the subject of teaching kids how to pay attention, we also need to teach them how to improve each and every practice session.  I have a few players in my class who think they’re doing a great job during practice.  They honestly think they’re working hard to become better at Judo.  The problem is that they don’t realize how little Judo they actually do in an average session.

While I have mentioned to them that you get better the more repetitions you do- garbage in, garbage out- it hasn’t been enough to make them change their work output.  Consequently, I have asked their parents to videotape them during practice so they can see how much laughing, giggling, and walking around in a daze goes on, and how little Judo is performed.  I hope that seeing is believing.

To help our students overcome incompetence, we coaches and teachers need to be more competent at giving directions.  Teach students what to do and how to do it, even when we assume they know how to.