Back in December when I wrote Hansoku Make, IJF!, I had trouble understanding why actions in certain video clips merited hansoku make. Well, apparently now, so does the IJF. According to a report by USJF Referee Development Committee Chairperson Joon Chi, twelve of the twenty-one clips that I called into question no longer deserve hansoku make. Instead, the IJF being the IJF, half of those twelve now require a shido to one of the players for what I can only guess is illegal gripping or defensive this or that. Clear on that?
To view the clips go to the IJF site. The ones that have had their outcome changed are the following:
23 No Hansokumake. Should be Shido for White
27 No Hansokumake. Should be Shido for White
29 No Hansokumake
31 No Hansokumake
39 Not Valid. Remove from samples
40 Not Valid. Remove from samples
44 No Hansokumake
46 No Hansokumake. Should be Shido for White
47 No Hansokumake
49 No Hansokumake. Should be Shido for White
50 No Hansokumake. Should be Shido for Blue
51 No Hansokumake. Should be Shido for white
Back in December, I also correctly anticipated the law of unintended consequences when I asked, “Will these new rules engender new tactics to continue to make Judo ugly? Will players develop pseudo-attacks in order to get uke to react and perform illegal leg grabs?” We didn’t have to wait very long for that to happen. Consider Travis Stevens’ (USA) own account to USA Judo on how he defeated four-time World Cup medalist Aliaksandr Stsiashenka (BLR) at the 2010 Paris Open. Down by a waza ari and yuko, Stevens explained,
. The ones that have had their outcome changed are the following:
23 No Hansokumake. Should be Shido for White
27 No Hansokumake. Should be Shido for White
29 No Hansokumake
31 No Hansokumake
39 Not Valid. Remove from samples
40 Not Valid. Remove from samples
44 No Hansokumake
46 No Hansokumake. Should be Shido for White
47 No Hansokumake
49 No Hansokumake. Should be Shido for White
50 No Hansokumake. Should be Shido for Blue
51 No Hansokumake. Should be Shido for white
Back in December, I also correctly anticipated the law of unintended consequences when I asked, “Will these new rules engender new tactics to continue to make Judo ugly? Will players develop pseudo-attacks in order to get uke to react and perform illegal leg grabs?” We didn’t have to wait very long for that to happen. Consider Travis Stevens’ (USA) own account to USA Judo on how he defeated four-time World Cup medalist Aliaksandr Stsiashenka (BLR) at the 2010 Paris Open. Down by a waza ari and yuko, Stevens explained,
I was shaking my arm out and trying to figure out how I was going to beat this guy when I remembered from watching his other fight that he was always trying to grab [Takahiro Nakai’s] leg when he stuck it out. So I decided to go with that and I was able to trick him into grabbing my leg and trying to throw me with a te guruma and it worked.
Seems like we are trading one type of ugly, penalty-based, tactical Judo for another. Not long ago, players won matches by getting their opponents to step outside the contest area. Now, we’ll have to witness guys sticking their leg out hoping that their opponent will take the bait like Aliaksandr Stsiashenka did, and perform an illegal leg grab. How exciting!
Can’t we just get back to positive, attacking Judo? Seems like the Classic Rules World Judo Championships (scheduled for March in New Rochelle NY) is trying to do just that: no penalties other than for unsportsmanlike conduct and dangerous acts, only ippon and waza ari, all grips, all postures, greater ne waza time, etc. I can’t wait for the outcome of that event.
One last word….International referees at the 2010 San Jose Buddhist Judo Club Sensei Memorial, an “E” level tournament for USA Judo, continue to mislead athletes and coaches when they say that they don’t like the new rules, but they must enforce them. While it may be true that they don’t like the new rules, it is still not true that these new rules must be enforced by the world’s national Judo federations. How do I know this? Because the IJF says so!
Judo purist have never agreed on the rules. In the 60-90’s, many players understood the rules and played them for all they were worth. An Olympic Champion (Gold Medalist) from South America won his games and did not complete a single throw. He had superior grips and understood the rules.
Then we progressed to the players that knew how to play the line (danger area). It was pure art form how they were able to get right up on the zone and attempting a falling away drop Seoi Nage.
Then we went through the late 90’s until present where matches are won/lost based on penalities. Many of the matches today are determined by the Referee’s. Have you seen the recent National Level Referee exam’s lately. The emphasis is on the penalties.
I would submit to you that Tactical Judo was always present. If you played a Judoka who liked to do the drop Seoi Nage at the edge of the mat, you engaged them in the middle of the mat. You don’t follow them, you made them fight in the middle.
The post that you quoted from Mr. Stevens goes to that very point. The player from Belarus was throwing and winning that match. He didn’t play the penalty game. I would venture to say the next time they meet he isn’t going to lose because of the rules. In his mind, he owned him because Mr. Stevens did not beat him, Belarus lost the match (which is two different things)!
Our problem is still in thinking. We think instead of fighting. We spend hours upon hours studying how to use the penalty game to beat this player or that player instead of focusing in on what our game is.
You learn all of the throws because you don’t know what will be required when your in the middle of a match.
In watching recent matches on judovison.com under the new rules, it looks like it’s 95% grip fighting…boring
Pingback: Judo Seen from a Distance - Ray Brinzer
Have they changes the numbering or the videos? Every one listed above is showing as hansoku-make.
Things change so frequently at the IJF level that it’s hard to know what is going on.