Oh Boy! MORE NEW RULES!

Another year, another set of rules...And the introduction of the “Super Ippon!”  Not kidding.

Oy.  Back at it.  The IJF has published yet another suite of changes to their rules. This isn't breaking news, mind you, but I got my first dose of first-hand experience this weekend at the Takemori Open.  So here is my quick summary of the changes:

Corner judges are replaced by cameras.

Description: Basically, they will now have the two people that used to be corner judges watching a laptop or TV. The main purpose, as stated by the IJF, is to make judo work better on TV. Corner judges "do not add to the presentation," can block some camera angles, and – when they disagree – "appear incompetent." So the guys watching TV are only supposed to voice their opinion under "exceptional circumstances."  Okay. It appears that one side effect of this one was to introduce instant replay at international competitions. That's fine.

Additional Commentary: While fine for international tournaments, local tournaments shouldn’t use this. Locals unfortunately don't need to worry about TV coverage, and the new equipment seems like an unnecessary expense. Worse, local tournaments are used to train referees. Thus, if you want to have an accurately called contest, intervention will be needed much more frequently than just in “exceptional circumstances”.  The result is that you have much more frequent verbal communication with folks off of the mat and it gets to be a real mess.

Returning to the old-school definition of Ippon.

Description: Over time the interpretation of "Ippon" has gotten more and more liberal. The definition is always required throwing the opponent largely on the back with speed, force, and control. The interpretation, however, allowed for lesser and lesser throws to receive the Ippon award.  I once saw a guy land on his belly, where Tori didn’t even have a grip on him anymore, and have Ippon called against him.  So they’re correcting that. They did make an exception for something that they're calling a "Super Ippon": this is basically where one guy throws the Bejesus out of the other one but the thrown guy may land on his side instead of on his back.  If it's super fast, super hard and with super control, they will make an exception on the "largely on the back" rule.  I agree with my friend Rob that this is been misnamed, however; it should have been the super Waza Ari.

Additional Commentary: Love this guidance. That said, they certainly didn't use it this most recent tournament. I think it will take years of reeducation to get a true Ippon back to the local level. But I'm glad the IJF noticed.

If you land in the bridge position, you automatically lose.

Description: Just clarifying the earlier rule. The purpose is to discourage unsafe behaviors. Fine with me.

While you will still lose after receiving your fourth penalty, the earlier penalties award no points.

Description: The purpose of this one was to give less of an incentive for players to try to get their opponents penalized.  So in the old world where your second Shido gave your opponent a Yuko, now it gives him nothing. Neither does your second or third. Your fourth one, however, will still result in a Hansoku Make (disqualification). Penalties do, however, play a tie-breaking role. So if you reach the end of the match with a tied score, and one person has fewer penalties and the other, the person with fewer penalties wins. Accordingly, any penalty in “Golden Score” time results in a win for the other guy.

Two-handed grip breaks, leg-assisted grip breaks, and “striking-eque” grip breaks earn you a Shido.

Description: The idea here is to discourage defensiveness and facilitate offense. The grip breaks that they have made illegal are viewed, it seems, as purely defensive movements. 

Additional Commentary: I don't have as big a problem with grip fighting as some. I also think that there's an art to defense and an art to grip-fighting and I would hate to lose that.

You must attack almost immediately after cross-gripping, belt-grabbing, or same-side gripping , else get a Shido.

Description: Continuing with the theme of discouraging defense, they removed the buffer time that you could go without attack.

Additional Commentary: Same answer as above.

There is a shorter fuse for not engaging.

Description: If you avoid engaging your opponent, or you grip your opponent solely to keep them from gripping you, then you get a Shido.

No more warnings for bear hugs – now it’s an automatic Shido.

Description: I guess this one is to protect the "aesthetic" of judo competition. I don't like it though; it keeps people from learning how to avoid and how to defend the bear hug.

No touching below the belt (with arms or hands) ever.  Not in combinations, not in defense. Hansoku Make (instant DQ).

Description: A worsening of the worst Judo rule ever.  One of the comments on this rule by the IJF read “It is agreed and understood that a greater degree of time will be allowed in Ne Waza because of the loss of transition time from Tachi Waza to Ne Waza.”

Additional Commentary: I have a few other posts about how much I dislike this rule’s predecessor, and this one is even worse.  In addition to all of the reasons for disliking the old rule, a new reason to dislike it I is that it will require a massive reeducation of referees in order for a longer transition to Ne Waza to be allowed. So groundwork is further neutered at the local level.  Which means it will be taught less, which means it wither – which makes our Art less effective. The same goes for leg attacks (e.g., Kata Guruma, Morote Gari, many versions of Ko Uchi Makikomi). The thing that kills me is that none of the referees I've spoken to like the rule, none of the competitors like the rule. So why do the local tournaments keep using it?

Once Osaekomi is called,the guy on bottom can no longer escape by moving everybody out-of-bounds.

Description: The ref now has the discretion to call an Ippon for the other guy if bottom guy is just blatantly trying to pull the person out of bounds..

Additional Commentary: This is great. Fleeing isn't allowed on the feet, so it shouldn't be allowed on the ground, either.

Similarly, effective Kansetsu Waza and Shime Waza won’t be ended just because the contestants move out-of-bounds..

10 seconds gives you a Yuko, 15 seconds gets you Waza Ari, and 20 seconds get you an Ippon.

Additional Commentary: Ippon holds were 50% longer when I started Judo…   I guess 20 is as arbitrary as 30…

Everyone has to bow at the edge of the mat and to each other.

Description: Additionally, shaking or slapping hands is expressly discouraged, though there is no penalty for this.  It isn’t clear what will happen if someone doesn’t adequately bow… Will it be considered a forfeit?

Additional Commentary: My guess is that this is another case of the Frenchies trying to stick it to the Muslims (as some Muslims feel religiously prohibited from bowing). In my opinion, as long as respect of some sort is shown to the contest area and to the opponent, then the spirit of the bowing gesture is upheld.  That said, I have no problem with bowing.

Matches will no longer be decided by referees' choice (Hantei).  There is no time limit for the sudden death period – the “Golden Score.”

“Crushing” (essentially using your grip solely to prevent your opponent from attacking) can get you a penalty.

Description: “Defensive crushing” will get you a Shido. The intent of this rule is that you should try to win via good Judo rather than just try not to lose. They specify, however, that “positive” crushing is okay, and that the “crushee” can actually get a Shido.

Additional Commentary: The intent is fine.  The effect of this rule, however, is not as fine: people will not learn to deal effectively with attackers who try to drag or sling them around, so it weakens the effectiveness of Judo.  As for the effect of the positive crushing rule (that the “crushee” gets penalized), I guess that is to prevent people from flopping and killing time, or just to weakly enter groundwork.

Weigh-ins are to be at 7 PM the night before contest.

Description: This is an attempt to mitigate the harmful effects of cutting weight. They call this rule change an "experiment" during which time they will try to discern whether or not it's having its intended effect.

Additional Commentary: I totally agree with the objective of trying to negate the harmful effects of cutting weight. I'm not sure this is the best way to do it, however. It seems to me that this will allow more drastic weight cutting by giving a person greater time to recover before the contest. Calling this an experiment, however, is fair because I don't know that my answer is the right one. I hope we’ll see.

  

One final comment on all of these rules is that these are IJF rules for IJF-sanctioned tournaments. Local tournaments don't have to use them. There are many rules that I oppose philosophically, but I understand if local tournament directors don't share my opposition. Other rules, however, are simply unsuitable for local-level tournament with local-level referees.  Directors should apply a filter.

There are some good videos explaining some rules at this site.

Cross-Training: Brazilian Jiu Jitsu

Not sure if there will be a "cross training" series, but I wanted to get some thoughts out of my head about the good and bad side of BJJ from a Judoka's perspective.  This isn't one of those "Judo is soooo much better than BJJ" type articles.  I enjoy both, and practice both.  I'm not one of those guys that think that BJJ stands for "Basically Just Judo" either.  They are siblings...  fraternal twins, maybe.  They have the same genetic base, but they look and act differently.  Obviously, there is a huge overlap in the technique base, but the contest rule differences, both in terms of permissible techniques and encouraged/discouraged behaviors leads to make them cultivate different techniques and behaviors, and makes them distinct arts.

So, with no further ado, here are my thoughts on what a Judoka should and shouldn't take from BJJ, and vice versa.

Good things that Judo can take from BJJ:

• Ground Defense:  You will generally see a broader range of attacks when rolling in BJJ than in Judo randori, and you'll get more groundwork in than your typical Judo class. Together, this allows you to really build a great "Spidey Sense" in your groundwork.  "Wait, Chad.  You meant groundwork in general, right?"  Well, yes, but read on... 
• Ground Offense... ish:  To be sure, there is a wide world of offense in BJJ.  And despite what some "Judo is best at everything" people may say, the BJJ community does have a better-developed ground game than the Judo community.  But the Judoka must be selective here, because if something takes too long to develop, it may not be allowed to develop (you'll get stood back up), and therefore shouldn't be at the top of your list.  
• Exposure:  While it won't all be directly applicable to your Judo, it will augment your martial skills, and can expose some holes in an area where you may feel very confident.  Leg locks and other joint locks and nobody to stand you back up... you'll see different stuff than in your average Judo class.

Good things BJJ can take from Judo:

• Decisiveness:  There is certainly decisiveness in BJJ...  Lord knows I have been on the receiving end of some decisive chokes and arm-bars.  But if you are a BJJer that finds yourself consistently taking the long road to victory (or long road to defeat), Judo will force you to be snappy, both standing and on the ground.  That, to me, is the good side of getting stood up if you don't make constant progress on the ground (though I still don't like it).
• Standing game:  Given that most of your time in BJJ is going to be spent doing groundwork (and in some places, more than 99% of the time is spent on the ground), Judo will help you develop a standing game.  But just like Judoka need to be selective about what ground techniques and habits they pick up from BJJ, BJJers need to be selective about what standing techniques and habits they pick up from Judo.  Because a Judo match can end with one good throw, Judoka can develop throws that don't leave them in a good position for groundwork.  So don't let that be you.
• Position before submission:  In Judo, you can win with a 25-second pin.  This generally leads one in Judo to secure a sound pin as a first concern, and seek a submission secondarily.  This can have a down-side, of course, but I think it is generally a good practice to secure control of your opponent before attempting to tap the sucker.  Nothing really revolutionary there.
• Safe falling:  Yeah, yeah... "Falling is not a reason to do Judo."  Blah blah blah.  If you are training to win the Olympics, sure.  Fine.  But I think it is one of the most useful self-defense techniques you will learn.  Most folks won't get in to a physical confrontation that really requires self-defense, but most folks will fall multiple times in their life.  And for the BJJer, you can take the stun-factor out of the big throws - that could lead to a loss - if you have been dumped a few thousand times...  =:>

But there are bad habits, too...  Bad habits that Judo can take from BJJ:

• Reliance on slow-to-develop techniques:  As mentioned, you need to be decisive in Judo, and, especially when you are on the ground, you need to constantly make progress.  Accordingly, you need to pick which clubs are in your bag, so to speak - and make sure your go-tos are the ones that have a high chance of working, and working quickly.
• Reliance on illegal techniques:  Leg locks, hands to the face, etc...  All quite useful, but, if you are planning to compete in Judo, you need to be mindful that these techniques aren't a linchpin in your game.  You'll likely hesitate, or worse, move forward with the technique and get penalized or kicked out, entirely.
• Allowing roll-overs:  BJJ is A-OK with allowing a mounted opponent to roll over.  Because then you can take the back (getting more points), and have an easier time tapping them.  But in Judo, you may have just gone from a likely win (having pinned your opponent), to a situation where you will likely have to stand up.  I'm not the best in the world.  Lots of people can eventually submit me if they take my back.  But I haven't come across many folks that can tap me in a time frame that Judo would allow.  So fight for your pin, and don't let the bad guy roll.

Bad habits that BJJ can take from Judo:

• Turtling:  It's related to my previous point.  Judoka are generally more worried about a pin than a submission, and so rolling over and turtling is a common "defense."  Personally, I would like to see this penalized in Judo, because it is an absolutely terrible habit from a self-defense perspective.  But it does make sense with the common Judo rule set.  So don't let yourself adopt this particular bad habit.  You'll get your back taken.
• Throws that don't end well:  If a Judoka gets an Ippon (winning throw) in a contest, then it doesn't matter what happens next:  the guy who was just thrown could roll him over, pin him, and choke him out in less than a second - but the thrower still won.  And because tournament rules tend to dictate training behavior, many Judoka tend to train this way.  But you can't win just from a throw in BJJ, so you'd better make sure that you are positioned well for groundwork at the end of your throw.
• Overcommitment:  Similar to the last point, but applied to the ground.  The Judoka is encouraged to take more risks than the BJJer  (BJJka?), because if he gets into trouble, he only needs to stop progress for a short time to get bailed out - stood back up by the ref.  In BJJ, if you get into trouble... you're in trouble.
• Settling for a pin:  As mentioned, you can win with a pin in Judo, but not in BJJ.  Well, you can, sort of... if you are ahead in points, you could ride things out with your opponent.   And I am a big fan of not forcing things... let your opponent make the mistake in his attempt to escape your pin.  Just be ready to snatch that submission...

So... what did I miss?

Interview With USJA President Gary Goltz (Part 2 of 2)

Here's part 2 of the interview with Gary Goltz, the current President of the USJA.  In this part, we get a bit more in to what's going on with Judo in the US vs. the rest of the world, and how it can be grown...  If you didn't catch it, you can find part 1 here.

CM:  I recall that you mentioned that there were ~25,000 registered judoka in the US. About how many of those 25,000 are registered with the USJA?
GG: We have about 9,000 active members and about 20,000 life members - though many of those are inactive. The USJF and USA Judo have about the same in terms of active members.  There are many people who are members in more than one organization, which is how we arrived at the 25,000 total amount. If you count some of the other groups that aren't recognized by the NGB there may be about 30,000.

CM: When did US Judo participation peak, and how many folks were practicing at that point?
GG:  Right after WWII during the 50's and early 60's, judo was at an all-time high in this country perhaps twice the current amount.
CM:  So while we've seen the US population almost double, we've seen judo participation cut in half.
GG:  Exactly. During the 50's and 60's, we were the martial art. There wasn't that much karate, tae kwon do, aikido, kung fu, or any Brazilian jiu jitsu. You know, when I started judo in 1965, I watched the Green Hornet with Bruce Lee and I said to my dad I want to learn how to do that stuff... The next thing I know, I'm at my local Y enrolled in a 10 week judo class as that was all they had back then!

CM:  Do you think that the competition from other martial arts has pushed Judo to the background, or is it something that we in the Judo community have done to ourselves?
GG:  I think the judo community can take much of the credit. In the early days of judo, there was an aversion to anyone trying to do it professionally or trying to make money.  Some great players like Gene LeBell were ostracized and banned from tournaments.
Karate schools on the other hand spread like wild flowers into the strip malls and many successful businesses were born. Stars like Chuck Norris and the striking arts got more popular while judo moved to the back-burner.
Since we never got connected to high schools like wrestling, we really had nowhere to go. Judo wasn't expanding commercially or non-commercially.


CM:  It's true... there are a ton of clubs - I'll even include myself in this - that just aren't trying to make any money.  You don't seem to see that in other arts.  Where did this sentiment come from?
GG:  The old AAU (Amateur Athletic Union) as I understand it was based on the notion that only amateurs could compete in events like the Olympics.  And they used to govern judo along with the JBBF (now the USJF).

CM: Do you have any sense for what is going on with Judo in other countries... France, Japan, Brazil?  Have they been growing, shrinking, or holding steady?
GG:  I'd say that judo is still growing. It's very popular in those countries, and in the former Soviet Republics - Russia, Georgia, etc., it's obviously popular in Asian as well as Central and South America, even in Africa judo is gaining ground.

CM:  So why is judo growing in these places and shrinking here?
GG:  I think we may have bottomed out and are starting to come back. One of the things that we're seeing is mixed martial arts schools and Brazilian jiu jitsu academies have begun embracing judo. In the USJA, we're trying to broaden our appeal too promoting judo as a great way to stay in shape while and learning self-defense skills.


CM:  So why do you think that Judo is so much more popular in France (and most of the rest of the world) than it is here?  Can it all be explained by cultural factors, or are there things that we should learn from their Judo community to apply here in the States?  And if so, what?
GG:  There are several reasons: They have national organizations that are supported by their governments in terms of money and authority. They have a single national standard (the judo that you learn over there is much more consistent). Their tournaments are televised and they've had a lot of success at the Olympics. Another thing that the French and the British did was from the beginning they took what they learned from the Japanese and interpreted in a manner oriented towards Westerners. For something to succeed in America, it has to be American... we have to make it a part of the American culture. If you look at Karate, they have done a great job of that. Also in other countries competition is geared towards teenagers and young adults. Here in the states we tend to push judo like a Pop Warner football league on kids. We need to be smarter in our marketing approach understanding that people come to judo for different reasons and that not everyone wants to be an Olympic champion.


CM:  Changing gears a bit - or maybe not - what is your personal opinion of the IJF rules, particularly the latest leg-grab changes? 
GG:  After these rules went into effect, I became much more serious about refereeing. I didn't want to be teaching my students something that would get them disqualified in a tournament. I have mixed feelings about the new rules. I like them in some ways - the quality of judo that you see in tournaments is better overall. You really are seeing more quality throws. On the other hand, I think that leg grabs are important. When I started judo, I did it for self-defense. Well, people grab your legs in a fight and you need to know how to handle that situation. There has to be some moderation where you encourage good stand-up judo, but you don't take so much out of it that it becomes unrealistic. Another thing for people to realize is that there are now many grappling and no gi tournaments outside of the main stream of judo which provide opportunities to still use these leg grabs, pick-ups, and even some striking techniques.
CM:  That's true, but like you said, people are going to end up teaching what is legal in a tournament, and most coaches are only sending people to IJF-rules judo tournaments.  So tournament-legal judo is all they are being taught, and that, then, doesn't work well in these other competitions...
GG:  You can always teach your students based on what tournament they are going to. Versatile instructors should be able to make the adjustments to fit each situation.


CM:  So if you could design the rules, how would you do it?  What would the Gary Goltz judo rules be?
GG:  Instead of hansokumake [immediate disqualification] for the leg grabs, I'd make it a shido [a lesser penalty]. It’s pretty devastating to hansokumake somebody because they got excited and grabbed a leg. It's too extreme and shido should be used as a warning to put the rule back in their head and let them continue with the match.

CM:  Does the USJA sanction tournaments that don't use IJF rules?
GG:  It depends on the situation. If they just want to use just ippon and wazari like in the olden days sure, we'll sanction it. However, if somebody wants to allow kawazu gake [leg entanglement, a dangerous banned technique] then we won't sanction it. It really depends on whether we can in good consciousness support it and provide liability insurance.
CM:  But it's not a matter of "If it's not IJF, we won't sanction it"...  But if it's safe and reasonable...
GG:  Almost all tournaments deviate from the IJF standards in one way or another. For example, the IJF requires a huge mat area for the Olympics, but at most local events they use smaller mat areas. So there are almost always some modifications.  Bottom-line is if it's dangerous regardless of the IJF rules, we won't sanction it.


CM:  What is the significance of IJF rules to most US Judoka?  That is, should we pay any attention to them, given that most of us will never compete in an international tournament? 
GG:  Well, they are relevant because most tournaments in the US use those rules. But like we said most competitors don’t think about competing in the Olympics and world championships. They compete within their local area and that's it. These are the people the USJA needs to focus on. To this end, the USJA and USJF formed its Grassroots Judo alliance with the goal of fostering participation in all aspects of judo. 

CM:  When I started Judo in the 90s, it seemed that the 3 big Judo organizations were constantly competing with one another, likely to the detriment of Judo.  I know nowadays, I can at least compete in a USJF-sanctioned tournament with my USJA membership, so it seems that there is at least some level of cooperation.  Are the other examples of such cooperation?  What, if anything, should we expect in the future?
GG:  Absolutely. The USJA and USJF the Grassroots Judo alliance now encompasses our joint Junior Nationals, Winter Nationals, and several other events. Another thing we’re doing is the USJA, USJF, along with USA Judo are communicating regularly to improve the brand of judo and we're working on a joint marketing initiative. The best part is that now if we have a problem with each other we feel comfortable picking up the phone and calling one of our counterparts to work it out.
CM:  That's great.  Are there any other examples?
GG:  Yes. Last year we issued a Triad Positioning Statement, where we said that our goal was to grow judo in the US. We no longer see pilfering members from each other’s organizations as a real growth strategy. We now defined "growing judo" as getting more (new) feet on the mat.


CM:  Is there a need for 3(+) organizations?  Do any of them serve a unique role, other than USA Judo and it's affiliation with the Olympics?  Is it better for the US to have many organizations tocan compete and hopefully innovate, or do you feel that we could get more done under one big umbrella?
GG:  The American Way is that we American's like choices. When you go to buy a car, you can look at Ford, at a Chevy, and many others. The USJA and USJF are working well together now and learning from each other. We each have different areas of expertise. I think that having the USJA and the USJF focused on growing Grassroots Judo™ with USA Judo focused on taking our best athletes to prepare them for the Olympics and the world championships as a viable plan. It would probably be cheaper if there was a single organization as there would be less overhead. But we're only going to get there by taking baby steps, building trust and letting nature take its course.


CM:  Thanks a ton for your time, Gary.  I really appreciate it.

So How Would I Run a Tournament?

Alright... so if the IJF rules are awful, what does a good tournament look like? 

In a recent post I pondered what the underlying principles should be as I seek to create a tournament...  The very brief summary is that tournaments should foster:

• Self-improvement
• Self-assessment (per Gerry Lafon's comment)
• Innovation within the Art
• A sense of community within the Art
• Publicity - that is, a connection with the non-Judo public
• The core principles of Judo

So, using that as a touchstone, here is what I came up with:

Lose the Japanese:  Let's start with what I imagine will be the most controversial.  As we want to use the tournament to help publicize the sport, we should not use a foreign language to narrate the competition. Ippon is the only thing I think we should keep in Japanese; it's part of the Judo brand, and, in any case, it will be pretty clear to the non-savvy onlooker what just happened (if not why it happened).  We should even replace "Hajime" and "Matte" with "Go" and "Stop".  It doesn't change a tiny bit about the competition itself, which is, after all, the main thing.  And I'm just talking about tournaments, here.  Feel free to keep the Japanese in classes.

Have a Flyer: Not at all controversial, but sticking with the publicity/community outreach thing, tournament hosts should create a 1-page flyer that goes briefly over the rules, how to win, how the tournament is structured (e.g., double elimination, round robin, etc), perhaps which divisions are on which mats, and some basic info about what Judo is.  And of course, don't forget to tell mention when and where they can find a dojo.  Make the flyer succinct and interesting.  Catchy, in other words.

No Harm, No Foul:  If it isn't unsafe, and it doesn't clearly oppose the spirit of Judo (which is a nebulous thing, I understand), keep it legal.  Weird grips?  No harm -  legal.  Head-diving?  Much greater risk of neck injury - illegal.  Leg picks and other things that involve grabbing pants/legs?  It's embarrassing that I even have to ask - legal. 

Bring Back Dakiage - Sort of: Dakiage, if you aren't familiar, is basically "the slam."  Quinton "Rampage" Jackson used to be famous for this, as seen here (@ around 40 seconds in):   Now, obviously slamming isn't safe - there are no good breakfalls from that, and after your head hits the mat, it will often bounce into the slammer's head for a guaranteed KO.  But one of the old rules went something like "if you can get them up to shoulder level with control, you win."  I like this rule.  They got rid of it, and now have a rule where if you can make the guy on bottom break contact with the mat, then you both have to start back on your feet. The rule isn't completely useless, but does lead to silly behaviors like "escaping" an arm-bar by lifting your opponent a centimeter off the mat. So, here's what I think: 1) If you can't get your opponent higher than your knee, the action continues, because it is hard to do a ton of damage to someone from that height (I think). 2) If you can get your opponent up to shoulder height in one decisive movement (with control), you win. Because they are basically pwned at that point (for my older readers: "pwned" in this case = finished). 3) If you get past the knee, but not to the shoulder (in ONE DECISIVE MOVEMENT), you just start back from standing. Reasoning is there is a risk of being spiked on your head, but it isn't guaranteed doom like shoulder height would be. And most importantly, 4) If you actually slam or spike your opponent - even if by accident, you are thrown out. This is to encourage control. By making this change, we would a) bring back a great technique that is super-duper useful, b) eliminate some more of the garbage, by-product behaviors like exposing yourself to an arm bar in order to stand your opponent back up, and c) possibly improve the quality of people's guard

Use Points:  So here's another controversial one.  I don't have a huge issue with the Waza-ari and Yuko frameworks (or, in my no-Japanese version, "Big Score" and "Minor Score"), but I also don't think that it really adds that much to a judo competition.  And people intuitively understand points.  So, if it isn't adding that much, and a change will make it easier to grasp, why not?  Now, I'm honestly not completely sold on the idea myself...  I need to sleep on it I guess.  Maybe we can have "Big Points" and "Minor Points"?  It still preserves the quality over quantity principle, but is spelled out more clearly for the lay-audience.

Deflate the Referees:  Too often, Judo referees remind me of that stereotypical neighborhood association guy that just lives to fine you for your grass being .02 inches higher than regulation.  They don't so much care that you are a good neighbor, they just live to punish and show their knowledge of the rules.  Honestly, I'll bet a lot of Judo referees *are* that neighborhood association guy or gal.  It's not about the ref, it's about the Judo, so I really like the approach of Freestyle Judo (and most other contact sports), where the ref will give instructions, then warnings... then penalties, unless something is just atrocious. 

Work to Pair Up Comparable Ranks:  I recognize that this isn't always possible, especially in smaller tourneys or with certain weight classes, but if we accept that self assessment is one of the things we want our tournament to promote, we shouldn't just have our white belt face off against two sandans before going home for the day.  There are a few things you could do to help this, for instance... 

Get Rid of Pre-Defined Weight Classes:  I don't have anything against grouping people of similar weight, but the current system has at least two bad by-products.  1) The guy that weighs X pounds may have only 2 other guys in his division, while the guy who is 5 pounds heavier is squaring off against 20 folks, and 2) It encourages cutting weight, which is at best not healthy, and at worst bad for you or even lethal.  So that guy who is X+ 5 pounds ends up fighting folks who walk around at X+20 lbs.  So just group people by weight and/or skill level, putting the cut-offs where ever is necessary to create the most balanced/fair divisions.  And the balance you place between skill level and size may vary - you could even get rid of weight classes altogether!  Now, it may be that having no defined weight classes could actually cause worse weight-cutting, and if we find that this is the case, then go back to the old way.  But we can help prevent that by ...

All Weigh-Ins on the Day of the Tourney:  The purpose is to discourage weight cutting, which is not a judo skill, and to get rid of the home-field advantage for the local club who can cut more weight than the out-of-towners.

Get People as Many Matches as Practical:  You come to a judo tournament to compete against others, and it really sucks to pay $40 to spend 20 total seconds on the mat against two vastly superior opponents. "OK - then get better" I can hear you thinking.  Fair enough, but let's let the guy or gal get some more matches in.  One tourney I liked (in Lafayette, LA?) had 2 pools of 5 people each in my weight class.  The pools would play round-robin style, then the top 2 from each pool competed in double-elimination.  It was fun.  A German beat me for 1st (GERMANS!), but it was a lot of fun judo.  Don't have time for that?  You can always just set up "funsies" matches between two folks that want to compete.  Just do something.  Find a way to help your competitors get more competition.

Lastly, Invite Everyone to Dinner: You don't have to pay - just invite people.  Make them feel welcome.  Get to know these folks.  You have to eat, right?  And heck, maybe you can cut a deal with the local Sizzler to cut you a deal on the price if you can bring them 30 hungry customers?  Or maybe if you can get RSVPs, you can cater it, to help folks get back on the road more quickly... It's a small thing, but I think it will help build the spirit of community in Judo.  That was honestly my favorite part of going to competitions back in the day - the camaraderie. 

So that's what I'm thinking.  What do you think?  What did I miss?  Where did I go too far?

What is Judo? or, "Judo: The Metaphorical Path of Laziness"

Sensei Lafon left a comment in a previous post that before we tried to articulate what the purpose of a Judo competition should be, we should first articulate what this "Judo" thing is, itself.  An excellent suggestion.  There is never unanimous agreement when one tries to define a thing like Judo, so there is a bit of "relative truth" here.  Judo is in the eyes of the beholder? 

WARNING:  I really go off on tangents on this one.  I apologize in advance, but I hope that it is still interesting.  In case you don't want to read the whole thing, here are some of the key points:

• Judo is a "way" - part of what that implies is that there are things not meant to be included in the Art, even though they may be useful, so that you can more fully explore what is included.
• There is more to Judo than just hand-to-hand combat, but make no mistake:  physical conflict is a core component of Judo, and we need to do a better job trueing back to that.
• Because of it's background, Judo should give emphasis to throws over groundwork, and when groundwork is done Judo should encourage decisiveness.  BJJ, on the other hand, should place no particular emphasis on the throw, and should not have concerns about techniques that are slow to develop, or periods in a contest where little or no progress is made.
• You'll have to read the article to see what I was talking about with the title of this post...

Ju + Do = Judo!
Anyhoo, a simple definition, borrowed from the Akari Judo web site is this:  "Judo, translated as the 'gentle way', is a martial art which teaches the use of balance, momentum, and timing to overcome your opponent."  Not bad for a starter.  The whole "gentle way" business is always problematic, though.  If you've seen Judo, it clearly isn't gentle.  I don't know enough Japanese to dispute whether "Ju" really means gentle, but I do have a good idea of what it implies:  One aspect is... well... "Lazy."  Sure throw the guy, but don't go out of your way.  Don't try to simply impose your will, but listen to what his posture and movements are telling you do.  Are his hips in front of his shoulders?  Then he probably "wants" to be thrown backwards.  Is she really reaching for that high grip?  She wants to be thrown with Seoi Nage!  Dr. Kano liked to talk about Seiryoku Zenyo - minimum effort, maximum efficiency.  That is really the Ju part of Judo, IMO.  Of course, "The Lazy Way" might attract the wrong kind of people.  And of course I am over-stating that - "minimum effort" doesn't mean that participants should exert as little effort as possible, and just lay down on the mat.  I usually go with "minimum effort to put the other guy on his back" - and when that guy is good, the minimum might be a lot.

But that's only half of the word!  Then, there's the "Do" part.  Literally, it means "the Way."  Ok...  Maybe not so useful.  If you are at all familiar with Chinese philosophy, it's the same as the chinese Tao (pronounced like the "dow" part of "down," so you start to see the relationship).  So... the "Way," as it is used here, is in the sense of a street, or path.  A metaphorical path.  A path is something that helps you travel, generally towards a destination.  A path is constrained...  that is, it isn't miles wide... You can move a little to the left or right, and more so in some parts of the path that others, but there are very definitely places you shouldn't step if you want to stay on the path.  And the path may not be the shortest way to get to wherever you are going, but the point is that by being on the path, you will see things that you wouldn't have, otherwise.  Practically speaking, this implies that there are techniques and practices that may be effective, but they should not be included in Judo.

A Way of Life?
Some people talk about the "Way" being a way of life.  That sounds good, but I'll be honest:  I don't get it.  I can see how asceticism is a way of life, but not Judo.  Certainly, many things that you learn in Judo are useful off the mat (much more than, say, things that you learn in tennis), and Lord knows there are enough "Verbal/Mental/Business/etc Judo" books out there, but in my opinion, it is a little too much to expect from Judo to teach us how to live.  Many of my instructors have been good role models, but none has taught me how to live (nor did I want them to), and I am certainly not teaching my students how to live.  So if that is supposed to be a part of Judo, it's something that has been lost wherever I have learned it, and it's not something I want anyway.

But getting back to the point, from reading some of what Dr. Kano wrote on the subject, the "Do" part (which he purposefully changed from "Jitsu" to be clear he was going for something different with his "ju do") does imply that there is something more going on.  Jita Kyoei - mutual benefit and welfare - is certainly a big part of this.  There is more that you are supposed to get from Judo than just learning a set of techniques.  But I will have to give the Do part of this more thought.

Sport or Martial Art?
I don't often make definitive statements, but here's one:  Judo is a martial art.  Period.  A core aspect of Judo is that is has, as it's core, how to deal with physical confrontation, and we cannot gloss over that.  Now, when you look up "sport," it just means "a physical activity engaged in for pleasure."  So, in that broad sense, sure, Judo is a sport, too (as long as you enjoy it, I guess).  People use the term "combat sport" also, which I think is fair.  I once heard, "Well, all of the really effective stuff was taken out so that it could be a sport that people could play."  If you believe that, you are missing the point.  I won't get in to it all here, but Kano removed things so that his students could practice all-out without injuring each other, and make the art *more* effective.

What Judo Isn't
Sometimes it is helpful to define a thing by what it isn't.   So what isn't Judo?...

• It isn't BJJ:  I love Brazilian Jiujitsu, and it is a very very close relative of Judo.  But they aren't the same.  One thing to think about is the type of combat that they grew out of.  Judo was the direct offspring of Japanese Jujitsu, which was around for centuries and had battlefield combat as a key concern.  BJJ, as a sort of hybrid of Judo and Japanese Jujitsu, was really brought in to form, as I understand it, in one-on-one no-holds-barred fights.  A key difference there is that the BJJ focus was, by definition, one-on-one, whereas the Japanese Jujitsu (JJJ?) could be one-on-one, or you may have multiple opponents to worry about.  So that, I think, is why Judo, by definition, should focus much more on throws than BJJ.  In Judo, it is proper that a solid throw can end a match, and (though it generally pisses me off when it happens), it is also proper that contestants should have to re-start if no progress is made on the ground.  I don't think that the IJF uses the right timing, but Judo groundwork should have more emphasis on decisiveness than BJJ should.

• Judo isn't wrestling:  Wrestling can also reasonably be called a martial art, though I think it is far enough removed from those combat origins that one need not necessarily call it that (and Judo under the IJF is headed down that path, but the good news is that the IJF can only set international contest rules, and doesn't define Judo itself - the instructors do that).  But I digress...  I am also a big fan of wrestling, and think that Judoka can greatly benefit from cross-training - the techniques are useful, and wrestling practices typically have some great training methods that we Judoka could learn from.  A key difference, though, is that Judo does need to true back to those combat origins.  You can point to a rule set that encourages defenseless turtling and say that Judo has already missed that boat.  But again, I say that the IJF tournament rules don't define the Art.  The problem is that most instructors (myself included) have allowed our instruction to get pigeon-holed by those rules.  After all, you don't want to train your folks in a way that will get them regularly DQd in contest.  Another aspect where Judo isn't wrestling is that... well... we wear clothes, and they don't.  Now, I can't think of any philosophical underpinning on why Judo must be done with gi (though one could argue that it is one of the constraints of the "Do"), so I think that is a gray area, and I don't have any objection to no-gi Judo. 

The Purpose of Competition?

OK...  Not to beat this rules thing to death, but I have some stuff in my brain that I want to get out before moving on...  I think that the Freestyle Judo rules are a great improvement over the IJF, but not perfect.  Gerry Lafon also has some interesting thoughts on the subject, but I'm not 100% sold on his brand either.  So... how would I design the rules?

Let's start with some statement of purpose:  something to set out what we want to accomplish with judo competition that we can true back to when going through this process.  Let's see...

Self-Improvement:  Competition provides a forum for the competitor to test and hone their skills, hopefully compete with people outside their dojo, and observe the techniques of others.  There's something missing here, something missing about what one gains from competing beyond just technique, but I'll go on...

Innovation:  Competition should be the breeding ground for the Art.  As one killer technique is introduced, the seed for it's killer counter is planted.  Any reasonably safe techniques should be allowed, even if they are "un-Judo-like" - it is the responsibility of the Art to figure out a "Judo-like" counter such techniques.

Community:  Tournaments, as they bring different dojos together, are a great place to foster relationships and comradery within the Judo community, and should be used as such.

Publicity (not quite the word I want, but...): Tournaments provide an opportunity for visibility to the non-Judo community, and they should make the best of this opportunity (particularly in light of the state of Judo in the US)

Principles:  I haven't fleshed this out at all, but the rules of a competition should ban/penalize unsafe practices, but should also ban/penalize actions which go against any underlying principles of the Art - both in its role as a combat art as well as the "Do" (way) that Dr. Kano envisioned.  What I am thinking about here is the encouragement of bad habits as a side-effect of some rules.  For instance, defenseless turtling - you shouldn't do that in a fight, but a judo player might do that from force of habit.  Or unsafe attempts at avoiding a throw - like posting.  I *think* that even in a fight, it may be better to take a safe fall than risk breaking your arm to avoid the fall... Additionally, some principles may need encouragement - things like Jita Kyoei (mutual benefit and welfare) and Seiryoku Zenyo (maximum efficiency, minimum effort).  One must be cautious here, as I think the primary place for teaching this is in the dojo, not a tournament - nonetheless we should keep an eye towards encouraging these principles where feasible.  And one last note on principles - I think the underlying concept of the shiai is to simulate a fight, within the confines of the Do, so we need to keep that in mind.

Not terribly concise, and it still needs work, but it's a start.  What do you guys think?  What is missing?  One off-shoot of having a clear statement of purpose as the basis for our competitions (rather than just a hodge-podge of various regulation) is that we could create different rule sets to increase focus on different aspects of the purpose.  For instance, if you really want to focus on development, maybe you implement something like Lafon's rules where all matches must go the full time-limit, or if you want to encourage people to learn to fight different sized-folks, then you get rid of weight classes, and have the heaviest fight their way down the group, then the next-heaviest, and so on.  And maybe you start over or fight your way back up once you reach the end.  Whoever has the most wins at the end wins the tourney!  But I digress...  My point is we need not be one-size-fits-all...

So... again... what do you guys think?

Freestyle Judo

In a recent post, I lamented how the rules handed down by the International Judo Federation (IJF, the official governing body of world judo) were working to change judo from an adaptable, effective martial art to an isolated, fragile sport.  After reading around in the internet, I found out about Freestyle Judo, which uses a different rule set for competitions that helps get judo back to what it should be.  It is found as a part of AAU Judo, which also sanctions IJF-rules tourneys.



The short version of the differences:

• First and foremost, they got rid of the crappy "no leg grab" rule
• Most grips are legal (e.g., belt grips, cross grips, etc) as long as they aren't overly defensive
• Ippons are harder to come by - no "rolling" ippons
• For every score less than an ippon, you get various degrees of points; while there is no waza ari, you can still win by getting a 12 point spread on your opponent
• More time is given for groundwork to develop
• No ippon for osae komi (hold downs) - the best you can get is 4 points for a 20 second pin
• You can get a point for passing guard, rollovers, and sweeps
• You can get penalized for passivity/over defensiveness on the ground (e.g., turtling for too long)
• Refs will give verbal instructions/warnings before assessing a penalty

With the exception of the no victory by osae komi rule, I like all of these.  It encourages creativity in the standing game, and discourages some of the garbage by-product behaviors that Judo has typically encouraged, like defenseless turtling.  They have also introduced a no-gi division, so there's that, too.

What do you guys think?  Do you like the changes?  Anything give you heartburn?  I may try to get a FSJ-rules tourney going around here (VA)... Anyone interested in competing?

You can learn more about Freestyle Judo at their website:  http://www.freestylejudo.org/

Judo Rules: A Case Study of How to Neuter a Martial Art

Judo was once an art of experimentation and adaptation, seeking all manner of competition in order to improve both the art and the practitioners.  Now, Judo has devolved to a sport trying to isolate itself from those from outside "The Art" who can nonetheless beat us at our own game.

In the early days of Judo, it was a time of massive experimentation by Dr. Kano and his students to find what worked and what didn't.  Of course, Kano had his own definition of what it meant for a technique to work - something along the lines of maximum efficiency, minimum effort. It had to be repeatable at full strength - that is, you should be able to do it over and over to someone without seriously damaging your partner/opponent. One criterion that is sometimes overlooked (most often, in my experience, by those who purport to teach Judo "the way Kano intended") is the most obvious one - the technique actually had to be able put a fully-resisting bad guy on his ass.  In my non-scholarly opinion, I think that these criteria form the foundation of a good Judo throw.  Notice, however, what I didn't say:  He didn't reject a technique because it wasn't how he was taught, because he hadn't seen it before, or because wasn't sure how to define it - and he certainly didn't reject a technique simply because other folks were kicking his students' asses with it.  Quite the opposite.

We all know the stories... Here's my synopsis: Kano's students with his new training method went out and kicked tail.  Yay!  But some folks noticed that these "judoka" weren't that great once you got them off of their feet, so they exploited that weakness and beat the judoka.  Shoot!  But then, Kano and the gang integrated some of those pesky ground techniques right on into this Judo thing, and gave them more emphasis than before!  What happens next?  Judoka take over Japan!  And then the world (except for the Americas)!  Yay!

If the IJF had been regulating those contests, they would have just banned groundwork outright.  Sissies.  When the Russians came in with their wacky Unjapanesy grips and started dumping Judoka on their butts, Kano might have integrated that into his teaching, and let the judo community learn how to effectively counter it.  The IJF instead outlawed "nontraditional" grips.  When ground specialists came back in and started butt-flopping and submitting their way to victory, Kano may have renewed his students' focus on their groundwork.  Judo refs instead worked to keep people off the ground as much as possible.  When the wrestlers came in and started yanking our legs out from under us, did we take Kano's example and figure out how to beat them?  No, we decided to make these effective attacks basically illegal.

The effect of all this is that instead of becoming a stronger Art that can take on all comers, we have isolated ourselves into irrelevance.  In making leg-grabs illegal, you make the judoka infinitely more susceptible to it in any confrontation that doesn't involve judo rules.  And I don't think that is what Dr. Kano had in mind.

Disclaimer:  I am not a historian, and everything I have said here is based on statements from instructors/colleagues or stuff I have read.  Please correct me if you see anything wrong - and if you can cite a source showing how I am wrong, all the better.