In Samoa Mr Barcos told me he spoke to many international coaches and they all agreed with the changes. I told him he was full of BS. No coach I speak to agrees or understands what he is trying to do. Plus, did you all know that from the next world champs in japan a country can enter 2 players in each weight division. Now that was done back in the 60′s & early 70′s. If that is not going backwards I don’t know what is. Barcos is screwing up our sport.

I am starting a petition against these crazy rule changes. I need names and help. Please email me on patrickmahon4@gmail.com to have ur name included and I will be in touch. Save the sport and help athletes.
Patrick

Competitive Judo VS Recreational Judo
AKA
(Maximum effectiveness VS Maximum efficiency)?

For the purposes of this argument, ‘Efficient’ Judo refers to the 40 traditional throws of the Gokyo-no-Waza. ‘Effective’ Judo refers to all variations and new classified techniques.

Many of you by now will be aware of the new rules that were trialled at the recent IJF junior world championships. One rule in particular concerns me…

“Leg Grips”
All direct attacks with one or two hands or with one or two arms below the belt are not allowed.

PUNISHMENTS: First attack: – Shido
Second attack: – Hansokumake

It seems to me on face value that this has been adopted so that Judo tends back towards the ‘classical’, more ‘efficient’ style of fighting. I believe it’s important to first ask “What is competitive Judo?” What’s it about? Is it the same as recreational Judo? Should they be the same? The following is my own opinion.

Efficient Judo is about getting the maximum effect using a minimum amount of effort. This surely is the ideal for any athlete in any sport – to perform at the highest level with the greatest ease. This arguably, and in my opinion, is what should be encouraged as ‘mainstream’ Judo. In other words, the first port of call for all practitioners of Judo whatever the ultimate goal or ambition. It is this Judo that best highlights and best encourages the principles of Kuzushi (balance breaking), Tsukuri (positioning), and Kake (execution), as well as the basic principles of movement (for comprehensive coverage of the principles of movement, see Itsutsu-no-Kata).

It is here I’m likely to divide opinions…..

“I don’t believe that ‘classical’, ‘efficient’ Judo is always the most effective”

So, what’s effective Judo? The objective in any contest is to win. Judo contests are not an exception to this rule. There are some techniques (namely leg-grabs and pick-ups) that do require a greater expenditure of energy and are therefore less efficient – but seemingly more effective, otherwise they would not be used.

So what are the possible reasons for outlawing individual techniques or even groups of techniques?

Safety issues? In some cases, the safety of athletes is compromised (e.g. Kani-Basami – scissors technique) In such cases, it is justified to ban those techniques in accordance with the founding ethos of “mutual welfare and benefit”. Are leg-grabbing techniques dangerous? I’ve neither seen nor been given any evidence to suggest so. This begs the question “Why such harsh penalties?” As non-dangerous infringements, surely a Shido for each incident would suffice. A Hansoku-make for a second offence seems harsh in the most extreme sense of the word. One is not disqualified for pulling the lapel across the chin a second time, and this can injure the opponent.

Are they inefficient? NO! Less efficient perhaps but clearly more effective often enough to have become such a major part of competitive Judo.

Do they lower the standard of Judo? This is the argument I’ve heard most often. Consistent successful use of any technique requires full understanding of the principles of Kuzushi, Tsukuri, and Kake as well as an understanding of the principles of movement. Often, this might be subconscious understanding (this is true for all techniques) but it is understanding nevertheless.

I’ve always thought that it is the different styles of Judo that makes it so entertaining. It means that every competitor is forced to continuously adapt and evolve their Judo to stay on top. Surely this only results in increased understanding of each basic Judo principle and increased Judo intelligence. How could anyone argue that this leads to a decline in standard?

Should we split Judo in two? NO! Absolutely not! As I mentioned at the start, I think that everyone should start by learning what I refer to as ‘efficient’ Judo because it better highlights the important principles that will ease and support long-term Judo development. For those that do choose to compete, I think they should have access to additional classes that teach ‘effective’ Judo i.e. learning how to win. To re-iterate, learning how to win should be the next step up after learning efficient Judo.

What I think is needed is for coaches to be able to distinguish between AND incorporate into their teaching BOTH efficient and effective Judo – rather than choose one as opposed to the other.

P.S.
Of course, this whole argument neglects to include Luke’s point. Often the initial attack can be so subtle that only the fighters can feel it. It would require a referee with an incredible knowledge of Judo movement, technique, and principles to always be able to recognise each and every situation that would allow leg-grabbing techniques. Surely a feint will count – otherwise we will soon see fighters feinting in order to bait the opponent to commit a leg-grabbing infringment!?! More tactics like this will result in even less tv friendly Judo.

(Just my opinions)