Talk:Judo/Archive 3

Been quiet here for a while & thougth this might help:

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
*Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?] done--Nate1481( ^t/_c) 16:12, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
*Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?] done--David Broadfoot (talk) 07:46, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
*See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.^[?]--Nate1481( ^t/_c) 16:12, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

• Please convert tables from HTML syntax to Help:Table wiki-markup.

*Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 78 kg, use 78 kg, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 78 kg.^[?] done--David Broadfoot (talk) 07:59, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), please spell out source units of measurements in text; for example, the Moon is 380,000 kilometres (240,000 mi) from Earth.^[?] Specifically, an example is 78 kg.

*Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?] done--David Broadfoot (talk) 08:06, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
*Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally do not start with articles ('the', 'a(n)'). For example, if there was a section called ==The Biography==, it should be changed to ==Biography==.^[?]done --Nate1481( ^t/_c) 16:12, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
*Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading ==Magellan's journey==, use ==Journey==.^[?] done--David Broadfoot (talk) 07:55, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

• Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) may be too long- consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per Wikipedia:Summary style.^[?]

*There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.

• is considered
• are considered
• might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please strike this comment).^[?] done --Nate1481( ^t/_c) 16:12, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

*Please make the spelling of English words consistent with either American or British spelling, depending upon the subject of the article. Examples include: defense (A) (British: defence), defence (B) (American: defense), organize (A) (British: organise), recognize (A) (British: recognise), categorize (A) (British: categorise), ization (A) (British: isation), counter-attack (B) (American: counterattack), anymore (A) (British: any more), gray (A) (British: grey). put to British English as per first version ([1]) except section on American judo ranks. --Nate1481( ^t/_c) 16:12, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

• Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
  • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.” - needs work--Nate1481( ^t/_c) 16:12, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
• Avoid using contractions like (outside of quotations): doesn't.
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Nate1481( ^t/_c) 11:25, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Are the elbows and crotch of the judogi more reinforced and padded then a karategi? Basejumper 19:00, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

In general the judogi is more reinforced than the karategi so the short answer is yes. Actually there is no extra padding or reinforcement in the elbows or crotch simply because the entire fabric of the judogi is stronger than the karategi. Loudenvier 16:12, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

A judogi is manufactured in a thicker weave than most other gi to prevent tearing and therefore supplies a small amount of extra padding, but no portion is specifically padded to reduce impacts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.209.216.184 (talk) 21:39, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Judo and throwing play little importance in MMA and actual street fighting which emphasize striking and grappling. Fedor Emelianenko has done judo tournaments, but he is strictly a samboist, not a judoka. His brother and sambo world champion, Aleksander Emelianenko even went so far as to say in an interview that he finished many fights on the ground just so he could show that "sambo is superior to judo."

The MMA fighters that have backgrounds in Judo are anything but top notch. Yamashita??? I can't think of any fighter that actually submitted verbally because someone kicked him in the leg too hard!

All due respect to Judo as a martial art and cultural treasure of Japan, but a serious fighting system it is certainly not. 84.112.40.182 21:22, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

You seem to be lost. This is not a debating forum. Your comments have barely any relationship to the article. Furthermore, you do not appear to know what Judo is: your first sentence makes it clear that you do not realise that Judo *is* (one of several forms of) grappling. Your statement that 'Fedor Emelianenko is strictly a samboist' would come as agreat surprise to him, especially given that he is a former Russian national Judo Champion. So what if his brother said that he 'finished many fights on the ground just so he could show that "sambo is superior to judo"' - it just shows that he is confused: both Sambo and Judo comprise standing and ground techniques, and, in any case, him winning fights on the ground proves no such thing. --David Broadfoot 05:57, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

In addition, every single grappling technique Fedor has used in MMA competition is regularly taught in judo and commonly used in competition, from throws to guard passes to pins to armlocks. It's all in judo.

As far as other MMA fighters with backgrounds in judo not being top notch - Paulo Filho is WEC champion and undefeated in a long Pride career, and has stated that judo and jujutsu are his keys to victory, Yoshihiro Akiyama is K-1 Hero's GP champion, Kazuo Misaki is Pride WWGP champion. Karo Parisyan is a top contender for the UFC's welterweight title.

In his second MMA fight ever, Dong-Sik Yoon took Quinton Jackson to a very close judges' decision, taking him down several times and threatening with close submission attempts. Yoon has now won two fights in a row, and Jackson went on to become UFC champion a weight class above Yoon.

The remark about Yamashita submitting to a leg kick is bizarre, seeing how the man never fought in MMA.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.153.178.74 (talk) 22:53, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Kimura vs. Helio Gracie. Obviously Judo has a place in MMA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.209.216.184 (talk) 21:41, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

to say judo has no place in MMA is ridiculous. Royce Gracie uses Brazilian JuJitsu, which is very similar to Judo and he was undefeated in his entire MMA career, except the fight with Matt Hughes. Most MMA fighters have a background in BJJ....so in reality, they have backgrounds in Judo. If you cant groundfight, which is pretty much all MMA is about, then you need to get into BJJ or Judo. whoever said Judo wasnt relevant, knows nothing about fighting or martial arts —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.255.80.194 (talk) 20:24, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

While newaza is clearly the ground aspect of judo, the standing part of it I have heard referred to variously as both nagewaza and tachiwaza. I'm not sure which is correct. I know that tachiwaza translates, roughly (all translations are approximate at best, as obviously no two languages could be more different than English and Japanese) as "Standing techniques" while nagewaza means "Grappling techniques", but they seem to be synonomous. If anyone can clarify, I'd appreciate it.

RedVengeanceIII 21:12, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

They are not technically synonymous but are functionally so. Nagewaza does not mean "grappling techniques" - it means "throwing techniques". As 99.99% of tachiwaza in practice is nagewaza, they are interchangeable in use. Only when someone like Shinya Aoki pulls off a standing wakigatame (or similar) is tachiwaza not the same as nagewaza. FlowWTG 21:32, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm... that's quite interesting. I take it you're a fellow practitioner. RedVengeanceIII 18:53, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Tachi-waza is "standing techniques" but it's not interchangeable with Nage-waza or "throwing techniques." There are Tachi-waza that are not Nage-waza like standing chokes (Shime-waza) and standing armlocks (Kansetsu-waza.) There are also quite a few Nage-waza that are not Tachi-waza, including all of the Sutemi-waza "sacrifice throws" that are done from a lying or falling position.

Sbabb (talk) 22:30, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that is correct. All sutemi-waza are tachi-waza: the technique is initiated from the standing position. --David Broadfoot (talk) 05:48, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Sutemi-waza does not have to initiate from a standing position. I've performed yoko-otoshi, tani-otoshi, sumi-gaeshi, tomoe-nage, and other sutemi-waza starting from a seated position, but that's almost irrelevant. The two main divisions of nage-waza are tachi-waza and sutemi-waza, and those divisions break down even further.

Look at Nage-No-Kata. It's broken into five sections. The first three are the tachi-waza sections: te-waza (hand techniques), koshi-waza (hip techniques), and ashi-waza (foot/leg techniques.) The remaining two sections are the sutemi-waza sections: ma-sutemi-waza (rear sacrifice techniques,) and yoko-sutemi-waza (side sacrifice techniques.) These divisions follow the standard divisions in the Go Kyo No Waza. For references, see "The Complete 7 Katas Of Judo" by M. Kawaishi (p.20 and other places), "Judo In Action - Throwing Techniques" by Kazuzo Kudo, and lots of other Judo books and web sites. Sbabb (talk) 07:07, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Judogis are much sturdier than karate uniforms. They have to be, as they take a lot more abuse. Judogis come in two styles: single and double weave. The difference between the two is basically the difference between pajamas and armor. The single weaves are very comfortable but not nearly as durable as the double weaves, which feel like armor but will last years, maybe a lifetime. RedVengeanceIII 21:15, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

An anonymous editor recently made an edit recategorizing Sombo and Brazilian Jiu-jitsu as "arts derived primarily from Judo". The current version refers to them as substyles of Judo proper. Opinions?

I agree with the recategorization - Sambo and Brazilian Jiu-jitsu are clearly no longer part of Judo proper any more than Judo is Tenshin Shinyo Ryu or Kito Ryu. Sambo was influenced by Freestyle, Greco, Russian folkstyles, and whatever Jujutsu Spiridinov studied in addition to Judo. Brazilian Jiu-jitsu was started by a man with a measly year or so of training in Judo (Carlos Gracie) who was training under a Judoka with questionable/unknown amounts of exposure to Lancashire and Catch-as-Catch-Can Wrestling (Maeda) - and even more importantly has since wildly diverged. While Judo is clearly the main or major influence in Sambo and the primary influence in Brazilian Jiu-jitsu, the each of the arts have diverged enough that calling them separate arts is entirely justified. Saying that similarity to Judo makes it also Judo doesn't hold up when you try to apply it to Greco-Roman or Catch.

Additionally and importantly, I don't know of anyone in either Sambo or Brazilian Jiu-jitsu that would consider their art to be substyle of Judo. Respectfully. FlowWTG 02:40, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

It can be argued either way – it's important to choose the appropriate balance. Using your reasoning, it can also be argued that all those "styles" are separate derivates. It comes down to how much change there is from what Kano originally designated to be "judo".

While you say that "each of the arts have diverged enough that calling them separate arts is entirely justified", it can also be argued that "each of the arts have diverged so little, that calling them essentially the same art as created by Kano is entirely justified". It can easily be argued that BJJ is more a style of judo than judo-do is, because judo-do features throws based on different principles to Kano's, whereas BJJ's throws are based on the same principles as Kano’s.

Re your comment that "Sambo and Brazilian Jiu-jitsu are clearly no longer part of Judo proper any more than Judo is Tenshin Shinyo Ryu or Kito Ryu" - Firstly, the original author of that section was not saying that BJJ is "a part of” judo, let alone a part of judo “proper” - they were saying that BJJ is a "style" of judo. Secondly, to compare that to saying that "Sambo and Brazilian Jiu-jitsu are clearly no longer part of Judo proper any more than Judo is "Tenshin Shinyo Ryu" or "Judo is Kito Ryu" is incorrect because Judo never was "Tenshin Shinyo Ryu" and Judo never was "Kito Ryu" - Judo is/was a merging of those jujutsu styles (and others) along with a reformation of the techniques; a balanced theory of combat; a new philosophy; and new ways of teaching. It is all those things that make BJJ and Judo (for example) essentially the same (category).

Re your comment that "Saying that similarity to Judo makes it also Judo doesn't hold up when you try to apply it to Greco-Roman or Catch"... The authors of that section are not claiming that mere similarity to judo makes something a style of judo; they are effectively saying that extremely strong similarity to judo makes it a style of judo. I'd also point out that an advanced judoka can enter a Sambo tournament or a BJJ tournament with nothing more than an explanation of the slightly different rule set and point scoring methods, and feel quite at home, and perform well. The same cannot be said for a judoka who entered a Greco-Roman wrestling tournament.

With your argument about outside influences as a reason not to include a particular art as a style... on that basis, Russian Judo should not be categorized as a style of judo either, because it was heavily influenced by Sambo. And Olympic Judo is not judo either, because it has been influenced by Sambo!

Lastly, I don't think that it is really important what how many practitioners of Sambo or Brazilian Jiu-jitsu would consider their art to be a sub-style of judo. Some certainly do. And the more they learn about judo, the more likely they are to agree. In the Wikipedia entry for Sambo, it states that "Sport Sambo" is a "version" of Sambo, and that it "is similar to Judo". US Judo describes Sambo as “a sport very similar to Judo” here [2]. When judoka with no Sambo experience have entered and won international Sambo tournaments, it’s hard to argue that they are not essentially the same art. Ditto when in 1962 the Soviet team excelled at the European Judo Championships despite never having trained in Judo.

“Sport Sambo” is more similar to Judo than it is to “Combat Sambo”, so on the basis of similarity arguments alone, Sport Sambo is Judo, but it is not Sambo! My point is that categorization cannot be based on simple or narrow arguments.

BJJ as a style of judo was added on 28 December 2005, so has been accepted in Wikipedia for two years now. If you run all those sports through a cluster analysis, I believe that you'd end up getting the categorization as seen in the current judo article.

That anonymous editor simply took all the styles with "Judo" in their name and categorized them as "judo" and categorized all those without judo in their name as "derived arts" – I say “A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” Thanks for opening up the discussion. --David Broadfoot 15:56, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I've reverted the revision of 11:50, 10 November 2007 by anonymous editor 147.126.95.165 because (a) it reintroduces spelling mistakes already corrected on 6-November and 8-November; (b) information about Judo being called Jiu-do and Jiu-Jitsu has been deleted; (c) no explanation is given as to why judo-do is any more a style of judo than BJJ or Sambo is; (d) that user's talk page is full of vandalism warnings [3] --David Broadfoot 10:00, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

While he is one of the few martial arts founders who actual had an advanced degree (several in fact) and held as professorship at a real university, according to the Manual of Style it should not be included in-line. --Nate1481( ^t/_c) 13:23, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I've created a new user box for us Judoka. Below is shown the current userboxes relating to Judo, the first is the original userbox, the other(s) are the newer:

|{{User:UBX/Judoka}}	This user is a judoka.	Usage
|{{User:Loudenvier/User Kodokan Judo}}	This user is a Kodokan judoka.	Usage

Very nice. Thank you very much! --David Broadfoot 09:07, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

There's is/was a bunch of POV content in this article. I've gone ahead and removed some of the clearest problem sentences, but there might be more. A few of the sentences could be replaced if a source is found, but others shouldn't be there at all (unless they're changed to "[this person] or [this organization] say ______" form, instead of "this is how it is"). Here's what I've removed so far: [4] [5] [6].

The section on Judo and MMA is problematic: the point of the paragraph is correct, but the way the point is expressed needs work. How about references to fighter rankings? MrVibrating (talk) 10:59, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

I've removed some more POV/unsourced/weasel-worded statements. Also, sources for claims likely to be disputed can't come from judo websites, although you can say "[such and such] judo organization says that _________" (but not "this is so"<ref to judo website>. MrVibrating (talk) 11:02, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

My God, surely we can find a better image than a couple of Army blokes in a shed wearing shoes and socks! 129.16.97.227 (talk) 15:40, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

What specifically is bad about the current image? MrVibrating (talk) 00:06, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

It does not represent the environment the vast majority of judo is performed in. How many dojos would allow senior judoka on the mat wearing shoes and/or socks? How many dojos include heavy machinery in the background? 85.224.8.124 (talk) 15:37, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Swoped with one from lower down, still uses both but the more prominatna one is now more acurate. --Nate1481( ^t/_c) 09:18, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I seconded this comment cant one provide a better image? I suggest something as http://www.karatethun.com/mediac/400_0/media/ffkama~seisa~normal_DSCN1434$5B1$5D.jpg --Vfbsilva (talk) 13:33, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

A score for a throw is only given when executed starting from a standing position.

Is this still true? While I'm rusty as I haven't competed for some years, I seem to recall a reinterpretation of the rules some years ago allowing scores for throws initiated from the knees, thus treating uke and tori equally in this regard. Was this an IJF decision, or a local variant? 129.16.97.227 (talk) 16:39, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I believe that (a) tori must be standing, (b) uke must standing or on one or both knees; and (c) ne-waza must not have commenced i.e. once ne-waza has commenced, and one competitor stands and throws the other one, then there is no score - unless the referee has stopped the action and restarted the match from standing position. --David Broadfoot (talk) 12:55, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, that must have been what I was thinking about. This changed sometime in the 90s, right? Ciao. 129.16.97.227 (talk) 11:05, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I am not aware of any change to that rule in the 90s or at any time. --David Broadfoot (talk) 12:38, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

An anonymous user had made twelve identical edits, each time a) removing BJJ and Sambo from the 'Styles' section, and b) deleting Fedor Emelianenko from the list of MMA judoka.

I have asked this user (numerous times on both on their talk page on my 'undo' edit summaries) to discuss the issue on this talk page, but they refuse to do so, and continue to make those deletions.

I note that:

1. BJJ and Sambo are two of the styles prefaced by the comment that "From Kano's original style of judo, the following similar forms have evolved" - please discuss here how is that statement incorrect rather than continue your edit war. (That preface was later changed to read "From Kano's original style of judo, several related forms have evolved—some now widely considered to be distinct arts".)

2. As for Fedor Emelianenko not being a judoka as argued by that user and another here that "Fedor Emelianenko has done judo tournaments, but he is strictly a samboist, not a judoka", I refer them to Fedor's Wikipedia entry and its citations, which state that Fedor began his training in both sambo and judo as a youth. Furthermore, his first national judo title was achieved in 1997, the same year he won his first national sambo title. He is also listed under Wikpedia's 'Russian judoka' category. Please provide information to back your claim that Fedor is not a judoka despite the cited evidence that he is.

The edit history is as follows:

  147.126.95.165 (24 Jan 2008)
  147.126.95.165 (21 Jan 2008)
  99.142.13.123  (22 Dec 2007)
  99.135.175.253 (21 Dec 2007)
  99.144.246.210 (20 Dec 2007)
  147.126.95.165 (15 Dec 2007)
  147.126.95.165 (15 Dec 2007)
  147.126.95.165 (15 Dec 2007)
  147.126.95.165 (10 Dec 2007)
  147.126.95.165 (17 Nov 2007)
  147.126.95.165 (10 Nov 2007)
  147.126.95.165 (3 Nov 2007)

The 147.* IP address edits were made from Loyola University Chicago, and the 99.* IP address edits were made from an AT&T account. All edits have been deleted by me and by User:Aitias and User:CardinalDan and User:Nate1481.

The list of seven styles has been on this page for over two years now. Please enter into a discussion here and stop your unilateral deletions. --David Broadfoot (talk) 14:12, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

---This is not related to the edit war, but I object to the term "styles" in the header of this section. Judo is not like karate which has multiple styles created by different people. I can't think of any authoritative reference that indicates there are styles of judo (except wikipedia type references which exist because this language has begun incorrectly creeping into modern English usage). I can't think of what term I would prefer to see, but something like "sub-specialization" or "judo evolution" or most likely "historical variations of judo". All of the listed arts evolved from judo, but are generally not considered styles of judo. More opinions?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.173.225.33 (talk) 20:42, 3 June 2008 (UTC) 

Could someone please go to List_of_judo_organizations and check what I wrote about Kodokan Judo Institute - it probably either needs to be fleshed out as to its special nature, or moved down amongst the list of all the other national bodies. Thanks. --David Broadfoot (talk) 14:54, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

I started a page called List of celebrity judoka and now someone has nominated it for deletion. If you want it to remain, please comment on this article's entry on the Articles for deletion page.

Other similar pages include:

• List of Celebrity Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu practitioners
• List of celebrity endorsed perfumes
• List of celebrity guests on the Howard Stern show
• List of celebrities
• List of celebrity appearances in video games
• List of celebrity inventors
• List of celebrity guest stars on Sesame Street
• List of celebrity judoka
• List of celebrity Scientologists

--David Broadfoot (talk) 23:04, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

The table listing U.S. Junior and Senior belt ranks may be somewhat confusing to the non-Judoka.

The columns list the Japanese name for the kyu rank, the USJF Senior and Junior belt colors, the USJA Senior and Junior belt colors, and the USJA Junior rank name. Unfortunately, the only English description of the rank in the whole table is the USJA Junior rank name, which is really only the correct rank description for USJA Junior ranks.

A non-Judoka is unlikely to be able to translate the Japanese rank names from from twelfth (Junikyu) to first (Ikkyu) into the correct English rank levels. If they have a friend who claims to be a "second degree brown belt," the non-Judoka is probably going to look at that table and wonder why a "second degree" wouldn't be wearing either a white or yellow belt, since those are the only belts on a row with the words "second degree" in them. The correct rank for a "second degree brown belt" would be Nikyu, but the only English words on that line are "Junior 11th Degree."

Sbabb (talk) 04:51, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

The "Techniques & practics" section says that arm locks are allowed for competitors 16 and older.

It's been 18 years since my last Judo competition, but the rules at that time were that kansetsu-waza (arm locks) were restricted to competitors at least 16 years old who also held a sankyu (3rd brown belt) or higher rank.

I won a match via hansoku-make when I was a yonkyu (green belt) because my opponent (a white belt) attempted an arm lock on me. We were both over 16, but neither of us had sufficient rank for the technique to be legal. Have the rules changed? I searched around and was unable to find a comprehensive set of U.S. competition rules that mentioned the current requirements.

Sbabb (talk) 04:58, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

At least in Canada you are. I, a yellow belt, competed in a local tournament a couple of weeks ago and attempted a juji katame. Nobody mentioned anything.

66.46.13.221 (talk) 22:23, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Armbars and armlocks are permitted for anyone over age 16 regardless of rank, according to judoinfo.com. Katierunner (talk) 04:30, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I think that there is misprint in word SOMBO (should be sAmbo), and why the capital letters? VGmonster (talk) 16:47, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

It is not a misprint - it is a direct quote. The capitalised name is also arguably more correct than lower case because it is an acronym. SOMBO and SAMBO are both correct acronyms, as is CAMBO. --David Broadfoot (talk) 01:13, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree. (just i've never heard this version of pronounciation, as in russian it is always sAmbo). One note: SAMBO = SAMozashchita Bez Oruzhiya (as on sambo page). Should this be removed from talk page? --VGmonster (talk) 21:15, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Even FILA calls it SOMBO (see [7].) In that document, they make the note: "In the French language, Sombo is spelled Sambo." That may be entirely incorrect. Likewiese there are references on the net to "SOMBO" being the normal spelling in the USA. There are also references to differences between SAMBO and SOMBO. e.g. this post "what the school I found offers is Combat Sombo, not Combat Sambo. The school stresses the difference in terminology and also the usefulness of Combat Sombo for combat." Likewise here they are listed as if they are two different arts. There are references saying that SOMBO is a more wrestling-oriented from of SAMBO (in the US?) and that the US switched to the SOMBO spelling overall because of SAMBO being a bad slang word for blacks. My guess is that that it happened the other way around: the spelling was changed for racial reasons and because attached to the sub-style then using that term; and then later the new spelling was applied to all styles of SAMBO. Re deleting this thread: anything that properly discusses the article should remain on the talk page. --David Broadfoot (talk) 01:57, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

In the list of judo techniques, only the first letter is capitalized, but the actual article names have each word capitalized, such as Seoi Nage. Some names contain hyphens, Kami-Shiho-Gatame. For the sake of consistency, should each word in the article name be capitalized, and should they contain hyphens in general? Shawnc (talk) 19:27, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I think that the technique names should be un-capitalised, un-hypehenated, and italicised. e.g. kami shiho gatame. Only the foreign words like "judo" and "aikido" that have entered the English language should not be italicised. As this issue is not just related to the contents of this article, it should be raised on the Martial Arts discussion area. A whole lot of articles need renaming. --David Broadfoot (talk) 05:43, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

WP:MOS-JP says "Macrons should be used in all cases outside of those specifically mentioned below." So unless there are objections, articles such as O goshi need to be renamed, as in Ō guruma. Shawnc (talk) 15:57, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

There's a mistake on brasilian belts.The order is right but the gray belt is missing.The gray one is after the white one and before the blue one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.62.128.59 (talk) 22:05, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

The graphic for the Brazilian belts pertains to adults. Children's belt colour differences are explained in the text. --David from Downunder (talk) 00:37, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

I've seen a credible documentary which claims that Judo has Indian origins. Name of the source wanted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.146.149.231 (talk) 05:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Judo has origins in ju-jutsu among other sports. So that would depend on if e.g ju-jutsu has its origins in india (which I do not find plausible) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.16.134.69 (talk) 06:46, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Judo was created by Kano from jujutsu, most asian arts art interlinked but there is not direct link to India, there are some direct links to western wrestling, but it is primarily derived from jujutsu based on principles set out by Kano. --Nate1481(^t/_c) 11:07, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Vladimir_Putin#Martial_arts says re Putin's practice of Judo: "Currently, Putin is a red/white belt (6th dan)", with "red/white belt" linking to Black belt (martial arts). However, Black belt (martial arts) isn't very specific on this - it might be better to make this link to Judo#Rank_and_grading or to Judo#Belt_colours.
On the other hand, the graphics in Judo do not show the "red/white belt" (though the text mentions this).
Additionally the text discusses belt colors in "most of Europe" as "in ascending order ... white, red, yellow, orange, green, blue, brown and finally black. Some European countries additionally use a red belt to signify a complete beginner, whereas other European countries such as the UK use a red belt as the belt one grade above a beginner to show that the person is a full member of a club."
Is Russia included in the "most of Europe" system? If so should the "red/white belt" be mentioned? If not, should a separate entry on Russian belt colors be added? -- 201.53.7.16 (talk) 06:19, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Red/white for 6th dan is used in the U.S.A. as well by some dojo's. It really depends on the dojo and the conventions followed by the instructors. —Mrand ^{Talk • C} 16:44, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi. New user here, so I apologise if I'm not following the correct guidelines. I was reading this article when I noticed unsited comments such as 'Cian was a small, frail, homosexual boy, who, even in his twenties, did not weigh more than a hundred and twenty pounds (54.43kg), and was often picked on by bullies.' There is no mention of anyone named 'Cian' elsewhere in the article, so I assume this is someone's idea of a joke. Also, there is mention of the character ju (柔) in judo meaning '"touchy", "gay", "happy"'and '"sweaty testicles"', apparently 'depending on its context'. I have a limited understanding of kanji, however I am certain that 柔 does not mean 'sweaty testicles', although I am not sure about the other meanings. Further verification with someone who understands kanji would therefore be appreciated. Kroneko (talk) 03:35, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

That was vandalism. Fixed. Oda Mari (talk) 04:34, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

The IJF has released new rules. Now there is no Koka anymore. So someone may adapt the article. --Jan Sende (talk) 21:27, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Is the opinion of Barton-Wright regarding the self-defense intentions of judo and jujitsu really that relevant? He only studied it for 4 years and didn't even understand the structure of japanese words (hence the awkward sounding Bartitsu). --24.141.101.192 (talk) 00:50, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

I've redone the self defense section entirely. Comments and feedback will be appreciated.--Kaboomski (talk) 12:00, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

I think that two criticisms against Judo as self-defense should be included to balance the stated positives, mainly: reliance on gi-grappling, and lack of practice with striking. Yashkir (talk) 00:30, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

I've included the two points you mentioned, as well as a criticism on over-emphasis of sporting rules. Kaboomski (talk) 01:14, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Hello everyone. Is there any verifiable proof to the following quoted statement - Judo#Judoka (practitioner) - available? A practitioner of judo is known as a judoka or 'judo practitioner', though traditionally only those of 4th Dan or higher were called "judoka". Best regards, --Hoosic06 (talk) 12:32, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Is there nobody here who can prove, or disprove that statement? --Hoosic06 (talk) 10:50, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

If you can find no proof from reliable sources on the web, feel free to remove it. Thank you for helping to improve Wikipedia! —Mrand ^{Talk • C} 15:53, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer! Removing it is not my intention. The quotation sounds reasonable and makes scense to me as judo practitioner, but I cannot find any sources for that. I even tried asking in the japanese wiki, but so far w/o any results either. --Hoosic06 (talk) 08:37, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm a judo practitioner in the UK, and there is a red belt between the white and yellow belts. My club is a member of the BJA. Is this just in the UK, or in the rest of europe too? Tory88 (talk) 21:24, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Different organisations use different belt colours, but most are fairly similar. For example, the BJC don't use a red belt for beginners, but the ability level for kyu grades is roughly similar. Catfish Jim & the soapdish 11:56, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

"The suffix -ka, when added to a noun, means a person with expertise or special knowledge on that subject. For example, Benkyo-ka means "scholar". The example is only pertinent if the person reading already knows the meaning of 'Benkyo' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.104.224.32 (talk) 09:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

The safety section as it is now is too one sided. Judo is a combat sport so obviously there is destructive power that can cause harm. See this article for example: http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20100826f1.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.150.170.36 (talk) 06:11, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

That's 108 deaths over a 27 year period. 4 per year. 4 more than is necessary, I agree. There are details of each fatality here. Some are as a result of exhaustion and heart failure but many are due to head injuries. I will think about this section and draft something to include in the article. Catfish Jim & the soapdish 09:43, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

• Proposing to combine references. Instead of having separate referenced sentences pointing to separate items in the references table (e.g. #1 ^ Kano (2008) p6; #2 ^ Kano (2008) pp9-10; #3 ^ Kano (2008) p11) have them point to one item in the table (e.g. ^ a b c d e f Kano (2008)). There are alternative ways to optimize a reference table. See more at Alternative Referencing Style. Fayerman (talk) 17:09, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

The references are to specific pages in the sources, something that has been requested for articles I've submitted to GAR in the past. I was intending to improve their functionality by using Template:harv style references, once I've got the prose and accuracy at a half-decent level. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 22:20, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

For obvious reasons, the number of "famous practitioners" in the infobox needs to be limited. Consequently, the criteria for inclusion has to be strict.

While Bruce Lee is undoubtedly famous and was, to an extent, a judo practitioner, he was not famous for being a judo practitioner and does not belong in such a list. Likewise, those who are famous for their career in mixed martial arts, but not Judo, cannot be included. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 13:08, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Further, it evolved to greatly emphasize the ground aspect of judo, Judo Newaza, while disassociating itself with karate (see Gichin Funakoshi's friendship with Jigoro Kano) and various other forms of striking or attacking a vital point in favor of takedowns from both Judo and later from universal grappling moves such as double legs and virtually any form of takedown to get to the judo-newaza technique variations outlined by the Gracie family. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.108.158.211 (talk) 10:46, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

User:Catfish_Jim_and_the_soapdish: Some of the links that you removed from the 'See also' section are already incorporated in the article, so removing them here makes sense (the Olympics and World Championships, for example). Judo in Canada and Judo in the United Kingdom are not, however, and until such time there is a section of the article that addresses Judo in specific countries, these links should remain in the 'See also' section.CanadianJudoka (talk) 18:25, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

(Edit conflict... I hate when that happens) I've removed some of the links in this section as they were unnecessary. The Canon of Judo is one of my favorite judo books, but it doesn't need a link here. Judo in the United Kingdom and Judo in Canada are undoubtedly interesting subjects, but as per the MOS, we need to use common sense when assessing what to link to... there are hundreds of countries in which judo is practiced and we cannot include them all, nor is it necessary to for the sake of this article. The other removed subjects are, I believe, covered sufficiently in the main body of text. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 18:31, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

I agree that it wouldn't be reasonable to list all of the countries where Judo is practised there, but I saw it as a temporary measure that is acceptable for the moment because there are only three articles on Judo in specific countries at the moment (these two and on on Judo in India). The main purpose of putting them there was to make editors and readers who are interested in Judo aware of the articles' existence. Maybe what needs to be done is to create an article (maybe a list) titled 'Judo by country' that can be linked in the 'See also' section here and then serve as directory of this type of article, prefaced with a discussion of the diffusion of Judo outside of Japan. I will be working on the 'Judo in Canada' article over the next few months when time permits, and I hope that it will be used as a model for similar articles. I would particularly like to see articles on Judo in France, Russia, Brazil, the United States, and of course Japan. CanadianJudoka (talk) 18:43, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Okay, excellent idea! Judo by country Catfish Jim and the soapdish 18:57, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for creating the list. I think that it would be a good idea to start a WikiProject for Judo sometime down the road to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Judo; articles on Judo by country alone could keep a group of people busy for a while. Let me know if you'd be interested in participating. CanadianJudoka (talk) 20:08, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Catfish - I like your changes to my arm bar section. Yep, that's me! An America. ;) Tanya ((♫)) 23:12, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

  Agree I'll start Judo in Brazil. — Jdcollins13 (talk) 18:35, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Great, thanks! CanadianJudoka (talk) 18:42, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Quote: A judo teacher is called sensei (先生?).[65] The word sensei comes from sen or saki (before) and sei (life) – i.e. one who has preceded you. Unquote

When I studied Chinese at university, my lecturer from Beijing said that 先生 xiansheng means 'first born'. Perhaps these are not the correct characters for sensei in Japanese. 123.26.60.240 (talk) 22:55, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

So it's mentioned that an ippon is 100pts, while a waza-ari is 10pts, but two waza-ari add up to an ippon? Someone should clarify this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.12.184.6 (talk) 15:41, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

It appears to be confusion resulting from the way the scores are displayed, i.e. 011 = 0 ippons, 1 waza-ari, 1 yuko. I have removed the erroneous information.Catfish Jim and the soapdish 18:31, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

The duration of pins that is mentioned to score ippon, waza-ari or yuko clashes with the articles for these scores: this article mentions 20 seconds for ippon, 15 seconds for waza-ari and 10 seconds for yuko whereas, the individual articles for these scores respectively mention 25 seconds, 20 seconds, and 15 seconds — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheCois (talk • contribs) 20:31, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

There are so many Japanese characters in the article it's hard to read. Since most of the words transcribed are links to the respective articles, anyone who should want to compare the transcription with the original can do so in those articles. Is it OK if I remove all Japanese characters from here, except for the ones for judo? The Other Saluton (talk) 21:02, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

I would personally object to that and don't think it's necessary. However, if this was debated properly and there was consensus for such a move, I wouldn't stand in its way. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 21:55, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

What do you mean by saying "debated properly"? The Other Saluton (talk) 16:21, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Actually, just go ahead and do it... if anyone else objects to them being removed it will be easily revertable. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 15:32, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

This list needs to be limited by some means otherwise it runs the risk of being unpalatable. I suggest it is limited entirely to people who are notable for their judo (perhaps amongst other areas of notability) rather than notable people who also do judo. Theodore Roosevelt certainly did practice judo a few times but he is not famous for it. We don't want to get to get into a situation where we are including the likes of Madonna (has been seen training in judo) at the expense of bona-fide practitioners.

For the sake of brevity I suggest that we should include on the basis of:

• are a winner of a gold medal at the World Championships
• are a winner of a gold medal at the Olympics (in Judo)
• made a substantial contribution to the development of the art or sport.

Comments? Catfish Jim and the soapdish 12:36, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

It may also be a good idea to add:

also see: List of Judo practitioners

To allow for an expanded list. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 12:43, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

In fact that is exactly what the article for Brazilian Jiu Jitsu does, dispensing with any list in the infobox... done as per WP:BB Catfish Jim and the soapdish 20:12, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

I agree with you. when I removed a red link yesterday, I thought there were too many names and clean up was needed. Oda Mari (talk) 10:07, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

A number of the names I started to clear before removing the list altogether were MMA competitors who train in judo. Is there any value in creating a list relating to this, or should they be included in List_of_judoka#Others or List of celebrity judoka Catfish Jim and the soapdish 10:25, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

• Judo et Judo-Do: haute ecole du combat par Hubert Klinger-Klingerstorff 1952
• Judo & Judo-do par Hubert Klinger-Klingerstorff 1953
• Teach Yourself Judo & Judo-Do par Hubert Klinger-Klingerstorff 1953
• Erwartungshorizont des Judo-Do: eine Technik-Checkliste par Dennis Arnold
• Les racines du judo français: histoire d'une culture sportive par Michel Brousse
• Cynarski Wojciech J., Sztuki walki budō w kulturze Zachodu, Wyd. WSP, Rzeszów 2000. (ISBN 83-7262-072-2 Parameter error in {{ISBN}}: checksum)
• Cynarski Wojciech J., Sztuki walki – Idō i Idōkan, SIP, Rzeszów 2009. (ISBN 978-83-61312-85-7)
• Cynarski Wojciech J., Martial Arts and Combat Sports – Humanistic Outlook, Rzeszów University Press, Rzeszów 2009. 172 p. ISBN 978-83-7338-439-2
• World of sports indoor, Volume 2 par Anil Taneja, ISBN 9788178357652.

‎Aikikai45 (talk) 17:30, 31 August 2015 (UTC) And now it is Moved excess bibliography entries to "further reading"--Aikikai45 (talk) 21:42, 1 September 2015 (UTC) despite extensive media coverage in the early year an example Judo do is no more

• Brazilian jiu-jitsu
• Kosen judo (高專柔道)
• Russian judo
• Sambo (especially Sport Sambo)!!!

Wikipedia:Splitting The two main reasons for splitting material out from an article are size and content relevance. If either the whole article, or the specific material within one section becomes too large, or if the material is seen to be inappropriate for the article due to being out of scope, then a split may be considered or proposed. Consideration must be given to size, notability and potential neutrality issues before proposing or carrying out a split. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aikikai45 (talk • contribs) 22:38, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

If you want a separate article about Judo do, make a draft at Draft:Judo do for review. JohnCD (talk) 22:41, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

I've already write an article Judo do you delete it 3 times and restored it 2 times then you put a redirect link to Judo#Related arts and derivatives [8] Protected "Judo do": Addition of unsourced or poorly sourced content BUT YOUR unsourced or poorly sourced content is an excess bibliography entries for others. You just bite me instead of working for wikipedia. I think it would have been more helpful for you to have corrected the sentence that you think is not correct or add {{Accuracy}} or {{Disputed}} but you prefer deleting all article for (G3: Blatant hoax). You do wrong. Now restore and repair. --Aikikai45 (talk) 22:50, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

If this is notable enough to be included as a derivative of Judo in the main Judo article, it needs to be notable as a martial art and should be able to stand on its own as a Wikipedia article. My take is that it should be allowed to be tested at AFD.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk • contribs) 07:32, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

I   Agree with @Catfish Jim and the soapdish: Also tested at AFD List of Judo-do techniques   Disagree   Merged List of judo techniques— Preceding unsigned comment added by Aikikai45 (talk • contribs) 08:26, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

• I believe that it'd be far better for the editor to work on this at AfC. Right now he's caught the attention of multiple editors because of their disruptive editing and there are concerns from many editors about whether or not the sources that were in the article actively backed up the claims. Like it or not, an editor's activity has a pretty big impact on how things are received at AfD and if people perceive an editor to be disruptive, they're more likely to be more harsh on an article. If the article is deleted at AfD based on the current sourcing (which was fairly weak, as it had only 1-2 usable sources and a host of self-published sources) then that would make it very, very difficult for it to be overturned in the future. For the article's sake, I think that it'd be more merciful for this to be worked on at AfC. If they wanted to ask someone to take a look at the article so it didn't have to wait as long at AfC, I have no issue with that. However right now I think that going to AfD would just be article suicide at this point. If anyone here wants to work on the article (@Catfish Jim and the soapdish:) then I have no problem restoring the draft. The only reason it was deleted was because the article creator had requested that it be deleted because they wanted to keep trying to disruptively re-add the article to the mainspace. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 10:26, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

I've done as much as I think it merits. It strikes me as one of the many judo based arts that appeared in the west in the mid-20th century but had no lasting or significant impact. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 13:38, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

I must say you two are very kind (with honourable mention to the other editors involved).Peter Rehse (talk) 13:49, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

I have some concerns about the book World of Sport Indoor as a reliable source. I've had a look at the publisher, Kalpaz's information for authors page: For Authors It really doesn't inspire confidence in terms of the level of editorial oversight they might apply to their publications. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 07:55, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Well its clearly self published but I suspect that will be the least of the issues.Peter Rehse (talk) 09:27, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

I've figured out why this book was bothering me. I deleted a reference to it in the judo article a few years back because the chapter on Judo entirely reproduced the Wikipedia Judo article as it was in late 2008. We can safely call this an unreliable and unusable reference. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 10:15, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

I have invited Aikikai45, when they come off their short block, to improve Draft:Judo do as best they can, with a view to submitting it to AfD to get a community decision on the notability question. I have also posted a message at WT:WikiProject Martial Arts#Judo do to see if anyone there can chip in. JohnCD (talk) 09:32, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

The following page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Moore_(wrestler) is flagged as an orphan. Is this article the most appropriate location for a link to this page to be brought in, given that that article indicates he suggeted the usage of weight classes in Judo? I've added a comment indicating what I mean, but I would prefer a second opinion on this one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BLu (talk • contribs) 15:56, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Unfortunately that article is misleading and is not really supported by the cited reference. Weight divisions had been suggested decades before Moore was involved and it's highly unlikely that Moore had any influence whatsoever over the decision to implement them. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 18:30, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

So that's a no, then... Can't say I'm too surprised. I've removed the comment to keep things clean, thanks for the reply! --BLu (talk) 19:03, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Freestyle judo is a ruleset that is used in some competitions primarily in the USA. It is not something that would be recognised in most parts of the world, certainly in terms of mainstream judo. I don't believe it merits the coverage that it previously had, so I have moved it to a subheading. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 12:59, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Not to be rude but this is the english language wikipedia is it not?--SeminoleNation (talk) 14:06, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Makes no difference. We have to adopt a world view on international subjects and, in any case, the USA does not come even close to having the majority of English language speakers in the world. My preference would be to remove any reference to BJJ, Freestyle Judo, Sambo, Russian Judo, etc. altogether from this article. But these arts and rulesets are still recognisable as judo.

I suggest, if you think it needs further coverage, that you start a new article on Freestyle Judo which can be linked to from this article. I will help with this if you need it. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 19:39, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

I do understand your views but I do think that freestyle Judo needs to be referenced in the main article. The modern IFJ Judo is not Jigoro's Judo. This article is about Judo as he developed it. I'm willing to compromise and leave it under the competitive Judo section because it is still competitive Judo. The IJF's Olympic centered rules do not dictate everything in Judo. Freestyle Judo resembles what Judo originally was and many people around the world feel the same way. All of these references are important. Judo is ever evolving because of the modern world of martial arts and the huge impact Mixed Martial Arts has done on every martial art worldwide. Jigoro's Judo is also why Kosen Judo came to be and why Brazilian Jiu Jitsu is what it is today.--SeminoleNation (talk) 21:35, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

The scale of competitive judo that operates under the banner of "Freestyle Judo" is insignificant when compared to those operating under IJF rules. Neither is a good representation of Kodokan judo as Kano formulated it, but IJF competitive judo is absolutely and utterly dominant in the competitive sphere; it is the ruleset that occurs in the World Championships, Olympics, PanAms, Europeans, etc. etc...

This has nothing to do whether one form is superior in quality over the other, it is just a reflection of their world-wide importance. Go to the UK, lots of people have heard of Brian Jacks and Neil Adams and watched them fight in the Olympics. Go to France and you will find lots of non-judoka who follow Riner. Outside of the USA, virtually nobody has heard of Freestyle judo and I doubt many people have heard of it in the USA outside of those who practice it. It just isn't significant enough to merit more than a couple of sentences in this article. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 22:42, 17 May 2017 (UTC)