Ozeki 'co-operation'

[Kozaru 0]

Jonosuke,

Here's the thing. As I've said before, we cannot prove anything with these numbers. But we can make things look bad. Most people think that you prove things with DNA or fingerprints, but it's not strictly true. DNA and fingerprints only provide odds which are overwhelmingly against the suspect being innocent. If you wanted to be on a jury and say, "Just because the DNA matches, does not exclude the possibility that another person has the same DNA at the locations sampled", you'd be technically correct. However, at some point in any given situation, most reasonable people decide that the odds are too out-of-whack to be coincidence. We can all draw the line in different places, and you seem to be one who has placed a stricter standard on the odds in this Ozeki case.

At 60% odds for motivated rikishi, I've given a 0.4% chance of all 11 matches turning out this way. At 70% odds, it's 2.0%. If you want, you can say you believe it's all legit and you're going to go with the low odds. But what most people on this thread have done is to at least acknowledge that THIS LOOKS REALLY BAD. I won't say 100% that these guys are throwing matches, but I will say with 100% certainty that it doesn't look good. You can end any disagreement we have here by coming out and writing that it looks highly suspicious, but that you're going to go with the coincidence possibility. So I ask you: How does this look?

Edited November 29, 2008 by Kozaru

[Kozaru 0]

Because your basis is basically between ozeki, they should have 50-50 bouts and if the results stray far, you suspect something.

This didn't strike me as strange until just now.... With every argument you put forward, I become more and more certain that you are either not properly reading my posts, or not giving my argument the proper consideration.

I didn't say that the odds are 50-50, and in fact, in post #3 of this thread, I gave the minimum odds as 60-40 in favour of the needy rikishi! This was to account for the extra motivation.

Let me show you how the percentages work here, for 11 matches to go in one direction (I've never considered the 40% and 50% odds previously in this thread):

40% on needy Ozeki (handicap due to likely injury and better basho of opponent) ------> 0.004%

50% on needy Ozeki (extra motivation cancels handicap mentioned above) ------> 0.05% (Note that this works out to 1/2000, and might be good enough odds to prove a case in a court of law, as they are beyond most people's level of reasonable doubt)

60% on needy Ozeki (this is quite a big advantage for a guy having a bad basho) ------> 0.4%

70% on needy Ozeki (huge advantage!) ------> 2.0%

80% on needy Ozeki (a real stretch) ------> 8.6%

90% on needy Ozeki (so ridiculous it shouldn't even be considered) ------> 31%

95% on needy Ozeki (*cough*) ------> 57%

I hope you see that at any reasonable odds at all, it's still unlikely that those 11 matches were all legit. We only even break the 1/3rd barrier when considering individual match odds higher than 90%. Your argument about me assuming the odds are 50-50 in order to make this theory work, doesn't hold up. I can give them 70% or 80% and it still looks like something's not right.

We cannot expect a certain bout to be 50-50 because depending on their physical conditions or "Genkiness" they may over or underachieve their normal ability as I pointed out Kotooshu's yusho basho or even this basho's Yoshikaze.

P.S. I think you're underestimating Yoshikaze, but time will tell. I expect him to get killed when he's higher up next basho, but think he has become too good to be ranked as low as he was this time around.

Edited November 29, 2008 by Kozaru

[Jonosuke 28]

I think it looks awfully bad to have ozeki still with kachikoshi-makekoshi line on the senshuraku or even a few days before. They should not be in that position so that there is no thread like this.

But you can come up with all the permutations you can have and the numbers listed but it still won't make that much difference to me as you have restricted the time span and players so your numbers do not extrapolate to all ozeki and times before your cut-off.

If going by looking bad alone, Chiyotaikai lost all his bouts to Kaio from March 2002 to March 2005, 15 straight basho (excluding Kyujo). If Taikai had ozeki cooperation on May 2002 as he lost to three ozeki and a yokozuna, and he won the Nagoya the following basho, he could have been a yokozuna. If he had another ozeki cooperation in the followng basho at the 2002 Aki then he could at least force the yusho kettei-sen against Musashimaru but still it was an equivalent to yusho as he would have finished with the same record as the eventual yusho winner.

You can pick a certain basho or certain span of time with certain rikishi and come up with any number of explanations to say one way or another but historically speaking, it just does not add up. If there was truly an ozeki cooperation, then this was a perfect time for Chiyotaikai to be a yokozuna but it did not happen. A mere makekoshi gets you only a kadoban but missing a yokozuna promotion, it means your whole Ozumo legacy.

Edited November 29, 2008 by Jonosuke

[Kozaru 0]

But you can come up with all the permutations you can have and the numbers listed but it still won't make that much difference to me as you have restricted the time span and players so your numbers do not extrapolate to all ozeki and times before your cut-off.

This doesn't make any sense. You continue to come forward with arguments that have absolutely no relevance to the accusation. It's no wonder that a few posts back I thought you were referring to Haru 2007, not Kyushu 2004, because Haru 2007 is actually within the scope of my accusation. Talking about an old possibility of Chiyotaikai's Yokozuna promotion from 2002? Arguing that the Ozeki shouldn't pay each other? The straw-men are running wild. To me, that's a sign that my case is strong. For whatever reason, you refuse to accept that it could even be possible for some but not all Ozeki to co-operate in some but not all years. I have 3 brothers. If they were all arrested as part of some plot, should the jury acquit them because the 4th brother was not involved? Should they see it as impossible to believe that my brothers were plotting for the last 3 years, but weren't plotting before that?

Things start, things end. Some people participate, others don't. 5 Ozeki, 3 years. Nothing more. If you can't discuss my accusation within its own scope, we're not going to get very far, are we?

Edited November 29, 2008 by Kozaru

[Jonosuke 28]

If you can't discuss my accusation within its own scope, we're not going to get very far, are we?

Because the scope does not prove anything.

If it happens now, why didn't it happen before? It's not as if these two guys became ozeki a couple of years ago. That's why we are not going to get very far.

You can say, OK, such and such rikishi bouts are pretty strange in such and such time period, then I have no problem saying based on the numbers you presented it's one sided or there is a certain trend.

But your thread is titled OZEKI co-operation and you don't specify the time period.

[Kozaru 0]

If you can't discuss my accusation within its own scope, we're not going to get very far, are we?

Because the scope does not prove anything.

If it happens now, why didn't it happen before? It's not as if these two guys became ozeki a couple of years ago. That's why we are not going to get very far.

You can say, OK, such and such rikishi bouts are pretty strange in such and such time period, then I have no problem saying based on the numbers you presented it's one sided or there is a certain trend.

But your thread is titled OZEKI co-operation and you don't specify the time period.

Then read beyond the title. Unfortunately, I couldn't fit my entire argument into the title of the thread. In the example above, if 3 of my brothers are arrested but I am not, could the media not call it the "Kozaru brothers case"?

You're right, the scope of an argument cannot prove anything. The scope is the boundaries of the argument, not evidence.

Why didn't it happen before? Maybe it did on a smaller scale, maybe it's because they now require it as they're too old to hold the rank legitimately, but that isn't even relevant. If I rob a store tomorrow, why wasn't I a criminal today?

Do you know what a straw-man argument is? It's no shame if you don't, and I only learned the term earlier this year. You've set-up many of them in this thread. And that's why the discussion has deteriorated beyond any usefulness.

Edited December 1, 2008 by Kozaru

[Kozaru 0]

I know people really, really miss this thread, so I'll give an update. We have new data points from the last few months. And the results are now that in the last 15 matches (in which Hakuho was not involved) in which a KK Ozeki had a chance to help out an Ozeki in need, the needy Ozeki has won all 15 of those matches.

http://sumodb.sumogames.com/Query_bout.asp...amp;show_form=0

This trend is only going to get more overwhelming in the future.

[Asameshimae 220]

Is this technically yaocho? I don't know what the definition is. I thought it meant money changed hands (but I could be very wrong). The dictionary reference I just read didn't mention money. I don't think there is any question that guys who need one more win make deals with guys who don't really mind one more loss. I wouldn't even be surprised if guys have given up a win with no under the table negotiations at all just because they want to help a guy in his time of need.

[Kozaru 0]

Is this technically yaocho? I don't know what the definition is. I thought it meant money changed hands (but I could be very wrong).

It doesn't make a difference to me what they call it. It's happening, and it's a good guide to pick winners in the games (Sign of approval...)

[Asashosakari 19,593]

I don't think there is any question that guys who need one more win make deals with guys who don't really mind one more loss. I wouldn't even be surprised if guys have given up a win with no under the table negotiations at all just because they want to help a guy in his time of need.

It has a name of its own: mukiryoku-zumo. Generally, the more loudly somebody complains about yaocho, the less likely they are to acknowledge the difference, or that there even is one.

[Kozaru 0]

I don't think there is any question that guys who need one more win make deals with guys who don't really mind one more loss. I wouldn't even be surprised if guys have given up a win with no under the table negotiations at all just because they want to help a guy in his time of need.

It has a name of its own: mukiryoku-zumo. Generally, the more loudly somebody complains about yaocho, the less likely they are to acknowledge the difference, or that there even is one.

I want to ask whether or not this was a shot at me. I, for the record, do not believe that money is changing hands. But what I believe about that is irrelevant. The only thing I have any reason to suspect is that the matches are not legit, which is suggested by the numbers in front of me.

Oh, and it seems I miscounted before when I said 15 back in May. It was 14 then, and 15 now. (That assumes I just counted correctly this time. I only have so many fingers, you know)

Edited September 27, 2009 by Kozaru

[Asashosakari 19,593]

I want to ask whether or not this was a shot at me.

No, it wasn't.

[Asameshimae 220]

If memory serves, a number of years ago (10 maybe?) for one or two basho, they tried a more dynamic system of setting up match ups and you saw a lot more rikishi with the same record facing each other. Though it was never mentioned (which is oh so Japanese) I was pretty sure that it was to try to keep matches truly competitive, especially the last day. The practice did not continue for whatever reason...

[ryafuji 815]

I have no evidence for this but it seems that matching those with 7-7 records on senshuraku is much less common than it used to be. My introduction to sumo was Channel 4's broadcasts in the late 80s and then it was referred to as a kind of tradition, a deliberate "playoff" system to ensure promotino and relegation.

[Asameshimae 220]

And there's the rub. The kachi/make koshi system makes it too easy for wrestlers to compromise their competetivity, yet the strict sumo system makes the prospect of going down to the lower ranks and becoming a flunky again with nothing but an allowance and all those demeaning chores... who wouldn't cheat if they had to...?

[Jonosuke 28]

Kozaru kun, OK, I got the right thread and I realized you and I traded a few barbs back and forth a while back and you and I know we will never in agreement about this point because you see a "pattern" and interpret in one way and I don't. Because I believe things do happen just like how many times Kotomitsuki faced Asashoryu and how many times he lost.

How could one rikishi win or lose so many in a row? Is Kototmitsuki letting Asashoryu win almost every time because Asashoryu needs a soft bout every now and then? Some see things as they are and ask why and others things as never are and ask why not?

You see things in one way and I don't and that's about all we can say about this.

[ilovesumo 12]

Well....I did not really wanna watch Mickey-Kaio....would have been a good toilet break, but I stayed and...well, you know...

[Kozaru 0]

Well....I did not really wanna watch Mickey-Kaio....would have been a good toilet break, but I stayed and...well, you know...

you know....? What, you went in your seat?

[Kozaru 0]

Because I believe things do happen just like how many times Kotomitsuki faced Asashoryu and how many times he lost.

That's one rikishi consistently having the number of an inferior rikishi. It's not 4 Ozeki who can beat each other when they need it, then exactly the opposite happens when the other one needs it. Repeatedly.

I made a poll. Let's have a vote and see what the forum thinks.

http://www.sumoforum.net/forums/index.php?...mp;#entry177027

But seriously, are you saying you didn't know the outcome of the Kaio-Mitsuki match before it took place? I'd like to see you write it explicitly.

[Sashohitowa 6]

I think it will be fun if we incorporate these discussions into a game - Guess the Results of the Ozeki-Ozeki Matches (or something with a better acronym).

The participants will be divided on West and East side - OBSC-philes and -phobes.

I just hope I don't forget that idea until November.

[Asameshimae 220]

Now, there's an idea! I think I'm in.

[Asojima 2,874]

We go through this dog and pony show every four months, so allow me to trot my pony out again.

Ozekis start every basho with only two career incentives: Yusho and Survival.

As long as they have two or fewer losses, they are generally in the yusho race and will go all out in every match. After the third loss, survival kicks in.

Survival is attained by getting 8 and only 8 wins. There is absolutely no career incentive for an Ozeki to obtain more. Survival has two factors. The first factor is to get that 8th win. The second factor is to avoid injury. Every match is approached with the judgment of whether it is worth going all out for a win or relaxing and avoiding injury. Relaxing does not necessarily mean handing over an intentional win. It is simply the avoidance of possible injury situations.

An ozeki who has his 8th win or his 8th loss is either very relaxed or kyujo. He has nothing to gain and everything to lose. Any late term matchup between a relaxed ozeki and a desperate ozeki will almost inevitably go to the latter. The latter can even use it in his calculations on which of his remaining matches to concentrate on winning. No agreement or yaocho is required. No commitment to a loss is needed. Human nature rules. The motivated ozeki wins and expects to win. The relaxed ozeki breathes a sigh of relief. Statistics lie.

Remind me to post this again in four months. (I am not worthy...)

[Asashosakari 19,593]

I was searching for something completely different but here's something from the vault that's semi-related to this neverending topic:

Edo period sumo was as gachinko as pro wrestling, and this was known at the time. (And probably explains why pro wrestling is as popular and taken as seriously as it is in Japan). Sumo was not (and is not) a sport, for the simple reason that the idea of spectator sports as we know it didn't quite exist. To be sure, there were games, and among the nobles there were competitions. But these were by-products of other pursuits. Bushi (warriors) would have archery competitions for a daimyo, but they didn't train in archery in order to win competitions. Now sumo though, with its rikishi, was entertainment. After all, its purpose was to raise money for temples and shrines. That's why you had "banner Ozeki" and things like that; to play to the crowd. It was first and foremost a show. It was only with the influx of foreign ideas in the Meiji era that the idea of "sports" (and the ensuing Japanese word "supootsu") took hold. One could say that sumo never quite completed the transition.

[shumitto 418]

Ozekis start every basho with only two career incentives: Yusho and Survival.

That is not exactly like this. Every competitor, no matter (EDIT) the sport or the art, has his own reputation to defend and it depends on his past achievements/ status among other things. A rikishi starts off the Basho, presumably, willing to win every and each bout. It doesn't happen for every one of them for obvious reasons, however, an Ozeki should try it a bit harder so as to end up with a 10-5, 11-4 respectable record. But, if an Ozeki is no longer at the Yusho race yet has clinched his 8 he still has plenty to do and the clich

Edited September 30, 2009 by shumitto

[Kozaru 0]

Add yet another data point (16 in a row now?), and probably another couple of voices asking me to shut the hell up. (Laughing...)