Kintamayama

Podcast - Yaocho discussion

Recommended Posts

Its "satire". You know, making fun of stuff.

(i guess your comment is in itself an attempt at satire; let's just carry on instead)
poor satire, sometimes mean spirited, and nearly always, deliberately or unconsciously, an attempt to muddy the waters to avoid the topic
isn't it clear that this is the point of my post?
isn't the greatest value of an open forum the opportunity to exchange sincere views and learn from one another?
sure, let's not take ourselves too seriously; we can have fun
we can still have open dialogue beyond a middle-school sensibility that goes nowhere

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sure, let's not take ourselves too seriously; we can have fun

we can still have open dialogue beyond a middle-school sensibility that goes nowhere

Be glad some people are actually still indulging you; by July you'll probably be on all regular posters' ignore list for wasting their time with repetitive nonsense.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Be glad some people are actually still indulging you; by July you'll probably be on all regular posters' ignore list for wasting their time with repetitive nonsense.

what did you have for breakfast?

again, the topic of the thread is yaocho, not mudslinging

if you are really interested in conversation on other topics, please private message me; maybe we can sort it out

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

again, the topic of the thread is yaocho, not mudslinging

It wasn't meant as mudslinging, only as a heads-up that it's likely going to get very, very quiet around your posts soon. Just so you'll know why nobody's playing along with your self-styled rebel act anymore.

if you are really interested in conversation on other topics, please private message me; maybe we can sort it out

Pass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Argument clinic. Recommended.

Edited by egparis18
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, here is a serious attempt to sum up my views on this discussion:

I think that the whole argument about rampant yaocho/mukiryoku rests on five pieces of evidence (I am using the term "evidence" extremely loosely here).

Piece #1: The 7-7 on senshuraku thing (which featured in the Freakonomics paper/movie), the miraculous comeback of 5-7 Ozeki thing, and other variants (actually there are some "weird" patterns that even most hardcore yaocho believers haven't heard about; but I won't tell you :-D).

Piece #2: Itai's revelations (allegedly almost every top-level bout in the 1990s was rigged); Miyagino's telephone conversation (Hakuho allegedly threw some bouts around 2006); and of course, the yaocho scandal itself that led to the "lost basho" in 2011.

Piece #3: Anomalies of all kinds; like Kotoshogiku winning a yusho, or Hakuho losing a bout against a Japanese Ozeki

Piece #4: Mike's bout analyses; musing about rikishi X not using an opportunity when he could etc.

All this is tied together in order to arrive at Piece #5: There is a conspiratorial motive behind all this. Here is a list of some motives and theories put forth by Mike Wesemann over the years: the NSK wants to install a Japanese Yokozuna as soon as possible (2005-2007); the NSK wants to fabricate a Japanese yusho (2007-2011); the NSK will do everything to prevent Hakuho from getting this or that record (2006-2010); it is not about money (yaocho), but about intentionally letting up (mukiryoku) (2012-); it is not the NSK that orchestrates things, it is the Mongolian Yokozuna (2011-); the ultimate goal is to create the impression that the Japanese sometimes can beat the Mongolians (2014-).

Now here is my take on each of these pieces (and I will also state how serious I take them).

Ad #1: Though the Freakonomics paper has its flaws, the evidence is clearly out there. How much of it is extra effort by rikishi at 7-7, and how much is intentional letting up on behalf of their opponents, is largely guesswork. But this is some good fodder for starting to muse about yaocho/mukiryoku.

Ad #2: If people who are in the know talk about yaocho, it's serious stuff as well. They might have motives that we don't know of, they might exaggerate things, but yeah, I tend to believe in their reports. And there is the yaocho scandal itself (interestingly, Mike Wesemann never speculated about rampant yaocho in Juryo before it was known). So let's say there was rampant yaocho in the top flight of Makuuchi during the 1990s, and there was some yaocho in Juryo before 2011. Would this be any evidence that there is yaocho/mukiryoku in the top-level bouts right now? Of course not! Citing instances from the past as proof for something going on today is paper-thin, at best. Those who insist that piece #2 is strong evidence should not be surprised if others point to their tin-foil hat.

Ad #3: Anomalies do happen all the time, as any sumo gamer can attest to. They exist in any sport, and there is no evidence why anomalies shouldn't take place fairly frequently in a sport where two athletes try to defeat their opponent in a split second. Seeing anomalies as something sinister going on, therefore, is not a particularly compelling argument to me. Especially if you factor in that some of those alleged anomalies might have reasonable alternative explanations. Injuries, for instance. I would have no problem assuming that an injury-free Kotoshogiku (with some luck of making the right decisions at the right moment) is capable of getting a 14-1 yusho, and even beating a potentially injured Hakuho along the way. In sum, I dismiss the whole anomaly argument because to me it all appears in a range of natural variation.

Ad #4: Mike's bout analyses make for a very compelling read. However, I believe there are things like confirmation bias and hindsight bias at play here. Why do I believe that Mike is particularly prone to these biases? First, because he does not allow for anomalies one bit. As other have stated already, Mike seems to believe that the outcome of a bout could be predicted with extremely high accuracy. Which is quite a strange assumption. Second, Mike builds his bout analyses on some basic assumptions that are extremely outlandish. For instance, he still believes that Hakuho could win close to 90 per year (there might be others who also think so). Even worse, he firmly believes that all Japanese Ozeki are at the same level, and that level would be about M6 (which is downright ridiculous; but he stated this as "fact" repeatedly). Of course, if you analyze bouts from Japanese Ozeki with the mindset that they are actually only M6 caliber, every win of them must be fake, and every loss of them must be deserved which is exactly what Mike does for years over years. Seriously, I remember once looking up all his reports to identify a win of Kisenosato that he did not find anything fishy about and I had to go back a full year of reporting!

The thing is that confirmation bias is difficult to escape. Last basho, I made an experiment and watched all bouts from Hakuho with the mindset that they might be rigged in his favor. I was surprised at how easily I found apparently fishy things in almost all his wins! This is not to say that others will also automatically fall prey to fixed mindsets. But if you like to, try it out! Try for just a moment to believe that Hakuho is not capable of winning by himself, and watch the bouts with this mindset. I am seriously interested in whether you "succeed" or not.

Ad #5: This is where all the ridicule comes from, I believe. Mike proclaimed big pictures for 10 years on end, and whatever he conspired, it simply did not happen. Never. The big pictures that Mike so eloquently conjures, and their constant failure to materialize, are the main reason for why he (and his fans) deserve some flak. And I think the big picture failure is the death blow to the rampant yaocho hypothesis. I would buy into the yaocho hypothesis if (and only if) the number of Japanese yusho would be unnaturally high. The yusho count of Japanese rikishi is the ultimate litmus test for rampant yaocho. I would be seriously concerned if Japanese rikishi had won three yusho per year over the last few years (that would be Mike's notion of "creating a sense of parity"). I would be somewhat concerned if the average number of Japanese yusho had been two per year. If the Japanese had walked away with one yusho per year, I would not have been concerned and thought that this is in the realm of possible. However, no yusho at all for 10 years?? Actually, given statistical patterns, one could make a better case for a conspiracy theory which says that the Japanese rikishi are always letting up and losing on purpose! How does THAT theory sound for a change? Let's make a Website around this thought. Many Japanese would LOVE it! :-)

Sorry for the lengthy rant, but on the upside, I have now added all to this discussion that I possibly could, and can move back to lurking mode. :-)

Edited by Randomitsuki
  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

again and again, in this thread or any other here, when the topics of yaocho or mukiryoku come up,

the same obsessionists bring out their straw man, conspiracy, and delight in unintended self ridicule, believing they have hidden the actual topic

while yaocho implies at least a bit of conspiracy, and mukiryoku may or may not,

it is necessary to get to first base before second or third

the ridiculists never actually deny that yaocho and mukiryoku take place, as they well know this is already established

instead of conversation, they throw up fantastic theories of conspiracy, pretending these have been proposed by others

is it an excess of bile that motivates this?

if not, what is it that so terrifies the conspiracy theorists here?

one can guess that it is a fear that open discussion will hurt sumo, as evidenced in the drop in attendance from the yaocho scandal

i agree that putting the spotlight on yaocho and mukiryoku can be overdone, and to the degree that it is, it's a disservice

in my view, the extreme denial of letting up (through implication, without actually stating so) is also a disservice, especially to the newer viewers trying to deepen their understanding of the art of sumo

so, conspiracists, while your practices may show mildly cute, they hardly reflect admirably

please ask yourself, does your frequent battering of your straw man serve the spirit and art of sumo?

I'm trying to understand what your point is. I think what you are saying is the following:

(Note I do not necessarily agree with this, I'm just trying to restate the only logical argument I can find more clearly.)

"There is a lot of bout-fixing and lazy sumo going on, but there is no one orchestrating it. Rikishi are individually throwing bouts, but not for some overall end goal as planned by some person or group. No one is directing anyone to lose any particular bout, but sometimes there are incentives for rikishi to lose matches. Hakuho all by himself with absolutely no pressure from the Kyokai has decided to ease up and let some people beat him every once in a while. The other Mongolians on their own, without input from either Hakuho, each other, or the Kyokai, also decided to lose to Kotoshogiku in order to get a Japanese Yusho winner. They never once participated in any discussion about this; they all perceived the situation such that things would be better on the whole if they decided to throw matches, and may have been encouraged by other's actions. All the talk of conspiracies misses the point; there are cultural forces at work that drive the Japanese and those brought into their culture to recognize when one should perhaps let up to let the other guy win for the good of everyone."

Is that a reasonable summary of the argument? I tried to encapsulate all the information available into a cogent argument that does not have obvious logical flaws but still includes explanations for all the things claimed.

Additionally:

Is there any possible result next basho that would convince you that things are (and were) absolutely on the level? If you can't answer "yes", you are clearly suffering from confirmation bias (see Rando's link) If you have a very narrow view of what is acceptable as a result of things being on the level, you are implying that the outcome of matches is very deterministic and that there is very little variance in who would win if rikishi didn't decided to throw matches. I have offered many examples, particularly Hienriki vs. Abiko, that were meant to illustrate that there is a significant amount of variance at all levels of the sport, so that variance among the top ranked rikishi is not unexpected at all. If you claim there are a wide variety of options that would remove your suspicion, then you should be able to point to a few specific things you think are likely to happen if things are not on the level. If you can only provide a narrative of how things were arranged after they happened, then that is hindsight bias (again see Rando's link).

That's not to say that you're absolutely wrong. It's just that you're heavily influenced by the aforementioned biases. Your arguments should based on falsifiable hypotheses - that is, you should be able to explicitly state that you would withdraw your argument should your hypothesis turn out to be false, and that there is a way of determining whether that hypothesis is false. Using any and all evidence in favor of your argument while refusing to make concrete predictions about the future is extremely unconvincing; if all the evidence supported your case, then the future should be easy to predict just like it's possible to predict how long it will take a ball dropped from a height to hit the ground based on our best physical theories. And in Mike's case, he has made concrete predictions, and every single one of them has ended up being wrong - yet he keeps making them and expects to be taken seriously. It definitely has much more in common with a religion than science. If you're a religious person and don't care much about science, that's your prerogative. And as mentioned above, it will be our prerogative to ignore you once we have realized that you're unreachable. I'm trying my best to help you out here and to understand what's going on, but from a rational skeptic's point of view it's very difficult to see why we should believe in things claimed by people who have a history of making wrong predictions.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

..... by July you'll probably be on all regular posters' ignore list for wasting their time with repetitive nonsense.

Already on mine. :-)

Edited by Kishinoyama
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a vaguely related note, does anyone remember (because I don't) what the Sumotalk position was about that 2007 tabloid allegation that Asashoryu was routinely buying 10+ wins from his basho opponents thanks to his kensho and yusho earnings?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm trying to understand what your point is.

i don't think it is difficult-

setting up straw men to accuse of imaginary conspiracy theories doesn't hide that yaocho and mukiryoku are meaningful topics,

this practice hurts the community; we are all better served to stay on topic and refrain from personal attacks

i don't know how to make it more simple, and wonder if your asserted confusion is not pretended

putting words in others' mouths is not a friendly exercise

the words you've just attempted to attribute to me have nothing to do with me; please take responsibility for your own ideas and speak for yourself

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm trying to understand what your point is.

i don't think it is difficult-

setting up straw men to accuse of imaginary conspiracy theories doesn't hide that yaocho and mukiryoku are meaningful topics,

this practice hurts the community; we are all better served to stay on topic and refrain from personal attacks

i don't know how to make it more simple, and wonder if your asserted confusion is not pretended

putting words in others' mouths is not a friendly exercise

the words you've just attempted to attribute to me have nothing to do with me; please take responsibility for your own ideas and speak for yourself

Despite what you may believe, this thread is not about your views but about Mike Wesseman's. Sumo Talk has repeatedly supported those theories (including in the podcast that is the original topic of this thread), hence they are far from imaginary. That means that people are not "inventing straw men", but arguing against a twisted view of sumo that has been repeatedly supported and maintained through countless years and endless failed predictions on the part of its supporters.

As far as your views are concerned, since you claim that you are being misunderstood, I would appreciate it if you actually say exactly what you believe. You have mentioned in another thread that ST is "everything you need to know about sumo", and in this thread that the podcast in question is "open coverage of how contemporary sumo really works, especially the changing role of yaocho in recent years", and that the last basho was "not a basho, and Kotoshogiku 'won'". Should I not infer by those comments that you subscribe to Mike's theories?

However, so as to avoid people "putting words in your mouth", feel free to let us know what exactly is your take on Mike's theories. Unless you do, and provide a concise summary of what your take on the matter is, I don't think there's any point of maintaining a discussion when all you are willing to contribute is an endless list of pseudo-intellectual cryptic comments.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

again and again, in this thread or any other here, when the topics of yaocho or mukiryoku come up,

the same obsessionists bring out their straw man, conspiracy, and delight in unintended self ridicule, believing they have hidden the actual topic

while yaocho implies at least a bit of conspiracy, and mukiryoku may or may not,

it is necessary to get to first base before second or third

the ridiculists never actually deny that yaocho and mukiryoku take place, as they well know this is already established

instead of conversation, they throw up fantastic theories of conspiracy, pretending these have been proposed by others

is it an excess of bile that motivates this?

if not, what is it that so terrifies the conspiracy theorists here?

one can guess that it is a fear that open discussion will hurt sumo, as evidenced in the drop in attendance from the yaocho scandal

i agree that putting the spotlight on yaocho and mukiryoku can be overdone, and to the degree that it is, it's a disservice

in my view, the extreme denial of letting up (through implication, without actually stating so) is also a disservice, especially to the newer viewers trying to deepen their understanding of the art of sumo

so, conspiracists, while your practices may show mildly cute, they hardly reflect admirably

please ask yourself, does your frequent battering of your straw man serve the spirit and art of sumo?

No one is obsessing- some of us have been waiting for ONE prediction of the conspiracy mongers to come true- never happened. Now, if Mike (or any other conspiracy-monger ..) had seen Kotoshougiku's yusho in advance, that would have been interesting. But he didn't.

There is no fear of open discussion- there is just a lot of boredom with unbased hindsight. I don't know how long you have been following sumo, but for me after following it for three years, it is really, really, getting tiresome to repeat over and over again that all that was supposed to happen never did. The fact that you see things or believe in them is your prerogative, but don't turn those who don't think everything is rigged into crazy obsessed people. As for the drop in attendance- we were all disgusted by what happened, but what happened really did happen. That's why many people were turned off by sumo for a while - the other stuff never happened.

And your last sentence is totally unclear- when you say conspiracists, who are you addressing? Those that believe in them or not? Who is the straw man, and what are you talking about there? Because it seems that you are actually agreeing with us "obsessed" guys..

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is obsessing- some of us have been waiting for ONE prediction of the conspiracy mongers to come true- never happened. Now, if Mike (or any other conspiracy-monger ..) had seen Kotoshougiku's yusho in advance, that would have been interesting.

you may recall that at your own youtube channel, people who saw the kotoshogiku 'yusho' coming (as he began his tally of rikishi, who stood there for him, no stronger than a strawman) said so

you asked them if they would be apologizing when koto failed to yusho; this can be the ONE prediction you've just asked for, and it didn't take a conspiracy monger to predict it, just watching the bouts

you don't need to apologize for failing to predict koto's results, and i don't feel a need to apologize for suggesting a possible fix for shohozan to yusho, in the previous basho

we were both just wrong in our predictions; happens a lot with predictions

labeling anyone who points out yaocho, or other forms of letting up, as conspiracy mongers is an example of setting up straw men

equating any reference to letting up as strict discipleship of views from sumotalk, is another example

those who have been doing these things habitually, and it is the same few characters, are the ones i call gangsters

they appear quickly at any mention of letting up, to muddy the waters of any legitimate discussion, and quickly resort to shoutdowns and other forms of personal attacks

but bullies never fare well, when they are stood up to- at middle school, in alleys, in prisons, at public forums

i do not count you as among these bullies, friend moti, as your views consistently show up as sincere, and with little resort to personal assaults

my hat is off to you, for going nose to nose with mike, something the bullies have not done

i have not watched sumo for as long as you, and know much less about it

i started at your youtube channel, where i still attend; many thanks

and i am not afraid of self important gangsters, nor of those with much more experience than i have

i have my views, and a right to express them at a public forum and am not too special to acknowledge my mistakes

and yes, i often agree with the 'obsessed guys' (including the gangsters), whose views i often share

Edited by wuli

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm trying to understand what your point is.

i don't think it is difficult-

setting up straw men to accuse of imaginary conspiracy theories doesn't hide that yaocho and mukiryoku are meaningful topics,

this practice hurts the community; we are all better served to stay on topic and refrain from personal attacks

i don't know how to make it more simple, and wonder if your asserted confusion is not pretended

putting words in others' mouths is not a friendly exercise

the words you've just attempted to attribute to me have nothing to do with me; please take responsibility for your own ideas and speak for yourself

I did not attempt to put words in your mouth. The quotes were only used for emphasis that what I was saying was not my own opinion and I should not be construed as supporting the truth of the things I wrote. It seemed the simplest way to illustrate where the block of text I was not actually supporting the truth of was located. I am attempting to rephrase in my own words what your opinion is on the extent of yaocho and mukiryoku, and in doing so offered what I thought was my best understanding of the position you were taking. If you deny that my attempt to rephrase your opinion was accurate, I would ask that you give details as to how you disagree with the things that I stated I thought were your opinion.

I fully agree that personal attacks are uncalled for, and the only theories that I have attacked are ones that I thought other people were actually offering. What I am trying to do is to understand the arguments you are presenting such that I can engage in offering counter-explanations without being told that I am attacking strawmen. I don't want to attack strawmen, and if I'm stating someone's opinion incorrectly, I would prefer to be informed as to how their opinion differs from how I am presenting it. The fact that I or others have been accused of attacking strawmen indicates that either we do not understand what it is our opponents are saying or you are claiming that we are being intellectually dishonest by knowingly distorting your arguments. If it was the latter, I wouldn't be trying so hard to get you to state what exactly it is you believe, so I am trying to get clarification.

You state that "yaocho and mukiryoku are meaningful topics", but you do not offer anything concrete as to what you believe was shady, and what you expect in the future. You appear to be deliberately vague so that your position is incapable of being meaningfully attacked by continuing the move the goalposts whenever a possible theory you might be proposing is shot down. What do you believe is happening such that yaocho and mukiryoku are meaningful topics? Is it merely that they are happening and the the extent is unknown? That is another reasonable position to take, and I would have a hard time developing further counter-arguments. I just merely want you to commit to some concrete opinion of what exactly you think the extent is. If you are unsure of the extent, that's fine, but in such a case you shouldn't be claiming that such-and-such was obviously fixed because you're saying yourself that you're not sure. If you have ideas about what the extent is, please present them as thoroughly as you believe them.

Edited by Gurowake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is obsessing- some of us have been waiting for ONE prediction of the conspiracy mongers to come true- never happened. Now, if Mike (or any other conspiracy-monger ..) had seen Kotoshougiku's yusho in advance, that would have been interesting

you don't need to apologize for failing to predict koto's results, and i don't feel a need to apologize for suggesting a possible fix for shohozan to yusho, in the previous basho

we were both just wrong in our predictions; happens a lot with predictions

YOU actually DO have to apologize, because you were accusing at least 2 wrestlers of lacking integrity and illegal action, and turned out to be WRONG.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Despite what you may believe, this thread is not about your views but about Mike Wesseman's. ...

As far as your views are concerned ... I would appreciate it if you actually say exactly what you believe. ... Should I not infer ... that you subscribe to Mike's theories?

... let us know what exactly is your take on Mike's theories.

thank you for this friendly invitation to share my views, krindel

perhaps this can be a takeoff point toward more productive discussion

as far as your request for what i believe, i exert to avoid belief as much as possible; belief is toxic in that it connotes an unhealthy emotional attachment to a view

we all have plenty of views, and they change a lot, nothing to get worked up about; after all, how much does any of us really know?

two tangled topics at this thread-

a) the value of sticking to a reasonable topic and allowing open discussion of it, without smokescreens attempting to obscure, and without personal attacks that attempt to drive away those who hold views different from the attackers

i think i've already pretty thoroughly addressed this topic at this thread

if you want to go further, please private message me and we can see what is possible, so that we avoid troubling fellow forum members, when the actual topic of this thread is

b) yaocho-

you've asked for my views

ok, though everybody has views and mine are nothing special, and my experience is substantially less than many posters here

the term yaocho gets thrown around a lot, covering multiple varying phenomena, hence lending to confusion; we can add mukiryoku, but it is still not enough to talk clearly about what goes on

i prefer to say letting up, gifting, helping and the like; it doesn't give the clarity we'd like (we need new words to do that) but it does more closely describe what one can actually see and feel in observing bouts

there is a lot of letting up in makuuchi sumo, enough to devalue the spirit of it substantially (i assume this applies on down the line, but i don't see those bouts)

we can wonder if this is why there is so little interest for it in japan, as some members describe

can one see letting up? sure, not that hard; when a provenly capable rikishi pretty much just stands there, letting himself be walked out instead of fighting

is weak fighting always letting up? no; there are hidden (or known) injuries (pretty often) and being asleep at the wheel (not so often)

can anyone say for sure on a given bout? not usually, but sometimes it is so obvious that nearly all agree

is it predictable? it is more likely when someone especially 'needs' a bout, as in an ozeki desperate for his 8, for example

is it complex and difficult to discuss, and to find largely common agreement? obviously

that should not make it a tabu topic nor is it a cause to attempt to prohibit those with views different than yours

i contest your assertion that i believe this thread is about my views (which, ironically, you've just requested); reading the thread demonstrates that i've been working pretty hard to get it back on topic

neither is it true that the thread is about only mike's views; they are relevant and so are kinta's and anyone else's

is it useful to drag up views from years back, when we have the link for current views here at the first post of this thread?

views can change every day, or more often than that

as to mike's theories, since you've asked, i do not need to subscribe to them; i prefer to come to my own views

i'm not sure what you understand mike's theories to be; if you mean, is there a lot of letting up? yes, there is. do top rikishi let up to create pretense that japanese 'ozeki' are more capable than they are? yes, plenty. are foreign rikishi prevented from rising to their authentic level? possible, as in the verb 'tochinoshined' which i don't recall anyone here needing to ask an explanation for

i hope this is helpful, krindel; if it is not on track, maybe you can be more specific as to what you want

if so, private messaging may be appropriate, in that we are already agreed that my views are not the topic of this thread

(any of us could write a book detailing our views about this stuff;

most of us know what quickly happens to those who do that, and who would want to read it, anyway)

with that out of the way, what are your views, about yaocho, mukiryoku, etc? no, not as opposed to old stories from sumotalk of years gone by

what are your views regarding the podcast, or what kinta may have shared recently (since the podcast garbled him), or better yet, what are views based on your own observations and studies of sumo, especially lately?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

YOU actually DO have to apologize, because you were accusing at least 2 wrestlers of lacking integrity and illegal action, and turned out to be WRONG.

letting up happens regularly, just like everywhere in the world of sports

think about it; if athletes go balls out, every second, they will all be exhausted and injured, and very quickly

if every bout was all out, more than half the rikishi could not get through a basho

they'd be flying off the dohyo most times, acquiring the expectable injuries

i suggested a possible fix for shohozan to yusho last december

looking back, yeah, that was pretty naive, silly

i don't see any need to apologize, just for being wrong

and i feel no disrespect for shohozan; i like his ikioi, yoshikaze level stuff sometimes

i still think he got at least a couple of gifts along the way

you gotta admit, it played pretty well for the crowd, there on his home turf

as for koto, no apology no way

in my view, he is a total ham, with most of the 14 pretty obvious stepouts or rollovers

nothing to get excited about, just a view

as always, i could easily be mistaken; just what i observed, and no disrespect intended

koto is at least a somewhat credible, if hammy, actor

and he managed where stronger rikishi had failed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

YOU actually DO have to apologize, because you were accusing at least 2 wrestlers of lacking integrity and illegal action, and turned out to be WRONG.

letting up happens regularly, just like everywhere in the world of sports

think about it; if athletes go balls out, every second, they will all be exhausted and injured, and very quickly

You say that as if its a widely accepted fact. Its not. It simply is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hamcornheinz

i'm not asserting anything special

consider something you normally do, typing, riding a bicycle, anything

is it really possible to go totally nuts with it, giving it every last molecule that you possibly can, as intensely as you possibly can?

how long will anyone last, energizing like that?

every successful practice is, necessarily, a measured practice

that includes sumo wrestling

we can thank great existence for mukiryoku; without it, the rikishis would destroy themselves much, much sooner

as it is, they have short careers (except the wily veteran), too often serious injuries (including the wily vet), and shortened life expectancies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hamcornheinz

i'm not asserting anything special

consider something you normally do, typing, riding a bicycle, anything

is it really possible to go totally nuts with it, giving it every last molecule that you possibly can, as intensely as you possibly can?

how long will anyone last, energizing like that?

every successful practice is, necessarily, a measured practice

that includes sumo wrestling

we can thank great existence for mukiryoku; without it, the rikishis would destroy themselves much, much sooner

as it is, they have short careers (except the wily veteran), too often serious injuries (including the wily vet), and shortened life expectancies

So instead of saying "Hakuho threw that fight", maybe say "Hakuho didn't look 100 percent today".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

can one see letting up? sure, not that hard; when a provenly capable rikishi pretty much just stands there, letting himself be walked out instead of fighting

...

is it really possible to go totally nuts with it, giving it every last molecule that you possibly can, as intensely as you possibly can?

how long will anyone last, energizing like that?

Do you agree or disagree that someone who gave their all every day for a while would eventually tire out and be able to be walked right out of the ring?

Edited by Gurowake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I see I got the dedicated thread I asked for! And given I blocked this lad in January, things are looking fine. This is not a discussion...it is repetitive trolling.

I really should look into this engineering, though, as such knowledge would be an enormous advantage in the sumo games, no? I could have the world championships sewn up by Natsu!

Is this testable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am reminded of a dog that barks loudly and growls menacingly at every stranger that walks by his yard. Doesn't he realize that people are just coming and going with absolutely no interest in the territory of the dog? Of course not; the dog is constantly having his knowledge reinforced that the barking and growling is working because all those strangers who were threatening his territory were successfully compelled to leave.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello there friend Wuli.

What I hold against you is using 'wily veteran' again to describe Aminishiki.

See you on Sumo Art. This thread is scalding my snout.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.