Sign in to follow this  
Mark Buckton

Futahaguro

Recommended Posts

Am I right in remembering that somewhere it is written that Futahaguro is the only yokozuna who didn't win a basho at rank?

I'm not saying I believe this - just that I've read it and can't find it on a brief SF search. Anyone else heard this?

Reason I ask - noticed yesterday that Yoshibayama never did win a title at Y rank either (Applauding...)

Only Makushita before his 5 year hiatus and Ozeki IIRC (Laughing...)

Edited by Adachinoryu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yokozuna Stats page

this site indicates he did not win as yokozuna. And I see that there were others who did not win at Y rank, either.

60-Futahaguro.jpg

Edited by Taizeniki

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, Futahaguro didn't win a single yusho, contrary to someone like Wakanohana III, who won many yushos before he became a yokozuna (and as a yokozuna, he won no more). Futahaguro is the only yokozuna who never won a yusho in his career.

*Celeborn

EDIT : ok, I beat you, Zentoryu, but your answer was more complete, so let's call it a tie ! :)

Edited by Celeborn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Futahaguro is the only Yokozuna to never win a Makuuchi division Yusho at any rank, Yokozuna, Ozeki or otherwise. He was promoted based on a pair of Jun-Yusho performances at Ozeki, but he never won a Makuuchi Yusho.

He is the reason the kyokai instituted the "two Yusho for promotion to Yokozuna" criteria in the late 80's early 90's.

EDIT: Beaten to the punch by a couple of minutes... (Applauding...)

Edited by Zentoryu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Futahaguro is the only Yokozuna to never win a Makuuchi division Yusho at any rank, Yokozuna, Ozeki or otherwise. He was promoted based on a pair of Jun-Yusho performances at Ozeki, but he never won a Makuuchi Yusho.

He is the reason the kyokai instituted the "two Yusho for promotion to Yokozuna" criteria in the late 80's early 90's.

thanks for the yokozuna education.... (Laughing...) (Applauding...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you aall for the above answers - must have remembered it wrong in the first place. (Laughing...) (Applauding...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He is the reason the kyokai instituted the "two Yusho for promotion to Yokozuna" criteria in the late 80's early 90's.

There is no such criterion. Yes, the guidelines for yokozuna promotion have been interpreted more strictly since 1988. Does that mean that two yusho is an absolute requirement? Not necessarily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, we know about that, cause Kaio&Chiyo were "yokozunable" after their 13-2, even if Asashoryu won the yusho with a 15-0 mark. They had to convincingly win the next yusho, but both of them (as expected) failed.

*Celeborn

Edited by Celeborn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is no such criterion. Yes, the guidelines for yokozuna promotion have been interpreted more strictly since 1988. Does that mean that two yusho is an absolute requirement? Not necessarily.

There is the utterly vague notion of "Yusho-equivalent performance", which has been sometimes (once?) called upon when the Kyokai has been desperate to promote a Japanese Ozeki to Yokozuna. That was the case, for instance, when Azuma won his first Yusho, and Taikai, who had lost in the Yusho kettei-sen (a famous henka), was made a "Yokozuna-candidate". I suppose the 13-2 Jun-yusho of Kaio and Taikai referred to above was also considered a "Yusho-equivalent performance", although I don't recall having seen that expression explicitly mentioned in that case...

Edited by Azumaryu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is no such criterion. Yes, the guidelines for yokozuna promotion have been interpreted more strictly since 1988. Does that mean that two yusho is an absolute requirement? Not necessarily.

There is the utterly vague notion of "Yusho-equivalent performance", which has been sometimes (once?) called upon when the Kyokai has been desperate to promote a Japanese Ozeki to Yokozuna. That was the case, for instance, when Azuma won his first Yusho, and Taikai, who had lost in the Yusho kettei-sen (a famous henka), was made a "Yokozuna-candidate". I suppose the 13-2 Jun-yusho of Kaio and Taikai referred to above was also considered a "Yusho-equivalent performance", although I don't recall having seen that expression explicitly mentioned in that case...

The closest thing to a criteria for Yokozuna promotion is two consecutive basho with "yusho or equivalent result". It

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The closest thing to a criteria for Yokozuna promotion is two consecutive basho with "yusho or equivalent result". It

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The closest thing to a criteria for Yokozuna promotion is two consecutive basho with "yusho or equivalent result". It
Edited by Yubiquitoyama

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He is the reason the kyokai instituted the "two Yusho for promotion to Yokozuna" criteria in the late 80's early 90's.

There is no such criterion. Yes, the guidelines for yokozuna promotion have been interpreted more strictly since 1988. Does that mean that two yusho is an absolute requirement? Not necessarily.

Criteria or guidelines, whatever you want to call it, there can be no denying that promotions to Yokozuna required consecutive yusho from the late 80's to the late 90's after Futahaguro.

Yes two yusho no longer appear to be necessary, but you can't deny that they were during that time period. Asahifuji, Konishiki and Takanohana were prime examples of this.

Edited by Zentoryu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a smiley after Cashew's last "coincidence" remark, or does it show only on my computer??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This "desperate for a Japanese Yokozuna"-talk is something I have never understood and never will. If the Kyokai is that, which they reasonably could be, they are at least in their actual actions damn good at covering it up.

Fact is, all the Yokozuna I've followed since I started following ozumo - ok, there's only five of them, from Akebono to Shoryu - have been promoted after two consecutive Yusho, so any "Yokozuna-candidacy" awarded by the NSK for a so-called "Yusho-equivalent performance" in one of the two consecutive Basho has seemed to me like a special favour to the Ozeki involved. Especially, seeing that both Kaio and Taikai were considered Yokozuna candidates despite being both 2 wins away from the Yusho seemed quite generous - when remembering, for instance, that Takanohana won 7 Yusho, each with at least 14 wins, before being promoted himself! (but ok, he never had two Yusho-equivalent performances in a row before the two Zensho Yusho that got him his tsuna). It seemed to me as a lowering down of the standard of the "Yusho-equivalent performance", which I had believed to be only in case of a Yusho kettei-sen.

Now, I've done a bit of homework and seen that two of the three Yokozuna promoted between Futahaguro and Akebono (i.e. Hokutoumi and Onokuni) were not promoted after two consecutive Yusho. This is deeply disappointing, as I have to acknowledge defeat and thank you for enlightening me - once again. :-/ ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now, I've done a bit of homework and seen that two of the three Yokozuna promoted between Futahaguro and Akebono (i.e. Hokutoumi and Onokuni) were not promoted after two consecutive Yusho. This is deeply disappointing, as I have to acknowledge defeat and thank you for enlightening me - once again. :-/ ;-)

Well, technically speaking, Hokutoumi and Onokuni were both promoted while Futahaguro was still Yokozuna, so the new promotion "interpretation" really hadn't come into being yet. It wasn't until after Futahaguro left sumo that the new "two Yusho" or else guideline started to get enforced.

Asahifuji was the only Ozeki promoted to Yokozuna after Futahaguro retirement and before Akebono's promotion. He was also the first victim of the new "interpretation", as his performance in late 1988 and early 1989 could probably have gotten him promoted under the old pre-Futahaguro guidelines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The closest thing to a criteria for Yokozuna promotion is two consecutive basho with "yusho or equivalent result". It

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The closest Asahifuji ever came before his promotion was consecutive jun-yusho. Perhaps strong jun-yusho followed by yusho would have been enough.

Konishiki never had two yusho-equivalent results in a row.

Takanohana had 14-1Y / 13-2D (playoff loss) in his second and third basho as ozeki (1993). IMO, that's the strongest evidence of stricter interpretation of the guidelines.

In any case, when Kitanoumi says that Kaio and Chiyotaikai might be considered yokozuna candidates after their 13-2 jun-yusho, I don't interpret that as slacker promotion guidelines. I think 14-1 yusho would have led to promotion, just like in similar previous cases.

Well, Asahifuji had 5 consecutive Jun-Yusho. Granted the first two (both 12-3) can be thrown out. But the other three (14-1 playoff loss, 13-2 JY, 13-2 Playoff loss)can be considered good enough to have gotten him promoted in much the same fashion as Futahaguro, especially since his record was more than comparable to the one that got Futahaguro promoted, in fact better over a three basho period.

Konishiki had two 13-2 Yusho sandwiched around a 12-3. Again this may have been good enough prior to Futahaguro. His record compares favorably to Hokutoumi's prior to the latter's promotion to Yokozuna (the main difference being that the 12-3 was not a Jun-Yusho), but then again Hokutoumi's Yusho was only 12-3.

So yes, I still regard these two cases as prime examples of a stricter interpretation of the rules. At least in comparison to the type of promotions that were being made prior to and including Futahaguro.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So yes, I still regard these two cases as prime examples of a stricter interpretation of the rules. At least in comparison to the type of promotions that were being made prior to and including Futahaguro.

I think you and Kashunowaka don't disagree on that part... ;-)

Yes, there was a stricter interpretation of the rules in 1988 compared to 1986-87. What I am saying is that the fact that every promotion since then has been after two yusho might be a coincidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So yes, I still regard these two cases as prime examples of a stricter interpretation of the rules. At least in comparison to the type of promotions that were being made prior to and including Futahaguro.

I think you and Kashunowaka don't disagree on that part... (In a state of confusion...)

Yes, there was a stricter interpretation of the rules in 1988 compared to 1986-87. What I am saying is that the fact that every promotion since then has been after two yusho might be a coincidence.

OK, I give. :-/

Sorry Kashu, didn't see that part of your post. ;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an interesting reflection on human nature that we keep looking for exact criteria for this promotion. My feeling is that the promotion criteria were always intended to be subjective and not just black and white. Having a committee enforces some degree of consensus, and is much better than having a sole shogun decide your promotion. This is not only true for the yokozuna promotion, but for many others in sumo as well...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's an interesting reflection on human nature that we keep looking for exact criteria for this promotion.  My feeling is that the promotion criteria were always intended to be subjective and not just black and white.  Having a committee enforces some degree of consensus, and is much better than having a sole shogun decide your promotion.  This is not only true for the yokozuna promotion, but for many others in sumo as well...

Very apt observation.

Many of the rules and procedures in ozumo seem very simple to begin with, but beneath the surface things aren't always as clear-cut. If the criteria for yokozuna promotion were simplified to two consecutive yusho, there would no longer be any need for the Yokozuna Deliberation Council. During the recent discussion about the shini-tai rule, someone on the mailing list complained about "whiny, nit-picking rules" and wanted to "keep it simple ... first down or out, period". Keeping it simple would mean that sumo could introduce electrical scoring instead, like in fencing. Hardly any need for gyoji and shimpan anymore. ;-)

The banzuke making is yet another example; it would certainly be possible to make a system of steadfast rules for banzuke making. But there aren't any, only some fuzzy guidelines, and even those aren't always followed. And yet here we are, looking at precedence cases and reasoning about promotions which in the end come down to subjective decisions by a committee ... I find it all most fascinating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this