HenryK

Here is a more complete list, encompassing all Yokozuna and a few Ozeki since 1960. Commentary etc. tomorrow [btw, Konokuni does not do well with this ranking (50.7 percent), there is no particularly noteworthy 6-basho run. Same seems to hold for Takanohana I.] Rank (perc.) Rank (points) Rank (mixed) Rikishi 6-basho run from... ...to Points Avail. Points Percen-tage Mixedscore Dominant Yokozuna (percentage>85) 1 2 1 Hakuho 08/7 09/5 636 699 91.0 579 2 3 2 Kitanoumi 77/9 78/7 633 706 89.7 568 3 7 6 Asashoryu 05/01 05/11 545 612 89.1 485 4 4 4 Taiho 66/3 67/1 624 701 89.0 555 5 1 3 Tamanoumi 70/9 71/7 640 729 87.8 562 6 5 5 Chiyonofuji 88/5 89/3 611 699 87.4 534 7 16 7 Takanohana II 94/11 95/9 515 601 85.7 441 Strong Yokozuna (85>percentage>70) 8 12 9 Tochinishiki 59/3 60/1 529 646 81.9 433 9 8 8 Takanosato 83/3 84/1 542 669 81.0 439 10 9 10 Kitanofuji 69/9 70/7 538 685 78.5 423 11 18 17 Wakanohana I 58/9 59/7 478 611 78.2 373 12 11 12 Wajima 73/3 74/1 532 690 77.1 410 13 12 13 Wakanohana II 78/1 78/11 529 689 76.8 406 14 6 11 Mienoumi 79/3 80/1 547 717 76.3 417 15 14 14 Akebono 00/1 00/11 528 708 74.6 394 16 15 16 Sadanoyama 64/9 65/7 522 703 74.3 388 17 19 18 Musashimaru 94/5 95/3 468 639 73.2 343 18 10 15 Asahifuji 88/7 89/5 536 735 72.9 391 Other Yokozuna (percentage 19 24 21 Hokutoumi 87/5 89/3 420 603 69.7 293 20 17 19 Kashiwado 66/9 67/7 495 717 69.0 342 21 21 20 Kotozakura 72/11 73/9 458 682 67.2 308 22 22 23 Tochinoumi 63/9 64/7 435 672 64.7 282 23 20 22 Onokuni 86/11 87/9 461 736 62.6 289 24 23 24 Futohaguro 85/9 86/7 424 698 60.7 258 25 26 26 Wakanohana III 96/3 97/1 374 620 60.3 226 26 25 25 Asashio 58/7 59/5 387 655 59.1 229 For Comparison: Outstanding Ozeki - - - Konishiki 91/5 92/3 415 601 69.1 287 - - - Wakashimazu 83/9 85/7 463 690 67.1 311 - - - Kaio 00/5 01/3 473 746 63.4 300 - - - Harumafuji 08/7 09/5 432 723 59.8 258

Hmm, my wish list would include Takanosato and Asahifuji among the yokozuna. There really aren't any ozeki clearly breaking into the "strong" group I guess but I'd still be interested in Wakashimazu, Kiyokuni and Konishiki. I will work off your strenght ranking stats and complement my list in the coming days. I don't really understand you because I suspect you already now of this thread which covers some sort of historical strength analysis. While a future version will have slightly changed values because I now also have all juryo bouts, the changes probably wouldn't be big with the strongest rikishi so have a look into that thread if you haven't already. Well, I knew top 20 (I believe) strenght rating that you used to update after each tournament, but that became inaccessible some time ago. The old thread on historic ELO scores I discovered only last night. The ELO ratings provide a piece of information that, imo, is critical but missing from standard rikishi career stats. My ideal would be if your database could an additional column to each sekitori with his ELO score after each basho.

Mienoumi is included below. As you predict, he is in the "strong" group. I'd be grateful for hints for other Y/O to look at. As for your strenght ratings -- I'd love to delve into them if I could. The table below mimicks strenght ratings to some degree, but imperfectly so. Specifically, the total points rating gives arguably too much weight to "strenght of competition" (penalizing Tokonohana, for example, for having Ozeki stablemates who he couldn't fight), while the percentage rating eliminates strenght of competition almost entirely from the equation 1/, which seems inadequate either (pretending Asashorhyu in 05 fought virtually the same quality of opposition as Kitanoumi in 78). One can of course combine the two, for example by multiplying the two scores (and I've added a column to that effect), but this is arbitrary. And anyway, the percentage or mixed statistics make sense only for rikishi in sanyaku or jin-join for 6 consecutive bashos. For intrinsic strenght there is nothing better imo than ELO ratings. I for my part would very much enjoy if your full ratings were again publicly acccessible (updated or not), and refrain from reeinventing the wheel. But I am of course aware that it is your ratings and your time we are talking about. 1/ Not totally though -- loss to a Yokozuna, for example, reduces the points score by 13, which damages the percentage score by more if total available basho points are 100 as opposed to 120. Rank(perc.) Rank(points) Rank(mixed) Rikishi From

Here is a table that follows your suggestion, encompassing the best 6-basho runs of all rikishi who won 5 bashos or more since the beginning of the 6-basho-per-year era. These are 19 Yokozuna and Mr. Kaio. Rank (perc.) Rank (points) Rikishi From

Funny how our top 8 are just identical. Further down we differ a little, see below my (your) score. I wonder where you have Wakanosato (or do you ot rank rikishi dropping to Juryo?) 1 Hakuho 2 Harumafuji 3 Kotooshu 4 Asashoryu 5 Kisenosato 6 Kotomitsuki 7 Baruto 8 Goeido 9 (11) Kaio 10 (12) Chiyotaikai 11 (14) Kyokutenho 12 (9) Aminishiki 13 (10) Kotoshogiku 14 (13) Kakuryu 15 (16) Miyabiyama 16 (19) Toyonoshima 17 (16) Takekaze 18 (18) Tochiozan 19 (-) Wakanosato 20 (17) Tamanoshima

Good point. Agreed.

You're entitled to your opinion of course, but a Juryo yusho? No way! Dejima is 35 years old and hampered by chronic injuries for most of his active career. Another MK in Juryo was on the horizon, and he did the right thing to strike sail with as much grace as possible. Nothing to be gained by dragging on forever. Strong emphasis on "chronic". I agree that this just isn't comparable to Wakanosato's "I broke my foot but I was already starting practice again right before I decided to take the 0-0-15 drop to protect my long-term viability". (BTW, wish more rikishi had his sensible outlook.) And Dejima's elbow injury dates back all the way to January; this isn't a thing that could have been expected to get magically better with yet another two months of time. And of course, IMO most juryo opponents would have felt no compunctions about henka'ing the crap out of him all basho long, unlike perhaps some of his long-time makuuchi foes. Let me just add that on reflection I agree. Dejima's career had been fizzling out over the past two years and seemed beyond resurrection.

Wow, does he know how to hit all the right buttons, or what? Japan = good, keiko= good, jungyo = good. He does, but to me this sounds too coreographed and not genuine. I for my part would like to read somewhat more interesting, reflective interviews from the big man. But the Japanese public does not seem to mind..

I'd be wary of doing that. (In general, I mean, not in Ama's case specifically.) It's just a fact that the very best skill levels aren't distributed evenly over time...back in Asashoryu's dominant days, there was arguably the usual good/mediocre ozeki gap (with Kaio/Taikai/Azuma on one side, Musoyama on the other while he was stlll active), and another sizeable gap below sekiwake (with, roughly, Musoyama/Wakanosato/Kotomitsuki above, everybody else significantly below, perhaps except Kyokutenho). Right now it's quite different, with more ozekis on the mediocrity side, and a much more evenly distributed group of lower sanyaku-strength rikishi but not really any "strong sekiwake" type of rikishi since Ama's promotion. Baruto's close, but too inconsistent yet. Anyway, what I'm trying to say is, while the banzuke ranks may not accurately reflect the individual skill levels, I don't think treating the top ranks as simply 1 through ~20 is an improvement. Just look at any banzuke from 1992 to see where that clearly breaks down. If anything, your genkiness adjustment ought to capture most divergences between actual and "justified" rank already, so you'd simply end up double-counting those differences. I agree. More generally, if one is after intrinsic strenght, there are at least two elements of this rating that need to be modified: -- missed bouts or bashos must not have a malus attached to them, but a counterfactual value simulating how the rikishi would have performed had he fought (based on recent performances), and -- the banzuke can't be basis for assessing opponents' strenght. Rather, it ought to be the strenght rating itself. If the opponents' strength is recomputed after each bout (rather than each basho), this would also capture genkiness during a basho. But this goes beyond of what I intended to capture, and simlar things have already be done elsewhere. I just wish they would be publicly accessible...

No, but this is not what the rating intends to capture. Asashoryu missed the two last bashos in 2007, hence his ranking dropped from #1 to #7. A tennis player who sits out both Wimbledon and the US Open won't be ranked #1 either. Btw, if one penalizes Asashoryu with 0 for amissed basho rather than -45, he is #5 in 2007. If one assumes he would have been as strong in the missed bashos as he was in the other 4, he is #2. I agree with (i), but unless you aim at an intrinsic strenght rather than an achievements rating, absences will always harm a rikishi's ranking, even if they come with a lower penatly. I do not agree with (ii), as this is exactly what the Quality Index attempts to address.

@ Toukeigakusha, Salle: thanks for the friendly words. Accounting for genkiness is surely an excellent idea (for example, by replacing the Abe index with one derived from the pre-basho points rating itself); it would get the exercise closer to ELO-type strenght ratings a la Doitsuyama or Randomitsuki. But since I try to mimick an ATP-type approach, I feel this is not needed here. Winning Wimbledon always yields the same ATP-points, no matter how well the opponents on the way to the title had performed recently.

Top scores for some legends in comparison: (all Y with 10+ yushos in the modern era) Hakuho Nagoya 08 - Natsu 09 636 Kitanoumi Aki 77 - Nagoya 78 633 Taiho Haru 66 - Hatsu 67 624 Chiyonofuji Natsu 87 - Haru 88 611 Takanohana K. Kyushu 94 - Aki 95 548 Asashoryu Hatsu 05 - Kyushu 05 545 Kitanofuji Aki 69 - Nagoya 70 538 Wajima Haru 73 - Hatsu 74 532 Tochinishiki Haru 59 - Hatsu 60 529 Akebono Hatsu 00 - Kyushu 00 528 Wakanohana K. Nagoya 58 - Natsu 59 478 Musashimaru Natsu 94 - Haru 95 466 A bit stunned where Hakuho comes out (I am not worthy...) (in particular since otherwise the list doesn't look unreasonable) As a sidenote, a Yokozuna winning 6 subsequent basho 15-0, beating each time 1 Y, 4 O, 2 S, 2 K and 6 M1-4 would collect 714 quality points.

Just checked what happens when one takes Takanohana's career-best 6 basho run, whis is a tad before the period in captured by the tables above. Takanohana maxes out at 548 (Kyu 94-Aki 95), which places him above Asashoryu and Akebono. Similarly, Musashimaru collected 466 quality points between Natsu 94 and Haru 95, but this implies no ranking change. I also checked alternative Akebono runs in the years 1992-94, but none matches his last grand hooray in 2000.

Sure it has shortcomings. In particular one has to be clear about what this index measures -- performance over 6 bashos relative to the other competing rikishi, whose strenght is approximated by their banzuke ranks. In the case of Hakuho, the top rating reflects a run of 85 wins in 6 bashos (Nag 08-Nat 09), competing against 4 or 5 Ozeki and, in half of the bashos, another Yokozuna. By contrast, Asashoryu's peak run (Hat 05 - Kyu 05) contained 84 wins with 3 Ozeki and no Yokozuna opponent(s).

End-year rankings, based on the same method. Again, please note that missing or not finishing bashos gets punished quite severely by the Abe index (as mssing slams gets punished by the ATP). 2002-2008 plus current ranking (post Nagoya 2009) # Current End-08 End-07 End-06 End-05 End-04 End-03 End-02 1 Hakuho Hakuho Hakuho Asashoryu Asashoryu Asashoryu Asashoryu Asashoryu 2 Harumafuji Harumafuji Chiyotaikai Hakuho Kotooshu Kaio Wakanosato Chiyotaikai 3 Kotooshu Kotomitsuki Harumafuji Miyabiyama Tochiazuma Wakanosato Chiyotaikai Musashimaru 4 Asashoryu Kisenosato Kotomitsuki Tochiazuma Hakuho Chiyotaikai Kaio Wakanonsato 5 Kisenosato Kotooshu Tokitenku Kotooshu Kotomitsuki Kotomitsuki Tochinonada Kaio 6 Kotomitsuki Asashoryu Kaio Chiyotaikai Chiyotaikai Miyabiyama Kyokotenho Musoyama 7 Baruto Toyonoshima Asashoryu Kotomitsuki Miyabiyama Hakuho Tosanoumi Tochiazuma 8 Goeido Kaio Kotooshu Roho Kyokotenho Tochinonada Takamisakari Tosanoumi 9 Kaio Kotoshogiku Aminishiki Kisenosato Kaio Tamanoshima Tosanoumi Kotomitsuki 10 Chiyotaikai Aminishiki Kotoshogiku Kaio Kokkai Kyokotenho Tamanoshima Takanowaka 1995-2001 # End-01 End-00 End-99 End-98 End-97 End-96 End-95 1 Musashimaru Akebono Musashimaru Musashimaru Takanohana Takanohana Takanohana 2 Tochiazuma Kaio Kaio Wakanohana Musashimaru Takanonami Akebono 3 Musoyama Chiyotaikai Dejima Akebono Akebono Kaio Musashimaru 4 Kotomitsuki Miyabiyama Tochiazuma Takanohana Takanonami Musashimaru Wakanohana 5 Kaio Takanohana Tosanoumi Chiyotaikai Tosanoumi Wakanohana Kaio 6 Wakanosato Dejima Chiyotaikai Takanonami Tochiazuma Musoyama Takanonami 7 Asashoryu Musashimaru Akinoshima Musoyama Wakanohana Takatoriki Musoyama 8 Takanohana Musoyama Kotonishiki Kaio Takatoriki Kotonishiki Kotonishiki 9 Tochinonada Tochiazuma Musoyama Kotonowaka Dejima Akebono Kenko 10 Tamanoshima Tosanoumi Takanonami Kotonishiki Musoyama Ashaiyutaka Kotonowaka

Here is some stuff for those who like getting lost in numbers... I've tried to come up with my own ozumo ranking. There are excellent ELO-type strength ratings already out there, hence I settled for something else (and simpler) -- and ATP-type ranking, summing up achievements over one year (6 bashos). To this end, I use the quality index by Masumi Abe, explained here. It has its shotcomings, but provides a benchmark. The table below shows (1) the top number of quality points a rikishi collected over six subsequent bashos, startigh in 1995 (before the Abe-index is not pubslished), (2) the highest rank a rikishi held when rikishi are ordered by 6-basho quality points, (3) and the number of bashos a rikishi was ranked #1, in the top 3, and in the top 10. Note that many rikishis' careers are truncated (=the early part of the career is before the period captured in the table);, for some, the missing part includes their career peak (e.g., Kotonishiki). Another feature to be aware of is that missing a basho or going fusen results in a large malus. The latter affects in particular Akebono and Takanohana. All Yokozuna were #1 at some point, but also Kaio, Tochiazuma, and -- for one basho -- Dejima. Hakuho is already leading the list, and wkith some margin ahead of Asashoryu, Akebono and Takanohana (as a sidenote, Takanohana gets treated a bit roughly by the Abe index, as he misses out on bonus points for beating an Ozeki due to the non-matches against his brother. Correcting for this would add roughly another 20 points). Harumfuji is already #6, ahead of Wakanohana. Kaio was ranked in the top 10 for 79 of the 82 bashos under consideration, and is by far the best Ozeki. Wakanosato is the top Sekiwake, peaking as high as #2, Tokitenku the best Komusubi, Homasho the best Maegashira. # Rikishi Max points

Well I like that Yokozuna is a rank for life, and I like that Ozeki enjoy limited rank protection. These are fundamental characteristics of the ozumo ranking system that also characterize the sport. Thus I wouldn't favor the sweeping reforms you suggest. But Ozeki are supposed to enjoy limited rank protection. Ozeki is not supposed to be a rank quasi-for-life which, for all pratical purposes, it is now. Hence I think a modest reform would be called for that would make it more difficult for an Ozeki to get out of kadoban. Several proposals have been pondered on this page, like requesting a 10-5 to get out of kadoban. And if we're already at reforming the bankzuke system, I would also like to make promotion to and demotion from Seiwake a little more difficult -- for example, a rank of at least M3 is a pre-condition for promotion to S (except for yusho-winners), an S can't be demoted further than M3, and if there is no suitable promotion candidate, an S with 7-8 or even 6-9 can keep the rank. There is just no point in demoting Kisenosato or Baruto outside the joi-jin when they mess up a basho, only to promote them back when they score 11-4 or 12-3 in the subsequent one against sub-par opposition.

That sounds like "I'd rather see anyone at Ozeki other than Kaio and Chiyotaikai", but when I look at the "promising young rikishi", I think I'd rather not. Can you point out anyone who has done consistently well recently? Best candidate would be Kisenosato, but he's still not beyond self-destruct now and then. I'd wager the number of kadoban wouldn't get any healthier right now. If there are only 3 rikishi around at this stage who can continuously satisfy Ozeki standards, so be it.

Too bad some rikishi didn't realize the obligation in time for Dejima, Miyabiyama [or Takanonami] ... Hard to live up to that obligation to an Ozeki who doesn't show up.

The question is the counterfactural. We got a glimpse during the two bashos in 2007 when Asashoryu was banned, and attendance fell to all-time lows. The jungyos in which Asashoryu participated after his return generated more interest than the bashos without him. At the time, ozumo looked pretty dependent on the flamboyant yokozuna. Now arguably and fortunately this would not be the same today, as Hakuho has replaced Asashoryu the as top dog, Kotooshu and Harumafuji seem have established themselves as serious Ozeki threats, and there are several interesting rikishi at the lower sanyaku ranks. But a claim that Asahoryu had not brought something to the sport that helped public interest seems improbable to me; even though the interest may have been for the wrong reasons in the view of some. I for my part will enjoy the flamboyant yokozuna as long as he is around, which probably won't be for too much longer. Further, I hope - and am increasingly confident -- that by the time he leaves, there is a critical mass of rikishi to challenge Hakuho and keep yusho races competitive. If Asashoryu then rides into the sunset, so be it -- ozumo will do just fine without him.

That's the written rule as unless you get that on kadoban, you will be saying Hasta la vista mighty quick but the unwritten rule is that you are supposed to get 10 as below that you will need to start coming up with an excuse, well, more like myriad of excuses as perfected by the current two, Taikai and Kaio. You misunderstood (but I also wasn't clear) -- with "needs to get them wne he needs to get them" I meant there is an unwritten obligation for other rikishi to help struggling Ozeki get their 8 wins.

I really don't understand your point. If 7 Y/O are too much why on earth do you desire ozeki runs? Imagine one run succeeding, then there are 8 Y/O which makes things only worse according to your argument. .... unless there is the occasional Ozeki demotion. Or retirement.

... as all human activity is ulimately insignficant in the endlessness of the the universe.

Because he keeps his "attitude" (or whatever generalized term one wants to put his quirks under) limited to the dohyo. Why is that part always so difficult for Asashoryu fans to understand? Hakuho's learnt exactly the right lessons from Asashoryu...be as cocky as you want inside the arena, but don't rock the boat outside. I guess there are people in our celebritized culture who are bored by athletes who don't feed the gossip machine*, but I for one couldn't be happier with how Hakuho's career is turning out. I for my part feel personality-wise something is missing in Hakuho, as much as I admire his sumo. I do not imply that he has to become an Asahoryu off the dohyo, but if he could at least start give somewhat more substantive and thoughtful interviews, it would be a starter. Kyokotenho, Harumafuji, Baruto, even Kotooshu (when he speaks) are more interesting.

..... as it makes it near-impossible for someone S-M3 to put in a series of KK, beware of an Ozeki run. Especially when the unwritten rule is that an Ozeki always needs to get 8 wins when he needs to get them, and that this endeavour also requires the support of sub-O ranked rikishi.