Podcast - Yaocho discussion

[Gurowake]

But who knows, maybe it's yaocho everywhere else, too,

That's exactly what it is to him. He doesn't understand the concept of luck in a contest of physical skill. He's clearly never actually played any sport competitively in his life. Even chess matches aren't 100% predictable because sometimes someone makes a move that is brilliant but for reasons they don't even realize, so you can even luck into wins that way over opponents who are better.

That Tochiozan quote is hilarious. Yeah, OK, Tochiozan bought two wins over Yokozuna, and got nothing to show for it except the same result as if he had beaten the maegashira he lost to instead. If he had enough money to decide to start an Ozeki run based on yaocho, how could he not throw a little money at those few weaker maegashira? He's just throwing money away to the Yokozuna in case he happens to somehow actually manage to beat everyone else? It's that kind of nonsense why I don't bother even looking at his website any more.

He doesn't always imply that money is involved or that anyone is buying "wins over Yokozuna". In fact, he usually suggests that the Mongolians are sometimes gifting wins or not fighting at their true ability, in order to give the impression that the Japanese rikishi are on the same level.

This doesn't make all that much more sense. Why gift wins to Tochiozan? He's not remotely in the same league as any Ozeki other than Goeido. The fact that rikishi sometimes lose to worse rikishi is not evidence at all of any sort of corruption. How can you explain Hienriki beating Abiko other than Abiko just had a bad day/Hienriki got lucky? Are you suggesting that even the Sandanme yusho are fixed, that they're protecting Jokoryu's record (why?), or something else? How can you explain Harumafuji losing to Tamawashi and Gagamaru, both foreigners clearly much worse than him? If he needed to in order to get Terunofuji his Yusho, why not lose to people that are actually good, like Kotoshogiku, who Harumafuji gave his 8th loss to? If they were actually arranging things, why didn't they give Kotoshogiku two wins on the last three days to not be kadoban? Kisenosato and Harumafuji had no use for those wins, and Hakuho could have lost to 'Giku too if you accept it as a given that the Mongolians were conspiring to help Terunofuji. You can't just throw random hypotheses around and say that because this one time things went exactly as you predicted it's clear evidence, when you're wrong 95% of the time.

Everything you see in Sumo that doesn't go quite according to plan fits in perfectly well with the random noise that you would expect in an athletic competition where people have to react to their opponents or the environment. Some individual sports, like swimming and running, are extremely predictable because the organizers strive to maintain very uniform conditions between competitions. But tennis, where you have to react to your opponent, golf, where the environment can be unpredictable, and all team sports, where sometimes teammates are not on the same page as well as them having to react to opponents, are not nearly as much. Reacting to what your opponents do is a large part of Sumo, and it is quite easy for even the best to make the wrong decision every once in a while because their opponent manages to fool them somehow, or they just try a poor idea or whatever. Hakuho is the best because he makes the least mistakes and has put in the training needed to be on top. But he's still human, and weird things can happen when placed against other wrestlers that have managed to prove themselves to be near the top of the sport. Just because he's going to beat Tochiozan 90% (or whatever) of the time doesn't mean the 10% of the time he loses he must have done it on purpose.

I have a very good model of just how random the matches are, and my model has led me to make, compared to the rest of the gaming population, relatively more accurate predictions despite having followed the sport a much shorter period of time. Past results suitably analyzed are such a good indicator of future performance that I am able to challenge the best in the prediction community who are also presumably taking the quality of rikishi's sumo regardless of winning or losing, while I look simply at the results. If the results were not a good guide for the future because there were favors traded or people suddenly decided to lose certain matches more than they should, why should analyzing the results give anywhere near a good indication of what will happen in the future? If things are working out such that they appear to be random chance events when analyzed as a whole, why would you add on the idea that people are tinkering with the process and doing so in a way that is indistinguishable from things working out in line with the stochastic model? Especially when that model works very well in the lower divisions where it's absurd to suggest that yaocho is rampant, adding the hypothesis that matches are not being hard-fought on a large scale is silly.

Are there some matches that people aren't giving 100%? Sure, look how many matches Ozeki tend to win after they go MK in a tournament, and look at kadoban Ozeki at 7-7 on Day 15. For those matches it is reasonable to assume that someone there is not giving it their all. But for matches in general, the yaocho hypothesis is unnecessary to explain why better rikishi sometimes lose.

[wuli]

... the yaocho hypothesis is unnecessary to explain why better rikishi sometimes lose.

one can suppose that we all pretty well agree that a better rikishi can lose, for various reasons

has someone asserted otherwise?

perhaps you can put some light on a less clear consideration

what is your 'yaocho hypothesis'?

Edited February 19, 2016 by wuli

[Dapeng]

Are there some matches that people aren't giving 100%? Sure, look how many matches Ozeki tend to win after they go MK in a tournament, and look at kadoban Ozeki at 7-7 on Day 15. For those matches it is reasonable to assume that someone there is not giving it their all. But for matches in general, the yaocho hypothesis is unnecessary to explain why better rikishi sometimes lose.

Sumo fans should accept that mukyrioku or powerless sumo is a normal phenomenon in professional sumo.

[CT3*]

Gurowake

Just to be clear...while I appreciate your well articulated response, I hope you didn't take my clarification of how I see Sumotalk's yaocho stance as me agreeing with it. I was merely clarifying that rarely do I see mention or assumption that money is changing hands in the bouts they deem yaocho or mukiryoku.

I generally avoid the yaocho discussions entirely. Why? I lurked on this page for years, but didn't start posting until after I'd been to Tokyo for my first basho. And having read the numerous (sometimes heated) discussions on the topic over the years, I concluded that there is no real value to me participating in yet another rehashing of the various viewpoints.

Some people watch the action on the dohyo and insist that every bout is legit. Others watch the same bouts and see many of them as fake. Some folks fit somewhere in the middle. And as people's varying viewpoints on the matter don't affect my enjoyment of sumo either way, I'm absolutely ok with that!

[Gurowake]

Are there some matches that people aren't giving 100%? Sure, look how many matches Ozeki tend to win after they go MK in a tournament, and look at kadoban Ozeki at 7-7 on Day 15. For those matches it is reasonable to assume that someone there is not giving it their all. But for matches in general, the yaocho hypothesis is unnecessary to explain why better rikishi sometimes lose.

Sumo fans should accept that mukyrioku or powerless sumo is a normal phenomenon in professional sumo.

So basically that people aren't giving their all because they just don't feel like it? That's part of what makes a rikishi who he is. If he doesn't have the will to win, that's part of the reason why he's bad. Despite me blasting the whole "will to win" thing elsewhere, I don't doubt that's it's a real phenomenon with most people (it just isn't so much with me). Most people don't like giving their all, and if they can get by with things half-assed, then they will. How a rikishi feels on a certain day, his desire to perform well, those go into how good of a rikishi someone is, and it's some of the aspect why there's variance, even if I didn't specifically mention it previously. I am definitely not arguing against "mukyrioku", and never have. I have no problem with the idea that sometimes people don't give it their all, and no problem with the idea that some of them take one for the team without being asked. But the idea that there's bout-fixing going on on a grand scale, and specifically that the Yokozuna pre-arranged their losses to Tochiozan for some nebulous goal is a load of rubbish. If Mike means that they just weren't trying hard enough, he shouldn't be saying it was "yaocho". I'm just going by the quote from Asashosakari; maybe he never actually said it that way, but that's what I'm responding to.

Edited February 19, 2016 by Gurowake

[Gurowake]

As I noted on two occasions there, I'm certainly willing to believe on very specific matches that some rikishi will have an extreme lack of will to win that is unpredictable by any statistical model, and that fans can often point them out due to the situation they are faced with. But that's not what's being claimed. What's being claimed is that there is widespread systematic pre-arranging of bouts in order to justify the fact that the better rikishi doesn't always win. When the argument for yaocho is blown apart, the retreat is to just "lazy sumo", which is somehow claimed to be just as bad when that's extremely far from the truth, or that the anti-yaocho people somehow claim isn't happening ever. What I'm claiming is that there is plenty of statistical evidence to show that there is inherent variance from some source (perhaps from a lack of will, among other things) that easily explains why Hakuho doesn't go 15-0 every tournament.

Edited February 19, 2016 by Gurowake

[wuli]

gurowake (oblivious oracle)

increasingly, it appears that you are the only asserter of the same 'yaocho hypothesis' that you are arguing so desperately against

i can see that you've contributed some relevant observations (thank you) but, again, what exactly is your 'yaocho hypothesis', and who else, if anyone, are you wanting to attribute it to?

Edited February 19, 2016 by wuli

[Gurowake]

gurowake (oblivious oracle)

increasingly, it appears that you are the only asserter of the same 'yaocho hypothesis' that you are arguing so desperately against

i can see that you've contributed some relevant observations (thank you) but, again, what exactly is your 'yaocho hypothesis', and who else, if anyone, are you wanting to attribute it to?

I don't really understand what you're saying here. Well, I think I know, but it's not what you actually wrote, so I'm not real sure.

The whole passive "it's being claimed that..." is that SumoTalk Mike has consistently talked about how Ozumo is rife with bout-fixing, and Asashosakari quoted one or two particular instances that Mike claimed were yaocho (I won't verify the quote, I'm just assuming it's accurate), and I'm assuming the podcast is all about how many instances he has seen recently. I feel it appropriate to rip apart his assertions about yaocho in the same thread the link to the podcast is in. I'm not saying that anyone here agrees with him, I just want to demonstrate for whoever may have listened to whatever tripe he passed off in the podcast how utterly inane it all is.

Then someone quotes me and disagrees saying "but what about lazy sumo?" which is something that is totally unrelated to yaocho, but is being brought up specifically because it has the same sorts of effects and much harder to argue against. That I am not arguing against something that has the same end effect as yaocho does not mean yaocho exists. It just means lazy sumo exists. It does not imply a wider conspiracy.

Edited February 19, 2016 by Gurowake

[Unkonoyama]

I am probably going to regret responding to this at all, but I have 15 more minutes to kill at the office before I can go home for the weekend. Also, these are my views and my views only; I am not qualified to summarize/interpret Gurowake's analysis (my terrible Hatsu gaming results are proof of this).

I think sometimes we forget that no one in any field can perform up to 100% of their ability 100% of the time. I'll use the recent Hakuho vs Kisenosato bout as an example. Obviously, Hakuho did not show very good sumo in this bout and lost. Is it possible that Hakuho decided to give Kisenosato a gift to help him avoid kadoban? Absolutely, and I do believe this sort of thing does happen once in a while. But, it is also possible that Hakuho just had a bad day at the office and/or Kisenosato was unusually genki that day. This is the concept of variance that many people have referenced in this thread. Without having insider information or the ability to read minds, we cannot make an accurate determination either way.

[wuli]

hmmmmmm,

all told then, there may not be much real disagreement here

between 'somebody said that somebody said', lazy sumo, mukiryoku, yaocho, plus needed words we don't yet have to describe the many possible mentioned and unmentioned sensibilities of a rikishi approaching combat,

it seems the different views are more about languaging than actual differences of opinion

it looks like we are all on a spectrum of how often, and to what degree, a rikishi lets up in a given bout, not whether this occurs or not

if we want to argue, we might as well choose to argue how hard a quarterback is trying on a given play

i think the waters get muddied by sloppy use of terminology, especially overuse of 'yaocho' when mukiryoku or even just plain tiredness or the like is actually meant

most of us may be closer in our sensibilities than we've supposed; that may account somewhat for how we persist as lovers of sumo, despite having differences in how we articulate what we see and feel as observers

[Kuroyama]

hmmmmmm,

all told then, there may not be much real disagreement here

between 'somebody said that somebody said', lazy sumo, mukiryoku, yaocho, plus needed words we don't yet have to describe the many possible mentioned and unmentioned sensibilities of a rikishi approaching combat,

it seems the different views are more about languaging than actual differences of opinion

I haven't read Sumotalk in many years, but if they haven't changed their tune then yes, they're asserting not just lazy sumo, unmotivated sumo, or "a bad day at the office", but bouts with explicitly prearranged outcomes. The former are inevitable in any human endeavor; no one can perform at 100% all the time for any number of reasons. The latter is a different matter entirely.

[wuli]

hmmmmmm,

all told then, there may not be much real disagreement here

between 'somebody said that somebody said', lazy sumo, mukiryoku, yaocho, plus needed words we don't yet have to describe the many possible mentioned and unmentioned sensibilities of a rikishi approaching combat,

it seems the different views are more about languaging than actual differences of opinion

I haven't read Sumotalk in many years, but if they haven't changed their tune then yes, they're asserting not just lazy sumo, unmotivated sumo, or "a bad day at the office", but bouts with explicitly prearranged outcomes. The former are inevitable in any human endeavor; no one can perform at 100% all the time for any number of reasons. The latter is a different matter entirely.

point taken, and very relevant

you are addressing actual yaocho, whether for money or another consideration (like retaining fans, for example)

though that was perhaps the central theme of moti's original posting here, the subsequent postings led me to the description you've responded to

my hope is to segregate out other causes of letting up

i think actual yaocho wants addressing, but perhaps in another, clearly dedicated thread

the history at this forum suggests it is the unhappiest of topics, promoting antagonism and where much agreement is unlikely

maybe sumotalk is an appropriate forum for it, since there is indeed plenty of appetite about it there

Edited February 20, 2016 by wuli

[Kintamayama]

It's really simple. Mike says the yusho was given to Kotoshougiku by the Mongolians. Plain and simple. As a ten-year gift. He is also saying that it was planned that Tochiouzan was supposed to get the yusho when the last picture of a Japanese came down from the Kokugikan ceiling but someone screwed up. I say there is no way a yusho can be fixed. A bout, sure, a few bouts, maybe. But getting 14 rikishi to lose on purpose just so Kotoshougiku of all people gets the yusho? Too many people involved to keep it a secret. If they wanted to make it believable, they would have given it to Kisenosato. Mike was adamant that it's possible and that it happened.

In the past, sumo talk made the mistake of pre-guessing a conspiracy. Many times. Kisenosato for Yokozuna was the one that comes to mind. When it doesn't happen, there is always someone who "screwed up", The podcast was on a martial arts channel where most of the listeners know nothing about sumo and are instinctively geared towards prearranged bouts.

It's not about mukiryoku or a final day win. It's a theory that sumo bouts are prearranged on a regular basis and that yusho too are prearranged. It is not presented as a thought- it is presented as a finalized fact that only idiots can't see.

My main point in my mysteriously garbled views- if these guys want to throw matches, you will never know. They are on jungyo all the time, hint hint. The last thing they would do would be having someone like Hakuhou losing so badly to Kisenosato that even a child can think it was yaocho.

"Look daddy, Superman lost to Thor, He just got pushed out of the Zohyo- that's impossible-he must have felt sorry for him or something or lost on purpose like when you lose to me in cards!"

Yes, it's THAT simple.

Edited February 20, 2016 by Kintamayama

[Asashosakari]

In the end, it all goes back to what Gurowake alluded to on the first page - the implied view that rikishi are some sort of robots that are supposed to produce perfectly repeatable results every time, and that any deviation from the "logical" outcome must be due to tampering with the "program". The only other component to the theory is the egocentric view that Sumotalk writers are perfectly equipped to determine what the "logical" outcome of every single matchup ought to be. In other words, it's people who think they can't be wrong, getting things wrong, then explaining why they actually weren't wrong. ("Because yaocho", of course.)

The most surprising thing about it is that there's actually an audience for that type of thing out there. Not because I somehow believe there's no audience for conspiracy theories (there certainly is), but because it's done in such paternalistic and heavy-handed fashion. I bet even the people who are avid followers would be quick to mock that "Father Knows Best" approach if they encountered it anywhere else where they don't have an emotional attachment to the message being presented.

Of course, it doesn't help that Sumotalk's writing style has become ever more jaded since Asashoryu retired, which was arguably the day that things began to go completely off the rails. In a more caring world, somebody would have organized an intervention by now. ;-)

Edited February 20, 2016 by Asashosakari

[Asashosakari]

Just for completeness, the exact quote of what I alluded to earlier was: "The surprise story at least through the first 12 days or so was Sekiwake Tochiohzan, a rikishi who I maintain is the best Japan has right now. Tochiohzan finished 10-5, but those two wins over the Yokozuna were complete yaocho, so in reality, we witnessed an 8-7 performance from Japan's best."

[hamcornheinz]

how many people read sumotalk? I actually admire how they were able to build a business on self-proclaimed expertise. In the same way I admire Trump. In awe at how they get away with all that nonsense.

[orandashoho]

Yes, and Ghu forbid that people like that get the masses behind them.

[Wakaebala]

Okay guys, I read these yacho-conversations (not just here, but in other topics as well), and I was starting to make my own opinion, when I realized why is this such a huge and emotional debate. When it comes to this subject, even the nicest guys go totally nuts. The problem with yaocho, that it is a matter of faith. And you can't argue on faith. That is its main power.

It's nice to tell people about our faith, but it can be annoying when someone tries to persuade someone else about his own.

So I won't try to persuade anybody, I just write down silently that I personally agree with people who doesn't think sumo is part of a huge conspiracy.

On the other hand, we must admit that 2016 Hatsu Basho was almost a perfect hollywood-story. The PR-angle was just perfect. I can see why it gives munition to the yaocho-believers.

So we should accept that we all are very different in our culture, in our sense of taste, even in our believes. But we all like sumo, don't we?

(Oh my. This is like my acceptence speech for the Nobel Piece Prize. Or worse. B-) )

[yorikiried by fate]

how many people read sumotalk? I actually admire how they were able to build a business on self-proclaimed expertise. In the same way I admire Trump. In awe at how they get away with all that nonsense.

ST used to be fun, before the forum died. Now you have the comments section below the daylies, which increasingly reminds me of the value of youtube comments (read: fuck all). Ten years ago, ST used to provide much sought after coverage of the actual basho, as at that time videos and streams were hard to come by. I think my first two years of deeper sumo interest were well covered by that. Admittedly, times seemed simpler then. As it was to follow the controversial propositions offered. I still agree 100% with Mike on his take of the Asashoryu charity event "scandal", for example (i.e. shameful behavior by the NSK). And the yaocho calls came mostly in the context of Kaiotaikai, where they were well founded.

I notice, though, that the yaocho topic has long since crossed the border of obsessive, while the opinions of the comments have entered the cultist. The breaking point was maybe the yaocho-by-mobile scandal. It was a see-we-were-right moment, which unfortunately continued to become an increasingly hysteric let's-push-through. At the moment, most contributors seem to be caught in their own construct. It is impossible to turn back from layers of layers of claims, many of which having turned out not so clearly true after all. The problem was and is: None of the main contributors seems to be able to admit they were wrong, not even with minor, insignificant things. For a long time I had attributed it to be a cultural thing (maybe unfair on Americans...), but finally I think it is just coincidally a trait shared by most people sticking to contributing for the site.

Anyhow, I rarely read it now. I sometimes comment (when Rando lifts his head and gets the flak from the trolls). I most likely won't contribute anymore, not that it was a topic of late. Nevertheless and very personally, I am still thankful for having been given the opportunity to publish my thoughts back at the time.

[Sumozumo]

I read ST for the first time a while ago and I don't really understand what they are going for with the bout by bout breakdown each day. It takes longer to read than to watch the actual bouts. Maybe it made sense back in the day when you had to send away for VHS or live in Japan? (tbh, our current situation is 10% technology and 90% dedicated people) Anyway breaking down split second reactions as conscious decisions by the rikishi when they're pretty much driven by training is an open call for confirmation bias to enter at full speed.

To add tangible data, if anything, yaocho is much less than what it was before. If you take guys coming in at 7-7 on Day 15:

1994: http://sumodb.sumogames.de/Query_bout.aspx?show_form=0&year=1994&day=15&rowcount=5&wins1=7&winsopt1=1

2015: http://sumodb.sumogames.de/Query_bout.aspx?show_form=0&year=2015&day=15&rowcount=5&wins1=7&winsopt1=1

2015 is pepper while 1994 is more salt (I just picked a random year in the past...)

Anyway, I'm sure this has been beaten into the ground around here by everyone who's been around much longer so I'll hold my tongue from now on.

[Kintamayama]

The plot thickens.. My long post from yesterday explaining my side is gone. Completely.

Beware:The long arms of the Yaochoists are everywhere.

[Katooshu]

Who has the authority to delete posts in that manner and what exactly was wrong with that one? I don't recall anything libelous or offensive...

[Kintamayama]

Who has the authority to delete posts in that manner and what exactly was wrong with that one? I don't recall anything libelous or offensive...

It will be restored soon hopefully. I don't think anyone did anything on purpose.

[Kintamayama]

Restored and all is well.

[Kuroyama]

http://www.sumoforum.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=34870&page=25#entry297735 sums it all up nicely, I think.

Edited February 22, 2016 by Kuroyama