Promotion/Demotion and Yūshō Discussion Kyūshū 2022

[Reonito]

36 minutes ago, Sumo Spiffy said:

Oh, well, never mind then. I thought sekiwake made more all this time.

It makes things like Daieisho's K2 ranking (rather than the S2 we all expected) all the more puzzling

[Wakawakawaka]

Why would it matter how good you do? It's how bad everyone else does. You have to earn your sekiwake slot the old fashioned way, by hoping the incumbents flop. 

[Sumo Spiffy]

4 minutes ago, Reonito said:

It makes things like Daieisho's K2 ranking (rather than the S2 we all expected) all the more puzzling

It does, but it also simplifies the possible rationales, unless they're so concerned about having to pay an ozeki that they're willing to make it harder for someone to get there. Given the cachet that ozeki are supposed to give the sport, that doesn't strike me as a plausible reason unto itself; if anything, it speaks more to the idea that they want to be extra certain ozeki candidates will acquit themselves well at the rank (especially since they did that to Daieisho before the Shodai Conundrum began in earnest).

There are also a lot of clues, going through rankings charts over time, that the association has grown away from the idea that more sanyaku are better (ie. banzukes across the entire second half of the 20th century) and that a relatively consistent, if stiff, set of requirements for skipping steps on the path up is preferable. The lack of Y/O wrestlers and prospects remains the possible wrench that turns this situation differently, but I would still be surprised if we don't hear anything along these lines before the banzuke is released and it still happens.

[Asashosakari]

Late response to this one...

On 29/11/2022 at 04:02, Sakura said:

The current Sekiwake and Komusbi ranks (combined) are rather bloated, and they could do with reducing the numbers to avoid the problem of `what happens if they stick with 10 sanyaku and the M1s pull out great records and they have to expand some more'. Reducing down to 9 wouldn't be enough to cure that problem, but reducing down to 7 causes a lot of problems in ordering the Maegashira.

8 would be a resonable number as you say and I think they don't have a problem with giving rikishi awful banzuke luck.

Problems of having too many high-ranking maegashira that put up promotable records are chiefly caused by trying to have too small a sanyaku, though, not a too large one. They can get away with 2 S + 2 K when they've got half a dozen Y/O who are almost all putting up regular kachikoshi, because that leaves only a couple more KKs for the joi riffraff. But in a situation like right now where the expected number of Y/O kachikoshi is rarely more than two, you get exactly what we've been seeing for quite a few tournaments now, logjams galore. You can't just have only four lower sanyaku in perpetuity when the KK/MK split in the non-Y/O joi creates six or seven sanyaku-deserving guys all the time. (And that's six or seven without even accounting for the Kyokai's annoying insistence on not demoting 7-8 sekiwake to maegashira.)

The tournament just gone has demonstrated all that very well, with its 7 S/K rikishi of whom no less than four went makekoshi. That's a perfectly normal outcome when you put that many less-than-ozeki-caliber rikishi into those ranks, and it would easily balance against the three maegashira who put up strong cases for promotion, if only they actually recognized the necessity of sticking to such a large lower sanyaku. Conversely, if those 7 S/K rikishi had done the unlikely and actually all had a great tournament, we simply wouldn't be having any maegashira deserving of promotion, balancing out as well.

[Reonito]

3 minutes ago, Sumo Spiffy said:

There are also a lot of clues, going through rankings charts over time, that the association has grown away from the idea that more sanyaku are better (ie. banzukes across the entire second half of the 20th century) and that a relatively consistent, if stiff, set of requirements for skipping steps on the path up is preferable.

Yeah, it's been consistently established that it now takes 11+ at K to force S, and that most KK results at ranks below M1e aren't enough to force K, though we haven't seen enough examples to know exactly where the lines are. Denying M1 13-2 Y -> S2 seemed to signal that M -> S2 isn't going to happen, but it is an n of 1 and who knows what factored into that specific decision

[Reonito]

2 minutes ago, Asashosakari said:

The tournament just gone has demonstrated all that very well, with its 7 S/K rikishi of whom no less than four went makekoshi. That's a perfectly normal outcome when you put that many less-than-ozeki-caliber rikishi into those ranks, and it would easily balance against the three maegashira who put up strong cases for promotion, if only they actually recognized the necessity of sticking to such a large lower sanyaku. Conversely, if those 7 S/K rikishi had done the unlikely and actually all had a great tournament, we simply wouldn't be having any maegashira deserving of promotion, balancing out as well.

A few bouts going the other way on day 15, and we wouldn't be staring at nearly as bad a mess.

[Tigerboy1966]

The best way to clear the logjam would be to have three or four new men at ozeki, but I don't see that happening soon. Our problem is that with Terunofuji out the top twenty or so men in the sport are very closely matched. For instance if Ryuden beat Takakeisho it would technically be a big upset but would anyone be shocked or more than mildly surprised at such an outcome. This makes it very difficult for anyone to put together the numbers for an ozeki promotion.

[Tetsuba]

Hi, so dunno if the leak about Kotonowaka is completely true but the joi is completely impossible to draw without an 5th lower sanyaku.
So for me Kotonowaka's promotion is a given.

Moreover, if you don't have a 6th lower sanyaku (Abi?/Meisei?) , the joi ends up with many people stuck at the same rank including Ryuden and Nishikifuji at 9-6. 
Unless you demote Mitakeumi and Tamawashi at M5w and M6w...

So I think we'll have another large sanyaku, but I'll be happily proven wrong if someone can show me their joi proposition with only 5 lower san'yaku guys.
 

[Tigerboy1966]

24 minutes ago, Tetsuba said:

Moreover, if you don't have a 6th lower sanyaku (Abi?/Meisei?) , the joi ends up with many people stuck at the same rank including Ryuden and Nishikifuji at 9-6. 
Unless you demote Mitakeumi and Tamawashi at M5w and M6w...

I think we are all looking at this problem and scratching our heads. I can leave an 8-7 man where he is but I can't demote him, and you really have to promote a 9-6... which means that you have the sanyaku demotees ending up at what look like ridiculously low ranks.

[Sakura]

13 hours ago, Asashosakari said:

Late response to this one...

Problems of having too many high-ranking maegashira that put up promotable records are chiefly caused by trying to have too small a sanyaku, though, not a too large one. 

I understand that. 

I think my point that I failed to make was a) large sanyaku is ok as long as it is Y/O heavy (i.e. 6 vs 4) and not the (3 vs 7) that we had. More of the problem, I think,  comes from the higher rankers not doing their job, as the penalty for failing for them is to remain in the Sanyaku next time.

b) With the top 8 stretching on the current banzuke (active in the absho) down to K2E, there is room (particluarly in a S/K heavy situation like this, where the talent gap is supposedly smaller) to spread a lot of wins around so that potentially no one in S/K would have a losing record and the folks at M1 would still have recods that would require promotion and that might be the sort of situation that they would want to avoid.

Personally, I think 10 is the ideal sanyaku size, but I think it works better if it is weighted towards the Y/O

[Sumo Spiffy]

5 hours ago, Tigerboy1966 said:

I think we are all looking at this problem and scratching our heads. I can leave an 8-7 man where he is but I can't demote him, and you really have to promote a 9-6... which means that you have the sanyaku demotees ending up at what look like ridiculously low ranks.

Shorthand, it looks like this:

7-man sanyaku: Everyone's substantially fked.

8-man sanyaku: One guy is mega-fked. There are options for who that could be.

9+-man sanyaku: Some fkery, but nothing terrible.

I think it's also worth nothing that, with Takakeisho the only wrestler immune to regular demotion pressure, it's more likely that the congestion goes down at least somewhat in the future. When ozeki hand out wins like Halloween candy, there are more promotion ranks further down causing pressure, but without anyone to demote to where they're coming up from. It's also potentially borked when an ozeki is demoted, even in a case like this where he goes to an additional sekiwake slot rather than a main one, because it may lead the committee to not want more sekiwake when perhaps they otherwise would, creating another downward push on the final rankings. That's speculation, but if it's true in any way, it's only impactful for this basho; it's guaranteed not to matter for the next two, at minimum, and that's only if Takakeisho completely eats shit all of a sudden.

[rokudenashi]

I ended up trying to balance out the logjam near the top by picking 4 komusubi and 4 sekiwake. Any other solution seemed to considerably overdemote the likes of Tamawashi, Tobizaru and Mitakeumi, due to the number of KKs in or around the jōi warranting occupation of the 1-3 slots. This gives us 10 san’yaku total (I agree with @Sakura… 10 feels right… gut feeling)

I didn’t check if the 1Y 1O 4S 4K pattern has occurred before but I would hazard to guess no… but then again, the san'yaku pattern this past basho was a first too wasn’t it? “Christmas tree” or something? 

Maybe this gives away too many of my guesses… not that I’d recommend copying them anyway 

edit: oops - thought this was the GTB thread until I saw the title

Edited December 1, 2022 by rokudenashi

[Sumo Spiffy]

5 minutes ago, rokudenashi said:

edit: oops - thought this was the GTB thread until I saw the title

It's ok. You don't want to give your ideas away to everyone, right? Make your competitors come look for them. 

[Wakawakawaka]

GTB January 2023 edition: Colloquially known as Guess The Sanyaku!

Guess wrong and you'll earn a life-sized anatomically-accurate hypothetical tortellini, guess right and you'll earn... who's kidding none of us are going to guess right. 43 man Sanyaku please!

EDIT: In regards to forcing/creating a new sanyaku slot... I know we have more than usual, but is it actually considered 'forcing' if say Meisei replaces Daeisho at K2w? K2w already exists right now, so the slot isn't really forced/new.

Edited December 1, 2022 by Wakawakawaka

[Seiyashi]

47 minutes ago, Sakura said:

14 hours ago, Asashosakari said:

Late response to this one...

Problems of having too many high-ranking maegashira that put up promotable records are chiefly caused by trying to have too small a sanyaku, though, not a too large one. 

I understand that. 

I think my point that I failed to make was a) large sanyaku is ok as long as it is Y/O heavy (i.e. 6 vs 4) and not the (3 vs 7) that we had. More of the problem, I think,  comes from the higher rankers not doing their job, as the penalty for failing for them is to remain in the Sanyaku next time.

b) With the top 8 stretching on the current banzuke (active in the absho) down to K2E, there is room (particluarly in a S/K heavy situation like this, where the talent gap is supposedly smaller) to spread a lot of wins around so that potentially no one in S/K would have a losing record and the folks at M1 would still have recods that would require promotion and that might be the sort of situation that they would want to avoid.

Personally, I think 10 is the ideal sanyaku size, but I think it works better if it is weighted towards the Y/O

Meta commentary on this thread, but it's nice to have the old masters back 

I may not be able to enter GTB this time round but it's nice seeing it cause a right kerfuffle.

[Sakura]

46 minutes ago, rokudenashi said:

I ended up trying to balance out the logjam near the top by picking 4 komusubi and 4 sekiwake. Any other solution seemed to considerably overdemote the likes of Tamawashi, Tobizaru and Mitakeumi, due to the number of KKs in or around the jōi warranting occupation of the 1-3 slots. This gives us 10 san’yaku total (I agree with @Sakura… 10 feels right… gut feeling)

I never said I thought that they would do 10 Sanyaku on the next banzuke.

I just think 10 is a good number in general, with the preference for me to be weighted toward the Y/O

[Sumo Spiffy]

43 minutes ago, Wakawakawaka said:

EDIT: In regards to forcing/creating a new sanyaku slot... I know we have more than usual, but is it actually considered 'forcing' if say Meisei replaces Daeisho at K2w? K2w already exists right now, so the slot isn't really forced/new.

Yeah, it is. The best way to think about it is that when someone in an additional K/S slot vacates it, it's gone immediately. If someone else pops it back open for the next basho, that's a separate matter. It's not easier to make K2W because someone else was K2W last time; apply the same requirements for opening a new slot that you normally would.

33 minutes ago, Seiyashi said:

I may not be able to enter GTB this time round but it's nice seeing it cause a right kerfuffle.

You can't be ass-deep in the discussion like this and not enter!

[Seiyashi]

What do you guys think about the potentially radical solution of keeping the 7-8 K2 pair as is?

[Sumo Spiffy]

6 minutes ago, Seiyashi said:

What do you guys think about the potentially radical solution of keeping the 7-8 K2 pair as is?

Looked it up a few days ago. I'm as sure as sure can be that this won't happen. The only 7-8 komusubi who maintain the rank have all been dinked from K1E to K1W, and then only in situations where there was absolutely nobody available to replace them. I could see an instance where a 7-8 komusubi isn't moved at all, but even then only in a situation where there's nobody to replace him. Secondary slots are, by their nature, designed to be vacated, so I can't imagine Tobi and Daieisho maintain rank.

Edit: To clarify, if we have a K2E and K2W, I am basically certain it would be Kotonowaka and Meisei/Wakamotoharu moving up rather than these two dodging a demotion.

Edited December 1, 2022 by Sumo Spiffy

[Seiyashi]

After having fiddled with it myself I agree Takayasu is likely sekiwake and there's a possibility someone joins Kiribayama and Kotonowaka at komusubi. Has no one else noticed another clusterf**k developing in the M11-M13 area if we stick to an 8-man sanyaku, and this is already accounting for the fact that there's a lot of underpromotion going around in the joi?

[Reonito]

25 minutes ago, Seiyashi said:

What do you guys think about the potentially radical solution of keeping the 7-8 K2 pair as is?

They only keep 7-8 K when there's no one to replace them, not when there are too many candidates

Edited December 1, 2022 by Reonito

[Reonito]

6 minutes ago, Seiyashi said:

Has no one else noticed another clusterf**k developing in the M11-M13 area if we stick to an 8-man sanyaku, and this is already accounting for the fact that there's a lot of underpromotion going around in the joi?

M10-M14 would have a fair bit of underpromotion/overdemotion, but nothing that would really raise eyebrows the way M1-M7 would. Banzuke with shrinking san'yaku pretty much have to unlucky across the board.

[maglor]

16 hours ago, Asashosakari said:

Late response to this one...

Problems of having too many high-ranking maegashira that put up promotable records are chiefly caused by trying to have too small a sanyaku, though, not a too large one. They can get away with 2 S + 2 K when they've got half a dozen Y/O who are almost all putting up regular kachikoshi, because that leaves only a couple more KKs for the joi riffraff. But in a situation like right now where the expected number of Y/O kachikoshi is rarely more than two, you get exactly what we've been seeing for quite a few tournaments now, logjams galore. You can't just have only four lower sanyaku in perpetuity when the KK/MK split in the non-Y/O joi creates six or seven sanyaku-deserving guys all the time. (And that's six or seven without even accounting for the Kyokai's annoying insistence on not demoting 7-8 sekiwake to maegashira.)

The tournament just gone has demonstrated all that very well, with its 7 S/K rikishi of whom no less than four went makekoshi. That's a perfectly normal outcome when you put that many less-than-ozeki-caliber rikishi into those ranks, and it would easily balance against the three maegashira who put up strong cases for promotion, if only they actually recognized the necessity of sticking to such a large lower sanyaku. Conversely, if those 7 S/K rikishi had done the unlikely and actually all had a great tournament, we simply wouldn't be having any maegashira deserving of promotion, balancing out as well.

Is this a bad thing though, necessarily? 

When the Y/O are strong, it's incredibly tough to get a good record in the joi, and so it's easy to make sanyaku if you can do it.

When the Y/O are weak, it's not hard to get a good record in the joi, and so it's correspondingly that much harder to get promoted into sanyaku.

If we go back to the Y/O of 2012, everyone in the joi would have 4 less wins and there is no logjam. It's just that a 10-5/11-4 in the joi now is really equivalent to an 8-7 back then. Think of it that way, and the logjam isn't so bad. 

It balances itself out really; the weaker the Y/O are, the better you should have to do to make sanyaku

[Asashosakari]

2 hours ago, Sakura said:

I understand that. 

I think my point that I failed to make was a) large sanyaku is ok as long as it is Y/O heavy (i.e. 6 vs 4) and not the (3 vs 7) that we had. More of the problem, I think,  comes from the higher rankers not doing their job, as the penalty for failing for them is to remain in the Sanyaku next time.

b) With the top 8 stretching on the current banzuke (active in the absho) down to K2E, there is room (particluarly in a S/K heavy situation like this, where the talent gap is supposedly smaller) to spread a lot of wins around so that potentially no one in S/K would have a losing record and the folks at M1 would still have recods that would require promotion and that might be the sort of situation that they would want to avoid.

Personally, I think 10 is the ideal sanyaku size, but I think it works better if it is weighted towards the Y/O

That's exactly my point, though - it needs to be around 10 regardless of the specific rank make-up. That's simply an unavoidable consequence of how the tournaments work. And no, the fact that there may be edge cases where even 10 might not be enough is no argument against that, when what's an edge case with 10 is a common outcome with 8.

[Asashosakari]

33 minutes ago, maglor said:

Is this a bad thing though, necessarily? 

When the Y/O are strong, it's incredibly tough to get a good record in the joi, and so it's easy to make sanyaku if you can do it.

When the Y/O are weak, it's not hard to get a good record in the joi, and so it's correspondingly that much harder to get promoted into sanyaku.

If we go back to the Y/O of 2012, everyone in the joi would have 4 less wins and there is no logjam. It's just that a 10-5/11-4 in the joi now is really equivalent to an 8-7 back then. Think of it that way, and the logjam isn't so bad. 

It balances itself out really; the weaker the Y/O are, the better you should have to do to make sanyaku

That's a very, very bad case of apples and oranges, quite honestly.

When there's 6 strong Y/O, the guy two spots down from them on the banzuke is called West Sekiwake, but he's only the 8th-best rikishi in sumo. That's probably a guy who largely fluked his way into sanyaku and won't be there for very long.

When there's 2 strong Y/O, the guy two spots down from them on the banzuke is still called West Sekiwake, but now that's the 4th-best rikishi in sumo. He's almost certainly performing more strongly than the West Sekiwake in the other scenario, and it will show in how he got to that rank. Meanwhile, the 8th-best rikishi in sumo will be the same kind of guy as before. According to you, he should be consigned to perpetual just-outside-of-sanyaku status, even though his performances are deserving of exactly the same thing as in the other scenario: occasionally bubbling up into sanyaku and then not staying there for long.