note: this has been updated following comments on reddit and consideration. Updates are primarily concerning slams and sweeps. It's still mostly as I originally conceived of it, though.
In Judo, I'm irritated by the lack of leg grabs and limited groundwork, the terrible habit of turtling, and the ease with which an instant win ippon is possible (I believe this forces players to naturally become defensive for fear of a single error in any attack turning into an instant loss, which then forces artificial grip rules and a shido penalty system to counteract the incentives thus created).
With Sambo, I'm irritated with the lack of chokes, and the limited groundwork is an improvement, but not enough.
With BJJ, I'm irritated that the rules reward guard pulling and have killed the BJJ standing game entirely, with the stalling, with the hyper-emphasis on guard.
With Wrestling, I'm put off by the inability to play off of your back, which is actually a very naturally good position for a human--his weak spot covered, all his limbs out in front of him (with the caveat of limited mobility, and very limited offensive options). The lack of real submissions is a flaw in my mind, of course, as well. These two artificial constraints create a lot of weird movement habits and leave fundamental holes in the wrestling game, just like any other grappling ruleset I see.
So, here's my take on an ideal generic grappling ruleset, starting from a BJJ ruleset template as a starting point.
I think the crucial skills in grappling are takedowns, pins, and submissions. As such, you only get points for doing those things.
Pulling guard is negative 2 points, conceding the takedown to your opponent. This is because one should never pull guard in real life from a standing position, and it takes advantage of the fact that striking isn't allowed in an artificial manner.
Sweeps are just treated as takedowns, and are awarded points on the same 1-4 scale that takedowns are, according to speedy, intensity, dominance of landing position, etc. As such, many 'sweeps' in modern sport BJJ wouldn't actually merit points (simply forcing a transition where one's opponent is now, slowly, put in a place where he's working guard instead of you).
No points for reversals specifically, but you do get 1 point for a 20 second pin--so if your reversal gets you out of a pin, or gets you into pinning the other guy, it's naturally rewarded, without points. Even more so if that position leads to a sub. A dramatic enough reversal might even be a 1 point takedown, potentially.
Upon completion of a 20 second pin, the player has ten seconds to move and transition to a new pin, submission attempt, etc. He may also choose to stand up and release his pin. If no change is made in ten seconds, both players are reset to standing.
Pins would be similar to Sambo in style, not wrestling. But all this means is that positional points are harder to earn; you don't get points for top mount, side mount, knee on belly easily. Those positions are either naturally rewarded by their good defensive and offensive properties (hard to be subbed, easy to sub from, good control, good mobility, etc.), or, if you are truly skilled at positional control, you can get points for just demonstrating this core grappling skill in the form of a pin.
But pinning is the lesser of the three grappling skills, as it is less viable when strikes and underhanded methods are on the table, and because submissions and takedowns actually have the ability to incapacitate your opponent, and pins do not. So it is the least extrinsically rewarded skill.
Takedown points are similar to Sambo--1 to 4 points depending on quality of the takedown. Takedown from the knees, unlike in Sambo, would count for points, though. Not sure if a 'total victory' style instant-win ippon throw should be included as an option or not; I think not, because any 'instant victory' ability makes players more defensive, because they fear it, and because it means the odds of winning on luck increase, and because it leaves something too important in the hands of the referee's opinion.
I like the idea of no 'leading by 8 points = victory', like there is in Sambo; I like the idea of leaving the option for a submission for someone behind on points open until the end.
Smooth "rolling" throws, like seoi nage, uchimata, etc., that you see so often in Judo/Sambo that don't have any real impact force and don't even require a breakfall from either player, just get the guy's back to make contact, should be considered inferior throws and get 2 points at most. Those which end with the attacker in a terrible position on top of that, should not receive either 1 or not any points at all.
A theoretical slam should count as a takedown. There are moves that allow one to slam an opponent that has you in guard, such that he cannot release his own guard, in Judo. (They are banned in competition, but up until the 70's they were still valid.) If one player is in the guard or triangle (etc.) of another player, and lifts the opponent up into the air, the ref should stop the match, separate them, and give the player that could have slammed his opponent if he chose to a full 4 takedown points.
The should discourage highly unrealistic guard strategies that rely on the ban on slamming, and it still gives those with valid triangles being lifted off the ground the chance to decide whether they believe their triangle will finish their opponent off in time or whether they should release and free theirself.
Lesser, small 'slams' to shake someone off of a triangle or off of guard, which represent no serious risk of harm to their opponent, should be valid.
Lifting an opponent who has you in guard or in a triangle one inch off the floor does not suffice for takedown points, and should not interrupt the groundwork, as it currently does in Sambo and Judo.
I think I am against neck cranks in general in a competition setting, because players will want to hold out against attacks that will fuck with their necks but 'not be enough to tap out to'. In real life, you would hold out against poor neck attacks because a little discomfort for a few days following isn't going to finish you off. I realize that there are good, real neck crank techniques that will be neglected, but I think that's an acceptable sacrifice in this case, just like sacrificing the reality of strikes. But can openers from closed guard should be legal--the correct answer is to just release your guard.
A stalemate position like 50/50 or closed guard, where no progress is made and both players seem unable or unwilling to make viable attack attempts for 20 seconds, and no pin is occurring, should be reset standing. This mimics the real world fact that striking would be forcing movement that isn't occurring in this artificial setting, and also prevents point-gaming stalling tactics.
All standard BJJ subs are legal from purple belt on. Only toeholds/heel hooks not legal for white/blue. Reaping is legal from purple belt on.
Notice that if you escape a pin by, say, wrapping up a leg, or recovering guard, you can force a standing reset by holding on to it.
---
I also would like to explore the idea of, instead of bracketing by belt level, mixing all belts together. '1st as a blue belt' would instead be the blue belt who got the furthest down the bracket before being defeated, for instance.
The problem is that, if we truly bracket randomly this way, white belts could lose to black belts straight away. If we seed higher belts to counter this, then higher belts get the advantage of being less tired.
Perhaps we could just have 'below 2 years experience' and 'above 2 years experience' divisions, with no seedings. Or perhaps instead of a true loser's bracket, we could modify it so that one only faces one's own belt level competitors in the loser's bracket.
---
An addendum: Judo being in the Olympics has greatly harmed Judo--this is an almost universal sentiment among modern Judoka. If we look at Sambo players who want an Olympic medal, they train Sambo normally, but they will modify their training for the ruleset of the Olympics when necessary. Sambo keeps its character, their students still train their leg locks, their double leg takedowns, and so on. Judo, on the other hand, has become modified to fit the rules made for the whims of the IOC. It has lost its proper Kata Guruma and is developing strange variant moves strictly for the peculiar rule changes it has, it has lost its guard game, it has lost its leg locks, it has forgotten it ever had atemi-waza, and so on.
But the Olympics shouldn't be about any one sport. Grappling is a fundamental human sport, like running, or swimming. Its rules should be neutral and pure. A ruleset like this would not only give other martial arts like Sambo or Shuai Jiao or even BJJ more equal footing, and thus be more in the spirit of what the Olympics really are--it would also free Judo to be itself again, not bound up by the pressure of its own 'success'.
---
What do you think?
Responses from BJJers
Responses from Judoka
Responses from Samboists
شركة تنظيف كنب بالخبر
ReplyDeleteشركة تنظيف كنب بالدمام
شركة تنظيف كنب بالجبيل
شركة تنظيف كنب بحفر الباطن