Banzuke Natsu 2017

[RabidJohn 1,855]

  On 02/05/2017 at 18:07, Asashosakari said:

Because they've implicitly turned S1e into a highly privileged spot now (relative to S1w), and it makes very little sense that the ozeki rank should be less privileged. But that's exactly what you're arguing for by claiming it's okay that Takayasu shouldn't be able to dislodge a KK Tamawashi from S1e but should be able to pass him outright and become ozeki. It's roughly equivalent to claiming that it should be possible to go directly from komusubi to ozeki.

I don't know about privileged, but S1E is the highest banzuke position at which there is still the jeopardy of an immediate demotion with an MK. The Y/O are beyond that, so ignoring the prestige aspect, etc., it makes little practical difference how they're shuffled from basho to basho. S1E has that slight 'buffer' of half a banzuke position, which may see them dropped to only S1W with a 7-8, whereas the same score for S1W means a certain drop to K or lower. For me, Tamawashi's current KK run has earned him that buffer, but that's only an opinion.

As for Takayasu, his KK run means that ozeki promotion is now his to lose, despite S1E being unavailable for him. If he scores highly enough, he will be promoted - and I'm pretty sure that's a fact rather than merely my opinion.

Now, as for that being "roughly equivalent to claiming that it should be possible to go directly from komusubi to ozeki", I had to really think about this, and the only way I would agree was if the ability to force hari-dashi slots in sanyaku had been removed. In that purely hypothetical scenario an ozeki-run-scoring K (or even an M1) could get stuck behind a highly unlikely group of sanyaku residents all scoring KK but not threatening promotion, so they'd have no option but to leapfrog him up to ozeki. But the reality is hari-dashi slots do exist, possibly for this very purpose, so a K or M1 putting up ozeki-run numbers will always force a promotion to the next rank, so a K>O promotion can't happen, so, no, it's not "roughly equivalent to..." etc.

---

As regards, sekiwake averages, I'd already seen from Gurowake's post that their actual average is slightly higher than 8, so I accept I was wrong - looking at the overall numbers. Look at the last 12 months, though...

[Asojima 2,874]

  On 03/05/2017 at 16:11, RabidJohn said:

.... so a K>O promotion can't happen ...

Let's go hypothetical and off the wall:

Low maegashira > yusho > komusubi > strong/zen yusho > ???? (There are already three 8-7 sekiwakes.)

Edit:
Let's go way off the wall:

makushita > yusho> juryo>yusho > maegashira > yusho > komusubi > strong/zen yusho > ???? (There are already three 8-7 sekiwakes.)

Edited May 3, 2017 by Asojima

[Morningstar 118]

  On 03/05/2017 at 16:44, Asojima said:

Let's go hypothetical and off the wall:

Low maegashira > yusho > komusubi > strong/zen yusho > ???? (There are already three 8-7 sekiwakes.)

I expect there would be a 4th Sekiwake's in the next tournament.

[Bumpkin 438]

  On 03/05/2017 at 17:47, Morningstar said:

I expect there would be a 4th Sekiwake's in the next tournament.

I agree. Also, and correct me if I am wrong, isn't there a rule that requires 2 consecutive tournaments as a Sekiwake before Ozeki promotion?

[PawnSums 59]

  On 03/05/2017 at 16:44, Asojima said:

Let's go hypothetical and off the wall:

Low maegashira > yusho > komusubi > strong/zen yusho > ???? (There are already three 8-7 sekiwakes.)

The Pawn Vote:

Me: S1e

My Cousin: Ozeki

[Asashosakari 19,661]

  On 03/05/2017 at 16:11, RabidJohn said:

Now, as for that being "roughly equivalent to claiming that it should be possible to go directly from komusubi to ozeki", I had to really think about this, and the only way I would agree was if the ability to force hari-dashi slots in sanyaku had been removed.

That was my point. As it's possible to create additional sekiwake slots, a high-performing rikishi won't be blocked at komusubi or maegashira, so there's no real need to do direct promotions from K to O. Obviously it's not possible to create additional S1e slots, which is why it makes no sense to suspend the meritocratic principle as they have done. Tamawashi ceded all rights to the slot by performing much, much worse than the guy immediately behind him did.

Even the Kyokai has normally agreed that a KK shouldn't afford blanket protection, given that they've happily demoted dozens upon dozens of kachikoshi sekiwake and komusubi to worse slots. Heck, they are (or were) even aware that it should be done elsewhere as well if the situation is screwed up enough: Juryo after Aki 1970

Not to mention the old days...

[RabidJohn 1,855]

  On 03/05/2017 at 21:18, Asashosakari said:

...which is why it makes no sense to suspend the meritocratic principle as they have done. Tamawashi ceded all rights to the slot by performing much, much worse than the guy immediately behind him did.

My first post on this subject stated that I was pretty much unaware of what had happened previously in similar circumstances, and maybe that's what makes it easy for me to accept that Tamawashi has not ceded all rights to the slot, otherwise he would not still be S1E...

I don't believe for one moment that 'they' have just left the sekiwake positions unchanged. If it is such a departure from what has gone before, someone has argued for a different way of doing things, and won that argument.

All I've ever said is I can make sense of it and tried to explain why, but if the sekiwake 'order' had been Takayasu, Kotoshogiku, Tamawashi this time, I'd have been just as accepting. Like everyone else here I've got no choice in that.

[Asashosakari 19,661]

  On 03/05/2017 at 23:14, RabidJohn said:

My first post on this subject stated that I was pretty much unaware of what had happened previously in similar circumstances, and maybe that's what makes it easy for me to accept that Tamawashi has not ceded all rights to the slot, otherwise he would not still be S1E...

I don't believe for one moment that 'they' have just left the sekiwake positions unchanged. If it is such a departure from what has gone before, someone has argued for a different way of doing things, and won that argument.

All I've ever said is I can make sense of it and tried to explain why, but if the sekiwake 'order' had been Takayasu, Kotoshogiku, Tamawashi this time, I'd have been just as accepting. Like everyone else here I've got no choice in that.

No offense intended, but I don't think any of us were struggling to make sense of it, as far as finding possible explanations. What's at issue is whether it's not merely a valid departure from common practice, but also a justifiable one, and I daresay nearly everybody believes that it isn't. And that includes the guys who've been in charge of doing the banzuke for the last ~130 years since it went meritocratic (except the ones in charge right now apparently), given how rarely they've done things this way.

I'm completely in favour of bending or even breaking banzuke-making principles. After 10 years I've broken nearly all of them in the various sumo game banzuke I do - but the goal should be to enhance the fairness of the ranking that results. This decision of theirs has done exactly the opposite. Takayasu posted the best score of anyone below ozeki, and he wasn't even rewarded with the minimum promotion that he was in line for. That just shouldn't be on.

The practical implications may be limited this time, but that's not necessarily the case. If we had 7 Y/O right now, the difference would be significant as a sekiwake in the #8 slot usually has a much easier first week than a sekiwake in the #9 slot.

Anyway, the crowning glory would be if this leads to some sort of "Takayasu's not even Sekiwake East, so we're going to ask him for more than 10 wins to complete his ozeki run" idiocy by the committee.

[itchyknee 60]

  On 03/05/2017 at 21:18, Asashosakari said:

As it's possible to create additional sekiwake slots, a high-performing rikishi won't be blocked at komusubi or maegashira, so there's no real need to do direct promotions from K to O.

There may be no need, but would they promote directly to Ozeki on a K 10-5, K 10-5, K 15-0 ?  Where the Komusubi wasn't able to force a sekiwake promotion against two adequately KK sekiwake in the two earlier tournaments, and where the Komusubi performed well against the Y/O competition.  Or would two rounds of K 10-5 itself merit a forced promotion to sekiwake regardless of an available spot?

[Jakusotsu 6,049]

Or perhaps Tagonoura simply forgot to ask the Kyokai for Takayasu's promotion.

[Asashosakari 19,661]

  On 04/05/2017 at 04:23, itchyknee said:

There may be no need, but would they promote directly to Ozeki on a K 10-5, K 10-5, K 15-0 ?  Where the Komusubi wasn't able to force a sekiwake promotion against two adequately KK sekiwake in the two earlier tournaments, and where the Komusubi performed well against the Y/O competition.  Or would two rounds of K 10-5 itself merit a forced promotion to sekiwake regardless of an available spot?

I tend to think that 2x 10-5 would force a promotion to sekiwake, but until it happens it's just guesswork on my part of course. 
 

  On 03/05/2017 at 16:44, Asojima said:

Let's go hypothetical and off the wall:

Low maegashira > yusho > komusubi > strong/zen yusho > ???? (There are already three 8-7 sekiwakes.)

They did float the notion of a direct promotion from K to O when Kotonishiki yushoed, at least the first time when he did it from M5 (not sure about the second time from lower down).

[RabidJohn 1,855]

  On 04/05/2017 at 00:12, Asashosakari said:

No offense intended, but I don't think any of us were struggling to make sense of it...

None taken, and I wouldn't presume to try and tell you or any of the other highly experienced sumo followers hereabouts what's what. I'm still here mainly to receive.

That said, I was somewhat taken aback at posts from forum regulars who were seemingly struggling to come to terms with and upset/annoyed by the latest sekiwake positions. That's something I don't understand. Ours is not to reason why, as the old poem has it. What's the point of getting all het up about something you have absolutely no influence over? I can understand the attraction of GTB, but second-guessing the banzuke is pretty pointless. Accepting the banzuke makes more sense to me, but I'm a path-of-least-resistance type, with low expectations to avoid disappointment.

 

 

 

[itchyknee 60]

There's precedent for K -> O promotion. http://sumodb.sumogames.de/Query.aspx?show_form=0&form1_rank=K&form2_rank=O

Three of the last four (in reverse chronological order), all of whom ended their careers as Yokozunae:

1st: http://sumodb.sumogames.de/Rikishi.aspx?r=3801

(1937 - 1938) M12E 7-4, M5E 9-4 > K1E 11-2 J - They had 4 Y and 1 O on the banzuke, so might have wanted another O to balance things out.

2nd (Musashiyama): http://sumodb.sumogames.de/Rikishi.aspx?r=3743

(1931) K1W 10-1 J, K1E 10-1 Y, K1E 8-2-1 - Two 10-1 scores were not enough to force a HD sekiwake promotion for some unknown reason (they even had a HD komusubi at the time).

4th: http://sumodb.sumogames.de/Rikishi.aspx?r=3645

(1914 - 1915) J3E 7-0 Y, M12E 8-1-1 J, K1E 9-1 J - They had 2 Y and 3 O so I guess they just figured he deserved it.

http://sumodb.sumogames.de/Rikishi.aspx?r=3645

 

I'm going to go with san'yaku being san'yaku, regardless of title, and that any san'yaku can be directly promoted to Ozeki or Yokozuna with a sufficient record.  At least historically.  The odds of getting two yushos (or "and yusho equivalent", these days) and a promotion to Yokozuna without first hitting Ozeki are highly unlikely.  That may even be why these Komusubi were directly promoted to Ozeki - to avoid the possibility of having to promote a komusubi or sekiwake directly to Yokozuna.

Musashiyama's promotion was simultaneous with the Shunjuen incident, which may complicate the reasons for that particular promotion.

 

Followup: No one has ever had two yusho and/or yusho-doten at komusubi and/or sekiwake rank two tournaments in a row (jun-yusho is another matter entirely).  I stand by the above analysis.  http://sumodb.sumogames.de/Query.aspx?show_form=0&form1_rank=K,S&form1_y=on&form1_yd=on&form2_rank=K,S&form2_y=on&form2_yd=on

Edited May 5, 2017 by itchyknee
Followup

[Washuyama 641]

  On 03/05/2017 at 18:25, Bumpkin said:

...isn't there a rule...

Using the word "rule" when discussing the NSK is always a stretch.  "Almost always some of the time" is probably safer.    

[Asashosakari 19,661]

  On 04/05/2017 at 17:08, RabidJohn said:

That said, I was somewhat taken aback at posts from forum regulars who were seemingly struggling to come to terms with and upset/annoyed by the latest sekiwake positions. That's something I don't understand. Ours is not to reason why, as the old poem has it. What's the point of getting all het up about something you have absolutely no influence over?

I'm confused. It's sports fans discussing what's going on in the sport they follow, no different from tennis fans complaining about wildcards to Sharapova or Formula 1 fans criticizing race rule changes. You could scrap 99% of off-the-field sports talk if "let's only have discussions that have a tangible likelihood of changing something" became the standard to follow. 

And the Kyokai certainly does react to negative reaction if it gets bad enough. (That doesn't mean I'm harbouring any delusions that this particular thread will achieve that.)

[RabidJohn 1,855]

  On 05/05/2017 at 20:46, Asashosakari said:

I'm confused. It's sports fans discussing what's going on in the sport they follow, no different from tennis fans complaining about wildcards to Sharapova or Formula 1 fans criticizing race rule changes. You could scrap 99% of off-the-field sports talk if "let's only have discussions that have a tangible likelihood of changing something" became the standard to follow. 

And the Kyokai certainly does react to negative reaction if it gets bad enough. (That doesn't mean I'm harbouring any delusions that this particular thread will achieve that.)

If I've come across as suggesting some subjects should not be discussed/criticized then I've misrepresented myself, and maybe it's totally unrealistic of me to suggest that there's no need to get wound up about stuff, because some folk always will.

[Yubinhaad 11,761]

There was one other name change in Kokonoe-beya which I didn't spot at first - Jonidan yobidashi Kaito is now Shigejiro (重次郎). It brings him into line with the two senior yobidashi at the heya, Shigeo and Shigetaro.