What makes a great ozeki?

[Godango 996]

Starting this thread to stop another continuing to be wildly off-topic. Here's the relevant posts:
 

2 hours ago, Godango said:

Personally I wish they'd adopt 33+ over three in sanyaku as an official requirement (with an exception for a hiramaku yusho in basho 1), and remove the subjectivity of 'standard of sumo' and whatnot. 

No one is going to ugly sumo/henka their way to this; and history is changed thusly (from 2000 onwards):

• Onokuni (promoted 1 tournament later)
• Chiyotaikai (promoted 21 tournaments later)
• Kisenosato (promoted 1 tournament later)
• Goeido (never promoted [crazy!])
• Asanoyama (promoted 1 tournament later)
• Shodai (never promoted )

Based on that, I say no more 'lenient' promotions. If Shodai was never Ozeki we'd be no worse off; and sure, Goeido was long-term -- but imo aside from his surprise zensho he was always joi/sanyaku masquerading as Ozeki.

 

35 minutes ago, I am the Yokozuna said:

When would this bullshit stop? 15-0 zensho yusho for an Ozeki, with an audacious kubinage against Harumafuji in his pomp, is something that I have witnessed from Hakuho and Harumafuji at the ozeki rank, and never from a joi/sanyaku rikishi in the last quarter of a century. Please let us have more surprise zensho yushos from ozekis. Unsuccesful ozeki could be ascribed to Mitakeumi with his four or five bashos at this rank, not to someone who spent 6 years at an ozeki rank. For me the ozeki should strive for kachikoshi, and 9-6 is a respectable result, so in that regard Goeido did more than well. 

 

21 minutes ago, Godango said:

Sure, I probably could have phrased that better. What I meant to say is that his zensho-yusho aside; I don't think of him as "one of the great ozeki".

Also, in fairness, I made the case of excluding his zensho from that statement, as it was obviously a spectacular achievement, in what I would OTHERWISE consider to be a pretty average (while again, as I disclaimed, long-term) ozeki tenure.

 

20 minutes ago, Bunbukuchagama said:

So, how many "great" ozeki do you have on your list? 

 

13 minutes ago, Godango said:

Are we seriously going to keep coming at me over semantics?

Goeido was a perfectly adequate ozeki. He had one spectacular tournament which was an outlier. He also MK'd in almost 1 in 3 of his ozeki tournaments, and got double digits in slightly more than 1 in 5.

If your standard is 'a good ozeki is one who holds the rank' than yeah, he was really good. If your standard is 'a good ozeki is one who is always in the yusho hunt and pushing for yokozuna' he wasn't that. If we're coming at this with different standards or definitions for what we want ozeki to be, that's fine; but it's another discussion.

On that note, I'm happy to take that discussion to it's own topic rather than keep taking this thread in this tangent.

 

7 minutes ago, Bunbukuchagama said:

I'm trying to find your goalposts. Is Takakeisho a great ozeki or a "perfectly adequate" one, for example? And should perfectly adequate ozeki deserve the rank or should it be reserved for great ones only? 

 

[Godango 996]

In response to @Bunbukuchagama's latest question, I don't know. I didn't think there'd be a strong reaction to my passing comment about Goeido, and I didn't think I'd be held to account for the exact phrasing of how I tried to phrase that passing comment more diplomatically. 

That said, off the top of my head, I think Takakeisho is a far more successful ozeki than Goeido. Without finding @Seiyashi's dive into historical ozeki (I'll have more time to look for it later), Takakeisho has (including his 'ozekiwake' tournament):

MK'd 1 in 3 tournaments (fractionally more than Goeido, in fairness)
Had double digits in almost 2 in 3 tournaments (far better than Goeido).

When Takakeisho competes, he's often in the yusho race. For me, that's what an ozeki should be. But again, that's for me. Others may, reasonably, have different views.

EDIT:

@Asashosakari just very concisely and accurately summed up what I think an ozeki should be (though I suspect they were saying it to disagree with me) -- but yes; I think an ozeki should be performing at close to Yokozuna level. For me, the purpose of the rank is to make the next step, with the rank itself affording some benefits and being a fantastic career achievement.

1 minute ago, Asashosakari said:

Well, that's the standard of a yokozuna who just doesn't have that rank yet.

Edited July 25, 2023 by Godango

[Bunbukuchagama 732]

1 minute ago, Godango said:

When Takakeisho competes, he's often in the yusho race

We also need to consider quality of their competition. 

[Seiyashi 4,098]

4 minutes ago, Godango said:

Without finding @Seiyashi's dive into historical ozeki

1 minute ago, Bunbukuchagama said:

We also need to consider quality of their competition. 

There should be one on Sum of Opponent Score midway through the linked post. Would be willing to dig out my code and spreadsheets for this one if you had something more specific in mind, but that will have to wait till tonight.

[Godango 996]

4 minutes ago, Bunbukuchagama said:

We also need to consider quality of their competition. 

How about you tell me your standard then; instead of just posting short contrary replies. I apologise if that's terse, but this is a pointless discussion if I'm going to think on a reply and provide some numbers and reasoning for you to just drop a less than ten word reply with yet another objection. I'm not interested in defending a gish gallop about a topic I'm not overly invested in and didn't intend to walk into.

[Asashosakari 19,427]

17 minutes ago, Godango said:

just very concisely and accurately summed up what I think an ozeki should be (though I suspect they were saying it to disagree with me) -- but yes; I think an ozeki should be performing at close to Yokozuna level. For me, the purpose of the rank is to make the next step, with the rank itself affording some benefits and being a fantastic career achievement.

Yes, I completely disagree with that, because it implies that there's a wide swath of performances - basically every rikishi that is good enough to average 8.5 wins long-term against the joi, but not good enough to average 10+ - that constitutes career failure.

I don't think you realize it, but you're essentially arguing for a sumo world where ozeki and yokozuna were never split from each other. Except that in your vision, the rank above sekiwake is called yokozuna, not ozeki. If "ozeki" is nothing more than yokozuna-in-waiting, the rank is unnecessary.

Edited July 25, 2023 by Asashosakari

[Bunbukuchagama 732]

16 minutes ago, Seiyashi said:

There should be one on Sum of Opponent Score midway through the linked post. Would ,be willing to dig out my code and spreadsheets for this one if you had something more specific in mind, but that will have to wait till tonight.

Thank you, this is a very comprehensive research paper, I'll need some time to study it. 

[Katooshu 3,251]

Great ozeki is an interesting concept, because if you're too good of an ozeki you're a yokozuna. 

Among those with some longevity at the rank not many beat this guy - only kadoban once in 31 basho (from a 7-8 where he was kyujo on day 15), double digit KK in 24 of them (all other KK were 9-6), 1 yusho and 11 time runner-up. Consistently in the yusho race or close behind, and clearly on a different level to everyone but the yokozuna. 

Edited July 25, 2023 by Katooshu

[Seiyashi 4,098]

30 minutes ago, Asashosakari said:

41 minutes ago, Godango said:

just very concisely and accurately summed up what I think an ozeki should be (though I suspect they were saying it to disagree with me) -- but yes; I think an ozeki should be performing at close to Yokozuna level. For me, the purpose of the rank is to make the next step, with the rank itself affording some benefits and being a fantastic career achievement.

Yes, I completely disagree with that, because it implies that there's a wide swath of performances - basically every rikishi that is good enough to average 8.5 wins long-term against the joi, but not good enough to average 10+ - that constitutes career failure.

I don't think you realize it, but you're essentially arguing for a sumo world where ozeki and yokozuna were never split from each other. Except that in your vision, the rank above sekiwake is called yokozuna, not ozeki. If "ozeki" is nothing more than yokozuna-in-waiting, the rank is unnecessary.

To add on to this, it's necessary to distinguish between ōzeki who are destined for yokozuna (yokozuna-in-waiting) and ōzeki who cap out at ōzeki (career ōzeki). The numbers I generated in my topic show that there's a very observable difference between their statistics during their tenure as ōzeki. If a particular ōzeki is not cut out for yokozuna then the numbers will tell the story, and no amount of wishing will make him cut out for the rope. This is exactly the kind of future discussion that I was hoping for, where the stats I generated can help ground some of the argument in objectivity.

Beyond the stats, subjectively, to me, a good career ōzeki should gatekeep the maegashira and lower sanyaku without being too much of a hindrance to the yokozuna in getting the yūshō. I don't really follow pro-wrestling so this analogy might be a bit off, but the career ōzeki should be the heels - they're there to set the bar and show they're badass but they're not the ones you ultimately root for, which are the yokozuna.

A good yokozuna in waiting will get the rope sooner or later, and his arc is just about how long he takes to get there.

By this subjective metric, Takakeishō has been a great career ōzeki, and all the handwringing over him not being able to put two basho back to back is about him not being cut out for yokozuna. Asanoyama was probably a YIW, while Mitakeumi and Shōdai have just wholly failed as ōzeki IMO, the former at least while holding the rank.

I used to think much like Godango but Asashosakari has more or less convinced me otherwise. I still think they should be hitting 10 on average in a climate of reduced competition (but subject to the argument that the current climate is not one of reduced competition but parity, hence the lower yūshō scores on average), but 9-6s are fine especially when there are strong yokozuna and they're on par with their peers.

Edited July 25, 2023 by Seiyashi

[Seiyashi 4,098]

3 minutes ago, Katooshu said:

Great ozeki is an interesting concept, because if you're too good of an ozeki you're a yokozuna. 

Among those with some longevity at the rank not many beat this guy - only kadoban once in 31 basho, double digit KK in 24 of them (all other KK were 9-6), 1 yusho and 11 time runner-up. Clearly on a different level to everyone but the yokozuna. 

I think at Yamanashi's behest, we established this guy just took his own damn sweet time to get the rope. It would have been a massive shame had he capped out at ōzeki since his numbers were not career ōzeki numbers.

(He also happens to be my top candidate for "great wrestler lousily coached", which is relevant to the other OT thread that should be spun off about now.)

[Asashosakari 19,427]

4 minutes ago, Katooshu said:

How about this guy - only kadoban once, double digit KK in 24 of 31 tournaments (all other KK were 9-6), 1 yusho and 11 time runner-up.

And yet, all the talk about him at the time was about how he was a failed yokozuna prospect, not a great ozeki. (Thank heavens he made it in the end.) That's the real problem with refusing to recognize that somebody like Goeido was a perfectly okay ozeki - you end up with every ozeki being a failure of some kind. Failed to take the next step, failed to be great altogether, failed to hold the rank long enough (Takayasu)...

Edited July 25, 2023 by Asashosakari

[Seiyashi 4,098]

Brings to mind a sumo variant of the old joke: there are two kinds of ōzeki - those who make yokozuna, and those that suck.

Clearly that overstates the case. The metric for performance at a rank cannot possibly depend on the speed at which you vacate the rank due to promotion. Demotion, on the other hand...

Edited July 25, 2023 by Seiyashi

[dingo 1,265]

For me, each rank represents a new level in itself, not as a jumping point to the next as it might be seen. There's many who never make it above makushita, or juryo. Same with ozeki, some rikishi are not made to get higher than that and getting 11 wins per basho in sanyaku represents the peak of their abilities. That's perfectly fine for me. Doesn't mean that they don't deserve the ozeki rank and shouldn't have been promoted, even if they remain far from yokozuna contention throughout the career. One can be a solid and deserving ozeki without that. 

Anyway that's my modest 2 cents. 

[Asashosakari 19,427]

7 minutes ago, Seiyashi said:

To add on to this, it's necessary to distinguish between ōzeki who are destined for yokozuna (yokozuna-in-waiting) and ōzeki who cap out at ōzeki (career ōzeki). The numbers I generated in my topic show that there's a very observable difference between their statistics during their tenure as ōzeki. If a particular ōzeki is not cut out for yokozuna then the numbers will tell the story, and no amount of wishing will make him cut out for the rope. This is exactly the kind of future discussion that I was hoping for, where the stats I generated can help ground some of the argument in objectivity.

Beyond the stats, subjectively, to me, a good career ōzeki should gatekeep the maegashira and lower sanyaku without being too much of a hindrance to the yokozuna in getting the yūshō. I don't really follow pro-wrestling so this analogy might be a bit off, but the career ōzeki should be the heels - they're there to set the bar and show they're badass but they're not the ones you ultimately root for, which are the yokozuna.

A good yokozuna in waiting will get the rope sooner or later, and his arc is just about how long he takes to get there.

I suspect a large part of what clouds some fans' impression of what the ozeki rank is, is exactly the promotion runs of the eventual yokozuna. Harumafuji going 15-0 -> 15-0 doesn't mean that that's a performance to be expected of ozeki, it means he was misranked at the time. Kisenosato was essentially misranked for years (just like Mitakeumi was, one rung lower). That's impossible to avoid fully as long as they don't loosen up the promotion criteria significantly, but while an argument can be made that the yokozuna criteria need to be as hard as they are because failure at the rank is career-ending, there's no such problem at ozeki.

Put rikishi in a position to succeed, and accept that some amount of failure is inevitable. Every intermediate rank on the entire banzuke works such that there are some rikishi who are exactly good enough for that rank, but no more, and some other rikishi who are just barely good enough for it and getting there through being lucky. The Kyokai is already trying hard to minimize the latter group as much as possible for the ozeki rank, and I'll never understand the persistence with which some fans want to minimize the former as well.

[nagora 88]

Clearly, a "great" ozeki is one that gains the rope. It's hard to see any argument that someone that never makes that promotion is "great" unless perhaps it's due to injury and retirement.

A good ozeki is one that is generally losing only (and not always) to higher ranked opponents or the eventual Basho winner.

It could certainly be argued that a strong Yokozuna can prevent an otherwise "great" ozeki from getting the final promotion, but history suggests otherwise.

But, there is a subjective aspect to "great" in any sport. For some it's a numbers/stats question; for others style is an indispensable aspect and a competitor can rake in the championships and not earn respect, while others with poorer records are admired. I think for most people, there is a sweet-spot where ability and style meet to create a "great". And once comparisons are made between generations - between rikishi who never met - the subjectivity goes off the charts. Who was better? Ali or Tyson? 

[Yarimotsu 585]

If we are just continuing the conversation from earlier I would've titled the thread a little differently as to my mind, it's pretty clear that a great ozeki will be a yokozuna, just the same as a great student will be a master and a great learner will be a fountain of knowledge. Any system that allows promotion to a higher rank should promote all of those with great performances at the rank below to the next rank above. In terms of measuring quality while at ozeki, I think @Seiyashi already covered all bases on that one.

The post I responded to was about what should constitute an ozeki / what should we consider for ozeki promotion. With that in mind I'd be tempted to start exploring some options by going the other way. Setting loose but definite criteria and letting subjective judgement rule out cases rather than setting tight criteria and maybe having exceptions to the rule that reach below the perceived standard.

I quite like this query as a starting point: 28 wins over 3 basho, all KK, with the middle basho in sanyaku, and the 3rd basho must be at least 11 wins. Grouping such runs by rikishi we could then consider the list of 85 rikishi since 1951 that meet this minimum as our only candidates for ozeki. I think it'd be hard to make a case for someone that isn't on the list. From there I'd want to see subjective consideration of all the other factors that get thrown around as reasons to promote or deny promotion discussed. 

https://sumodb.sumogames.de/Query.aspx?show_form=0&columns=3&n_basho=3&sum_wins=28&group_by=rikishi&showintai=on&having=1&form1_wins=>7&form2_rank=K-S&form2_wins=>7&form3_wins=>10&form3_year=>1950

Seems as though nagora and asashosakari above have similar ideas (at least on the why)

Edit: Just to be clear, if you have absolute maximum, minimum, and a 'comfortable/desired range' for total number of ozeki at any given time, then finding the formula that works best is a simple matter of trial and error. I would hazard a guess that more than 7 ozeki at a time starts to feel very strange, and adjust a formula around that to continue.

Edited July 25, 2023 by Yarimotsu

[Bunbukuchagama 732]

7 minutes ago, nagora said:

Clearly, a "great" ozeki is one that gains the rope.

We already have a word for them: Yokozuna. 

[Godango 996]

1 hour ago, Asashosakari said:

Yes, I completely disagree with that, because it implies that there's a wide swath of performances - basically every rikishi that is good enough to average 8.5 wins long-term against the joi, but not good enough to average 10+ - that constitutes career failure.

I don't think you realize it, but you're essentially arguing for a sumo world where ozeki and yokozuna were never split from each other. Except that in your vision, the rank above sekiwake is called yokozuna, not ozeki. If "ozeki" is nothing more than yokozuna-in-waiting, the rank is unnecessary.

To clarify, and maybe this is where things are getting misconstrued (partially my fault):

A good/great ozeki: In the yusho race more often than not. Occasional MK's, but generally double digits when KK'ing. You're right, typically they go on to become yokozuna and my point could be moot; but if Takakeisho retired tomorrow I'd consider him to have been a good ozeki, also see 2000-2004 Kaio.

An adequate ozeki: See above, but remove the requirement for in the yusho race more often than not and the double digits. Goeido, 2005-2011 Kaio.

A mediocre or 'failed' ozeki (I think 'failed' is an insanely harsh term and I wouldn't advocate for it, but for the sake of expanding my view) would be those who barely lasted in the rank; think Mitakeumi, Tochinoshin. 

I have to stress, I think all of these ozeki types are valid ozeki which is a spectacular achievement in and of itself. We're talking about the best of the best who aren't quite the best, I couldn't be more splitting straws if I tried, and I recognise that. But that's my take on calibre of ozeki; since it was asked.

Edited July 25, 2023 by Godango

[Godango 996]

8 minutes ago, Yarimotsu said:

If we are just continuing the conversation from earlier I would've titled the thread a little differently as to my mind, it's pretty clear that a great ozeki will be a yokozuna, just the same as a great student will be a master and a great learner will be a fountain of knowledge. Any system that allows promotion to a higher rank should promote all of those with great performances at the rank below to the next rank above. In terms of measuring quality while at ozeki, I think @Seiyashi already covered all bases on that one.

The post I responded to was about what should constitute an ozeki / what should we consider for ozeki promotion. With that in mind I'd be tempted to start exploring some options by going the other way. Setting loose but definite criteria and letting subjective judgement rule out cases rather than setting tight criteria and maybe having exceptions to the rule that reach below the perceived standard.

Agreed; this thread is more a response to the back and forth on my Goeido aside.

Edited July 25, 2023 by Godango

[Yarimotsu 585]

4 minutes ago, Godango said:

To clarify, and maybe this is where things are getting misconstrued (partially my fault):

A good/great ozeki: In the yusho race more often than not. Occasional MK's, but generally double digits when KK'ing. You're right, typically they go on to become yokozuna and my point could be mute; but if Takakeisho retired tomorrow I'd consider him to have been a good ozeki, also see 2000-2004 Kaio.

An adequate ozeki: See above, but remove the requirement for in the yusho race more often than not and the double digits. Goeido, 2005-2011 Kaio.

A mediocre or 'failed' ozeki (I think 'failed' is an insanely harsh term and I wouldn't advocate for it, but for the sake of expanding my view) would be those who barely lasted in the rank; think Mitakeumi, Tochinoshin. 

I have to stress, I think of these ozeki types are valid ozeki which is a spectacular achievement in and of itself. We're talking about the best of the best who aren't quite the best, I couldn't be more splitting straws if I tried, and I recognise that. But that's my take on calibre of ozeki; since it was asked.

For what it's worth from someone who didn't/ couldn't actually watch at the time, I'm promoting Kaio to yokozuna in 2004.

[Jakusotsu 5,982]

Intriguing question: how would the banzuke develop over time if every rikishi only loses against higher-ranked opponents?

[Bunbukuchagama 732]

Just now, Jakusotsu said:

Intriguing question: how would the banzuke develop over time if every rikishi only loses against higher-ranked opponents?

Everyone would stay at their initial ranks more or less?

[Jakusotsu 5,982]

1 minute ago, Bunbukuchagama said:

Everyone would stay at their initial ranks more or less?

Ist it that simple? How about the joi who have more than 60% higher-ranked opponents?

[Bunbukuchagama 732]

Just now, Jakusotsu said:

Ist it that simple? How about the joi who have more than 60% higher-ranked opponents?

Well, there are torikumi considerations, obviously. But an "ideal" banzuke would be the one that would have every rikishi placed exactly at his "deserved" rank and achieving a perfectly average 8-7 or 7-8 result. 

[Jakusotsu 5,982]

Just now, Bunbukuchagama said:

Well, there are torikumi considerations, obviously. But an "ideal" banzuke would be the one that would have every rikishi placed exactly at his "deserved" rank and achieving a perfectly average 8-7 or 7-8 result. 

Well and good among lower Maegashira, but how about Sanyaku?