What makes a great ozeki?

[Tsuchinoninjin 1,276]

13 hours ago, junsan said:

A good ozeki gets average 10 wins every basho stays there forever. A great ozeki does that for a year or two and moves up to the big fat rope.

Almost nobody in history qualifies as 'good ozeki' in this definition. Maybe nobody.

[Tsuchinoninjin 1,276]

32 minutes ago, Tsuchinoninjin said:

Almost nobody in history qualifies as 'good ozeki' in this definition. Maybe nobody.

dB came back up so I gave it a shot and its almost funny how good an indicator a 10 win average is at an ozeki becoming yokozuna.

The only one above since 1960 data is Asanoyama, but he fails the 'stays there forever' criterion. Therefore, we have proven that there are no good ozeki.

Note this includes fusenpai but not kyujo.

[Godango 1,014]

1 hour ago, Bunbukuchagama said:

You are connecting two arbitrary numbers. Why top 1% = 10 wins? Why not 9 wins? Why not 2% or 0.5%? 

 

17 hours ago, Godango said:

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.

[Reonito 1,518]

Overall, since 1958, ozeki are 6754-2434 against maegashira (73.5% wins) so as a group, they're holding up their end of the deal. Here are the top 18 by the number of fights. Goeido is certainly not a standout, but even he was at 65%. Musashimaru wrecked rank-and-filers at an 87% clip.

1.	Chiyotaikai	419	307-112
2.	Kaio	415	294-121
3.	Takanohana	357	254-103
4.	Takanonami	349	259-90
5.	Kotooshu	346	229-117
6.	Konishiki	275	206-69
7.	Musashimaru	262	228-34
8.	Hokutenyu	261	194-67
9.	Wakanohana	248	201-47
10.	Yutakayama	245	181-64
11.	Goeido	244	158-86
12.	Asashio	229	175-54
13.	Kitabayama	221	153-68
14.	Kotozakura	212	165-47
15.	Kisenosato	209	169-40
16.	Kotoshogiku	207	142-65
17.	Musoyama	200	129-71
18.	Takakeisho	192	135-57

[Godango 1,014]

1 hour ago, Reonito said:

I'd argue these are two very different things. The second is totally reasonable, and I'd guess without looking that nearly all ozeki have strong winning records against maegashira (I could get some numbers, but sumodb is down atm). The first is really, really hard, depending on who else is on the banzuke, and usually accomplished only by those ozeki destined to be yokozuna.

Yeah I don't disagree; but we're talking about the top 1% of rikishi. Again, and it seems I can't possibly disclaim this enough; this is a standard I'm setting for what I personally consider to be a high-quality ozeki. I'm not saying 'ergo all other ozeki are pointless and we should get rid of them' (though admittedly I was advocating for a scenario where Shodai and Goeido may never have been promoted).

The reality of course is that all ozeki (much like yokozuna) go through periods of strength and weakness. And yes, logically, ozeki who remain strong almost always make the jump. But it's a fair discussion as to which ozeki were typically stronger or weaker in comparison to other ozeki; and those are the two of the subjective criteria by which I would measure that strength. Length of tenure would certainly come into it after that for me; as I stated to in an earlier posted.

If another's belief is that length of tenure is a more/equally important metric for the strength of an ozeki; I have no problem with that; I just personally value it a little less.

[Asashosakari 19,647]

57 minutes ago, Godango said:

So we're talking about the varying quality among the approximately 0.6% of rikishi who were 'better' than then 99% of all other rikishi; but not as good as the remaining 0.4%. Again, the hair splitting makes this conversation almost pointless; but in my mind; if you're a top 1% rikishi; the expectation should be that you are:

• More often than not putting up double digit results / being in the yusho race
• More often than not beating maegashira

Essentially my expectations are a tampered down version of yokozuna expectations.

I'm sorry, but while these may be your expectations, practically none of the thinking that underlies them makes any sense at all.

• Your "it's just the last percent of the skill curve, so the differences within it should be minimal" implication is exactly backwards from reality. Hakuho is way further ahead of the average yokozuna than the average yokozuna is ahead of the average ozeki, yet by your logic Hakuho vs. average yokozuna is basically a distinction without difference, since we're now not even talking about the last percent, but even less than that. Skill differences get larger at the extremes, not smaller.
• "Top 1%" is literally meaningless as a benchmark for how the rikishi included in that group should be expected to perform, since the only thing that matters for how ozeki (and yokozuna) perform is how strong they are relative to their actual opponents, who themselves constitute just the top 2-3% in modern sumo. The other 97% are at varying degrees of mostly irrelevant to completely irrelevant.
• Beyond that, this Y/O strength level relative to actual opponents can't even be meaningfully tied to any percentile of the overall rikishi population, whether 1% or anything else. If sumo suddenly opened up to worldwide recruiting and the number of people trying to be rikishi quintupled, the rikishi we would consider yokozuna (say, on average the best 2 at any given time) and ozeki (say, the next 3 underneath) would now represent just the top 0.2%, an even more exclusive group than before. You appear to imply that you would then expect them to perform even better, while in reality all high rankers who aren't dai-yokozuna material would probably perform worse because such an increase in the size of the talent pool would mean massively greater depth just below the Y/O, making their opponents more formidable threats.

[Godango 1,014]

10 minutes ago, Asashosakari said:

I'm sorry, but while these may be your expectations, practically none of the thinking that underlies them makes any sense at all.

• Your "it's just the last percent of the skill curve, so the differences within it should be minimal" implication is exactly backwards from reality. Hakuho is way further ahead of the average yokozuna than the average yokozuna is ahead of the average ozeki, yet by your logic Hakuho vs. average yokozuna is basically a distinction without difference, since we're now not even talking about the last percent, but even less than that. Skill differences get larger at the extremes, not smaller.
• "Top 1%" is literally meaningless as a benchmark for how the rikishi included in that group should be expected to perform, since the only thing that matters for how ozeki (and yokozuna) perform is how strong they are relative to their actual opponents, who themselves constitute just the top 2-3% in modern sumo. The other 97% are at varying degrees of mostly irrelevant to completely irrelevant.
• Beyond that, this Y/O strength level relative to actual opponents can't even be meaningfully tied to any percentile of the overall rikishi population, whether 1% or anything else. If sumo suddenly opened up to worldwide recruiting and the number of people trying to be rikishi quintupled, the rikishi we would consider yokozuna (say, on average the best 2 at any given time) and ozeki (say, the next 3 underneath) would now represent just the top 0.2%, an even more exclusive group than before. You appear to imply that you would then expect them to perform even better, while in reality all high rankers who aren't dai-yokozuna material would probably perform worse because such an increase in the size of the talent pool would mean massively greater depth just below the Y/O, making their opponents more formidable threats.

All fair. My only points back would be:

• The example with Hakuho -- there will always be outliers. But you're right, I'm not taking into account the gulf that can exist in that 1% group. 
• Also fair about top 1% not holding much water when we're talking about performance relative to the top 1-2%; I mainly went into percentages to illustrate that I'm not trying to diminish an specific rikishi's achievements, but you're correct, I got carried away.
• Also your final point is fair due to me getting too carried away with the percentage tangent.

The problem here I suppose ultimately is that I have my expectations, and they are what they are; and I keep being expected to justify them and digging myself further in to an unexpected tangent . I'm not too proud to admit it. 

All the same, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect double digits from ozeki and above. They won't always get it, it's the nature of sumo. I just think they should get it more often than not. And my personal first (not only) criteria for rating strength of ozeki tenures would be looking at that. I don't think that's super-controversial. 

[Yangnomazuma 79]

15 hours ago, Jakusotsu said:

Apart from the obvious Kaio, I can't help thinking of Takanonami.

I have to concur but I'm SO conflicted.  The entire heya fed off each other and benefitted from not having to face each other.  So, Takanonami definitely benefits from not having to face not one, but two active yokozunae.  Still, there were more than enough quality beyond the heya that he was certainly tested and found to be superb.  Takanonami, yes.  Kaio, of course.  Chiyotaikai, yes.  Let me add, from just the "recent" past:  Baruto and Tochiazuma (he was AWESOME when healthy).  One might even consider that Konishiki was until injury (both to his body and his mind) and the rise of 3 dai-yokozuna destroyed him.

[Seiyashi 4,108]

45 minutes ago, Reonito said:

Overall, since 1958, ozeki are 6754-2434 against maegashira (73.5% wins) so as a group, they're holding up their end of the deal. Here are the top 18 by the number of fights. Goeido is certainly not a standout, but even he was at 65%. Musashimaru wrecked rank-and-filers at an 87% clip.

1.	Chiyotaikai	419	307-112
2.	Kaio	415	294-121
3.	Takanohana	357	254-103
4.	Takanonami	349	259-90
5.	Kotooshu	346	229-117
6.	Konishiki	275	206-69
7.	Musashimaru	262	228-34
8.	Hokutenyu	261	194-67
9.	Wakanohana	248	201-47
10.	Yutakayama	245	181-64
11.	Goeido	244	158-86
12.	Asashio	229	175-54
13.	Kitabayama	221	153-68
14.	Kotozakura	212	165-47
15.	Kisenosato	209	169-40
16.	Kotoshogiku	207	142-65
17.	Musoyama	200	129-71
18.	Takakeisho	192	135-57

Broken down in greater detail here, and separated out between Y and O. The question is, how often do you expect them to win against maegashira? Your average career ōzeki does it 70% of the time, the average yokozuna in waiting 84%.

I think broadly speaking that's fair enough. The "problem" is with our recent ōzeki having a relatively bad record against sanyaku (50% or thereabouts), which goes back to show the relative parity of competition in this era.

[Godango 1,014]

23 minutes ago, Seiyashi said:

Broken down in greater detail here, and separated out between Y and O. The question is, how often do you expect them to win against maegashira? Your average career ōzeki does it 70% of the time, the average yokozuna in waiting 84%.

I think broadly speaking that's fair enough. The "problem" is with our recent ōzeki having a relatively bad record against sanyaku (50% or thereabouts), which goes back to show the relative parity of competition in this era.

Yeah 70% is pretty good, I'm happily surprised it's that high. I would have said they should win 2/3 at least against maegashira.

Based on your numbers; I'd say anything above 75% is great, anything below 60% is poor (by ozeki standards). I arrived at this largely by standardising the results and going 1 standard dev above and below the average; which is also pretty harsh. The only proper (more than 2 standard deviations) outlier is Tochinoshin; and I'm perfectly content with calling his ozeki tenure one of the least successful of history (which again, doesn't take away from his spectacular feat in reaching it and that he deserves to be remembered as an ozeki).

So Wakashimazu, Kotokaze, Baruto, Asashio, pretty great. And they're all relatively short runs (Asashio less so), which reinforces my bias against length of tenure vs. results at the rank.

Edited July 26, 2023 by Godango

[Seiyashi 4,108]

16 minutes ago, Godango said:

Wakashimazu, Kotokaze, Baruto, Asashio, pretty great.

Interestingly, Wakashimazu and Kotokaze had 22 basho at the rank, which is just slightly under the average of 22. Asashio had 31 basho, but then I think the consensus in that thread is that Asashio was one of the worse ōzeki of his period. And the exceptions to your length vs performance are Kaiō and Chiyotaikai, who had very good tenures and above average stats during that tenure across the board.

Edited July 26, 2023 by Seiyashi

[Godango 1,014]

2 minutes ago, Seiyashi said:

Interestingly, Wakashimazu and Kotokaze had 22 basho at the rank, which is just slightly under the average of 22. Asashio had 31 basho, but then I think the consensus in that thread is that Asashio was one of the worse ōzeki of his period. And the exceptions to your length vs performance are Kaiō and Chiyotaikai, who had very good tenures and above average stats during that tenure across the board.

Yeah Asashio is defs an interesting one. Solid record against Maegashira, but not a big 10+ scorer. I suppose quite a few Y/O during his tenure which means if he was consistently losing to them and other sanyaku but beating maegashira that would explain consistent 8/9's; and in that context I wouldn't hate it. Losing to other Y/O is fine, really. Seems like he was a good 'barrier' like some here have alluded to being important.

[Barutokai 65]

Interesting discussion. I also love statistics. I have more than one opinion...

If the standards are too high then you gonna have a Banzuke ending at Sekiwake, because no one can make it.

But on the other hand emotions are important too; not statistics alone.

You can become Ozeki with a 32/3, 71% record. You can stay at the rank with an 8/2, 26,7% record (going 8/7 0/15). People won't like that. Especially when you get Torikumi-luck.

Well, but you can't look in the crystal ball to see if an Ozeki is gonna suck in the next tournaments. And having an ODC would kinda be ridiculous too.

[Jakusotsu 6,045]

The whole discussion reminds me what an entirely unique item the Ozumo banzuke is. Sure, there are elaborate rankings in any other sport, but not this kind of expectation and responsibility tied to the top ranks. It comes with the names, I guess.

[Asojima 2,874]

The kadoban factor screws up the statistics.  An ozeki who is no longer in the yusho race has no incentive to risk injury by acquiring more than 8 wins.  A "good" ozeki plays the game well.  A "great" ozeki is one that is consistently in the late day yusho race.  These guys tend to become yokozunas.   Most ozekis are playing the 8 and out scenario.  In the late days of the basho, two 8 win ozekis are often matched.  This forces one of them to acquire a 9th win.  The yusho race and the late day matchups add warts to the expected win  stats

Edited July 26, 2023 by Asojima

[dingo 1,294]

5 hours ago, Seiyashi said:

 

Once again great work on the analysis! Off topic but going through it again I guess it would be useful to distinguish the old Kirishima from the new one. 

[Hakuryuho 335]

What makes a great Ozeki for me?

Being Mongolian, it‘s like they sign a 2-for-1 deal  to move up to Yokozuna sooner or later 

[Seiyashi 4,108]

53 minutes ago, dingo said:

Once again great work on the analysis! Off topic but going through it again I guess it would be useful to distinguish the old Kirishima from the new one. 

If I ever update it, Kirishima I and Kirishima II would definitely be in order.

[Jejima 1,414]

12 hours ago, RabidJohn said:

I doubt he loses much sleep over being remembered as a 'weak' yokozuna rather than 'great' ozeki.

I find it difficult to give 'Yokozuna' Wakanohana III much credit, because....

a) He became Yokozuna at a time when his heya had an outstanding Yokozuna, a really good Ozeki and two sanyaku/joi-jin regulars, who he didn't have to fight to get his tsuna.
b) He never won a yusho whilst ranked as a Yokozuna.
c) This basho  - when he refused to pull out, despite being urged to do so by all and sundry. 

Edited July 26, 2023 by Jejima

[RabidJohn 1,853]

55 minutes ago, Jejima said:

I find it difficult to give 'Yokozuna' Wakanohana III much credit, because....

a) He became Yokozuna at a time when his heya had an outstanding Yokozuna, a really good Ozeki and two sanyaku/joi-jin regulars, who he didn't have to fight to get his tsuna.
b) He never won a yusho whilst ranked as a Yokozuna.
c) This basho  - when he refused to pull out, despite being urged to do so by all and sundry. 

a) Meaningless. He faced the same opposition as his brother and stablemates. They also had it easier because they didn't have to face him, either.
b) Yeah, that's disappointing.
c) Totally get that. I feel the same way about Onokuni's MK.

Thing is, if he hadn't had the 'misfortune' to win those last two yusho back to back, you'd probably remember him as an ozeki at least on a par with Takanonami.

[Jejima 1,414]

10 minutes ago, RabidJohn said:

a) Meaningless. He faced the same opposition as his brother and stablemates. They also had it easier because they didn't have to face him, either.

Not completely meaningless, in my opinion. There were five+ Futagoyama rikishi (at one stage, there were eight! Admittedly, only five of the 'high' standard) at a time when the division only had 40 rikishi, and the kosho rule was in existence, and regularly (ab)used. Therefore it was easier for him to get promoted to Yokozuna than for a rikishi from a heya without any 'stablemates' from the same position. Yes, this applies also to his brother and stablemates - I am not disagreeing with that. At that time it was well-known among those watching, including the experts on the English language NHK broadcasts as the 'Futagoyama factor'. Akebono used to complain that it was harder for him to win the yusho, than for his great rival Takanohana II due to that factor. Akebono ended his career with 11 yushos and Takanohana ended with 22.

[RabidJohn 1,853]

2 hours ago, Jejima said:

At that time it was well-known among those watching, including the experts on the English language NHK broadcasts as the 'Futagoyama factor'. Akebono used to complain that it was harder for him to win the yusho, than for his great rival Takanohana II due to that factor. 

Yet Takanohana II was "an outstanding yokozuna' and Takanonami "a really good ozeki".

Going back to your original post, I was unsure whether " - and Wakanohana" was intended to be denigrating or not. I just wanted to provide context. 

With 19/29 double-digit ozeki results, including 5 yusho, Wakanohana III was as much a part of the Futogoyama factor as Takanohana II and Takanonami, IMO. 

Your opinion of him as a yokozuna - which I understand and respect - doesn't change what Musashimaru (and Akebono) had to go up against.

Edited July 26, 2023 by RabidJohn

[Jejima 1,414]

In my original message, I noted that Musashimaru was Ozeki at the time of two great (dai-Yokozuna) Yokozunas. But then I thought that some people might point out that Wakanohana was also a Yokozuna at that time, so I mentioned him too in passing, and bit tongue-in-cheek, as I thought it was common acceptance that his Yokozuna career was not that great. I expanded on my thoughts in a later post regarding why I personally consider Wakanohana's Yokozuna-hood to be not that special. Then I defended one of my points which had been dismissed as 'meaningless'.

The recent point about Wakanohana and Musashimaru (plus Akebono), is not one that I made, I think.

Am I allowed to think that Musashimaru's tenure as an Ozeki was good during the era of two dai-Yokozuna?

Am I allowed to think that Wakanohana's Yokozuna career was not that great?

Am I allowed to think that Wakanohana's promotion to Yokozuna (and by extension, the results of heya-mates) was aided by the 'Futagoyama-factor'?

I think that these are the things that I have recently asserted on this thread.

It almost feels like we've gone back two decades, and repeating the discussions about the Futagoyama factor on the Sumo mailing list (which still exists).     

[Kishinoyama 596]

53 minutes ago, Jejima said:

Am I allowed to think that Wakanohana's promotion to Yokozuna (and by extension, the results of heya-mates) was aided by the 'Futagoyama-factor'?

Yes you are allowed and it does help a rikishi to not have to face at least 5+ rikishi from the same stable. The schedulers had to go farther down the banzuke to find opponents for the Futagoyama rikishi. Of course this can have an effect on the outcome of the tournament and I am certain in some cases, it did.

[RabidJohn 1,853]

1 hour ago, Jejima said:

Am I allowed to think ...   

Did I not state that I understand and respect your opinion?

I believe this exchange has unearthed another factor in what it takes to be a great ozeki: don't be a disappointment if you subsequently get the rope.