What does Ippon mean?

[Furikuchan]

Something came up in class today that I figured I should get some opinions on.
Ippon in judo is supposed to be a symbolic winning of the fight, from my understanding. Either you have thrown him hard enough that he isn't getting back up again, you have broken his limb so he won't be fighting any more, or you have made him pass out through suffocation (hold-downs) or loss of blood to the head (chokes). Symbolically, this marks an end to the fight without actually hurting people in tournaments.
Well, then look at the IJF regulations for tournament 'ippon' in regards to throws. All that matters is who was in control at the moment of impact and how hard the impact was. Anybody that's been to a judo tournament has seen at least one of these debatable 'ippons' where one guy does 90% of the work, then the other guy helps his shoulders hit the mat and ki ais. There is some force, but there was only control for that second of impact.
Is it just me, or do you need a bit more control for that to truly end the fight? You pull that stunt on the street, and your opponent will just get right back up, only a little more angry.
How does that constitute ippon?

[redbull]

as my understanding goes an ippon by throw would be one where both of the opponents feet come off the ground and the opponet lands on his back. But then again you are right i have seen alot of ippons in tournaments that looked more like wazary than ippon.

[saikyou]

for me, throwing the opponent with control and with enough force is considered as ippon. maybe you are talking about counter-throws. well, yeah, the opponent does 90% of the throwing action but that last second effort to regain control from a throw will give you the momentum from the original throw. add your own force plus gravity and you'll make a very heavy counter-throw for the opponent. maybe that's the reason why the refs score those counter as ippons. some of those counters are pretty nasty. (ura nage, tani otoshi, and te guruma) that's my opinion. well, yeah, ive seen those throws that looks more of a waza-ari than an ippon. its the ref's decision and we can't change that. :D

[judojedi]

the rule our club usually fights under are, with regards to ippon:

ippon (meaning 1point or 10 scores) for demonstrating 'control' of your opponent.
ways of demonstrating control:
1: tapout - from armlock or choke/strangle
2: hold down - opponent held to the ground with at least one limb controlled for 30 seconds
3: throw- opponent must be taken off their feet and placed firmly on their back/shoulders

'used to be a 4: lift and hold opponent above your head for 'x'seconds but this is no longer leagal'

you were asking about 'control'. this can be and is, debatable, especially with highly skilled fighters. if you move in for a throw, and get countered, then try to counter the counter it can look all very messy.
basically, if your shoulders hit the deck first, your opponent gets the points.

[jonsku]

Originally posted by judojedi

you were asking about 'control'. this can be and is, debatable, especially with highly skilled fighters. if you move in for a throw, and get countered, then try to counter the counter it can look all very messy.
basically, if your shoulders hit the deck first, your opponent gets the points.

true.especially when one tries to throw with morote-gari and the other guy (succesfully) counters with tawara-gaeshi the referees have done mistakes, even on national level, and scored ippon for the morote-gari guy.

jonsku

[judojedi]

i've had some dubious decisions go against me in comps. it does your head in. players who work the penalty points also get my goat! i feel like clipping them round the ear!
its pure bad sportsmanship to intentionally get your opponent a shido/chui/keikoku or hansoku-maki
GGGGRRRRRRRRRR!

[Aegis]

I had a dubious decision go FOR me in competition. I don't actually remember what I did exactly, but the opponent went for a big forward throw, possibly tai-otoshi which I countered with uke-waza, or possibly yoko-wakare. However, when i think back on it I become more and more sure that I didn't pause long enough to show the ref that I had stopped the throw but instead launched myself around the throw for an ippon. Don't get me wrong here, my throw deserved the ippon, but had the ref decided that his technique was the attack, my throw would have been discounted and he'd have recieved probably a yuko or waza-ari.

Still, can't complain when they work for you :)

[judojedi]

never gone for me!
all my ippons have been genuine, bonified, clear and blaintant ippons. honest.

[zumtream]

Its all down to how the refs were taught. I have seen people been slammed on their back under perfect control and then the only a wazi would be given. Other times i have seen people landing on their sides but a ippon would be given.
I believe that an ippon should be given if at least both shoulders and the upper back lands on the mat and the thrower to be in control of the throw.

[Aegis]

<aside> Heh, another Cambridge forumite.... soon there'll be enough of us for an uprising</aside>

I have seen that corner judges are there for a reason. On several occasions I've seen a corner judge call the ref to one side and then seen the ref change his awarded score from an ippon to as low as absolutely no score... admittedly it was a bit difficult for him to see, but that much difference is quite amazing.

[Furikuchan]

Actually, i was kind of wondering why the rule is around that a tiny throw or a debatable decision can be an ippon.
If an ippon is the end of the fight, how can bumping the guy on the ground with very little control end a fight?

[Aegis]

If you were stupid enough to allow your opponent to throw you with an uncontrolled throw, landing hard enough on your back that the ref decides it's a good throw, you deserve to lose. If you're being careful about your balance, your opponent will have to really work at the throw for it to score an ippon, while if you're off balance and your opponent exploits the chance for an easy win, give him credit for the move and learn from it for future reference.

[DeepFreeze]

This is the IJF definition of ippon:

(a) when a contestant, in a controlled movement, throws the other contestant largely on his back with considerable force and speed
(b) when a contestant holds with osaekomi waza (grappling technique) the other contestant who is unable to get away for 25 seconds after the announcement of osaekomi
(c) when a contestant gives up by tapping twice or more with his hand or foot or says maitta generally as a result of a, shime waza (strangling technique) or kansetsu waza (armlock technique)
(d) when a contestant is incapacitated by a shime waza or kansetsu waza

And naturally if you get 2 waza-ari's, it will count as an ippon.

I have been referee for some time now, and I have been refereeing in dozens of competitions. The points given vary largely between different referees. Some time ago the rules were different, since ippons were given more easily. That was supposedly due to being viewer friendly. The people who went through their training that time, may still give ippons slightly easier than they should.
I consider myself an "old-schoolist" and require quite successful techniques in order to give points.

[zumtream]

Originally posted by Aegis
<aside> Heh, another Cambridge forumite.... soon there'll be enough of us for an uprising</aside>
Hey. What club are you at in Cambridge and who is your sensai (if you don't mind my asking).

[lwicks]

Hi All,

good to see the IJF definition there.

Ippon has (at least in the past) meant that the throwing technique must be executed with ALL of the following criteria:
1. Force
2. Speed
3. Control
4. Mainly on the back.

If one of these is missing then the score should be Wazari.


I agree with those of you who have seen dodgy refereeing calls. Just last weekend I say awful refereeing decisions.

IMHO, this is not because they are bad people, more that refereeing is too important in the modern sport of Judo. Referees are the "stars" not the players or throws.

Referees control the fights now, as oposed to allowing the players to fight fairly, safely and providing the score. They are too caught up (IMHO again) with catching infractions rather than allowing the fights to develop and flow.

This is particularly obvious at lower levels.
I have the pleasure of knowing more than one Olympic level referee and have found them to have a much more open refereeing style, trying to let the throws happen whilst making sure no unfair advantages happen. They are also more interested in ensuring that theplayers compete safely than about what minor rules they break!

Just my two cents.

Lance

[brown belt]

well in my association an ippon maens tori must throw his opponent clean onto his back with force with no acceptions. yea i have been in competitions where refs have made lousy judgments on thrown, even when i have thrown an opponent and knew it wasnt ippon they have called it of couse i didnt complain but im sure my opponents wernt too pleased. alot of associations have different perceptions of an ippon throw, i know of 1 association where as long as ur opponents back hits the floor even if it is when he tries to roll away it is counted as ippon which i think is ridiculous. but a clean throw where tori obviously has controil and where ur opponent lands on his back with force should count as ippon and nothing else.

[zumtream]

i know of 1 association where as long as ur opponents back hits the floor even if it is when he tries to roll away it is counted as ippon which i think is ridiculous.

Thats stupid. This would mean you couldn't do sacrific throws.

[brown belt]

yea i kno completly rediculous but the might have changed it slightly by now

[Jason Simpson]

I have been a referee for some years now, and the way i decide if it was an ippon is: was there technique and control, and if done on concrete, would they get up after it? any less and its a wazari i'm afraid. i hate to see other refs give an ippon just because someone went on their back. Also, what some refs would give wazari, i would give ippon. even though they are not flat on their backs, there is still enough control, technique to warrant the ippon.