2016, Volume 12
Effects of the International Judo Federation Refereeing Rules on the match results and points in the All-Japan Judo Championships
Keisuke Miyake1, Takeru Sato1, Takayuki Yokoyama1
1School of Health and Sport Sciences, Chukyo University, Aichi, Japan
Author for correspondence: Keisuke Miyake; School of Health and Sport Sciences, Chukyo University, Aichi, Japan; email: k-miyake[at]sass.chukyo-u.ac.jp
Background and Study Aim: The All-Japan Judo Championships (AJJC) is an open-weight tournament to determine the best judoka in Japan. The AJJC has been held under the Kodokan Judo Refereeing Rules (KDK Rules) since 1951. In 2011, the All-Japan Judo Federation introduced the International Judo Federation Refereeing Rules (IJF Rules). In this study, we aimed to clarify the effects of IJF Rules on match results and points in the AJJC.
Material and Methods: The 115 judo matches in the AJJC from 2009, 2010, 2014 and 2015 were separated into two groups, the KDK Rules’ tournaments (2009, 2010) and the IJF Rules’ 2014–2016 tournaments (2014, 2015), and compared. The winning content, winning methods, attack efficiency index (AEI) and penalty per minute (PPM) were analysed for each match.
Results: Regarding winning content, in IJF Rules’ 2014–2016 tournaments, wins by ippon significantly increased, whereas wins by superior performance significantly decreased when compared with KDK Rules’ tournaments. Furthermore, for winning methods, wins by technique significantly increased; however, wins by decision significantly decreased in the IJF Rules’ 2014–2016 tournaments when compared with KDK Rules’ tournaments. The AEI significantly increased; however, PPM showed no difference between IJF Rules’ 2014–2016 and KDK Rules’ tournaments.
Conclusions: Results suggested that IJF Rules have positively affected AJJC match results and points, and they have also made tournaments more exciting and appealing to audiences.
Key words: combat sports, competition rules, competition content, open-weight tournament, comparative analysis