# No legs rule



## lklawson

Anyone competed under the new "no leg attacks" rule?  A friend just came back from his first comp under it.  He hated it.  Claims everyone else did too.

Personally, I think it's horribly stupid but I haven't competed under it (I hope not to, actually).

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## punisher73

I have heard of this in some BJJ tournaments.  Alot of it had to do with liability.  If you sink in a good heel hook you can tear out the knee before the person even has the chance to tap to it.

The other reason I have heard is that there are alot of "cheap" leg attacks that take away from the pure BJJ (not saying I agree with this, just the reason I have heard).  For example, instead of trying a guard pass many beginnners flop down and try an ankle or leg lock.

Depends on your goals for competing I guess. By limiting your attacks, it does cause you to get better at the other areas.  On the other hand, it doesn't allow you to train to attack and defend well with those tools either.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise

I cannot believe that this went through and is now being practiced.  Judo just took away more of their skill sets.


----------



## lklawson

punisher73 said:


> I have heard of this in some BJJ tournaments.  Alot of it had to do with liability.  If you sink in a good heel hook you can tear out the knee before the person even has the chance to tap to it.
> 
> The other reason I have heard is that there are alot of "cheap" leg attacks that take away from the pure BJJ (not saying I agree with this, just the reason I have heard).  For example, instead of trying a guard pass many beginnners flop down and try an ankle or leg lock.


Leg-locks are already banned under Judo Shiai rules.  They're still a part of the "Official Curriculum" but who actually teaches them?  Almost no one.  I came across some semi-official document somewhere, discussing leg locks in Judo, which said, to paraphrase, "Sure they're part of the curriculum but if you want to actually learn them, you need to ask special permission from a high-level sensei and even then you can use then in randori."  I was like, "what?!?!?!"

Instead of outlawing leg-locks, which were already illegal in shiai, this rule outlaws *throws *and *takedowns *using a hand/arm grip on the leg.  The Single, Double, Irish Pick, Fireman's Carry, etc.  All illegal now.  (well, the rule is specific about making them illegal as initial attacks but you can still use them as a counter.   )



> Depends on your goals for competing I guess. By limiting your attacks, it does cause you to get better at the other areas.  On the other hand, it doesn't allow you to train to attack and defend well with those tools either.


Take away too much and what's the point of learning the art anymore?  Might as well study ballroom dance.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Nolerama

My first grappling tournament was an All Subs Allowed event; event to the First Year fighters.

I think that rule stinks.

I'm not big into leg locks, but I like that they're there.


----------



## Xue Sheng

Just wonderful :disgust:

So Im guessing that this is not allowed
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qw6fQrVWGXo&feature=related 
I wonder what his teacher would think about this new rule


----------



## Nolerama

I think those are allowed Xue.


----------



## Nishibi Ryu

Keep in mind people that this has been happening since Martial Arts became sport. Rules are made to make it safer and look better according to the powerful ones at the time, not that I agree with any of them.

You don't need to go to high ranking sensei to learn leg locks just find a do jo that teaches the old way, as in pre 1960's. I should say that locks should not be used during randori unless it is done by very experienced people it does not take much effort to dislocate or break a limb. From my experience if you teach a novice they will abuse the lesson and not stay  around for long because that is all they want to kearn.


----------



## Nolerama

Lol. Right on. Pre 1960's is old school? The "Old Way"?? Come on, don't lump good teaching method in a chronological fashion. It's a complete falsehood.

Back then, and all throughout history, there were good teachers and bad.

Same as now.

Rule sets are rule sets. But I think beginners should know a well-rounded game; especially in grappling. That includes leg locks, and escape from leg locks (the latter more than the former).

My first grappling class went over escaping from a leg lock. I'm still doing it, and I don't think I've ever abused it. The same goes with the myriad of training partners I've rolled with and encountered.

I can see why it's not allowed in competition for certain skill levels and it's to protect the longevity of the competitor... Most rules in competitive MA are for that very reason.

I cornered some gym buddies at a grappling tournament this weekend and the host gym's instructor said it best when it came to the No Leg Locks (But ankle locks were okay) for beginners, and No Slamming rules for all classes: "We want to play Jiu Jitsu for the rest of our lives."

So competitors place rules in which to protect their longevity in their sport?

You don't have to compete.

Oh yeah, I think telling a novice that there are moves and "secret techniques" that are unavailable to them simply because they're new is the reason why they don't come back in conjunction with an elitist teaching method. Besides, would you really want a person who came to learn one technique and one technique only to stay at your gym? I wouldn't. Seems like a horrible training partner to me.

On the other hand, if your teacher's curriculum places X tech on a low priority, in favor of higher percentage, fundamental tech, then yeah, I completely understand.


----------



## David43515

I think that what people are worried about is when you remove a technique from competition people stop learning to apply and counter it. Thier use of the art gets sloppy. 

I remember a guy a few years ago who had an old copy of a pretty standard Judo book in English. In that edition the last chapter showed about 20 pages of official self defense kata that Kano had made. They aren`t in any of the modern editions of the book. When the guy`s sempai saw it he literally begged to beable to copy the chapter. The sempai was a professional Teacher who`s job is to train other judo teachers, and not only did he not know the kata....he never even knew they existed.


----------



## Nishibi Ryu

Nolerama said:


> Lol. Right on. Pre 1960's is old school? The "Old Way"?? Come on, don't lump good teaching method in a chronological fashion. It's a complete falsehood.
> 
> Back then, and all throughout history, there were good teachers and bad.
> 
> Same as now.
> 
> Rule sets are rule sets. But I think beginners should know a well-rounded game; especially in grappling. That includes leg locks, and escape from leg locks (the latter more than the former).
> 
> My first grappling class went over escaping from a leg lock. I'm still doing it, and I don't think I've ever abused it. The same goes with the myriad of training partners I've rolled with and encountered.
> 
> I can see why it's not allowed in competition for certain skill levels and it's to protect the longevity of the competitor... Most rules in competitive MA are for that very reason.
> 
> I cornered some gym buddies at a grappling tournament this weekend and the host gym's instructor said it best when it came to the No Leg Locks (But ankle locks were okay) for beginners, and No Slamming rules for all classes: "We want to play Jiu Jitsu for the rest of our lives."
> 
> So competitors place rules in which to protect their longevity in their sport?
> 
> You don't have to compete.
> 
> Oh yeah, I think telling a novice that there are moves and "secret techniques" that are unavailable to them simply because they're new is the reason why they don't come back in conjunction with an elitist teaching method. Besides, would you really want a person who came to learn one technique and one technique only to stay at your gym? I wouldn't. Seems like a horrible training partner to me.
> 
> On the other hand, if your teacher's curriculum places X tech on a low priority, in favor of higher percentage, fundamental tech, then yeah, I completely understand.


 



LOL I wondered if the pre 1960 comment would get a fun reaction, I did not mean that teachers were better then just refering to the exclusion of many techniques due to the Olympic inclusion of Judo. Kawaishi's book in cluded all of the older locks which were being banned by the Kodakan during that period, so really the no leg rule is no different, but if you want to learn the deleted style you must find someone who's sensei trained during  that time that's all.

No I would not want a student who was only looking for one technique, thats my point, its not elite teaching its finding out who they are as people and what are their motives. I don't say there are secrets or call them grass hopper, I just want to teach the right person and that takes time and certain things should be reserved for all that effort its a reward.


----------



## Nishibi Ryu

David43515 said:


> I think that what people are worried about is when you remove a technique from competition people stop learning to apply and counter it. Thier use of the art gets sloppy.
> 
> I remember a guy a few years ago who had an old copy of a pretty standard Judo book in English. In that edition the last chapter showed about 20 pages of official self defense kata that Kano had made. They aren`t in any of the modern editions of the book. When the guy`s sempai saw it he literally begged to beable to copy the chapter. The sempai was a professional Teacher who`s job is to train other judo teachers, and not only did he not know the kata....he never even knew they existed.


 

Exactly my point, thank you for sharing!


----------



## Steve

I had read about this on judoforums a while back and there was a lively debate, IIRC. Some thought that this was a natural progression to keeping sport Judo actually judo related. There was some concern that allowing throws outside the Judo canon opened the door for more wrestling takedowns.  In this case, specifically single and double leg takedowns.

I'm not a judoka, so I'm sure I don't know all of the inner politics of it, but that was my impression.


----------



## lklawson

stevebjj said:


> There was some concern that allowing throws outside the Judo canon opened the door for more wrestling takedowns.  In this case, specifically single and double leg takedowns.


It's crap.  Singles, Doubles, Fireman's, Picks, etc. are all standard Judo throws.




























Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Steve

Kirk, I'm not saying otherwise.  Honestly, I don't know nearly enough about Judo to suggest otherwise.  

What I'm saying is that the impression I got is this rule is intended to prevent wrestling style takedowns in competition.  It's a reaction to a perceived dilution of the style.


----------



## lklawson

stevebjj said:


> What I'm saying is that the impression I got is this rule is intended to prevent wrestling style takedowns in competition.


Honestly, that's what I take from it too, though some disagree.



> It's a reaction to a perceived dilution of the style.


Yeah, but still, I mean, what the heck?  These techs are part of standard Judo, so how could it be that allowing them somehow dilutes?  It's crap.  It comes across VERY much as "well, heck, Wrestlers have been eating our lunch so we gotta do something to make sure they can't make Judoka look bad." instead of getting better at the very same blasted techs that have been part of your syllabus since day 1.  

Maybe I'm wrong, but, if so, I'm *FAR* from the only one who's wrong.  And, what with Judo membership declining, this is not the right message to send.  Martial arts that are scared of others don't get more people to join up.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Nishibi Ryu

lklawson said:


> It's crap. Singles, Doubles, Fireman's, Picks, etc. are all standard Judo throws.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


 

Yes and in a few years they will be forgotten throws just like all the others, why not just get everyone to stand and push each other over its safer and less dangerous. Sport will kill MA one day it will not even resemble what it should be.


----------



## punisher73

lklawson said:


> Honestly, that's what I take from it too, though some disagree.
> 
> 
> Yeah, but still, I mean, what the heck? These techs are part of standard Judo, so how could it be that allowing them somehow dilutes? It's crap. It comes across VERY much as "well, heck, Wrestlers have been eating our lunch so we gotta do something to make sure they can't make Judoka look bad." instead of getting better at the very same blasted techs that have been part of your syllabus since day 1.
> 
> Maybe I'm wrong, but, if so, I'm *FAR* from the only one who's wrong. And, what with Judo membership declining, this is not the right message to send. Martial arts that are scared of others don't get more people to join up.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


 
Thanks for the earlier clarification. I didn't realize that it was for Judo comps. I thought it was for grappling tournaments done by BJJ.

Kano took those takedowns from western wrestling long ago. Kano VERY much understood the idea of taking what works for you.

Judo does this all the time with their rule sets. Look at how different "grips" have been banned or outlawed because other countries started to win in international competition. Now, you have people with no Judo experience (in some cases I have heard) but are great wrestlers entering Judo tournaments and winning. They change the rules again. It is all politics to look good.


----------



## Gruenewald

From my understanding the idea is to "turn judo back into judo", because so much wrestling was being done. A lot of singles/doubles and leg picks are *not* a part of traditional judo technique, more like supplemental techniques brought into judo in modern times because they are in fact so effective and there was nothing prohibiting people to do so as far as rules are concerned. Being a wrestler, I didn't mind at all, haha. I could do leg shots and sprawl better than most anybody else there, so I could usually beat them at it if they started trying wrestling stuff on me. Like punisher73 mentioned, they want people winning with "judo", not foreign arts similar to judo. It _is_ all politics.

Also just a note, some of those gifs/pics that Iklawson posted are not judo techniques (from my knowledge anyway, might be wrong)... with the exception of the fireman's throw of course, which is known as kata-guruma in judo. Unless of course somebody can provide names for those throws, but yeah to me most of those look like leg picks and take downs taken straight from wrestling. Just because they're wearing judo gis doesn't make it a judo technique. =P

1st picture: looks like a (not so great) leg pick
2nd picture: don't recognize that at all, looks like another leg pick
3rd picture: looks like sukuinage, except not sacrificing, I don't know if you could consider that a leg throw
4th picture: standing kata-guruma
5th picture: double-leg takedown, wrestling
6th picture: looks kind of like ouchi gari countering o soto gari, can't really tell though

Also let me remind everybody, wasn't the rule in judo that you can still grab the leg if there's full body contact between the two judoka? And there's like a time limit or something? That would still allow for at least some of the techniques shown...


----------



## elder999

Gruenewald said:


> Also just a note, some of those gifs/pics that Iklawson posted are not judo techniques (from my knowledge anyway, might be wrong)...


 
Yeah, you are wrong.

That second set of images can also be found here, in a listing of the Official 67 throws of Kodokan judo-with the names.Any beginner should recognize _sukuinage_, for instance.

Leg grabbing throws are called _ashi dori waza_-and, under the new rules they're simply not permitted as initial attacks. You can still use them to counter, and you can still use them to follow up from an initial attack.


----------



## Gruenewald

elder999 said:


> Yeah, you are wrong.
> 
> That second set of images can also be found here, in a listing of the OFficial 67 throws of Kodokan judo-with the names.Any beginner should recognize _sukuinage_, for instance.


Hehe sorry, misspelled it (seoi-nage > sukuinage... now I feel dumb). Running on little sleep atm, fixed. Why is there no drop at the end, I've never learned sukuinage remaining standing. Doesn't that make it a different technique somehow since there is no drop/sacrifice?



elder999 said:


> Leg grabbing throws are called _ashi dori waza_-and, under the new  rules they're simply not permitted as initial attacks. You can still use  them to counter, and you can still use them to follow up from an  initial attack.


Thanks, and do you happen to know if there's a limit to how long you can hold the leg, or is it just as long as contact remains between the two people (chest to chest, or side to side, whatever it may be)?


----------



## elder999

Gruenewald said:


> Hehe sorry, misspelled it (seoi-nage > sukuinage). Running on little sleep atm, fixed.


 

I didn't think so. I think you just got your names confused-there are, after all, _Ippon *seoi-nage* (&#19968;&#26412; &#32972;&#36000;&#25237 ,__(Morote)_ *seoi-nage*(&#32972;&#36000;&#12356;&#25237;&#12370 in judo, and, confusingly, Danzan ryu jujutsu has a Seoi goshi that is pretty much judo's seoi-nage, and a seoi-nage that is actually _Ippon seoi-nage, _the one-armed shoulder throw.



Gruenewald said:


> . Why is there no drop at the end, I've never learned sukuinage remaining standing. Doesn't that make it a different technique somehow since there is no drop/sacrifice?


 
Because sukuinage isn't a sutemi-waza, though it can be practiced this way, and probably would have been _in armor,_ and often is in *sumo*-since they're so heavy......




Gruenewald said:


> Thanks, and do you happen to know if there's a limit to how long you can hold the leg, or is it just as long as contact remains between the two people (chest to chest, or side to side, whatever it may be)?


 
A pretty good explanation of the amendment can be found here.


----------



## Gruenewald

elder999 said:


> I didn't think so. I think you just got your names confused-there are, after all, _Ippon *seoi-nage* (&#19968;&#26412; &#32972;&#36000;&#25237 ,__(Morote)_ *seoi-nage*(&#32972;&#36000;&#12356;&#25237;&#12370 in judo, and, confusingly, Danzan ryu jujutsu has a Seoi goshi that is pretty much judo's seoi-nage, and a seoi-nage that is actually _Ippon seoi-nage, _the one-armed shoulder throw.


At my dojo ippon seoi-nage and morote seoi-nage are often referred to as simply "seoi-nage" in passing, and to be completely honest I haven't often seen many of the techniques spelled (although I intend to rectify that immediately) so I had no idea how to spell sukuinage. Typed some kind of equivalent spelling into Google and let it correct it for me, then completely blanked on the fact that I was typing seoi-nage as in ippon or morote seoi-nage; won't be making that mistake again. =)

Thanks for the link.


----------



## lklawson

Gruenewald said:


> From my understanding the idea is to "turn judo back into judo", because so much wrestling was being done. A lot of singles/doubles and leg picks are *not* a part of traditional judo technique, more like supplemental techniques brought into judo in modern times because they are in fact so effective and there was nothing prohibiting people to do so as far as rules are concerned. Being a wrestler, I didn't mind at all, haha.


Sorry, but wrong about that too.  Check out some of the early judo manuals.  Lots of "wrestling" in them.

Good sources include the early British Judo club, Tani & Unenishi material, and the Allanson-Winn material.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## Gruenewald

lklawson said:


> Sorry, but wrong about that too.  Check out some of the early judo manuals.  Lots of "wrestling" in them.
> 
> Good sources include the early British Judo club, Tani & Unenishi material, and the Allanson-Winn material.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


Thanks, didn't know that.


----------



## lklawson

Gruenewald said:


> Thanks, didn't know that.


Lots of stuff in old Judo that isn't done now.  Yamanaka's "Jiu-Jutsu or Jiu-do" includes a leg lock, for instance.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## elder999

lklawson said:


> Lots of stuff in old Judo that isn't done now. Yamanaka's "Jiu-Jutsu or Jiu-do" includes a leg lock, for instance.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


 
Lots of stuff in Judo that isn't done in _Olympic_ Judo, or competitive Judo, sport Judo, whatever you want to call it. There are Judo teachers all over the world who "do that old stuff..." :lol:


----------



## lklawson

elder999 said:


> Lots of stuff in Judo that isn't done in _Olympic_ Judo, or competitive Judo, sport Judo, whatever you want to call it. There are Judo teachers all over the world who "do that old stuff..." :lol:


Indeed.  The trick is to actually FIND them.

Leg locks are pretty well documented as being part of the historic Judo curriculum.  But when was the last you you actually found anybody teaching them as part of Judo?  Seems like, even when someone is teaching them, it's often "they do this in Sambo" or some such.

At a guess, maybe 1 in 200 Judo Sensei teach leg locks.

And what about Judo's traditional Atemi Waza?  I've seen it taught... as part of Kata.  

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## elder999

lklawson said:


> Indeed. The trick is to actually FIND them.
> 
> Leg locks are pretty well documented as being part of the historic Judo curriculum. But when was the last you you actually found anybody teaching them as part of Judo? Seems like, even when someone is teaching them, it's often "they do this in Sambo" or some such.
> 
> At a guess, maybe 1 in 200 Judo Sensei teach leg locks.
> 
> And what about Judo's traditional Atemi Waza? I've seen it taught... as part of Kata.
> 
> Peace favor your sword,
> Kirk


 
Willin' to bet it's more like 1 in 50, and even more common in Russia, _New York_, Chicago,Hawaii and a few other places.....


----------



## lklawson

elder999 said:


> Willin' to bet it's more like 1 in 50


So, you're guess is that about 2% teach what used to be standard curricula?  



Peace favor your sword,
Kirk


----------



## bignick

Rules are what they are and if you want to compete it's not a whole lot of use griping about them.  If you want to use these techniques, set them up as part of a combination/continuation of technique and you're just fine within the rules. 

Of course, you're gambling that a ref agrees with you about it being a real counter or combination and you don't get a hansoku make off the bat.  I completely agree that this is to stifle BJJ players or wrestlers from coming in and immediately trying to turn a judo match into a ground grappling game.  

Things change, right now this is the rule and I don't it will stick around.  That being said, we have to keep in mind the progressive origins of judo and who's to say what Kano would have wanted or not wanted in his art a 100+ years down the road, he was certainly not averse to trying new things or getting rid of things that no longer seemed to work.


----------



## Tiberius

So one has to keep track now of what he cant use in a tournament, although its being taught in class.


----------



## Tez3

Tiberius said:


> So one has to keep track now of what he cant use in a tournament, although its being taught in class.


 
That happens all the time if you do martial arts, you learn techniques that kill and maim but usually don't actually use them in training.


----------



## Tiberius

Yes I know, but you would think that goes for some lethal stuff you dont learn untill past your black belt.


----------



## bignick

Tiberius said:


> Yes I know, but you would think that goes for some lethal stuff you dont learn untill past your black belt.



Any judo throw done strongly, to someone without good falling skills, on hard ground or concrete becomes a potentially lethal technique.  In that case, white belts are learning "lethal stuff" in their first few classes. The same goes for many martial arts and techniques. 

The reality is that any art has techniques you don't do in friendly company.  The leg rule is silly to me, but not that big of a deal.  I highly doubt it affects the great majority of judoka on a day to day basis in their training.


----------



## Touch Of Death

Moves you can practice with a partner are worthless to learn.
Just my two cents.
Sean


----------



## Bruno@MT

Touch Of Death said:


> Moves you can practice *as intended* with a partner are worthless to learn.
> Just my two cents.
> Sean



Fixed that for you 

I cannot speak for Judo, but in traditional Japanese jujutsu or ninpo, there are plenty of throws that are designed for making you land on your head without a chance to break your fall. gan seki nage for example.

You can't really practice this throw as intended with a partner because said partner will break his neck. However, you can practice it by performing the throw at less than full speed and letting him land gently.


----------



## elder999

Bruno@MT said:


> I cannot speak for Judo, but in traditional Japanese jujutsu or ninpo, there are plenty of throws that are designed for making you land on your head without a chance to break your fall. gan seki nage for example..


 

This is also true for a great deal of Judo-some would argue *all* of Judo's throws have this intention, with only a slight modification.......of course, like a lot of other things, one doesn't find this taught in most dojo.


----------

