[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Go to: Mailing List Archive | Makunouchi Banzuke Page

Re: [sumo] kaio chances



On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 08:05:10PM +0200, Moti wrote:
> "Dignity factor" is a key factor in ascertaining 
> promotion to Yokozuna. If it didn't exist, KaioU may have been promoted 
> already. But because it's there, and important, he wasn't. The 
> shinpan-bucho members who were against the promotion said it 
> themselves-to promote KaioU now under these circmstances would be to 
> "cheapen" KaioU. Dignity is a title pre-condition. It was one of the key 
> factors in deciding whether he got promoted or not, if not THE final 
> deciding factor.
> This pre-condition is deeply associated with the essence of Sumou, and 
> to not take it into consideration as a factor in the question of 
> promotions is not understanding what Sumo is about.
> My opinion, OK? You can say it's a crock, but you can't say it's irrelevant.

I can, better, say that your argument doesn't logically follow.  There
are set, performance-based criteria for promotion;  Kaio has never met
them.  There was plenty of talk that Asashoryu ought not to be promoted
having met them, for such reasons (and others, besides), but he was.
I've never heard anyone previously imply that either on the one hand,
Kaio was so dignified he ought to be promoted regardless, or on the
other, that he lacks the dignity, even if he performs up to snuff.  So
the issue is not, in his case (and for all practical it seems to me,
ever) about dignity-as-distinct-from-performance.  Is winning two basho
back to back somehow more 'dignified' than winning five over a longer
period of time?  Beats me.  Would he have some quality of dignity if
he'd had one more win last basho that he otherwise lack?  Only if one
defines 'dignity' in an entirely circular manner, IMO.


> I disagree. Facts. 4 times. He failed. Injured and/or healthy, he 
> failed. Choked. He may finally succeed now, but till now-choked.

Don't you mean five?

To fail is not to choke.  (Necessarily.)  To choke is to fail
_specifically due to the pressure on one to succeed_.  Unless you have
powers of telepathy you cannot state as a matter of fact he "choked",
and you'd need IMO much more powerful circumstantial evidence that it's
even likely.  (That he's too injury prone, and/or not quite good enough
to hit the required standard both seem to me to be more persuasive.)

Cheers,
Alex.
[EndPost by Alex Ferguson <abf@cs.ucc.ie>]