Re: Takatoriki & Aki-basho banzuke prediction

[Yugo Yodogawa <yyy@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>]

> >I don't think introducing match-ups between rikishi of the same heya would
> >be necessary; I'm afraid of the large number of yaochou matches that might
> >result.  
> 
> This is the same argument we heard when Sumo Kyokai adopted the matches
> based on heya instead of heya-group (ichimon) at Hatsu-basho in January,
> 1965. In the first day under the new system, there was a match between
> Yokozuna Taiho and Sekiwake Tamanoshima (later became Yokozuna Tamanoumi),
> and Tamanoshima beat Taiho in the very exciting match. Actually, the
> matches fought hardest were the matches between the rikishi from the same
> ichimon. Rikishi fought hardest to prove their sincerelity. There were so
> many great matches because of the new system, and no one argued any more
> yaochou matches because of the (then) new system. 
> 
> If we have been using the old ichimon-to-ichimon sumo matches, we wouldn't
> have been enjoying Sadogatake-beya against Futagoyama-beya matches, or
> Dewanoumi-beya (Mainoumi & Oginishiki) against Musashigawa-beya
> (Musashimaru & Musoyama) matches.
> 
> Once you start a new system, people will forget the old system.
> 
> I will suggest to limit the matches between rikishi from the same heya to
> prevent any yaochou arguments in the following manner for the first year.
> 
> 1st basho: same heya matches only the first 8 days.
> 2nd basho: same heya matches only the first 10 days.
> 3rd basho: same heya matches only the first 11 days.
> 4th basho: same heya matches only the first 12 days.
> 5th basho: same heya matches only the first 13 days.
> 6th basho: same heya matches only the first 14 days.
> 
> After a year, they will get used to the match against rikishi from the same
> heya.

Well, I can see rikishi like Takatoriki and Takanohana going at it 100%, but
I just can't see yaochou not emerging in a situation like this: Takanohana and
Wakanohana meet on day 14, with Takanohana tied with Akebono for the tournament
lead with 1 loss.  Wakanohana is already out of contention with 4 losses.  Do
you really think Wakanohana would try to beat his brother and hurt his chances
of getting the yusho?  I think the outcome would be quite predictable.

> >I think a better solution would be to split up Futagoyama into two
> >or three stables, especially if all the internal dissension/animosity Abe-san
> >mentioned a while back really does exist.  Would it be possible for Takatoriki
> >and a few other rikishi to transfer to somewhere like Taiho-beya?
> >-yugo
> 
> I don't think this solution is possible because of the following reasons.
> 
> 1. It is hard to single out the case of Futago-yama. You better treat all
> heya equally.
> 2. I don't think Futago-yama Oyakata will confirm the problem existing in
> Futagoyama-beya.
> 3. For a rikishi to change heya, he needs to get approvals from concerned
> heya, in this case both Futagoyama-beya and Taiho-beya, and Sumo Kyokai. I
> don't think Futagoyama or Sumo Kyokai will allow any rikishi to move from
> one heya to the other heta.

I think if the sumo-kyokai really is concerned about the problem, couldn't
they force large heya (not just Futagoyama, of course) to break up whether or
not the Oyakata approve of it, explaining that such a move is in the best
interests of sumo?  Furthermore, if there really is such a strong anti-Hanada
feeling among certain Futagoyama rikishi, a breakup would be good for not only
the fans and rikishi of other heya, but for Futagoyama-beya itself.
-yugo