Ryvai wrote:As some of you may have noticed Yarden GERBI (ISR) performed some unnusual shime-waza in the semi-final and final of the judo world championships in Rio 2013.
What she did was using her own bottom part of the jacket (suso?) to choke her opponents in the turtle position. According to IJF rules using the bottom part of the jacket to choke would be illegal, however, there is a loop hole. If you study how GERBI performs the choke you can see that uke's hand is protecting the neck and her gi is coming on top of it, therefore uke is choking herself in this situation and the choke therefore would become legal. It also says that it is illegal to fully encircle any part of uke's body with parts of uke or tori's gi, but this is not relevant for this scenario. I believe the IJF is discussing this choke and has deemed it to be legal, however I have no source for this information. Since she did this in the semi-final one would expect them to react when the same choke be applied in the final, especially since it was done in the exact same way.
Competition rules IJF artiicle 27, shido, nr. 18
To apply shime-waza using the bottom of the jacket or belt, or using only the fingers.
This choke is popularily called the "Gerbi-choke", variation of the peruvian-necktie, suso-jime, eri-gatame and so forth on the internet right now. Would you high-ranking gentlemen be willing to find a more "Kodokan Judo"-fitting name for this technique? My thought is that the lower part of the jacket (suso?) is outside the belt still part of tori's Eri and is trying to choke with it from one side to the other. Perhaps okuri-eri-jime would be the closest? Discuss guys! Videos of the choke in action below:
Semi-final vs. ABE (JPN)
Final vs. AGBEGNENOU (FRA)
Not quite. In the first clip, you can't see exactly what part of the jacket is used in the choke. The fact that one grabs the bottom of the jacket while pulling it out of your own belt or while handing it to the other hand or while holding it when guiding it around the opponent's neck, doesn't mean that that part is used to actually effect the choke.
When the jacket inside the belt, every part under the belt is skirt or bottom of the jacket. Since it is tucked in the belt, by simply grabbing any part below that belt, a lever is created. That is one of the major reasons why this prohibition exists. However, when the jacket is pulled outside the belt, the situation changes, and the whole lapel remains lapel just until the corner where the horizontal part starts. The horizontal part evidently remains bottom irrespective of whether it is inside the belt or not. So, there is nothing illegal in what she does.
Suso-jime as non-standard Kôdôkan terminology requires choking with the actual apron or bottom of the jacket. The second clip is definitely not Suso-jime, and the first one cannot be concluded with certainty from this clip. It may be that there are other recordings from a different camera angle that allow a definite conclusion. I am certainly not convinced at all it would be suso-jime. Suso-jime typically involves taking the real "bottom of the jacket" like in the middle of the back, where irrespective of the situation, it cannot be considered as "lapel".
You can forget eri-jime. There is no way that this can be considered eri-jime.
The ridiculous BJJ terminology (when considered in a Kôdôkan jûdô context) deserves no further attention, and neither does suddenly naming it after the jûdôka knowing that this choke has been around long before she was born. People like Kashiwazaki used similar things and many others all the time.
These lever chokes in classical terminology typically classify as either kensui-jime or hasami-jime. Kensui-jime implies that with the leg in the neck you pull up the opponent's chin. Kensui-jime and hasami-jime are very similar, but kensui-jime normally requires both hands still holding the lapels and bot hands still assisting in the choke in that way, whereas in hasami-jime that is not so. In other words, one of the reasons that kensui-jime is less opportune as designation here is the same as why eri-jime is inappropriate, although eri-jime is far less appropriate.
So, in old terminology, choke 2 meets the criteria of hasami-jime, and choke 1 does too. Even if in choke 1 truly the bottom of the jackets would be held, it still meets the criteria of hasami-jime, since hasami-jime does not expire as a name irrespective of where one grabs; suso-jime does, however. In other words, it is possible to do the choke so that it meets bot suso-jime and hasami-jime-criteria, but in that case the hasami-jime designation is preferred, because the most significant mechanism of effecting the choke is not precisely where one grips, but is the lever action that makes use of the knee cavity. Hasami-jime refers to a scissoring action, the legs of the scissor being formed by the left arm and left leg, or in case as with Gerbi where she puts both legs on uke's back, the left arm and both legs working in unison as if they were just one leg.
In Kôdôkan terminology before 1993, this choke simply classified as as a henka of ashi-gatame-jime. Before 1993 the Kôdôkan had a clear distinction between sankaku-jime and ashi-gatame-jime, arguing that every sankaku-jime was ashi-gatami-jime, but not every ashi-gatame-jime was sankaku-jime. This choke would then have been ashi-gatame-jime which isn't sankaku-jime, in a sense that the control with the leg was essential but without fulfilling a complete triangle.
After 1993, the term ashi-gatame-jime disappeared, and a similar terminology popped up in the armbar section, where now "ashi-gatame" (from ude-hishigi-ashi-gatame) became a 'new' category of armbars. As to the chokes, only two options are possible, either katate-jime or sankaku-jime. Sankaku-jime, must be rejected, since the legs can be held straight so that there is no triangle whatsoever being formed. In that case, katate-jime remains as only option. After all, the principle is simple. In katate-jime you choke with one hand, while exerting counter pressure with another body part of tori usually on another body part of uke. But since this position will look so different to most novice judoka when compared to basic or standard katate-jime, they will be confused not understanding how "such a different choke" still has the same name. They will likely easier fall for exotic names such as Suso-jime because they will likely know no other choke with that name, and for them it will be less important if that name is actually wrong or not and why it is wrong.
So basically, modern terminology: henka of katate-jime, old terminology: henka of hasami-jime (with the possibility to perform it as a henka of suso-jime, but this name being less opportune for reasons explained before).