This study investigated the effects of kendo practice on changes in urinary volume, creatinine, sodium ion (Na+), and chloride ion (Cl-), and in blood lactate. Six healthy male kendo club members performed three typical kendo practices-5 min Jigeiko,5 min Kakarigeiko, and 5min Kirikaeshi with their maximal effortor a continued warming-up exercise (control). Urine was collected 5 times after each type of exercise: after 30 min rest in a sitting position following urination, after 30 min warming-up exercise, and after 30,60, and 90 min of recovery from exercise. Blood samples were collected twice: during the resting period and at 5 min after exercise. The urine taken 30 mmn. after the end of exercise, which most distinctively showed effects of practice, was compared between practices. Urinary volume, Na+, and Na+/Cl- were significantly higher after Kakarigeiko than after Jigeiko and Kirikaeshi. Urinary creatinine concentration was significantly lower after Kakarigeiko than after Jigeiko and Kirikaeshi. The post-exercise blood concentration of lactate was significantly higher after Kakarigeiko than after Jigeiko and Kirikaeshi. Thus, urinary excretion after Kakarigeiko, in particular, showed specific changes. The possible reason is that Kakarigeiko is accompanied by heavy lactate oxygen debt, which might depress the function of kidney tubules, resulting in loss of reabsorptive function in response to glomerular filtration rate.
The two purposes of this study were to research the principles of evaluation of judo kata performance and to suggest new principles. To this end, we examined and analyzed both Japanese and European methods of evaluating performance to identify any controversial methods of problems. The results that we have arrived at can be summarized in the following paragraphs. A major flaw appears when the European “Losing Mark System” is carefully evaluated due to the system's inherent inability positive points such as the skills of the performances of a kata. When only the negative points are being considered, it becomes obvious that a balance must be achieved to permit the correct awarding of points to the contestants. On the other hand, the current system in Japan does not clearly differentiate between “good and better” or “poor and worse”. The lack of a clear statement of principles to use in evaluating the performance of kata in both the Japanese and European systems of marking Kata makes it extremely difficult for judges to give a mark to competitors. These inadequacies also are aggravated by the absence of an official referee system for Kata championships. As the “waza no ri” is the basic concept in the evaluation of judo kata performance, the meaning of waza no ri which consists of both the “giho” (the rational mechanism of techniques)and “shimpo” (the determined psychological attitude), it is essential for both aspects to be utilized to bring each separate kata technique into its fundamental existence. The “giho” resolves the external aspect of performance within the framework of combat and “shimpo” deals with the internal aspect of expressing the meaning of combat within the total framework of all katas. It is therefore a prerequisite for students to study successfully katas through the waza no ri and it is not possible for teachers to teach their students kata without a thorough understanding of waza no ri. Finally, without full knowledge of the waza no ri, judges in competitions will be unable to satisfactorily evaluate kata performance and award points in a rational manner that leads to the best team emerging as victors in all levels of competition from local school intra mural competitions to World Championship results.
This study examines how the Judo referees and judges can arrive at different scoring conclusions in Judo matches. The Judo matches were refereed using two different methods: simultaneous and present refereeing. This study compared the ‘throwing technique’ evaluations, made by the referee and the judges, under the different refereeing conditions. Using this comparative method, we hoped to clarify how referees and judges express differing opinions for 'throwing technique' eval uations. The discussion section in the present article reveals the following findings 1. The incidence of differing opinions for ‘throwing technique’ evaluations was higher in simultaneous refereeing, compared with present refereeing. This was in part due to the privilege of the referee in present refereeing, who makes the final call if there are differing opinions between a referee and a judge. However, the incidence of differing opinions for ‘throwing technique’ evaluations cannot be completely eliminated, due to the nature of judo refereeing, using the present method or otherwise to referee. A refereeing method that incorporates the gathering of different opinions for ‘throwing technique’ evaluations, during a match, and that allows referees and judges to quickly reach an agreement about the ‘throwing technique’ scoring outcome by conference, is required. 2. When matches were officiated by less skilled referees and judges, the incidence of differing opinions for ‘throwing technique’ evaluations tended to increase, and furthermore, the incidence of differing opinions for ‘throwing technique’ evaluations was particularly high for high-scoring throwing techniques; namely, “Ippon”, “Waza-Ari” and “Yuko”. However, this issue could not be proven from the present results. 3. Most of the differing opinions for ‘throwing technique’ evaluations were caused when evaluating two consecutive techniques with different outcomes, such as, “Ippon/Waza-Ari”, “Waza-Ari/Yuko”, “Yuko/Koka”, and “Koka/No Score”. The incidence of differing opinions for ‘throwing technique’ evaluations was the highest for “Koka/No Score” and lowest for “Others”. Based on the above findings, differing opinions for ‘throwing technique’ evaluations could be divided into groups according to whether or not the scoring outcomes can be clearly differentiated. The same throwing technique can appear to be quite different, depending on the viewing position and angle, thus be the cause for the scoring evaluations to differ. To the best of our knowledge, no scientific study has examined the relationship between scoring opinions and the position and angle from which throwing techniques are viewed. To elucidate the factors involved in differing opinions of the scoring values for throwing techniques, relative to the viewing angle of referees and judges, is important to ensure the correct outcome of Judo matches.
Dosha-archery is a form of Japanese archery with the purpose of shooting arrows from one end to the other of the outer area on the west side of Sanjyusangen-do temple. It was done in this temple in Kyoto for the first time in the mid twelfth century (according to another reports, fifteenth century) and flourished also in Edo, present-day Tokyo. It started with testing one's skills as primary object, but since the 17th century the main purpose has come to compete with others in the amount of arrows shot. In order to show the merits of Dosha-archery competition by quantity, even within the Japanese martial arts (bujyutsu _??__??_) its existence is unique. Dosha-archery was by its equal implementation qualifications and its objectivety established as an open and public competition based on clear and decisive standards. This paper aims to clarify the actual conditions of the Sanjyusangen-do temple as a place for competitive sports training. The outcome of the research is to make clarify the differences in the scale of Kyoto Sanjyusangen-do temple and theEdo, present-day Tokyo Sanjyusangen-do temple.