Competition size Kendama Box

@htimSxelA will know more but my understanding is that it was created specifically for Gloken's KWC but believe it is also used for Catch & Flow and their other contests now.

Read about a LBB that was a bit too big and was 'adjusted' to fit at some contest. Also I believe it, the box, was partly (in some cases mostly) the impetus for the development of larger cupped kendama. Many new models are "designed to the box" and are maxing out measurements to try and get that competitive edge. It's kind of like what happened with tennis rackets way back and we ended up with the 'butterfly nets' we have today.

The JKA uses its seal system to make sure that whatever shows up in a competition or test is the "legal" size. To get the nintei (approved) seal the maker has to submit their kendama before it's produced and offered for sale. This is how many other sports do it, have a certifying body set rules to which the makers adhere.

 

Here is the earliest post I can find on the Gloken box (KWC 2014).

 

Yea there are a couple models that are reeally close, the GT-BH is the examples I've often heard. Manufacturing tolerances are +/- maybe 10-25 thousandths of an inch, so a smaller one might fit, but a larger one might not. Humidity can affect this as well, for sure.

It seems to me that players are independently gravitating towards a size that is a little smaller than the max box size, for example the Prefect is pretty close to the max (we went slightly under box dimensions, to ensure even the upper end of the tolerance still fits), but a lot of players have told me the prefect is slightly larger than they prefer. So I think the driver for design has been in part defined by the box, but is still mostly defined just by player demand. There does seem to be an ideal zone for ken size and cup size that players mostly agree on.

I'm not sure I know of any examples of a ken with cups too large to fit in the box. I think cups that large would be a hinderance to play. At a certain point a giant cup does make it harder to do lunars, the cup will cover so much of the tama there isn't much room to hold onto it, or make adjustments.

 

To more directly answer your Qs:

Is this standard at all competitions?
Not all contests, but a lot of contests have adopted it. In some cases I would guess the contest organizers don't actually have a box, but rather just know which models do fit, or not.

Who is the authority?
GLOKEN designed the box, it seems to me they just chose round numbers that were slightly larger than most models available at the time (17 x 7.5 cm), but you'd have to ask Kubota or Kota or someone at GLOKEN for the actual reasoning behind the choice of box size.

What if you have a competition sized dama that swells in humidity? (That actually happened to me with a KUSA Ash Craft Slim Plus that fit one day but had to be super crammed in the next).
If it doesn't fit in the box at the check-in time, then you can't use it. The check is only performed once, at least at past KWCs.
Wood expands most in the direction orthogonal to grain growth, so generally this shouldnt be tooo much of an issue (the box dimensions align in parallel with the direction of grain growth, so you'll see less expansion in those dimensions, though there is still some).

Do competitions strictly hold you to this standard or will an occasional oversized mod make it through to compete?
Depends on the contest. I think Nobu let Rod use an LBB at C&F in the past. Its like a half mm too large lol

I've been around for a number of conversations between industry leaders over the years, discussing ways to bring in a 'certified seal' sorta system like this. Other people involved were Jero (kusa), Sweets/Gabe/Paulson (sweets), Sam/Lex/D-Rob/Bosch (kenco), Jake Wiens, David (Sunrise), Philip/Thorkild (krom), Kubota/Ishibashi (gloken). Maybe the Roots guys were there for one of them? Maybe Matt Rice? I feel like I may be forgetting one or two people...

Its been years since anyone really brought it up in N America though, here's a summary of where the conversations usually ended:

"Okay this sounds great, but how does it actually work? Who gets to be in charge of deciding what is officially certified? Is it a collection of company owners? Which companies get to be involved then? This is a big conflict of interest, since an 'official product' is going have more commercial value, assumedly. What is the actual legal structure of the certifying organization? How is it funded? Do the company owners have to volunteer time to organize all this?" Etc

I think the last time the discussion happened (at least that I was involved in) was during an MKO event years ago, Sweets proposed expanding their (at the time new) level system into a wider certification sorta system. Everyone liked what they were working on, but the same sorta issues mentioned above kinda stonewalled the ability of the wider industry to really invest into it. So while Sweets continued on with their level system, it never grew to include a certification seal or anything like that really, at least not more widely in the industry.

 

That's very likely the reason many sports have an independent governing/sanctioning body to handle requirements and implement rules. A neutral and independent organization, that doesn't manufacture the items themselves, would seem to have a better chance of handling things in a fair manner. They'd also have the personnel to dedicate to the project since they are a separate entity specifically tasked to handle it. The various makers work with this independent organization as equal brand/company partners so no one group is seen to have an advantage. Fees can be paid to the organization to support its efforts and cover costs so the governing body doesn't have to compete with the manufacturers by having their own products etc.

The structure of golf for example is handled by R&A/USGA who make the rules for both game play and equipment. In car racing there are several organizations who make the rules and run events same for boxing, martial arts, and others. So having a single regulating body isn't a strict requirement. In Japan for kendama it has been the JKA filling this role since 1975. One thing to note is that since the JKA is a non-profit most of their organization are unpaid volunteers so they can draw upon a large but fluid support/worker group. Operating as a non-profit organization also means they look at things, for good or ill, differently than a regular for-profit company.

 

Yea, at the time those conversations were had this idea of a neutral party was brought up, but everyone more or less agreed that kendama was such a small industry that anyone who cared enough and knew enough to run such an organization was probably already involved in the kendama business at least loosely (sponsored players, etc). It was a young and fairly small community, nobody was thinking it would be easy to avoid conflicts of interest.

> In car racing there are several organizations who make the rules and run events same for boxing, martial arts, and others.

I like it, that seems to me like it would be most viable in kendama-world. Outside the JKA, it seems like the box is fairly standard (or at least, 'the models which assumedly fit in a box if one were present'), but if someone wanted to run a series of events, I suppose they could make stipulations about which damas were allowed in it. If their events were important enough to dama players, perhaps deals could be made with manufacturers to create pre-certified kendamas to sell on the market. If there were multiple big event circuits, perhaps you could even have double-pre-certified kens made. You could buy a new Sweets-league certified Sweet kendama, that is also stamped with the GLOKEN-Cup-Tour certification mark. lol. A dama all tatted up with seals of approval.

 

That's the reason that all the member businesses would need to pay dues, membership fees, stipends, or whatever for the upkeep of the governing body. It would cover costs of doing business like salaries etc. so it works somewhat like a non-profit in that regard and the businesses would be equally represented.

If there wasn't someone considered neutral like a retired or semi retired kendama player then hire someone from outside and train them about kendama; it's just an administrative role. It's not like the organization would independently be the sole source of rules and regs so the entirety of kendama knowledge need not rest with one person. Create an advisory board of players/brands to make the rules/regs and then let the governing body administrate it.

The sanctioning body could either create their own independent competitions and/or approve brand competitions which followed the body's rules/reqs. The whole series of competitions could be linked and placing would give players points across the year like they do in many auto racing series. The points could go toward an annual end of season competition where the highest scoring 32 (or whatever number) compete for the top title of the year. If there were multiple organizations maybe the top player(s) from each group's series could meet in a 'title' or 'belt' match like boxing and other sports.

Independent players likely have more flexibility as to the events they attend. Sponsored players, like sponsored car drivers, generally go where their sponsor says they need to go otherwise it wouldn't make a lot of sense to call them company sponsored. Since the companies are financially supporting the governing body it would probably be a good idea to participate in its events to get their money's worth.

Certification of the implements of any given sport are pretty much all certified before any event so it wouldn't seem that unusual for makers to have "certified" kendama that are designed and built under the regulations of the sanctioning body. Since those same makers are also part of the advisory board then they had a hand in making the rules too so it shouldn't be an onerous yoke to bear.

When I was racing, no matter the event organizer, we all had to have certain items to compete. One item in particular was a helmet that met current regs. The helmets were certified by several agencies/organizations and each race recognized one or more of those. Even if I were to race one day in Texas and the next in Europe the helmet I had was cross certified so it was all good. Multiple certifications are possible if the various governing bodies work together. Of course there can be specialty or restricted events but that is not unusual either. (I'm still waiting for the All Natty Invitational myself. )

IIRC the JKA's World Kendama Festa had some events where players could use non-nintei kendama as well as nintei only kendama events. KWC/Catch & Flow and others using the box also allow JKA nintei/suisho certified kendama so there's kind of already the framework to put something together. The main thing is we wouldn't have to reinvent the wheel. There are already a bunch of sports sanctioning bodies out there and we could pick and choose what works for kendama. Just my 2 yen/peso/cents on it.

 

I generally agree with all that, concerning the legal setup of the organization. I think the conflict of interest surrounding the ongoing operation of the organization is still at play though: member companies could act as gatekeepers. I'd expect any rational business involved to have their own self-interests. In larger industries this becomes less of an existential issue, I think. Its easier to gate-keep the small pie, than the large one.

But I think these issues are acceptable, insofar as a 'certification-for-X-event' goes. Trying to be _The_ certifying body for the wider community makes those conflicts of interest more of an issue.
I guess I would rather see the sort of diversity of products we have now in the market, whereas a widely accepted 'certification standard' would lead to less diversity.

Interesting comparison with helmet certifications, makes me think that at least kendamas are not complicated objects. The nuance of certification doesn't get too technical, which makes the job easier, I think. (although I'm reminded of hearing stories about JKA certification requiring paint durability of a certain threshold, tested via moshi-kame runs, ha).

 

I don't doubt that sporting goods manufacturers in other sports are looking out for their own interests so I don't see kendama as different in that regard. If they've managed to find a way to work with a sanctioning body, make good products, and stay in business I'm not entirely sure why kendama couldn't do the same.

As for leading to less diversity, maybe maybe not. In car racing we had different classes at the same event within which there were rules specific to that class only: stock, prepared, modified, etc. Different types of equipment and modifications were allowed within that class and there was a lot of variation. Certification of any given sporting equipment item generally comes down to measurements and materials so that part shouldn't be too difficult.

*Here's the Ozora paint testing device. There are wooden cups at each end. The paint must pass a 10,000 catch/strike regime. The tama on the right is the tested one.



Certification/standardization can also lead to wider acceptance bringing in more players from across the world rather than relegating localized groups to a subculture in their area. With everyone playing from the same rule book, using essentially the same equipment, cross border competition is much easier; a level playing field.

I guess it really comes down to goals. What do we want for kendama? If we're OK with it staying a niche activity then we're probably good where we are with minor adjustments as needed. If going big time is a consideration then regulation is inevitable and not inherently a bad thing. I do not know of a sport in the Olympics that does not have a regulating body connected to it.

 

(I'm going to skip using the DS inbuilt quote system, I find it rather clunky when trying to respond to multiple individual things at once)

>I don't doubt that sporting goods manufacturers in other sports are looking out for their own interests so I don't see kendama as different in that regard. If they've managed to find a way to work with a sanctioning body, make good products, and stay in business I'm not entirely sure why kendama couldn't do the same.

Yes, but the concern was for those companies not involved in the organization (including companies that don't even exist yet). Being involved is an advantage, and allows for gatekeeping, that was more the issue discussed.

>As for leading to less diversity, maybe maybe not

All else equal, it seems logical to me that it would lead to less diversity. With X number of businesses that have X number of dollars to invest in product development, having a number of those businesses invest in creating products that follow the certification standards means there is less dollars being spent on a non-certified (more diverse) selection of products.
However, I can see the argument that a successful certification system grows the game, and allows the number of companies and number of dollars to increase, thus more diversity potential-- but thats sort of a second-order effect that may or may not happen.

>*Here's the Ozora paint testing device. There are wooden cups at each end. The paint must pass a 10,000 catch/strike regime. The tama on the right is the tested one.

Whaaat that is super cool! Thanks for sharing this, I love it lol

> I guess it really comes down to goals. What do we want for kendama?

I think the great thing is that we don't necessarily need a one-size-fits-all solution. Kendama has grown in N America in spite of there being no centralized certifying body guiding it, but there are also a lot of players out there that see the appeal of such a thing, and actively partake in the Sweets certification system, GLOKEN Kentei tests, JKA tests, Mirek's system (kendamagame.com), etc. Both are there, for those that want em.

Unsurprisingly, I see a lot of parallels between kendama and things like skateboarding (unsurprising, because the N American industry was basically built by people who had a background in extreme sports, and applied the same sort of model): there is a wider culture to skating, but also through time there have been contest circuits and regulating bodies that have varying degrees of influence.

I think this has been discussed on here before, but skateboarding/the olympics is a great example of this. Skateboarding doesn't really need the Olympics (actually, there is a LOT of hate of the olympics, coming from a large number of skaters), but having skateboarding in the olympics will undoubtedly expand the sport to new audiences. So going back to your quote ("I guess it really comes down to goals. What do we want for kendama?"), I guess I would say that its hard to define the collective 'we', more so I think some people would love it, some people wouldn't really care, and hell, maybe some people would be actively against it (counter-culture influence again, perhaps).

 

OK @htimSxelA I'll forgo the built-in quote system as well in hopes that it aids thought flow. Thank you for taking the time to go through these mental exercises here and apologies for the "wall of text."

>Yes, but the concern was for those companies not involved in the organization (including companies that don't even exist yet). Being involved is an advantage, and allows for gatekeeping, that was more the issue discussed.

I think here we might be talking past each other a bit. The base concept of the sanctioning body is that it is functionally independent of the companies who are part of it. Those companies do support it financially as members but don't have control of its direction except as part of the advisory group which would be more sport related than administrative. Gatekeeping by member companies shouldn't be an issue since they wouldn't make the call as to which companies are allowed "in" or what their role would be once part of the group.

>All else equal, it seems logical to me that it would lead to less diversity. With X number of businesses that have X number of dollars to invest in product development, having a number of those businesses invest in creating products that follow the certification standards means there is less dollars being spent on a non-certified (more diverse) selection of products.

This is where the "maybe maybe not" thought comes in. The limitation of variables directed at a single goal could produce the results you suggest. However it doesn't have to be that equation. Even in today's semi structured ecosystem companies are making non-certified items. Brands can bolster their bottom line teaming up with other companies to make unique items that are fun to play, interesting, or collectible etc. Yamagata Koubou (Ozora) is a good example of this. They've partnered with Starbuck's, Honda, CHUMS, Japan National Football Assoc., BEAMS, JAC, etc. Under their own brand they also make the Ozora, ReShape, Taisei, Taiyo, and Emperor shapes only one of which is fully "certified." They also own and operate the means of production.

>However, I can see the argument that a successful certification system grows the game, and allows the number of companies and number of dollars to increase, thus more diversity potential-- but thats sort of a second-order effect that may or may not happen.

Very little is guaranteed in business and nothing happens over night so there is always going to be at least some risk in new actions/programs/etc. That shouldn't preclude them from being researched and implemented if the potential achievements match the envisioned goals. I'm not convinced that success or failure of a certification system being implemented is entirely dependent on the the system itself but rather the success of the industry and sanctioning body's attempts to implement it. That is to say if a system is created but not completely supported and promoted enthusiastically it will not bear fruit. As for being a "second-order effect" I guess I'm not seeing it quite the same way; engage more players, sell more kendama.

Regarding the Ozora testing machine, glad you like it. Had to go through my kendama video library to dig that out and convert it. Not all companies have created a device like that so when the Meijin Takumi (formerly Kiwami) was released and design audited they just gave samples to a famous kendama player to rack up the Moshikame catches. I'm told that the pattern of marks was very similar.

>I think the great thing is that we don't necessarily need a one-size-fits-all solution. Kendama has grown in N America in spite of there being no centralized certifying body guiding it, but there are also a lot of players out there that see the appeal of such a thing, and actively partake in the Sweets certification system, GLOKEN Kentei tests, JKA tests, Mirek's system (kendamagame.com), etc. Both are there, for those that want em.

Unsurprisingly, I see a lot of parallels between kendama and things like skateboarding (unsurprising, because the N American industry was basically built by people who had a background in extreme sports, and applied the same sort of model): there is a wider culture to skating, but also through time there have been contest circuits and regulating bodies that have varying degrees of influence.

Having one sanctioning body, or more, doesn't really strike me as a "one-size-fits-all solution" but rather could provide a structured way to grow the community and industry and that definitely is something we need. Since at least 2015 we've seen a lot of kendama companies and players leave. Prior to this time as the market increased more companies came in but that meant smaller shares for everyone. Once the pie started to shrink some businesses had a hard time adjusting; fewer players means fewer and/or smaller companies. A solid sanctioning body could be an additional tool to help even out the peaks and troughs in the market cycle by helping to keep sales up and engage players for a longer time. Football, soccer, baseball, tennis, etc. don't appear to suffer the waves in participation as strongly as kendama. While there are kendama certification systems out there now they aren't as ubiquitous as to be available "for those that want em." A well supported sanctioning body could help with that.

>I think this has been discussed on here before, but skateboarding/the olympics is a great example of this. Skateboarding doesn't really need the Olympics (actually, there is a LOT of hate of the olympics, coming from a large number of skaters), but having skateboarding in the olympics will undoubtedly expand the sport to new audiences. So going back to your quote ("I guess it really comes down to goals. What do we want for kendama?"), I guess I would say that its hard to define the collective 'we', more so I think some people would love it, some people wouldn't really care, and hell, maybe some people would be actively against it (counter-culture influence again, perhaps).

Skateboarding is well outside my purview hence my car racing analogies but we go with what we know. Love or hate the Olympics it generally represents the pinnacle of sport in many ways. One aspect is world-wide recognition of the given sport. A pretty high number of regular folks will recognize most of the sports in the Olympics. I would posit that recognition can lead more easily to participation. Throw in the relatively low cost of entry for kendama and suddenly there could be a lot more interested people out there just by becoming more widely known.

There are a fair number of sports not currently in the Olympics that also do well for themselves, American football, and Cricket to name a couple, but a commonality in all of them are well supported sanctioning bodies. As for who the "collective 'we'" are, it seems likely to be companies, educators, and others who would be directly involved in the creation and maintenance of the sanctioning body. Since many long time and competitive players are affiliated with various makers those voices would be included as well. Down the road regular players might also have input but initially it would likely be easier to make the broth with fewer chefs.

TL;dr Having a well supported sanctioning body would seem to offer more potential positives than negatives. My personal hope/dream is to have the kendama as easily recognized as a soccer ball and have so many more players world-wide that it supports companies in a more stable manner. It's a circle, a feedback loop if you will. At its most basic more players means more sales for companies which in turn support the community by making more kendama, having events, etc; rinse and repeat.