How "should" the system work?

[Andrew Green]

A lot of how it shouldn't work going on, but how should it work? Who should get rank, how, when and why? Can we take a positive spin on all this nonsense without fighting?

Personally I believe the (belt) system is flawed and has lost credibility and practicality. I'm all for a recognize coaching/instructor levels and that is it for adults. Kids get some level progression to keep them motivated if needed, but adults arguing over colored belts seems silly...

But I do a more sportive approach, and that won't work for preserving traditional styles...

Perhaps a elected council in charge of managing standards and preserving the history? As opposed to a single person? Maybe a Instructor / Examiner / Council member breakdown?

Might prevent the innevitable splits that occur when more then one person is in a position to take the top seat after the current head dies. Give a bunch of top seats and do some voting...

But I guess the point is trying to apply the same ranking system to every teaching / learning system is kind of silly.

What does everyone else think? How "should" things work?

[Bob Hubbard]

I think rank should mean something. Be something earned.
Not bought, not given for "time in", not "honorary", not for writing a book, doing a video, or having a seminar.

I can spend 40 years in collage. Doesn't guarentee me a degree.
I see ranks as that. You test for it. If you pass, you get the promotion. If not, train some more.

One can argue that after a certain point there is no more material.
There is always more material.
There is the mastery and perfection of ability.

If you've passed the point of new material, your ability to demonstrate the old should improve.

Why can I get promoted just for being there in the arts, but in other training enviroments must constantly demonstrate my knowledge of the material?

One can argue about promotions in the military or civilian jobs. I say, it's not the same.

[Andrew Green]

I can spend 40 years in collage. Doesn't guarentee me a degree.

Accredited College's have to follow rules about how they award degrees in order to retain that accreditation. How can we duplicate that effect and distinguish earned rank from diploma mill rank? (You can get College degrees through diploma mills too, but not from a accredited College)

[evenflow1121]

I agree with most of what you said, I do believe that the belt system is flawed. And in many ways, I do like what the JKD guys have done for ranking. With respect to belts however, I believe there are two extremes and both can be bad, there are schools that have two little belts and test everyone at the same period in time, so you are guaranteed a bb in say 2 yrs and keeps people going, even if they suck they can flaunt their little bb around. Then there are other schools that have too many belts, that teach absolute garbage but want to keep you in there for as much as they can and milk just about every penny out of you, things like color cordinated gi's and practice "numchucks" (I say this because I actually heard one of these instructors refer to nunchaku like this). I believe that rank should be earned and it should be explained and highly emphasized to the person who is about to make his commitment with the particular studio, dojo, dojang, school, et al. That belts in this place are earned, and if it takes you 7 yrs bb so be it, if you are looking for a short cut you are not going to get it. And explain why, because I dont want to give you a false sense of confidence, because I also have a responsibility as the issuer to your future students should you teach anyone, ect.

[ginshun]

Are there really that many people out there that worry about belts?

[arnisador]

Yes, there is always more material and more options.

Belts or the like are an economic necessity if you teach kids. But no matetr what you do, people will try to find ways to rank themselevs, even if it's only seniority. It can't be avoided.

[Andrew Green]

Are there really that many people out there that worry about belts?
Judging by the archives on this and other MA forums....

[Flatlander]

Mod Note:

Thread moved from the Study, as it is martial arts related.

-Dan Bowman-
-MT Moderator-

[Tgace]

IMO, belts were never about "fighting ability" they were just markers for who knew what. Knowledge is different from fighting ability. How many people believe that a 10 yo black belt can beat a 30 yo 200lb. man? That 10 yo met all the technique/curriculum requirements to earn the belt. The problem with the system is our impression of what that system means more than any problem with the system itself.

[Flatlander]

Personally I believe the (belt) system is flawed and has lost credibility and practicality.Yes. But, that's your belief. The belt's importance is quantified by the person wearing it. For some, the belt is important and necessary. For others, not. Me, for example.

[arnisador]

I wonder what Jigaro Kano would say if he knew what had become of the belt system.

[Jaymeister]

IMO, belts were never about "fighting ability" they were just markers for who knew what. Knowledge is different from fighting ability. How many people believe that a 10 yo black belt can beat a 30 yo 200lb. man? That 10 yo met all the technique/curriculum requirements to earn the belt. The problem with the system is our impression of what that system means more than any problem with the system itself.
Good point :asian:

[47MartialMan]

A lot of how it shouldn't work going on, but how should it work? Who should get rank, how, when and why? Can we take a positive spin on all this nonsense without fighting?

Personally I believe the (belt) system is flawed and has lost credibility and practicality. I'm all for a recognize coaching/instructor levels and that is it for adults. Kids get some level progression to keep them motivated if needed, but adults arguing over colored belts seems silly...

But I do a more sportive approach, and that won't work for preserving traditional styles...

Perhaps a elected council in charge of managing standards and preserving the history? As opposed to a single person? Maybe a Instructor / Examiner / Council member breakdown?

Might prevent the innevitable splits that occur when more then one person is in a position to take the top seat after the current head dies. Give a bunch of top seats and do some voting...

But I guess the point is trying to apply the same ranking system to every teaching / learning system is kind of silly.

What does everyone else think? How "should" things work?
The system is flawed and appointing others to a board will only cause other flaws.

[eyebeams]

It depends on the goals and values of the system. Anything with competition needs to have ranking to determine competition categories. Rank is pretty straightforward there: If you know the curriculum and can compete at a given belt level, you've got the belt (or whatever). The only exception is at the high level, where separate coaching credits are necessary. Folks can be good trainers but lack the gift for the best wins.

Otherwise, I personally prefer not to have large tests interrupt the folow of training. Any kind of heavy grading before earning instruction responsibilities strikes me as largely pointless. Ideally, a system should:

* Have a division for total novices.
* Have a division for mid-level practitioners (pre black belt).
* Have a division for coaching/teaching.
* Have a parallel division to coaching/teaching, for refinement of ability. Let's stop this at something like godan and be done with it. If you're cooler than godan, then someone will surely notice.

There is little worse than a competent fighter who's a bad coach. They get frustrated and you get frustrated by the gulf in ability and communication. Mike Tyson was, for example, one of the greatest boxers to have ever lived. Would he be just as good a coach? Not really. A coach can have mediorce talent, solid skills, and great coaching ability.

Finally, divorce commerical and organizational elements from rank as much as possible. I'd rather have organizationally savvy low belts than less savvy high belts.

[searcher]

I wonder what Jigaro Kano would say if he knew what had become of the belt system.
Very good question. I heard Hayward Nishioka say that Kano started using a belting system to give his students training goals. That it took several years to progress from one belt to the next. It is now a flawed system, but the real question is what do we do about it? O-sensei Philip Porter has an article about the belting system and its use on the United States Martial Arts Association website at www.mararts.com (http://www.mararts.com). I am sure that not everyone will see things his way, but it is what he has come to believe over his 50+ years of training.

[47MartialMan]

Very good question. I heard Hayward Nishioka say that Kano started using a belting system to give his students training goals. That it took several years to progress from one belt to the next. It is now a flawed system, but the real question is what do we do about it? O-sensei Philip Porter has an article about the belting system and its use on the United States Martial Arts Association website at www.mararts.com (http://www.mararts.com/). I am sure that not everyone will see things his way, but it is what he has come to believe over his 50+ years of training.
Dont forget the fancy colors. Now, even Kung Fu schools use color sashes. Likewise such fall into the colorful rank snare.

[Andrew Green]

The system is flawed and appointing others to a board will only cause other flaws.
Probably, so how can it be fixed?

[47MartialMan]

Probably, so how can it be fixed?
It may never be able to.

Some time ago, there was the idea of the US Gov' getting involved to set national standards.

I cant seem to find the article, but if memory serves, a Senator whom had a rank in TKD was trying to push it. And if memory serves, one member on the board to monitor such standards, was his instructor, or Grand Master.

[evenflow1121]

I cant seem to find the article, but if memory serves, a Senator whom had a rank in TKD was trying to push it. And if memory serves, one member on the board to monitor such standards, was his instructor, or Grand Master.
Lol, I hope you do find the article 47 I'd be really interested in knowing what moron would want to push something so absurd. What a great thing, lets have one universal std and disregard requirements for all the other systems out there and oh wait it gets even better, my instructor, who is a grandmaster in just one out of hundreds of systems can sit on the board and have the authority to decide who is legit and who is not.

[47MartialMan]

Lol, I hope you do find the article 47 I'd be really interested in knowing what moron would want to push something so absurd. What a great thing, lets have one universal std and disregard requirements for all the other systems out there and oh wait it gets even better, my instructor, who is a grandmaster in just one out of hundreds of systems can sit on the board and have the authority to decide who is legit and who is not.
Its not funny. This was a decade or so ago. I have it saved somewhere. It was before the "Almighty Internet".

[Jerry]

I think the ideal will vary by art. I know in mine there's a cirriculim: "know this material, move on to a new set of material", like subjects in school. In terms of internal rankings, I like this system.

In terms of external rankings; I wouldn't mind seeing something like you have in trades (apprentice, journeyman, master).

[47MartialMan]

I think the ideal will vary by art. I know in mine there's a cirriculim: "know this material, move on to a new set of material", like subjects in school. In terms of internal rankings, I like this system.

In terms of external rankings; I wouldn't mind seeing something like you have in trades (apprentice, journeyman, master).
Who regulates it on such a scale?

[Jerry]

In most trades, there is a guild.

[Corporal Hicks]

Maybe you could enforce the fact to students that the belt only implies knowledge, not technical skill?

Just an idea!:idunno:

[dsp921]

Belts/rank don't imply technical skill? Are you saying that all you have to do is explain the material to someone until they know all the moves and then give them a black belt? Without ever having to leave the chair or execute the techniques with some level of skill? Rank should be given when someone knows the material and can apply it. Without developing skill, what's the point of training?

[Corporal Hicks]

Belts/rank don't imply technical skill? Are you saying that all you have to do is explain the material to someone until they know all the moves and then give them a black belt? Without ever having to leave the chair or execute the techniques with some level of skill? Rank should be given when someone knows the material and can apply it. Without developing skill, what's the point of training?
No, what I meant to say was that, maybe the ranking system should be altered so that its not entirelly based on just technical skill or knowledge. There is a boundary, you can have a great technical fighter yet he knows nothing about that knowledge side of his art, therefore he has achieved the 'Martial' side of his art but knows nothing of the 'Art' side of his art.
I notice the fact that there seems to be some swaying that belts should only be awarded if somebody can be a great technical fighter, I dont believe that entirelly the case, as you said before both sides should be equally noticable. It seems that some would rather you achieve the belt through being a great fighter than being a Martial Artist. If you have achieved your belt through fighting skill only then that doesnt mean alot to me because I could not see the follow student in you who has strived to understand everything in the science of fighting but nothing else, unless your aim is to be a fighter, imo.

I totally agree that somebody should know the material and can apply it!

Or you could simply scrap belts altogether for adults. If you are real Martial Artist Imho then you would not care about your rank for it is not part of yourself, it does not make you who you are, you are as you as a person, wearing a belt may simply be there to increase your ego. I dont know, maybe I'm being harsh. Belts for motivation maybe. Dont mean to offend!

kind regards

[Andrew Green]

If you are real Martial Artist Imho then you would not care about your rank for it is not part of yourself, it does not make you who you are, you are as you as a person, wearing a belt may simply be there to increase your ego.

Hehehe... Ok, define "real martial artist" :D

I agee with you to a point, but the idea of a "real" martial artist is gonna be a very hard sell. Different people train for different reasons. I think the system is broken, and I have no interest in belts. But "real" is perhaps not the right word ;)

[dsp921]

No, what I meant to say was that, maybe the ranking system should be altered so that its not entirelly based on just technical skill or knowledge. There is a boundary, you can have a great technical fighter yet he knows nothing about that knowledge side of his art, therefore he has achieved the 'Martial' side of his art but knows nothing of the 'Art' side of his art.
I notice the fact that there seems to be some swaying that belts should only be awarded if somebody can be a great technical fighter, I dont believe that entirelly the case, as you said before both sides should be equally noticable. It seems that some would rather you achieve the belt through being a great fighter than being a Martial Artist. If you have achieved your belt through fighting skill only then that doesnt mean alot to me because I could not see the follow student in you who has strived to understand everything in the science of fighting but nothing else, unless your aim is to be a fighter, imo.
I think what you are saying is that a martial artist should be well-rounded, and I agree. I don't think someone needs to be a "great" fighter to get rank, but they should be up to the standards of the school acknowledging the rank. Finding a school that has standards you find acceptable is what people need to worry about. If you visit a school and are not impressed by the higher rank students for whatever reason, go to the next school. You definitely should be able to fight, though, since that is what martial arts are about.



I totally agree that somebody should know the material and can apply it!
Absolutely, that's what it's all about.




Or you could simply scrap belts altogether for adults. If you are real Martial Artist Imho then you would not care about your rank for it is not part of yourself, it does not make you who you are, you are as you as a person, wearing a belt may simply be there to increase your ego. I dont know, maybe I'm being harsh. Belts for motivation maybe. Dont mean to offend!

kind regardsI understand this totally. If there is a problem with the credibility of ranks it is because people are more concerned about what the outside world thinks than they should. I, for one, train for me, I don't care what outsiders or even the guy next to me in class think. The only person I have to satisfy is myself, and the only person I care to impress at all is my instructor. He knows where I am and I know where I stand with him, simple enough.

[dsp921]

I think the system is broken
What do you mean by "system"?

[Corporal Hicks]

Hehehe... Ok, define "real martial artist" :D

I agee with you to a point, but the idea of a "real" martial artist is gonna be a very hard sell. Different people train for different reasons. I think the system is broken, and I have no interest in belts. But "real" is perhaps not the right word ;)
Lol, I knew that was coming!
By "real" I guess I meant it as in you knew it in your heart, that you are a Martial Artist. You know thats what you are, nobody else can tell you that you are or not! It doesnt matter what belts or what anybody else thinks, you know you are not 'kidding' yourself. I would define real as when it becomes a part of you, and one thing I would say which might annoy some is that you understand the principles of your art. If you just fight, using the arts, I would not Imo condsider you a Martial Artist, I would consider you a fighter, nothing wrong with fighters, no problem, I have a friend who I would consider to be one and thats what he considers himself to be, as he has no interest in the art side of martial arts, he simply wants to fight better, feel better, be fitter and healthier and 'kick ass' if you would put it that way.
I dont know, its tricky and even with my opinion I dont want to offend some people with it. I cant really define it as you asid but in essence I would say if you truely consider yourself to be a Martial Artist, then thats what you are. I take pride in those two words, maybe I'm sad but hey, who cares!

kind regards

[Andrew Green]

What do you mean by "system"?
The belt rank. How it works and how most everyone thinks it works are completely different. Using this people can exploit it.

[Corporal Hicks]

What do you mean by "system"?
I think Andrew was referring to its abuse by people. Maybe I'm wrong lol! Since belts nowdays can be used to make money and are a key part of mc dojo's!

"So and so is obviously hard because they have a black belt in Karate!!", really?
'Discuss the validity of this statement with reference to specific examples?

I think not!
I have just realised that this has no revelance whatsoever, so time for cereal!

[Corporal Hicks]

And he actually put a reply anyway! :whip:

[dsp921]

The belt rank. How it works and how most everyone thinks it works are completely different. Using this people can exploit it.I guess that's the part that I don't care about. Sure there are schools that give rank for nothing and one could say that cheapens the rank for those that really earn it. But that is really only a problem if what other people think matters. I don't wear my belt on the street and I rarely talk about my training so there is limited oppportunity to hear misguided opinions.
There really isn't a way to stop people from abusing or exploiting the rank system. I guess what it comes down to is that the individual needs to take the responsibility to make sure they are in a good situation and not being ripped off.

[47MartialMan]

No, what I meant to say was that, maybe the ranking system should be altered so that its not entirelly based on just technical skill or knowledge. There is a boundary, you can have a great technical fighter yet he knows nothing about that knowledge side of his art, therefore he has achieved the 'Martial' side of his art but knows nothing of the 'Art' side of his art.
I notice the fact that there seems to be some swaying that belts should only be awarded if somebody can be a great technical fighter, I dont believe that entirelly the case, as you said before both sides should be equally noticable. It seems that some would rather you achieve the belt through being a great fighter than being a Martial Artist. If you have achieved your belt through fighting skill only then that doesnt mean alot to me because I could not see the follow student in you who has strived to understand everything in the science of fighting but nothing else, unless your aim is to be a fighter, imo.

I totally agree that somebody should know the material and can apply it!

Or you could simply scrap belts altogether for adults. If you are real Martial Artist Imho then you would not care about your rank for it is not part of yourself, it does not make you who you are, you are as you as a person, wearing a belt may simply be there to increase your ego. I dont know, maybe I'm being harsh. Belts for motivation maybe. Dont mean to offend!

kind regards
Nice post...

I wonder how many would "shelve" their rank if knowledge and skill is most important

[Jerry]

Is this why "real physicists" don't persue degrees or awards?

[evenflow1121]

Its not funny. This was a decade or so ago. I have it saved somewhere. It was before the "Almighty Internet".
I dont think its funny, I think its outright insulting that a Senator who trains in one system, would want to have a std set for all systems and have his own instructor sit on the board.

[Tremble]

Yet here we all are, with Belt ranks on our posts??? ;)

[Corporal Hicks]

Yeah, true, but I cant get rid of mine!! Otherwise I would, same with the reputation points, if I found the option to turn them off I would. I come on here for the knowledge not for the reputation or to compare with others. Can I actually turn them off?

[arnisador]

Yeah, true, but I cant get rid of mine!! Otherwise I would, same with the reputation points, if I found the option to turn them off I would. I come on here for the knowledge not for the reputation or to compare with others. Can I actually turn them off?
I think you have to be a supporting member ($12/year), but then you can disable it.

[arnisador]

Yet here we all are, with Belt ranks on our posts???
People would just rank themselves by post count otherwise.

Hey...maybe that's not such a bad idea? :D