Another ATA 5 year old black belt

[Twin Fist]

i refuse to take an organization seriously that added CAMOFLAUGE as a belt color.

case closed.

oh, and in case i need to say it again?

anything less than a 3 yr BB (and they better be fan-friggin-tastic to make it in 3 years) is crap

any younger than 10 is crap, even for a poom or jr black

any younger than 16 for a DAN rank is

say it with me

CRAP

 

[andyjeffries]

I have to agree with where you said "a black belt should be achievable to everyone". The standards and requirements should be things anybody can achieve with hard work and persistence (maybe not at 5 years old though).

I agree with you on both points. I'm not saying 1st Dan/Poom should be easy, it should take considerable effort - but that's relative effort to that person, I'm not a fan of crazy requirements to prove you're worth a belt rank that are only achievable by the elite. I'm not saying there aren't exceptional children out there at this age and at that point I may re-consider whether I feel it's too young, but having just had two kids go through that age (my youngest is 6, so not that much older) and having a few students at 6, I can't imagine any of them being disciplined enough to be a poom/dan holder.

That discipline level is more important for me than the understanding of philosophy or ability to defend oneself against an attacker for a child, and I haven't seen any 5-6 year olds that have what it takes.

 

[miguksaram]

My point is this...none of us are calling them frauds or a crappy company because they give out black belts (albeit black belt certification) to people who are not martial artists. We all have our definition of what a black belt is or should be. My definition works for me and my students. Example: We have students who are under 16 who will wear a solid black belt for sport purposes....guess what, some of them are only green and purple belts in the school. They just really excel in the sport aspect. We have Jr. Black Belts that wear a solid black belt in tournaments, but will wear a black with white stripe in the school signifying that they are Jr. What the ATA does has nothing to do with me. Just like what Six Sigma does has nothing to do with me. So why stress it?

As for the argument, that makes us all look bad, I have to tell you that hearing about an instructor manhandling his/her students makes us all look bad. This just makes that school look quirky. Outside of that news article would any of you have even known that school existed? Personally there are not enough ATA school around my area to keep stressed out that they belt milling 5 year olds. I'm more worried about TUF making us look like a bunch of drunken buffoons waiting to beat the crap out of one another (Please note that while I worry about the image it creates, I do find the show entertaining....I know...I'm a hypocrite).

 

[Cyriacus]

i refuse to take an organization seriously that added CAMOFLAUGE as a belt color.

case closed.

oh, and in case i need to say it again?

anything less than a 3 yr BB (and they better be fan-friggin-tastic to make it in 3 years) is crap

any younger than 10 is crap, even for a poom or jr black

any younger than 16 for a DAN rank is

say it with me

CRAP

...Crap?

 

[dancingalone]

My point is this...none of us are calling them frauds or a crappy company because they give out black belts (albeit black belt certification) to people who are not martial artists.

Because the black belt is tongue-in-cheek. It is clear Six Sigma is not certifying the physical performance of their people in martial arts. Instead, they use black belt merely as a label for expert which is reasonable enough in my view if their verification and award process was/is a credible one.

We all have our definition of what a black belt is or should be. My definition works for me and my students. Example: We have students who are under 16 who will wear a solid black belt for sport purposes....guess what, some of them are only green and purple belts in the school. They just really excel in the sport aspect. We have Jr. Black Belts that wear a solid black belt in tournaments, but will wear a black with white stripe in the school signifying that they are Jr. What the ATA does has nothing to do with me. Just like what Six Sigma does has nothing to do with me. So why stress it?

As for the argument, that makes us all look bad, I have to tell you that hearing about an instructor manhandling his/her students makes us all look bad. This just makes that school look quirky. Outside of that news article would any of you have even known that school existed? Personally there are not enough ATA school around my area to keep stressed out that they belt milling 5 year olds. I'm more worried about TUF making us look like a bunch of drunken buffoons waiting to beat the crap out of one another (Please note that while I worry about the image it creates, I do find the show entertaining....I know...I'm a hypocrite).

I've owned a commercial dojang for almost 4 months now. I can tell everyone that one of the most common questions I answer for prospects and/or their parents is 'How long does it take to get a black belt'. To a lesser extent, a few of them have had previous experience elsewhere and they can be a little surprised when I tell them my best guesstimate is that training 2-3 times a week for an hour at a time, it might take 3+ years to attain sufficient physical competence to be awarded a chodan (and this is hardly a grueling gauntlet of time).

So clearly lesser standards elsewhere can 'affect' me. My task is to turn the way I do things into an asset, rather than letting it be a possible liability, and that is as things should be.

I think most people don't really care too much whether it is easy or hard to get a black belt. For them the training experience is most important, and they can receive a great value for their money even if the standards are more rigorous and the promotion pace slower.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

You asked if I thought it was "not legitimate." I said don't think so at all, that is I do not think it is "not legitimate," meaning that I think it IS legitimate.

Thank you for clarifying that.

Regardless of their intention, it's an inescapable fact that those guys are gone. Yes, their systems are still being taught, but those systems have continued to evolve, and I would argue that ideas about the belt system have as well.

I would argue that it hasn't evolved in the countries where the art originated but that the idea of the black belt was taken and changed into 'martial arts master' by returning US servicemen who brought the art back here. That doesn't mean that the idea has evolved; simply that it was never properly communicated in the first place.

I like that you posted 3 gymnastics videos and a dance vid to prove your point about martial arts. That notwithstanding, those kids are impressive. I'll grant you that the kids in the last vid are freaks of nature. But I can at least say that all the 5 year olds I've personally seen performing patterns do so with a certain herky jerky, almost robot like kind of movement that denies them an ability to perform the task with what I would call "acceptable technique."

I didn't post them to prove a point about martial arts. I posted them as a response to what you said a five year old body was incapable of. The movements of taekwondo and most martial arts simply are not that complex. I do believe that kids under the age of fifteen (general number, not carved in stone) should not be subjected to joint locks due to greater potential for injury, but that has nothing to do with the ability of the child.

I didn't immediately see any videos of actual five year old black belts (maybe they're out there, but I'm not inclined to take the time to dig them up) , but the videos that I posted demonstrate that a five year old is capable of attaining proficiency in a physical skill that requires substantial amounts of practice.

Again, while I am not crazy about the practice, I think the reasons that most of the detractors list are lacking if looked at critically.

My main issue with the practice has nothing to do with the age of the child but more to do with the fact that the schools that do it all seem to be overpriced McDojos and they are using the belts to bilk parents out of more cash.

 

[dancingalone]

I would argue that it hasn't evolved in the countries where the art originated but that the idea of the black belt was taken and changed into 'martial arts master' by returning US servicemen who brought the art back here. That doesn't mean that the idea has evolved; simply that it was never properly communicated in the first place.

Check out the leading karate organizations and ryu in Okinawa and Japan. They've evolved similarly or they have been influenced by the Western conception of what a black belt means. Last time I looked into this because of a similar thread on MT, I verified the JKA (leading Shotokan org) requires a 3 year minimum time before testing for shodan http://www.jka.or.jp/english/faq/faq_main.html#12. It is not said outright, but there is a clear implication of competence inherent within the rank. Similarly, the Junkokan, a leading Goju-ryu school on Okinawa, said 5 years was normal to achieve a shodan with them (sorry no link as this was a conversation I had with a member). As with anything, there are exceptions, but there are the normal guidelines.

How this pertains to TKD and the apparent normal 1 year term in Korea, I don't know. But I think it would be wrong to think that the original sources are NOT affected by what happens elsewhere.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

i refuse to take an organization seriously that added CAMOFLAUGE as a belt color.

case closed.

oh, and in case i need to say it again?

anything less than a 3 yr BB (and they better be fan-friggin-tastic to make it in 3 years) is crap

any younger than 10 is crap, even for a poom or jr black

any younger than 16 for a DAN rank is

say it with me

CRAP

Guess old Chuck Norris really must be crap! He started in 1958 and was back in the US opening a chain of dojos in 1962. Sounds like less than two years to black belt to me (I'm pretty sure that he got his in about a year). And to open a dojo in only four years.... when everyone knows that you have to be at least fourth dan to open a dojo... and that takes at least another four years.... Chuck must have been totally unqualified!!

If Chuck was crap in Way of the Dragon, then man, crap must be the new superb. I suspect that many of the MA fathers that we revere took less time than you and others claim in needed to be a "real" black belt.

Whenever things like that are mentioned, the response is always, "but that was Chuck Norris..." as if he's the exception to the rule. Actually, he isn't the exception to the rule; he simply was exceptional. Not everyone is exceptional. Not every first string college quarterback is Tim Tebow.

You do understand that karate and judo use the belt system for competition bracketing and because it made it more marketable to the Japanese school system don't you?

You also understand that the whole system of rank is lifted from a Japanese game of Reversi (popularly known as Othelo)?

The whole thing was grafted onto arts that were modern sport oriented arts that focused on personal development and competition. A black belt has absolutely zero correspondence to self defense. That is a marketing gimick made up to promote it in the US where sports like TKD, Karate, Judo, and Kendo had no chance to compete with boxing, wrestling, football, or baseball for popularity.

When the make up of US dojo student bodies were ex-military and other tough-guy adult males, the black belts were going to all be tougher guy adult males. I doubt that the school age children in Japan who were learning karate and getting black belts looked as tough as the US black belts... because the US black belts were all adult males who were inclined towards fighting before they ever stepped into the dojo.

The make up of students is much more diverse now, and belt factory schools aside, the average black belt will reflect that. The fact is that in the countries where these arts originate, getting to black belt is between a year and two years and has been since the arts were founded should tell you that you need to realign your perception of what a black belt is.

Or simply say that it takes that three to four years at your school and that other schools differ... instead of simply writing them all off as crap.

I do however agree with you regarding the camo belt. It is just plain stupid. So is the whole recommended and decided element of ATA grading, which as I understand it (no ATA member has ever disputed this) turn eight geub tests between ninth and first dan into sixteen geub tests, each of which with an accompanying fee. Adding a camo belt seems like just adding belts for the sake of adding belts so that more money can be charged...

...which is really my big criticism of the ATA.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Check out the leading karate organizations and ryu in Okinawa and Japan. They've evolved similarly or they have been influenced by the Western conception of what a black belt means. Last time I looked into this because of a similar thread on MT, I verified the JKA (leading Shotokan org) requires a 3 year minimum time before testing for shodan http://www.jka.or.jp/english/faq/faq_main.html#12. It is not said outright, but there is a clear implication of competence inherent within the rank. Similarly, the Junkokan, a leading Goju-ryu school on Okinawa, said 5 years was normal to achieve a shodan with them (sorry no link as this was a conversation I had with a member). As with anything, there are exceptions, but there are the normal guidelines.

How this pertains to TKD and the apparent normal 1 year term in Korea, I don't know. But I think it would be wrong to think that the original sources are NOT affected by what happens elsewhere.

Well, apparently in the US, the black belt is evolving into a two year affair. The fact that two years seems to be the norm for the industry means that, by your logic, those of you who expect longer periods of time should evolve to the new standard as well.

I don't really care how long other schools take to promote a student to first dan; each school has its own training methods and their own mix of material. But to impose that upon other schools and then judge them based upon how your school (not your's specifically, but the general your) does things is inappropriate.

 

[Gemini]

Quick Question. I Googled Six Sigma. Is it what I think it is? $550 for a Black Belt?

How significant a Six Sigma certification is depends on where you received it from and what type it is. If you received a certification based on manufacturing from Motorola (who developed the process) or one of the companies that incorporated the process directly from them, it will be considered highly prized as the requirements needed do achieve that are stout to say the least. Many schools are now offering certification, but none will carry that kind of weight and more emphasis will be put on historical success. The "Black Belts" I've worked with have been quite capable, but I'm not a huge fan of the Six Sigma process. I don't feel in my industry it applies well.

Back to the relevance to the post by miguksaram "how many of you get pissy about the sales group Six Sigma that gives out black belt certificates for their program". I think it's interesting, but I know regarding the ones I work with that they think more of mine than I think of theirs.

 

[dancingalone]

Well, apparently in the US, the black belt is evolving into a two year affair.

Within TKD, that might be true. Not so much other arts like karate, aikido, BJJ, judo (heh), or kenpo.

The fact that two years seems to be the norm for the industry means that, by your logic, those of you who expect longer periods of time should evolve to the new standard as well.

I don't know that I concede 2 years is a norm [yet] in the United States. And it's not too late at all to fight the trend if indeed it is the trend to shorten the length of time to BB in TKD to 2 years or less.

I don't really care how long other schools take to promote a student to first dan; each school has its own training methods and their own mix of material. But to impose that upon other schools and then judge them based upon how your school (not your's specifically, but the general your) does things is inappropriate.

It is very appropriate to set a qualitative value on varying amounts of training content, duration, and intensity in order to explain the differences between them. A 6 course certificate in accounting courses does not equal a 2 year junior college degree in business and that in turn is not a 4 year BBA in accounting.

 

[Twin Fist]

pretty sure Chuck Norris would qualify under the "fan-friggin-tastic" clause i sighted earlier Daniel

but how many people are Chuck Norris?

and who says you have to be a 4th to open a school? i did it as a 2nd. My instructors did it as 1st, but back then, there were no morons giving BB's to 5 year olds either,

the belt meant more back then

so, to be clear

it only takes a year -two years in KOREA, in japan it is a different story. They still have standards.

the KKW just said that they are cool with 1 year bb's right?

so either:
1- they dont care how well you know it

or

2- what they consider BB material isnt very much or very complicated.



i

Guess old Chuck Norris really must be crap! He started in 1958 and was back in the US opening a chain of dojos in 1962. Sounds like less than two years to black belt to me (I'm pretty sure that he got his in about a year). And to open a dojo in only four years.... when everyone knows that you have to be at least fourth dan to open a dojo... and that takes at least another four years.... Chuck must have been totally unqualified!!

If Chuck was crap in Way of the Dragon, then man, crap must be the new superb. I suspect that many of the MA fathers that we revere took less time than you and others claim in needed to be a "real" black belt.

Whenever things like that are mentioned, the response is always, "but that was Chuck Norris..." as if he's the exception to the rule. Actually, he isn't the exception to the rule; he simply was exceptional. Not everyone is exceptional. Not every first string college quarterback is Tim Tebow.

You do understand that karate and judo use the belt system for competition bracketing and because it made it more marketable to the Japanese school system don't you?

You also understand that the whole system of rank is lifted from a Japanese game of Reversi (popularly known as Othelo)?

The whole thing was grafted onto arts that were modern sport oriented arts that focused on personal development and competition. A black belt has absolutely zero correspondence to self defense. That is a marketing gimick made up to promote it in the US where sports like TKD, Karate, Judo, and Kendo had no chance to compete with boxing, wrestling, football, or baseball for popularity.

When the make up of US dojo student bodies were ex-military and other tough-guy adult males, the black belts were going to all be tougher guy adult males. I doubt that the school age children in Japan who were learning karate and getting black belts looked as tough as the US black belts... because the US black belts were all adult males who were inclined towards fighting before they ever stepped into the dojo.

The make up of students is much more diverse now, and belt factory schools aside, the average black belt will reflect that. The fact is that in the countries where these arts originate, getting to black belt is between a year and two years and has been since the arts were founded should tell you that you need to realign your perception of what a black belt is.

Or simply say that it takes that three to four years at your school and that other schools differ... instead of simply writing them all off as crap.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

pretty sure Chuck Norris would qualify under the "fan-friggin-tastic" clause i sighted earlier Daniel

To which I say, yes he's fantastic, but everyone else who received their black belts at the same time probably took about the same time (less than two years) and were not fantastic. As I said, Chuck was exceptional but not an exception to the rule.

but how many people are Chuck Norris?

How many people are Tim Tebow? The rest of the rookie QBs who graduated from college probably played for the same amount of time that he did; likely four to six years before high school and four years a piece in high school and college. You only get one or two Tim Tebows a year. They are exceptional players, but they are not exceptions to the rule; two different things.

A twelve year old kid with a 200 IQ who is placed into college is an exception to the rule; he or she leapfrogged most or all of middle school and all of high school. A twelve year old kid with a 200 IQ who goes through middle school and high school before going into college is exceptional, but is not being made an exception.

and who says you have to be a 4th to open a school? i did it as a 2nd.

A lot of people. By second dan, most people have not learned the entire system. A first dan in considered a beginning degree, so that makes you an exception. Which is fine, by the way; but there are plenty of people who would apply to you the same standard that you are applying to two year or less first dans.

You bust chops on the Kukkiwon, but the Kukkiwon considers fourth dan and higher to be instructor degrees. Based on your logic of time in grade, they are stricter about it than your instructors were.

That is not a slam at your ability as an instructor or to those who promoted you, by the way. Just pointing out that people could look at your own time in grade and make similar assumptions of you that you do of other TKD schools and orgs.

My instructors did it as 1st, but back then, there were no morons giving BB's to 5 year olds either,

the belt meant more back then

Did it?

I think that it is more accurate to say that the commercialization that exists today did not exist back then. Back then, a first dan was a fairly low grade and both it and the belt were used for competition bracketing. Still is on both counts, so I disagree that it meant more.

so, to be clear

it only takes a year -two years in KOREA, in japan it is a different story. They still have standards.

the KKW just said that they are cool with 1 year bb's right?

so either:
1- they dont care how well you know it

or

2- what they consider BB material isnt very much or very complicated.

Honestly, taekwondo isn't very complicated and first dan isn't at all advanced.

 

[andyjeffries]

You also understand that the whole system of rank is lifted from a Japanese game of Reversi (popularly known as Othelo)?

I'm sure you know this, but just in case others quote you in the future, it's not Japanese Reversi/Othelo, it's a separate game called Go in Japanese, Baduk in Korean or Weiqi in Chinese. It's all about survival, positioning and territory. There are a lot of sayings about military strategy that are directly applicable to Go. Reversi uses swapping over over markers when they are in between two opposite colour markers and places the markers in the squares. Go uses capturing of stones when all four liberties (intersections between lines) are covered by enemy stones (or otherwise unavailable, e.g. on the edges of the board) and places the markers on these intersections between two lines.

I started learning Go because I had a friend when I was much younger telling me how cool chess was and I read a quote saying "they're developing computer software that can beat grandmasters in chess, but they aren't even close to making one that can beat an average teenage Go player in the far east. It's like playing four games of chess simultaneously".

It's a very simple game, but lots of fun. I only ever played with friends (never ranked), but really enjoyed it (until my closest go playing friend died in a motorcycle accident - I pretty much haven't played since).

What interests me is that when they "lifted" the rank system from Go, they didn't bring it over in it's exact form. Ignoring the number of kyu (geup) before 1st Dan, Go has separate ranks for professional and amateurs (such that a 6-7th Dan Amateur may be able to compete with a 1st Dan Professional). I'm surprised they didn't keep the distinction or use a similar system where there are dan ranks for competitors and dan ranks for teachers, or something.

I understand some BJJ schools do this (white band on your belt for a competitor black belt, red if you're a teacher black belt).

Cheers,


Andy

 

[Twin Fist]

i agree, TKD isnt complicated at all really. It is the wing chun of korea.

i disagree that it meanbt less, in fank it meant MUCH more then than it does now

and actually, back then, BB was THE rank. it wasnt untill the 70's really that you even saw stripes on BB's

when i started, in 84, the six schools were all operated by 2nd's

the guy in charge of the whole org was a 4th.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I'm sure you know this, but just in case others quote you in the future, it's not Japanese Reversi/Othelo, it's a separate game called Go in Japanese, Baduk in Korean or Weiqi in Chinese.

Yes, I do, but I was going for simplicity and to point out that the system was lifted from a game and was not created for or by martial arts instructors. The belts were invented by Kano, who I believe was inspired by ribbons given out to competitive swimmers. There is no historical significance to rank belts, black or otherwise.

Also, if I am not mistaken, the judo-gi was based on the undergarments that Japanese wore under their kimono and hakama. I had also heard that the karate-gi is essentially the undergarments that Japanese wore under their kimono and hakama. I do not know if that is accurate, however.

 

[Gemini]

there were no morons giving BB's to 5 year olds either,i

Just curious, if your training included manners. I personally haven't awarded a 5 year old black belt, but would not hesitate to do so under the right circumstances. More to the point, I know people that have, that I have a great deal of respect for. Having differing opinions is always fine and while sometimes it may get passionate, I'd appreciate it if you'd drop the name calling of people you don't even know.

 

[dancingalone]

Honestly, taekwondo isn't very complicated and first dan isn't at all advanced.

I recall expressing a similar viewpoint in the past that TKD as GENERALLY TAUGHT is not a complex martial arts system. I was taken to task by some people for saying such, particularly on the ITF side, and they gave some good evidence that General Choi had formally classified all the variations of specific techniques such as the side kick and so their kicking practice at the very least has nuance to it.

I've also expressed in the past that TKD should be more than a punchy, kicky art, and that excellent TKD should contain a goodly amount of technical influences from judo and body conditioning from karate as that was the background many of the early TKD men had. No one ever disagrees in full with that statement, yet if we explore it, we should come to the conclusion that even a chodan in TKD, trained in a serious fashion complete with those methods, is not a trivial undertaking.

I suppose whether TKD is simple or whether a 1st dan is advanced or low level depends on what we think a 1st dan in TKD ought to know.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

i agree, TKD isnt complicated at all really. It is the wing chun of korea.

i disagree that it meanbt less, in fank it meant MUCH more then than it does now

and actually, back then, BB was THE rank. it wasnt untill the 70's really that you even saw stripes on BB's

when i started, in 84, the six schools were all operated by 2nd's

the guy in charge of the whole org was a 4th.

I question that it was THE rank; there were high dans by the 1970's in Korea. For one, BB is not a rank, but a representation of about ten ranks, none of which are differentiated by belt color. GM Uhm Woon Kyu who signed my KKW ildan may have been ninth dan, but his belt is the same color as my belt.

So while black belt may be THE belt, it is not a rank, though I suspect that it has always been promoted as such in the US because Americans are accustomed to education going on for a set period and then ending with a certification, from which they either persue higher certifications or use their existing certification to either pad their resume or to simply adorn their wall, their training goals having been met.

Another issue is that a good number of the servicemen who brought martial arts back to the US only were able to train up to first or second dan before returning home. As they couldn't promote any higher than a rank below their own, the highest rank in their school was one below whatever rank they held, usually first dan.

By 1980, taekwondo had been developed to a point that there was considerable material after first dan, such that a second dan would not have learned the entire system.

Part of the reason that a black belt may have 'meant more' in 1984 is simply because there were not that many of them and the general population didn't know what a black belt entailed. I can tell you that when I started training, I was told that first dan was only the beginning, and I started training in the seventies.

I will conceed that the level of commercialization that exists today did not exist in 1984, but it was already well underway by then. I will also conceed that the quanity of belt factories was much lower at that time. By the mid to late eighties, the modern commercial dojo/dojang was well established and there were many of them. I trained in one called 'Kim's Karate' in Rockville in 1988. That school would have fit right in with modern schools, allowing for differences in forms and sparring between schools of differing federations.

Honestly, anyone could get just as hung up on you having been only a second dan running a school as you do on schools issuing black belts to children. And you could give them all of the explanations in the world to justify it, but if they cannot get past the grade of second dan, then nothing that you would have said to them would have mattered. As I understand you are fourth or fifth dan now, which are considered instructor ranks and would raise no eyebrows.

A lot of it is a matter of perspective. You're more concerned about what qualifies as a first dan holder. Personally, I'm more concerned about what qualifies as an instructor, due to things that I encountered in the last school where I trained. Who is wearing what color belts concerns me less; it simply tells me where they are in the curriculum.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I recall expressing a similar viewpoint in the past that TKD as GENERALLY TAUGHT is not a complex martial arts system. I was taken to task by some people for saying such, particularly on the ITF side, and they gave some good evidence that General Choi had formally classified all the variations of specific techniques such as the side kick and so their kicking practice at the very least has nuance to it.

The Kukkiwon has similar nuances to kicks and strikes, but that doesn't make it complicated. When I said 'complicated' to Twin Fist, I was speaking of the complexity of individual techniques. A side kick is not complicated. Getting it right and and doing it well takes practice, but the mechanics are not particularly complicated. Most kicks that are difficult are difficult because they require a degree of athleticism that is difficult for most people to attain, but that does not make them complicated.

I've also expressed in the past that TKD should be more than a punchy, kicky art, and that excellent TKD should contain a goodly amount of technical influences from judo and body conditioning from karate as that was the background many of the early TKD men had. No one ever disagrees in full with that statement, yet if we explore it, we should come to the conclusion that even a chodan in TKD, trained in a serious fashion complete with those methods, is not a trivial undertaking.

Depends on how you structure the curriculum. If you have punchy kicky in colored belts and don't introduce throws and locks until first dan, then there would be little difference. However, the average time to BB in hapkido from feedback that I have received is that it is pretty much in line with what is seen in taekwondo; two years on average in the states. I could be wrong, as that is feedback that I have personally received, not hard data. But given that hapkido actually has more kicks than TKD, I don't see where TKD with some grappling would be radically longer to first dan.

I suppose whether TKD is simple or whether a 1st dan is advanced or low level depends on what we think a 1st dan in TKD ought to know.

Well, if dan grades go up to ninth or tenth dan and it takes over thirty five years to get to ninth and over forty to get to tenth dan, then it really doesn't matter what you think TKD ought to be; first dan is still very early on in the grading structure, even if it takes you six years to get there. From first dan to sixth dan, you are looking at approximately fifteen years of training. So regardless of what you are including in taekwondo, I consider first dan to be a beginning dan. You used the term, "Chodan" above. Does not chodan mean 'beginning dan?'