Another ATA 5 year old black belt

[puunui]

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.

Right, those servicemen who went overseas to study martial arts generally received their 1st dan in about one year of training. They enjoyed martial arts training and so when they left, they started their own schools, as 1st Dan "black belts". But their problem was how to promote their students. They did not have sufficient rank to promote to dan levels, so they began to lengthen the time required for promotion. If and when their students questioned their own one year promotions, fantastic stories of 8-10 hour training, seven days per week started coming out. Hence, the urban legend that black belt that takes 5 or more years to earn, when in fact, it took one year of ordinary training, and still does.

 

[dancingalone]

Half of MDK joined the KKW. The half that didn't was tang soo do so far as I know, which is not taekwondo, but Korean karate.

Not sure how this group ended up calling themselves Moo Duk Kwan Tae Kwon Do but that's what their name was. It was all over their uniform patches. As far as their curriculum, it was pretty much what I think of when Tang Soo Do comes up in conversation. Japanese forms executed with TSD variations, big emphasis on hip twist and reverse hip twist.

Though if they have new material up to fifth dan, and assuming that fifth dan is roughly ten years after chodan, then that sounds like a pretty substantial amount of material. So yes, I would still consider chodan to be a beginning dan and a fairly low rank.

Daniel, where the difference comes in is that these guys had very high standards for awarding their black belts. So 'beginning' dan rank or not, their chodans looked like black belts in every sense of the term. They didn't give their students any slack because 1st dan is the first dan rank.

 

[puunui]

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 don't know about the judo part, since that is a separate art, but there is body conditioning, in the form of hogu drills. Hogu drills toughen one's body to take blows and you also learn to minimize the effects of hard blows, while being a good training partner.

 

[mastercole]

I had in mind a Moo Duk Kwan Tae Kwon Do group that was active in Texas and Oklahoma in the seventies and eighties. Not sure if they are around any more though I know some guys from that group have moved onto other affiliations. In any case, this group had no new material after 4th or 5th dan. The master level material were Korean versions of the Japanese karate forms like Sip Soo and Kong Sang Koon.

Might be folks from GM Jack Hwang. A friend of mine in OK visits GM Hwang from time to time and has interesting conversations with him. GM Hwang signed the document that formed the WTF as USA representative, along with GM Ed Sell. I used to practice that set of hyung; pyongahn, chulki, balsaek, sipsoo, ohshipsabo, kongsangkun, etc. Some instructors do add additional sets of forms to their higher dan curriculum. The ones I know who do so told me they need something else to teach the higher dans to keep them motivated. I understand this, but then, it's not for me. When I was in Europe with GM Dae Sung Lee of Hawaii he asked to follow me through Bassai-dai, he always liked that form and also wanted to teach it to his students. GM Lee was a very good fighter and he is also excellent at forms. He figured Bassai-dai out in a day, and the next day he was performing it amazing, like he has done it for 30 years.

Anyway, I think that that current material learned is simple a gate into deeper learning, learning that takes the rest of our life. No need arrive/discover another gate that I might not ever enter, especially if I have not already entered the existing gates that I have already discovered the opening. This is why I tell my Dan holders "dig deeper" and "grind fine." Nothing I came up with myself, something that was said to me some time ago.

 

[dancingalone]

There seems to be to much concern in regard to learning a curriculum or system of a martial art. It do not think the real value is in the curriculum or system, I feel it is in the exploration of technique and subsequent application of the techniques.

To many people can demonstrate 1-30 of this, and 1-50 of that, and all the forms in this or that, but have no real evolution in skills. Evolution in actual technical skill and application skill to me, is the greater learning.

Precisely.

 

[Twin Fist]

TKD IS a simple art, but you might not know it if you hadnt studied other arts.

kajukembo is MUCH more complex and EPAK is like nuclear physics compared to TKD

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.

 

[andyjeffries]

Everyone has their own idea of what a "black belt" is. All instructors have their own standards and also their own reasons for promoting someone to "black belt". Where the disagreements come about is when someone uses their own standards or their organization's standards to judge the legitimacy of someone's promotion who is outside their organization, instructor, or even style. How fair is it to judge a judo rank, from a taekwondo perspective?

I've been thinking about this a fair bit recently, regarding judging other Taekwondoin's rank.

When I see someone of a particular rank I used to think "they aren't worth X dan!". Recently this has changed in my mind to be reworded slightly as "I wouldn't have given them X dan based on that performance". Loss of exclamation mark and a slight softening of the wording. This is significant to me because I feel it means that I've changed from purely judgemental of other masters' decisions to considering more what I feel a certain rank/person should demonstrate (solidifying in my head about how I will promote students to those ranks). Also with the addition of the "based on that performance" I'm also giving a subtle nudge that it's not necessarily always about an objective level, but a subjective increase for that student and progression down a path.

This change may not seem much to others, but to me it feels like a subtle changing in my viewpoint that I like.

 

[puunui]

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.'

It takes about one year to earn a Hapkido 1st dan in Korea, same as a taekwondo 1st poom/dan. Personally, I don't really see what the big deal is over a 1st dan or 1st poom.

 

[puunui]

I am the same way in that I strive to completely understand Taekwondo and not go searching outside of Taekwondo looking for things to "complete" it, it's already complete, I just need to study deeply to find it.

I used to do that, try to study all these other arts in an effort to make taekwondo more "complete". But I abandoned that approach when I began gaining access to high level seniors and teachers and pioneers and information. Today, there is so much information that is freely given that there really is no need for anyone in kukki taekwondo to go outside their art for "completion". It's all there for the taking and studying. Instead, people still want to fight it. I really don't understand that.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

If we're talking about TKD with close range methods added, perhaps it never truly existed under the name of 'taekwondo'. I reference what was known about the early TKD men where it is said a bunch of them trained judo as well, such as the accounts of GM Chun, Sang Sup studying judo in high school and then later teaching karate/tkd to judo practitioners at one of the gymnasiums in Seoul (slipped my mind). There are other examples surely.

So if as TKD became organized and codified, it would seem like these founders did not necessarily pass on everything they knew and learned to their creation. Regardless, this is what I mean when I speak about old school TKD as practiced by the founders - strong karate enhanced by the addition of powerful Korean kicking as well as grappling methods received through judo.

Given that taekwondo has been codified in pretty much its current form for over forty five years and the founders transitioned from whatever they were doing before to create taekwondo, I would have a hard time calling the early stuff 'old school taekwondo.' Given that the Kukkiwon does not limit what one teaches to just their curriculum, a modern school could still teach precisely what you describe above with regards to the grappling from judo and maybe some karate forms in addition to the core curriculum and it would be perfectly acceptable.

Well I mentioned the Moo Duk Kwan TKD group above... There's also the 'Texkwondo' Jhoon Rhee system I personally trained in. You pretty much had learned everything by 2nd dan in the style, except for a few dan forms (we didn't use all the Chang Hon forms - maybe 4 of the dan hyung in addition to the color belt forms as well as learning a few Japanese forms).

Well, after first dan in the Kukkiwon, you learn a few new Korean forms, but when I had trained I learned the vast majority of the technical material in the geub grades. I continued training and learned Koryo and then was taught keum gang, and ultimately received dojo-dans for my second and third dans, but was never KKW certified and really only consider myself to be an ildan.

Even though my former GM tasked me with teaching taekwondo, I consider myself unqualified to do so. Part of the reason that I left was because I was not receiving training anymore; I would show up to train and was handed the class. The trend seemed to be the same for other students who stayed on much past first dan. By the time I left, he had twelve year old first and second pums teaching adult classes. Nice kids, and very good practitioners. But not ready to teach in my opinion.

 

[andyjeffries]

Personally, I don't think 1st Poom/Dan should be teaching anyone anything. They should be focused primarily on their own learning and development. There is plenty of time to get into teaching later down the path. Same for 2nd Poom/Dan.

I knew we'd disagree on that one ;-)

I no longer feel that it's right for 1st/2nd Dans to run their own clubs. I ran a club as a 2nd Dan and with hindsight was nowhere near ready. That said, if people want to run clubs as 1st/2nd Dan that's their business, but I wouldn't push a student of mine in to it. However, I do think they should be getting some partial experience in teaching at Dan level. The reason is that I spent quite a while helping my Grandmaster with teaching others and talking about teaching. I learnt so much during that period on how to teach. I think it helped shape me in to a better teacher than I would have been without.

I'd like my students when they reach Dan level to have practice at teaching before they open their own club.

Out of interest, do the senior masters/grandmasters on here specifically put effort in to teaching their Dan level students how to teach? At what grade does this take place and in what form? Or do you just give them a nudge when they get to 4th Dan with no real teaching experience in to running their own club?

I've obviously had my path which feels like it works for me and want to pass that on to my students. I may change this over time, but that's my feelings based on my current thoughts.

 

[andyjeffries]

Give it time. You may change your views soon enough, or at least understand why other instructors promote quicker than you are used to. Also, I believe kukki taekwondo calls it il dan now, and has retired the cho dan terminology.

I've always heard it referred to as Ildan. Chodan for me would seem like a throwback to the Japanese term Shodan, it feels weird to hear 1st Dan referred to as chodan to my ears.

 

[puunui]

I've been thinking about this a fair bit recently, regarding judging other Taekwondoin's rank.

When I see someone of a particular rank I used to think "they aren't worth X dan!". Recently this has changed in my mind to be reworded slightly as "I wouldn't have given them X dan based on that performance". Loss of exclamation mark and a slight softening of the wording. This is significant to me because I feel it means that I've changed from purely judgemental of other masters' decisions to considering more what I feel a certain rank/person should demonstrate (solidifying in my head about how I will promote students to those ranks). Also with the addition of the "based on that performance" I'm also giving a subtle nudge that it's not necessarily always about an objective level, but a subjective increase for that student and progression down a path.

This change may not seem much to others, but to me it feels like a subtle changing in my viewpoint that I like.

That's good. That's progress. You don't want to be thinking the same thoughts for your whole life.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Not sure how this group ended up calling themselves Moo Duk Kwan Tae Kwon Do but that's what their name was. It was all over their uniform patches. As far as their curriculum, it was pretty much what I think of when Tang Soo Do comes up in conversation. Japanese forms executed with TSD variations, big emphasis on hip twist and reverse hip twist.

Sounds like Korean karate. Probably a lot of fun too!

Daniel, where the difference comes in is that these guys had very high standards for awarding their black belts. So 'beginning' dan rank or not, their chodans looked like black belts in every sense of the term. They didn't give their students any slack because 1st dan is the first dan rank.

Not sure where giving slack came up, but I will say that different arts will have different standards. Given that the belts' primary usage is for competition bracketing within age, weight, and gender groups in ATA taekwondo (specifying as this is an ATA thread), there really is no comparison between ATA TKD and TSD.

As for the Kukkiwon, they do not issue a dan grade to practitioners under fifteen and the organization does not utilize black belts for those 14 and under practitioners (though many KKW schools in the states issue them anyway). 14 and under practitioners are issued a pum grade and a pum belt (black/red). Belts in KKW TKD are also mainly for competition bracketing within age, weight and gender groups.

 

[puunui]

Out of interest, do the senior masters/grandmasters on here specifically put effort in to teaching their Dan level students how to teach? At what grade does this take place and in what form? Or do you just give them a nudge when they get to 4th Dan with no real teaching experience in to running their own club?

Being around until 4th Dan, you naturally will see teaching perspectives. I do believe that 3rd Dan should assist in teaching responsibilities, such that when they go out on their own, at 4th Dan, they have that experience. It is during the 3rd dan period that the assistant instructor starts thinking about how they will keep this, or change that, or get rid of this in favor of that, etc. Then at 4th Dan, they get to test their own theories out on their own students. When students open their own dojang, I as a general rule give them complete freedom to do and teach however they want. They can always come and ask, but they don't I generally keep my mouth shut and let them figure it out for themselves. Again, I am not into micromanaging or controlling my students. As 4th Dan, they can and should exercise their own freedom and judgment on how to do things. Similarly, when you start your own family, your parents leave you alone and you raise your kids as you see fit. Same thing. Ultimately, the martial arts, and life is about freedom, making choices, learning from those choices, and living with the consequences of those choices.

 

[mastercole]

Not sure how this group ended up calling themselves Moo Duk Kwan Tae Kwon Do but that's what their name was. It was all over their uniform patches. As far as their curriculum, it was pretty much what I think of when Tang Soo Do comes up in conversation. Japanese forms executed with TSD variations, big emphasis on hip twist and reverse hip twist.

GM Hwang Kee joined Moo Duk Kwan into the Kwan unification, creating "Taekwondo Moo Duk Kwan" only to get upset because he was not selected as the leader and resigned the KTA. When he did so, only about 20% of Moo Duk Kwan followed him, the other 80% or so stayed in the KTA as "Taekwondo Moo Duk Kwan" following GM Hwang's senior student, GM HONG Chong Soo.

So some Moo Duk Kwan members in the USA followed Taekwondo Moo Duk Kwan in whole, or in name only. So we see folks with the Taekwondo Moo Duk Kwan patch, practicing what we would call "Tang Soo Do".

Daniel, where the difference comes in is that these guys had very high standards for awarding their black belts. So 'beginning' dan rank or not, their chodans looked like black belts in every sense of the term. They didn't give their students any slack because 1st dan is the first dan rank.

Myself, I don't know if I would call their standards high, I think I would call them strict. To me, a high standard would be a correctness of technique, compared to a standard, and back then, especially in the USA, most everyone, Korean and non-Korean lacked correctness of standard. In earlier cases, the standard was still being set, so it was whatever goes. Being strict was adhering to "whatever goes" at the time.

 

[dancingalone]

Given that taekwondo has been codified in pretty much its current form for over forty five years and the founders transitioned from whatever they were doing before to create taekwondo, I would have a hard time calling the early stuff 'old school taekwondo.'

I wouldn't. I respect and honor ALL of the knowledge the people that created taekwondo had as it played a role no matter how small, no matter if it is not taught in the main now. It is their complete personal experiences that made them who they are in the first place.

Given that the Kukkiwon does not limit what one teaches to just their curriculum, a modern school could still teach precisely what you describe above with regards to the grappling from judo and maybe some karate forms in addition to the core curriculum and it would be perfectly acceptable.

Certainly. I do not question this.

Well, after first dan in the Kukkiwon, you learn a few new Korean forms, but when I had trained I learned the vast majority of the technical material in the geub grades. I continued training and learned Koryo and then was taught keum gang, and ultimately received dojo-dans for my second and third dans, but was never KKW certified and really only consider myself to be an ildan.

Even though my former GM tasked me with teaching taekwondo, I consider myself unqualified to do so. Part of the reason that I left was because I was not receiving training anymore; I would show up to train and was handed the class. The trend seemed to be the same for other students who stayed on much past first dan. By the time I left, he had twelve year old first and second pums teaching adult classes. Nice kids, and very good practitioners. But not ready to teach in my opinion.

<Nods>

 

[mastercole]

I've been thinking about this a fair bit recently, regarding judging other Taekwondoin's rank.

When I see someone of a particular rank I used to think "they aren't worth X dan!". Recently this has changed in my mind to be reworded slightly as "I wouldn't have given them X dan based on that performance". Loss of exclamation mark and a slight softening of the wording. This is significant to me because I feel it means that I've changed from purely judgemental of other masters' decisions to considering more what I feel a certain rank/person should demonstrate (solidifying in my head about how I will promote students to those ranks). Also with the addition of the "based on that performance" I'm also giving a subtle nudge that it's not necessarily always about an objective level, but a subjective increase for that student and progression down a path.

This change may not seem much to others, but to me it feels like a subtle changing in my viewpoint that I like.

This is true, and I don't personally know the struggles a student of another instructor went through, or the struggles of that instructor to get that student to their current point. Therefore I can not judge them.

Now if it is a student from another school that comes to train with us, I see they have great ability, but was never taught skill, I know there was something wrong, but who knows exactly what it was that was wrong.

 

[dancingalone]

Given that the belts' primary usage is for competition bracketing within age, weight, and gender groups in ATA taekwondo (specifying as this is an ATA thread), there really is no comparison between ATA TKD and TSD.

No, it's not. Although competing is encouraged, many ATA students don't attend tournaments at all. Like with most martial arts schools today, TKD or not, ATA or not, the belt rank is used to designate knowledge of curriculum and there is a certain connotation of proficiency attached as well.

As for the Kukkiwon, they do not issue a dan grade to practitioners under fifteen and the organization does not utilize black belts for those 14 and under practitioners (though many KKW schools in the states issue them anyway). 14 and under practitioners are issued a pum grade and a pum belt (black/red). Belts in KKW TKD are also mainly for competition bracketing within age, weight and gender groups.

I really wonder how that idea is so proliferate in your perspective. The school I purchased follows KKW guidelines. They don't compete at all in AAU or USAT tournaments. The belts are there to represent progression in the curriculum and in taekwondo in general.

 

[puunui]

Half of MDK joined the KKW. The half that didn't was tang soo do so far as I know, which is not taekwondo, but Korean karate.

Way more than half. I would say 90%, if not more went with Taekwondo. The Moo Duk Kwan was organized differently than other kwan, which were much more top down type organizations. Instead, the Moo Duk Kwan had a board of directors which voted on decisions, and that board voted to go with the KTA back in 1965. GM HWANG Kee disagreed with that, but what could he do. He was outvoted by the Moo Duk Kwan membership.

Same with the ITF and General Choi. More than 90% of the seniors in the ITF left. Neither the Soobahkdo Hwe nor the ITF compared favorably in terms of size to kukki taekwondo. Instead of a USA vs. Russia superpower battle, it was more like Cuba vs. USA.