Can there be a Universal Black Belt?

[lklawson]

Sure.

I believe that there is a core way of doing most things like punching and kicking.

The evidence contradicts your belief. There are marked differences between a Thai shin-kick, a MMA "cut kick," a Savate fouette, a Tang Soo Do dulryo chagi, and most every other "round house kick" from differing styles.

I believe this core way is in line with what is mandated by physics. I believe that different arts, styles and systems flavor that core one way or the other. I believe it would be great if everyone understood the core way clearly before they started training some flavor. Mind you, I think these basis could be learned relatively quickly, but would be great to know that everyone in the room understands what we can effectively demonstrate based on physics and not building fanciful ideas, arts, styles and systems on things they could never demonstrate realistically (but here again I was rooted in the idea that Martial Arts were for learning combative measures one might actually need to use one day).

It would be "great" but it would also be impossible because your base assumption is wrong.

For example, this kind of training could prevent things like;

Why would you want to "prevent things like this"???

and what I see at most schools similar to this;

I find that exceptionally hard to believe. Even at the bad schools I've visited, they're commonly way better than what you have represented here.

 

[geezer]

Jason, as you can surmise from my previous response to the OP, I think the idea of a "Universal Black Belt" is pretty far fetched for all of the reasons enumerated by so many others. However, I do agree with the idea that there are many core principles that are found throughout the martial arts. However, they are manifest in such diverse, even contradictory ways that your idea of a universal Black Belt becomes an impossibility.

Still, you could benefit from studying the basics of a handful of iconic styles which might be very generally representative of the major kinds of arts practiced around the world. Perhaps you could explore how certain core concepts such as balance, movement, speed, power generation, focus and transition, etc. are expressed in each, as well as strategy, objectives, attitude and philosophy of combat.

You might choose a selection of percussive or striking arts, including, for example Okinawan Te, Japanese Shotokan, a Korean art like TKD, Northern Chinese Chang Chuan, A short-bridge, Southern Chinese art like Wing Chun, at least one "internal" combat art like Chen Village Taiji, and something from SE Asia like Silat, perhaps a bit of Indian Kaliripayat and some competative arts such as Muay Thai and Western Boxing. You should also experience a smattering of Eastern and Western grappling, throwing and Joint locking arts. At the very least Judo, Bjj, Some Catch Wrestling and Shuai-Chiao for grappling, and then a bit of Chinese Chin-na, and maybesome Japanese Daito Ryu Aiki-Jujutsu for locks?

Oh, and there's weapons to consider. You could sample classical Japanese Kenjutsu and Kendo, Some Chinese work with Gim and Dao, ...definitely try Filipino Escrima, and also historical Western Swordsmanship ...some basic broadsword and rapier work, for example.


Now of course this is a lot of stuff, even just to cover the basics with any quality. For a "sampler" course, I'd suggest a minimum of four years, full-time study, five days a week plussome serious time doing homework and research, just like earning a BA or BS degree in a demanding field. Now, I admit that even after four or more years, this training would be so broad, that your knowledge would be ..."a mile wide and an inch deep" but still very worthwhile. You could call your degree a...

UNIVERSAL WHITE BELT!!!

 

[Gentle Fist]

As someone who has obtained the rank of Shodan or higher in 3 different styles (Judo,Jujutsu,Ke?po) I will simply state that it will never happen. There is no one walking the earth that knows the name of every martial arts style from memory, let alone be proficient enough to teach and master all of them...

Unless... you can find a way to download all of them into your mind like in the Matrix!

Neo: I Know... Kung Fu
Morpheus: Show me

(fight scene)

 

[jasonbrinn]

it's because you never dedicated enough time and effort to advance in rank in any traditional martial art. You feel that this reflects badly on you, so you overcompensate for it in other ways.

Sorry Smith - I spent 13 years training relentlessly in Karate to earn my first BB, which I now have a 3rd degree in approaching 4th here soon). I also spent 13 years in Daito ryu obtaining another BB and a 2nd degree. So no, Professor Green did not do it in the library with the wrench.

Why? Why will we have to take your word for it about either the legends that you hinted at, or the fact that you don't lie? None of us know you except by the reputation which you've garnered here on this forum, and that reputation does not presuppose anyone to excessive trust.

Sorry you feel that you were able to obtain this from forum posts on the interwebs.

Somewhat. I find the cultural references and requirements fascinating myself. Self defense and martial arts are two entirely seperate things. All of my self defense situations (and there were a number of them) came well before I began learning martial arts. One does NOT necessarily require the other. Of the people that I know who have had to actually defend themselves in a life or death situation, very few of them were martial artists.

I have had to defend myself more than once and my training is exactly what got me through it alive.

That is an incredibly flawed bit of logic there. Nobody except for you has said that any art is 'wrong'. You asked for opinions on your ideas, but got upset and argumentative when every single one of those opinions you asked for told you that your ideas were flawed. Nobody (except you) said anything about any arts being wrong. For you to throw that up there as justification for your flawed ideas is bordering on ridiculous.

It was a suggestion based on the logic behind the attacks against my idea and YES I agree it is incredibly flawed.

Last point: I only got "upset" when Captain Chris came riding in pointing out how he knows so much and we all need to here him cause we's is wrong.

 

[jasonbrinn]

Just for morbid curiousity, how long would it take to get this "universal" black belt? As the time range for obtaining a black belt varies depending on the system, from roughly two years to over a decade, is the idea that you would have to train for an additional period of time, prior to the style's own time line for black belt, or would this some how "fast track" your learning? Big problems with either scenario.

Awesome and thanks for playing along Frank (imagine that someone open to discussing a different idea instead of jumping down its throat first)!

I think the time to get the belt would be the time it took to get the material and demonstrate it effectively (tests). No exceptions.

How would you devise a curriculum for this "universal" black belt for students of two very popular arts, Tae Kwon Do and Judo? How much commonality do you see between the two arts that you could devise a curriculum that would significantly benefit both arts, without subtracting or adding extraneous elements to them?

While talking with the group of "legends" the idea that each respective Master would give the absolute minimum for their arts. Like a knife master gives top three things, judo master gives top three things and so on. These Masters would serve on the board that backs up the certifications. The curriculum would be designed not to overlap yet fit together to develop a nice well rounded base.

Once a student has obtained this "universal" blackbelt, what is there to stop them from opening a club and teaching, despite the fact that they have no grounding in any particular art? Do you see this as something that would heighten the percieved value of a black belt, or lessen it, as it would be looked upon as a junior belt, similar to what is given to kids in some systems?

There would be nothing from stopping them nor should there be. The fact is though WE all would KNOW exactly what they are teaching and their level and the buyer could be
WELL INFORMED!

Lastly - this was an idea and a fun discussion amongst Masters of the like I will probably never will be that I got to sit in on. I thought it would be fun to share and kick around not stomp into the ground and treated as if I know nothing for even suggesting the concept. Funny thing is that compared to the guys actually having the discussion getting talked down to by someone online like Chris is actually vey amusing

Thanks again,


Jason Brinn

 

[Chris Parker]

Sorry Smith - I spent 13 years training relentlessly in Karate to earn my first BB, which I now have a 3rd degree in approaching 4th here soon). I also spent 13 years in Daito ryu obtaining another BB and a 2nd degree. So no, Professor Green did not do it in the library with the wrench.

This is the Daito Ryu you only trained at seminars in....?

Here's the thing, Jason. If everyone looking at the way you present something, especially those who focus on the more traditional arts, all see huge problems with the way you address things, then don't be surprised when your training is questioned as well. It really seems that any of the actual training has almost bypassed you completely, and all you've done is look at mechanical methods and "techniques", missing the martial arts that are meant to be passed through them.

Sorry you feel that you were able to obtain this from forum posts on the interwebs.

We can only go on the way you present yourself, Jason.

I have had to defend myself more than once and my training is exactly what got me through it alive.

Honestly, that's a case of post hoc ergo propter hoc (after it therefore because of it). Happy that you got out okay, but that doesn't necessarily follow that martial arts are about self defence, or even that there's a huge correlation between your martial training and your getting out safe. The only way we could know that definitively would be to put you in the same situation without any martial art training, but such a control group experiment is impossible.

It was a suggestion based on the logic behind the attacks against my idea and YES I agree it is incredibly flawed.

There was logic behind the criticisms of your idea (not attacks, Jason... I could do that if you wanted, though), and your "suggestion" was really a failed attempt at trying to link ideas that had no relationship.

Last point: I only got "upset" when Captain Chris came riding in pointing out how he knows so much and we all need to here him cause we's is wrong.

Now, I could take offense at that.... but, for the record, I didn't come in here pointing out "how much I know", or insisting that everyone needs to listen to me because you're all wrong... you're the only one that's been wrong in this thread. From the OP onwards. And believe me, I haven't gone through a tenth of what I know about why your idea is totally unfeasible, so I've hardly pointed out "how much I know".

Could you perhaps try to answer the criticisms, or the questions rather than just complain that no-one thinks your idea is a good one? Try to back it up, or provide some reason, or evidence as to why you think all martial arts can have a universal black belt program, equally applicable to all? Say, by answering the questions I had on punching?

 

[jasonbrinn]

Fair enough Chris.


Understand that just because you reject my premises does not mean I have not answered ALL of the questions posed (whether in general or specifically).

Fact is I was a SUPER traditional person for almost half of my martial arts history to date (15 years plus). After getting my first BB in Karate after 13 years of straight training I moved to a new city for work. There I started training Shorinji ryu, Okinawan Kobudo and Tai Chi Chuan. I stayed until reaching BB candidate in Shorinji ryu and Kobudo and completed my Tai Chi Chuan training before shipping out in the military.

I came to where I am by asking questions, training with everyone I could and fighting with the ideas presented. I have ONLY cared about Martial Arts from the perspective of how they can help me with self defense and survival. I have all the culture and religious influence I need with my faith.

In terms of Physics there are only certain valid options to choose. I base all of my techniques against scientific training and testing and re-training and more testing. In the end I take the things that work the highest percentage of time and follow the training methods that achieve the most productive and efficient results.

To determine the "best" punch in my world you take ALL the punches and put them in a test. The testing is done against what you want to strike. Since I focus on self defense only, I want to strike the human body. With anatomy we know there are good spots to hit with a fist and then there are not so good spots. Now that we have the striking areas defined we strike with all of the punches and measure a) damage we receive by punching and b) damage we deliver. When you take the results you have one or two that stand out. Out of the one or two I choose the most versatile punch and start training it. While this is not the most perfect process it does deliver the highest yielding percentage shots - which is what I bet on.

If you had to run out into the woods and you could only grab three things you would choose the tools that you can use in the most situations and especially the most critical need areas such as survival.

There may very well be 40 different ways and types of punches, but I really only need to train one to an above average level to be more effective than most. If you are going to shoot aim for the body.

A saying I use all the time when teaching BJJ is "position before submission." You have to earn the right to use any technique, method or concept. What gets you there and even takes you through is balance, power, speed, focus, timing, etc. Things like these are generic to everyone - the same laws apply. I focus on trying to perfect these basic elements and mastering a few tool sets that can be used in many incidences. This has proven itself for me and my students across many real world circumstances.

While I appreciate you Chris, I don't appreciate the personal jabs at me. You talk about me not addressing the ideas I put forth while you make tongue in cheek remarks in weak attempts to besmirch my training personally. You have basically called me a liar and or fraud on numerous occasions while you can be found across this entire website making "expert" remarks on more topics and disciplines then I have life to type in here now.

If you didn't like the idea then you could have just said you didn't and left it at that like Steve did.

Thanks again for making me question why I even bother to post here in the first place.


Jason Brinn

 

[K-man]

Amazing! I close my eyes for 7 hours, go to training, open up MT and it's all over, done and dusted. Five pages no less!

Well, I have to put in my two bobs worth. I tried to look at it from Jason's perspective. What is common to all the martial arts? I figured that if I could get that part sorted then you could have a base so after 'x' amount of study we have our generic black belt. Now, if the course is three or four years full time study we should come out of it with a bit of practical knowledge, so, just as we have Bachelor of Science (Chiropractic) we could have Bachelor of Martial Arts (Karate) etc. So far so good.

(Wonderful thread! In combines at least three threads that I can think of. 'What is a Martial Artist', 'Frankenstein systems' and 'Sport or Self Defence'.)

The basic course could be like the accreditation courses we have here. For example I have certificates in 'Fitness' and 'Sport (Coaching)'. We could include things like nutrition and lifestyle but at the end of the day, full time I have about six months of course content. So I go back to look for the base knowledge that is common to all martial arts .... Mmm!

OK! I couldn't think of much there except meditation and Mushin. Never mind, within the faculty we will have departments for Karate, Aikido, Kung Fu, Ninjutsu, TKD, Muay Thai, etc. I could just go to Chris' list but it probably was a bit light on. His list didn't even include Systema, Krav or Capoiera, let alone BJJ.

Now for our Karate division. We will need to separate Okinawan Karate from Japanese Karate as they have evolved into vastly different animals. Within the Okinawan school I think we might have some common threads. And, maybe the Japanese styles have a bit in common. Now Aikido. Ok we have lots of techniques in common but the basic stances are totally different between styles. One style is not going to convince the others to change, especially when something works for them. So, maybe we could distil our Aikido down to three departments. This is really starting to get difficult.

Hang on a minute! I forgot to ask. Why do we want this basic black belt? We will need schools bigger than Universities to cater for all the different styles and at the end of the day we will have different qualifications, just like now.

Sorry Jason, the idea is not in the least bit viable. :asian:

Oh! And in real life, Chris is actually a nice guy! :cheers:

 

[Chris Parker]

Fair enough Chris.

Right.

Understand that just because you reject my premises does not mean I have not answered ALL of the questions posed (whether in general or specifically).

We'll come back to this, but straight away, no you haven't.

Fact is I was a SUPER traditional person for almost half of my martial arts history to date (15 years plus). After getting my first BB in Karate after 13 years of straight training I moved to a new city for work. There I started training Shorinji ryu, Okinawan Kobudo and Tai Chi Chuan. I stayed until reaching BB candidate in Shorinji ryu and Kobudo and completed my Tai Chi Chuan training before shipping out in the military.

I'll say a couple of things here. Firstly, I wasn't asking for your history, but thanks. Next, a black belt in karate isn't necessarily any kind of indication of being a "super traditional" person/martial artist, so I'm not sure if anything there was meant to prove anything, mainly as your posts (here and elsewhere) indicate that, if that was the case, you've forgotten everything from then.

I came to where I am by asking questions, training with everyone I could and fighting with the ideas presented. I have ONLY cared about Martial Arts from the perspective of how they can help me with self defense and survival. I have all the culture and religious influence I need with my faith.

Which contradicts your previous claim of being a "super traditional person", really. Which is it? You were a traditional minded martial artist, or you were only concerned with what you considered effective? They aren't really the same thing. And as far as you having "all the culture and religious influence you need", wow have you missed the point. And where has the religious thing come from? You do tend to keep adding things in randomly...

In terms of Physics there are only certain valid options to choose. I base all of my techniques against scientific training and testing and re-training and more testing. In the end I take the things that work the highest percentage of time and follow the training methods that achieve the most productive and efficient results.

As I said earlier, physics is not the actual primary influence that you should be looking at to see how off your idea is. And really, your idea there is more about biomechanics that physics anyway, but it's still not that. But, for fun, let's deal with the rest of this comment.

Do you really think that you're the only one to have a "scientific" approach to combative disciplines? Dude, I know arts that have been doing that for 500 years. They actually describe their technical repertoire in terms of scientific mechanical principles. But more to the point, what kind of testing? After all, you've stated that you don't have any sparring, only doing set drills and the like (and trained unnamed fighters to MMA success in that method), so how are you ensuring that what you're doing actually works? Then again, if it's for self defence, rather than competition, what are you doing, going out and getting into fights to test new theories?

Basically what I'm saying is that, based on the priorities that you've stated, and the approach you take, I can't see any form of testing that is actually what would be seen as a scientific approach, or even able to render a definitive result one way or another.

To determine the "best" punch in my world you take ALL the punches and put them in a test. The testing is done against what you want to strike. Since I focus on self defense only, I want to strike the human body. With anatomy we know there are good spots to hit with a fist and then there are not so good spots. Now that we have the striking areas defined we strike with all of the punches and measure a) damage we receive by punching and b) damage we deliver. When you take the results you have one or two that stand out. Out of the one or two I choose the most versatile punch and start training it. While this is not the most perfect process it does deliver the highest yielding percentage shots - which is what I bet on.

Except that that's a highly flawed concept.

A number of years ago there was a National Geographic program on martial arts (Fight Science)... and in it, they did exactly that. They got a bunch of different practitioners from different arts to see who had the most powerful punch, who had the most powerful kick, and so on. And at the end, they gave a list of who had the "best" so they could make up the "best" possible collection of martial arts techniques. They decided that the boxers punch was the strongest, the muay Thai knee was the most powerful leg strike, a turning TKD kick was the most powerful "full" kick, a "ninjutsu" (the guy used had no connection to the art itself, a complete fail on Nat Geo's part) hammerfist was the most devastating hand strike, and so on. Except that if you tried the muay Thai knee, or the "ninja" hammerfist, or the TKD kick from a boxers posture, they wouldn't work. By the same token, if you were set up for throwing TKD kicks, the boxers punch would be severely reduced in power as well.

What I'm saying is that, whatever you choose, it can't be in isolation, choosing just a punch, then presumably just a front kick, then a turning kick, then an elbow, and so on. It needs to be congruent and all work together, otherwise none of it will work, as each of the different elements will work against each other, and you end up with a dozen things that work in their contexts taken out of their contexts.

Really, though, the reason I asked is that if you said you were picking a horizontal (flat) fist, then I'd be pointing out that in about half the striking arts out there, that wouldn't match their punching methods, which are vertical fists. There would also be the question of if the punch is corkscrewed on the way out, some will, some will do it partway, some won't at all. In short, no matter what you came up with, it would only match the smallest percentage of martial arts.

If you had to run out into the woods and you could only grab three things you would choose the tools that you can use in the most situations and especially the most critical need areas such as survival.

Frankly, that's a flawed analogy. Firstly, if you're fleeing into the woods, and are grabbing tools, then what you pick will all be aiming for the same aim (survival), which is not the case for martial arts (no matter your personal reasons for training in martial arts, it is not universal), the tools would be able to be consciously selected for deliberate usage to a specific purpose, enabling the conscious mind to control what you do with them, and when. For example, if you chose a box of matches, a tent, and a shotgun, you're not going to be expected to light matches while putting the tent up and shooting the gun, are you? Martial techniques, on the other hand, need to be congruent in order for them to be reliably present when needed... you need a single power source, a single approach, and a single overarching strategy. This should be able to be expressed in a number of principles, which might cover one or more ranges (depending on what your strategy is); the use of different power sources, strategies, and approaches doesn't work for a number of reasons.

There may very well be 40 different ways and types of punches, but I really only need to train one to an above average level to be more effective than most. If you are going to shoot aim for the body.

Sure, but I have no idea why you're now making this about your personal performance... you posited an idea where people would get a generic "universal black belt", which was made up of the "basics that apply to all martial arts", allowing the prospective student to "specialize" in a particular art after getting the "universal black belt". This isn't about what you would use, it's about your construct. Or are you saying that what works for you is the one thing that everyone should train in?

But, again, if you're training in that one punch, it has to fit in with everything else that is part of the course. Otherwise everything else you put in there will work against the punch, and no matter how good it is, it'll be weakened by confusing it with other approaches. That said, you're now saying that there are many different types of punches? I thought your contention was that there were underlying basics that all arts applied in a similar enough way, and that was the basis of why you thought your plan was a good idea...

I have no idea why you've now brought shooting into it, though.

A saying I use all the time when teaching BJJ is "position before submission."

Well, that's a standard BJJ strategy there... and, gotta say, doesn't seem to have much to do with the previous, or the following...

You have to earn the right to use any technique, method or concept. What gets you there and even takes you through is balance, power, speed, focus, timing, etc. Things like these are generic to everyone - the same laws apply. I focus on trying to perfect these basic elements and mastering a few tool sets that can be used in many incidences. This has proven itself for me and my students across many real world circumstances.

Firstly, the vague truisms vary wildly in how they're applied and approached from art to art. As a result, you really can't take the approach of one art when it comes to, say, power, or speed, and apply it to another. So that's a fail there. When you mention "the same laws apply", no they don't. If you're talking laws of physics, the biomechanical approach does actually alter that to a degree from art to art. If you're talking about the detail that they all have to address those truisms, sure, but not in the same way, with the same context, or by the same rules. So no.

And the second half (where again you take this to your personal approach) is completely irrelevant. I'm not asking what you do in your training time, I'm asking how you think there is any viability to a universal black belt program that doesn't contradict 99% of arts.

While I appreciate you Chris, I don't appreciate the personal jabs at me. You talk about me not addressing the ideas I put forth while you make tongue in cheek remarks in weak attempts to besmirch my training personally. You have basically called me a liar and or fraud on numerous occasions while you can be found across this entire website making "expert" remarks on more topics and disciplines then I have life to type in here now.

There have been no jabs, Jason, unlike the ones you've taken at me. Okay, maybe a small one with your Daito Ryu experience... as far as calling you a liar, I actually implied that there was more than sufficient evidence to cast doubt on your claims and statements, so having you tell us that you don't lie would require taking you at your word, which is not something that I feel many here would feel is a safe bet. You've made numerous claims, been asked details to supply credibility to your words, and have dodged the questions each time. If you've been telling the truth, okay. But you need to realize that you have created the image we have of you yourself.

If you didn't like the idea then you could have just said you didn't and left it at that like Steve did.

Well, you almost immediately addressed questions to me, not to Steve.... so I figured, you know, I'd stick around and answer them....

Thanks again for making me question why I even bother to post here in the first place.

Wasn't it that...:

Once again I say thank you to everyone for their carefully thought out posts and responses. I enjoy posting here at MartialTalk directly because of the great people, the vastness of experiences and the willingness of the community to share, critique and honestly exchange ideas.

?

Hmm.

But to address what I said at the beginning, you haven't come close to answering the questions you've been asked. If you can't remember them, here you go:

Here you go Jason

Look through these and then standarize them

Aww heck...just because I like you let's make it easy and limit it to a partial list from China, Japan and Korea...now standardize these

(see post for full list)

Honestly, I'm not sure what you're saying in a lot of this, Jason....



Hmm. Okay.



Are you saying that they were all the same OTHER THAN striking surface, angle and power, or that those aspects were all the same in each? If the former, well, that's a part of the differences between karate and Wing Chun (I'm assuming you meant Joe Lewis, can't find any "Jow" Lewis, yeah...?). If the latter, well, there should have been notable differences... the method of "rooting" to generate power for Wing Chun is markedly different from the rotational power in traditional karate, or the kinetic linking found in boxing, so unless these people were just working with what you were already doing (in which case it is far from you then learning "Wing Chun" punching or the like), then you seem like you missed quite a bit there...



I honestly have no idea what this has to do with the idea being put forth here... are these high ranking black belts entering a new school as beginners, and don't know what they're doing there, or is this in some kind of competition? Or are you trying to say that people here aren't respecting your experience enough, and we should agree with you, or give your ideas more credence due to your 30 years experience? Frankly, none of it seems to have any relevance.



In what? What are you actually talking about here? And consistency only needs to be within the same context. There is no need for consistency between Hung Gar and Seitei Iaido....



Remedy for what? That karate practitioners don't do the same thing as Aikido practitioners, let alone members of the Dog Brothers?

Hmm, missed this bit.



Better at what? What use does Daito Ryu have for such things? Daito Ryu is claiming to be a Koryu, which means it's concerned with preserving the way things are done in that art. What use does Iaido have for any of it? What about Kyudo? Martial arts are not (I'm going to emphasise this, as it's a common misconception that I see a lot) NOT about self defence. They can be, aspects of them can be, but that's not the single reason for them. If you are training for Judo competition, then knife conflict, punching and kicking mean absolutely nothing. If you are training in Filipino martial arts, knife is going to be a big aspect, but it's going to be completely different to Japanese knife methods, with very different attacks, weapons, and far more.

I can go on for hours, Jason. This single statement shows gigantic gaps in your understanding of martial arts in the breadth of their ranges. Make us all better? Not in the slightest.

Hi Jason,

I would have to say no, there can't be a universal BB. That would imply that there'd have to be 1 art. However, looking at your last paragraph, where you talk about specialties in specific arts...could you clarify that please?

Using your analogy universities would offer courses in "Generic Literature 101", which would not cover any specific literature. Once students received their B.A. degree, they could go on to graduate school for classes in "18th century English novels", "20th Century French short stories" and "16th century Chinese poetry". It doesn't work that way.

Leaving aside the flawed comparison to college education, what exactly would be covered in "punching class 101"?
How to form a fist?
How to generate power?
How to land a punch without being blocked or countered?
How to use punches in combination?
When to use a punch?

The answers to these questions (and many more) are completely different in arts such as Wing Chun, Shotokan, Boxing and Bujinkan Taijutusu. There is no "generic" answer to any of these questions that would carry over into those various arts. You might have the opinion that a certain approach to punching might be a "superior" approach, either in general or for an individual, but that's very different from being a generic approach that would have any connection to most martial arts.

Ok, perhaps I'm misunderstanding you, and if so please clarify. Going on what you're saying, if the BA or BS was the univ. BB, and then goes on to study in a specific area, the univ. BB would teach someone a basic set of skills, ie: how to punch, block, kick, etc, and then they'd go on to pick the art that interested them, ie: TKD, BJJ, etc.?

Okay, you're willing to be wrong... so, after you were immediately corrected, and given example after example of how wrong you are, why are you still trying to argue?

That is what you see at most martial arts schools....... where are you looking?

I have not seen that at any martial arts school in almost 40 years of training. Don't get me wrong, I have seen some pretty bad schools but if that is what you are using to support your argument, something that appears to be an obvious spoof then you have no support for what you are saying at all

And exactly what are you tryig to proove with the first video of various arts most of which are not kung fu by the video label, and do you have any idea what you are really saying when you say Kung Fu?

The thing about using YouTube to support anything is there are just as many examples to the contrary of anything you are trying to prove

But what about those generic college degrees that are really not generic that you spoke of before?

Hmm, actually, we'll try it this way.

Jason, you're wanting to come up with a single set of basic, universal approaches that people would learn (to a level of black belt) before "specializing" in their preferred art, yeah? Then let's look at what that might involve. Let's look at a punch.

What is the "basic" punch like? How is the fist held? How is it formed? How is the power generated? Does it come from the hip, or the shoulder? Or somewhere else? How are the hips used? What is the stance used that the punch is thrown from?

Give some answers to that, and we'll see how it fits with a range of arts, yeah?

And how does that punch apply to BJJ in the Universal approach?

Why? Why will we have to take your word for it about either the legends that you hinted at, or the fact that you don't lie? None of us know you except by the reputation which you've garnered here on this forum, and that reputation does not presuppose anyone to excessive trust.

Why would you want to "prevent things like this"???

I find that exceptionally hard to believe. Even at the bad schools I've visited, they're commonly way better than what you have represented here.

If you're unsure of where the questions are, or what they're referring to, just click on the arrow in the quote name tag, and it'll take you to the post itself.

Oh, and who said I'm nice in real life..... damn lie that is...

 

[K-man]

Oh, and who said I'm nice in real life..... damn lie that is...

OK. Maybe I stretched the truth, but you are acusing me of .. well .. lying. Now I find that quite distressing and despite the fact that it could be considered a breach of forum rules, I consider that my integrity needs to be upheld. Therefore I have no choice but to challenge you, using rules as laid out in the new universal code, both armed only with our new basic black belt, to a duel. No using your fancy ninja stuff though! Your place, or mine?

Alright, if you insist .. we could probably fit in a coffee after.

 

[Makalakumu]

Chuck Norris has the only Universal Black Belt.

 

[TimoS]

Jason, you're wanting to come up with a single set of basic, universal approaches that people would learn (to a level of black belt) before "specializing" in their preferred art, yeah?

You know, I think the Finnish Karate Federation tried something like that I think in the 80's. It was before I started training, so I can't be sure, but I think the basic idea was to have a universal (well, ok, at least Finland wide) black belt (and color belt) criteria, kind of eliminating the need for styles. I don't know how long that experiment lasted nor how many styles/training groups eventually went along with it, but I know that it has long since been abandoned and my guess is they found out it just didn't work. I think the idea was to give Finnish karate competitors an edge, but as far as I know, the results were pretty much the opposite.


---
"Look. Listen. Sweat." - Morio Higaonna

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Buka]

I think a universal black belt is a good idea. But first we should have a National Black Belt. Here in the states we could have Congress run the whole thing.

I hope they give out cookies with the new belts. I like cookies.

 

[Chris Parker]

OK. Maybe I stretched the truth, but you are acusing me of .. well .. lying. Now I find that quite distressing and despite the fact that it could be considered a breach of forum rules, I consider that my integrity needs to be upheld. Therefore I have no choice but to challenge you, using rules as laid out in the new universal code, both armed only with our new basic black belt, to a duel. No using your fancy ninja stuff though! Your place, or mine?

Alright, if you insist .. we could probably fit in a coffee after.

Aw, I don't get to use my fancy stuff? Damn... it's all I got, really!

You know, I think the Finnish Karate Federation tried something like that I think in the 80's. It was before I started training, so I can't be sure, but I think the basic idea was to have a universal (well, ok, at least Finland wide) black belt (and color belt) criteria, kind of eliminating the need for styles. I don't know how long that experiment lasted nor how many styles/training groups eventually went along with it, but I know that it has long since been abandoned and my guess is they found out it just didn't work. I think the idea was to give Finnish karate competitors an edge, but as far as I know, the results were pretty much the opposite.


---
"Look. Listen. Sweat." - Morio Higaonna

Thing is, if we're looking just at a base criteria for a single art, which might have a range of forms, then there is precedent for that. It's called Seitei Iaido.

Seitei Iaido was created (or formulated) by a group of masters of a range of Iai systems, with the aim of giving Kendoka experience in actually handling a sword, and draws it's kata from Muso Jikiden Eishin Ryu/Muso Shinden Ryu (two branches of the same school, really), Hoki Ryu, and Mugai Ryu. As it was originally meant to be little more than basic sword handling, there were a range of changes made to the kata themselves, the cutting method was made a bit bigger, the different grips employed by each of the Ryu were swapped for a more "generic" grip, the position in the obi (belt) where the sword was positioned was altered for easier access, to the point where it was in a less practical position (from a Koryu/combative Iai approach), as there was no space left for the kodachi (short sword), something that would be implied in the older systems, but not needed or present for Seitei Iaido.

As time has gone on, Seitei Iaido has progressed outside of the position of simply being there for Kendoka to feel what a real sword feels like, and has become a separately taught discipline in and of itself. This has lead to an overly structured and rigid approach to the art, where the techniques now are about precise action, to the point that if your kissaki (tip of your sword) is a few degrees off in your chiburi, it needs to be corrected. That, combined with the overly homogenized approach to Iai that Seitei represents means that, while it'll give you exactly what it's designed to (experience in handling a sword), it's not really the same as the more combative approach in the systems it draws it's techniques from. In fact, in order to put some more "reality" into Seitei Iaido, as well as a means of ensuring continued interest and practice of older methods, performance of Koryu versions of kata are required at higher ranking levels. Of course, that often means going back and removing all the important aspects of the kata the way it is done for Seitei in order to do it properly for the Koryu form... such as the cutting method, the grip, the angling, the timing, the positioning, the distancing, the attitude, and more. Does learning Seitei first make the Koryu kata easier to learn? Well, kinda... but often it's a matter of learning what you shouldn't do from Seitei when doing the Koryu form. By comparison, if you just went straight into the Koryu form, you wouldn't in any way be slowed down by not studying Seitei... in fact, you'd get the Ryu's approach a lot faster with less confusion.

So does it work? For what it was designed for, yes. But it wasn't really designed as a stand-alone art, nor as a jumping off point to then go into further study of Iai. It was assumed that if you wanted to learn Iai, you didn't ask a Kendo teacher, you found an Iai teacher (Koryu), so it's not really the same as having a base form the way things are presented in this thread. Additionally, this is just for one art, which is just one aspect of swordsmanship.... you really couldn't use it as a basis for all martial arts, or even all sword arts. Similarly, you couldn't have a basic "universal black belt" in an unarmed combative approach and think it's anything to do with an art such as this.

 

[Cyriacus]

Speaking generally, whats the point of a Universal Black Belt when it could take a decade to get a Black Belt in, say, BJJ - But half a decade for Karate or something? The Training is different. The Methodologies are different. They are different, or else They wouldnt have different names and identities and principles and concepts. Emphasis on 'concepts'.

And what would You gain? Youd need to communicate with every organisation and outlet in the world, and convince them all to individually agree to this one standard for Black Belt, despite the fact they all teach different stuff. I wouldnt call Myself a Boxer if Id spent a few years doing Judo, because They arent the same. Theyre different, separate things.

I couldnt be bothered trying to catch up with the debate going on here, but thats My view on the matter.
But I will say that even if You got everyone everywere to agree, what about the perfectly good Outlets, Teachers, and Organisations who wanted no part in it, either due to personal preference, or in the name of Their Traditions? Theyre just deemed to be 'lesser', because Theyre not a part of the mighty Universal Belt Confederation?

 

[oaktree]

Hi Jason,
Martial arts are to different from style to style and even from teacher to teacher to have a universal black belt.
People's focus on what they want to get out of martial arts will also have an impact on how they go about training in it.

If a universal standard is set not every art or teacher may be able to meet that standard.
If we are to have a universal standard this would mean Taijiquan and MMA fighters would have to be equal at least on a basic term. Meaning the majority
of who train in Taijiquan would have to spar like MMA fighters or MMA fighters would have to water down to equal the universal level for Taijiquan.

 

[lklawson]

While talking with the group of "legends" the idea that each respective Master would give the absolute minimum for their arts. Like a knife master gives top three things, judo master gives top three things and so on.

Absolutely, 100% impossible. There is no way that any art can be effectively represented, even in an "absolute minimum" from the "top three things." This doesn't give a basic foundation in anything.

I think the time to get the belt would be the time it took to get the material and demonstrate it effectively (tests). No exceptions.

Demonstrate effectively the "top three 'things'" from a gazillion different martial arts? Seriously?

These Masters would serve on the board that backs up the certifications. The curriculum would be designed not to overlap yet fit together to develop a nice well rounded base.

You are still suffering from false assumptions that there is a lot of cross over. There isn't. Look, even in boxing it's all different. A Mendoza stance looks nothing like a LPR stance and they function differently. A LPR "Straight Left Lead" looks nothing like a modern boxing Left Jab. They function differently and have different goals. How many hundreds (thousands?) of "Masters" would have to sit on the boards? Geez, can you even get two "Masters" from different TKD organizations to agree on what is the "top three 'things'" in their arts? ITF and WTF? How about their "Sign Wave" methodology?

 

[lklawson]

There may very well be 40 different ways and types of punches, but I really only need to train one to an above average level to be more effective than most. If you are going to shoot aim for the body.

But that's not what you were arguing for and it clearly demonstrates why a "Universal Black Belt" would be impossible.

A saying I use all the time when teaching BJJ is "position before submission."

You teach BJJ? Where? What credentials? A BJJ teaching credential is really easy to verify.

 

[Carol]

A college degree is only universal when it is being applied to a task outside of its core concentration.

 

[clfsean]

A college degree is only universal when it is being applied to a task outside of its core concentration.

True enough... My degree says on the paper from the school "Bachelor of Science Computer Information Systems", not "Bachelor of Science, whatever..."