How Important Are the Number Of Black Belts In A School?

[MJS]

Some schools have alot of people wearing black belts, others not so many. Some schools hand them out like candy, other make you bust your *** for them. Some feel that if a potential student walks in and sees all these black belts, that maybe that'll be a factor in them joining, while others tell you that it is possible, but you have to work for them, that they're not handed out easily.

So, what are your thoughts on this? Do you feel that if you walked into a school and the instructor said that he trained 30 people to BB level vs. him saying that the BB rank is hard, not impossible to reach in his school, thus he only has a handful, that that is a factor in whether or not someone would join the school?

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I've been to my dojo on nights when it looked like a black belt academy; I was the only kyu rank or nearly the only one. On the other hand, none of the black belts had less than 10 years at the dojo, and most of them were in the 20 to 30 year range. So, I think in that case, having a lot of black belts shows that we have a lot of retention (and we're not a big dojo).

I asked the typical newbie question when I started - I was told white to black could take anywhere from five to seven years. The fastest time on record was one of our sensei's who passed away last year - he earned his black belt in 4 and 1/2 years. Most everybody else takes longer.

I've been training now for nearly 4 years. I've just earned my ni-kyu, so I have another year to ik-kyu at the least. Maybe I'll earn my sho-dan at the end of 2013; that would be five years. If it takes longer, it takes longer.

One thing I know is that when I earn my black belt, there will be no question as to whether or not I deserve it. My sensei would turn me down in a second if he didn't think I was a black belt. But our dojo isn't really run as a profit center; no one involved gets paid; our monthly dues just keep the lights on.

I've seen some young men and women in other styles who have earned their black belts in a much shorter period of time. It doesn't bother me; but on the other hand, I'm mature enough to not feel threatened by it. Maybe they're better than me. Maybe their black belt doesn't mean what our black belt means. In any case, I'm not competing against them; only myself.

Now, to answer your question specifically about attracting students, my sensei has always said he likes brown belts. From his point of view, as I understand it, he thinks his black belts are so good that newbies look at them and think they can never attain that standard, so they might become discouraged. He thinks brown belts are the backbone of the dojo; the NCO so to speak. He thinks new students can look at brown belts and think "Hmm, I could see myself able to do that someday." Hey, I'm a good example of a bad example! Wanna see a kata screwed up, I'm your guy!

 

[MAist25]

I think the amount of black belts at a school should be completely irrelevant when making your decision on whether to train at a school or not. The quality of black belts is important when making your decision because they can give you a good idea of what you might eventually look like if you make the decision to train at that school. If they look like garbage, they look like garbage. If they look solid, they look solid. The number does not matter, quality matters.

 

[Kong Soo Do]

There is an Akido school near work that has been around for a very long time. Their policy at the school is that you are a white belt until you earn a black belt. I don't remember the time frame to train for black belt but it was many, many years. Apparently the school has stood the test of time.

In 37 years, I've certified less than a dozen individuals at the BB level, two at the Master level. However, since we rarely wore uniforms or belts, it was a moot point. They came for training not 'stuff'. And to be honest, many really didn't care about earning a belt at all.

I think the bottom line is what the seeking individual is looking for and what their perception is on the martial arts. If they have a fast-food mentality and the extent of their martial knowledge comes from T.V. and movies...well they're probably looking for a lot of BB's and the quickest way to get one. If they're serious about the training, belts just won't matter regardless of the number in the school...or lack thereof.

 

[Cyriacus]

I think the amount of black belts at a school should be completely irrelevant when making your decision on whether to train at a school or not. The quality of black belts is important when making your decision because they can give you a good idea of what you might eventually look like if you make the decision to train at that school. If they look like garbage, they look like garbage. If they look solid, they look solid. The number does not matter, quality matters.

This.

Plus, it may be a Dojo that only just opened. You cant blame them for not being able to magic Black Belts out of the air to make it look appealing

 

[oftheherd1]

...

I think the bottom line is what the seeking individual is looking for and what their perception is on the martial arts. If they have a fast-food mentality and the extent of their martial knowledge comes from T.V. and movies...well they're probably looking for a lot of BB's and the quickest way to get one. If they're serious about the training, belts just won't matter regardless of the number in the school...or lack thereof.

I get your point and can't disagree with it.

Still belts were important to me, because each one earned was an opportunity to go on and learn more. But as I have mentioned before, I never wanted to even test for a belt that I didn't feel I was fully qualified for.

I was fortunate that my GM respected that and wanted to teach that way. In Korea, most military were there for only one year. He provided the opportunity to earn a BB in one year. However, most did not, or could not, spend the time in training to avail themselves of that opportunity. Not many earned a BB from on post. I was most fortunate in that I spent 3 1/2 years there, and was able to attain a 2nd Degree Black Belt before I left.

 

[MJS]

I've been to my dojo on nights when it looked like a black belt academy; I was the only kyu rank or nearly the only one. On the other hand, none of the black belts had less than 10 years at the dojo, and most of them were in the 20 to 30 year range. So, I think in that case, having a lot of black belts shows that we have a lot of retention (and we're not a big dojo).

I asked the typical newbie question when I started - I was told white to black could take anywhere from five to seven years. The fastest time on record was one of our sensei's who passed away last year - he earned his black belt in 4 and 1/2 years. Most everybody else takes longer.

I've been training now for nearly 4 years. I've just earned my ni-kyu, so I have another year to ik-kyu at the least. Maybe I'll earn my sho-dan at the end of 2013; that would be five years. If it takes longer, it takes longer.

One thing I know is that when I earn my black belt, there will be no question as to whether or not I deserve it. My sensei would turn me down in a second if he didn't think I was a black belt. But our dojo isn't really run as a profit center; no one involved gets paid; our monthly dues just keep the lights on.

I've seen some young men and women in other styles who have earned their black belts in a much shorter period of time. It doesn't bother me; but on the other hand, I'm mature enough to not feel threatened by it. Maybe they're better than me. Maybe their black belt doesn't mean what our black belt means. In any case, I'm not competing against them; only myself.

Now, to answer your question specifically about attracting students, my sensei has always said he likes brown belts. From his point of view, as I understand it, he thinks his black belts are so good that newbies look at them and think they can never attain that standard, so they might become discouraged. He thinks brown belts are the backbone of the dojo; the NCO so to speak. He thinks new students can look at brown belts and think "Hmm, I could see myself able to do that someday." Hey, I'm a good example of a bad example! Wanna see a kata screwed up, I'm your guy!

Nice posts all around! This past August, I took my training in a different direction, and began training at a Kyokushin dojo. Many times, after class, we'll chat. One of the topics that's come up recently, was that he doesn't hand out Black Belts easily. He said that he couldn't bring himself to hand them out, like some other schools do. I just tested for Blue in Dec. There was a guy there testing for his Black. He's already a BB, from a different dojo, but he had received the belt when he was younger, so it was now time for his adult BB test. The test was no joke. 10 rounds of fighting and he busted his *** thru the entire test.

During my time there, I've seen a handful of Brown Belts and even fewer Black. Now, again, I've only been there for a few months, so perhaps people have come and gone, I'm only going on what I've seen currently. Nonetheless, I'm guessing that his school is much like yours...that it could take upwards of 7yrs+. Likewise, I'm in no rush, when it happens, it happens.

I tend to believe that the longer it takes, the higher quality the BB will be. This isn't to say that someone who gets it in 4yrs isn't quality, but if thats the norm, I'd have to question whether everyone was the same quality and actually deserving.

IMHO, for me, its just that...the quality over the quantity.

 

[Kwan Jang]

I believe that it is a combination of quality and how much does the student have to grow in order to reach this level. You can show me a school that has few black belts and none of them young that many on this board would regard as good signs, but my first thought is that the instructor(s) are probably not very good (provided that we are not talking about a young school). First, odds are that they are more of the mindset of eliminating those who are of weaker character rather than building the character of the students who came to them for this purpose. Can they take only elite athletes to a high level? Or can they motivate that fat, lazy kid to reach heights that no one, including that kid, ever thought was possible. I'm not talking about the "everybody passes so they feel good" approach. Rather being able to be a good enough instructor to take that "C-level student" and over the years turn them into an "A-level student" and human being. As good or better of a black belt than the "Weed-out-the-wimps" school down the street did for those who were mentally half way to black when they walked in the door.

Do they retain those students after they earn first dan and can you challenge them and provide meaningful progress and curriculum after they reach this level? One school might have very demanding requirements and make a student bust their tail to earn black and keep pushing, learning and growing and may have tons of black belts, not because they are watered down or a belt factory, but rather that their school was the one that people had the most challenge from and kept them learning and growing and challenged. While another school might have very few black belts and just blame the students who quit because they weren't challenged enough or the quality of the teaching and curriculum wasn't high enough to motivate them to continue. And then brag that it's because of their "high standards" that no one reaches black belt in their school. A third school may have legitimately good teaching, high standards for grading and give great value to the underbelts, but burn them out in the process of attaining first dan and then give them very little progress or meaningful curriculum after they hit black. This type of school might have a good graduation rate to first, but be very weak in going to second and beyond.

IMO. as a master instructor and as a school owner, the quality of my "product" is the quality of my advanced students, especially my black belts. If I am not truly providing the people who come into my training center with a REAL value and if I don't motivate them and guide them into really reaching into their potential, then I shouldn't be in business. Still, to me first dan (or poom) is not mastery and while it should be a very high standard, I believe that it should be something that anyone with the guts, determination and indomitable spirit to keep pushing themselves beyond their previous limits should be able to attain. I also believe that I should be able to take that same student to a much higher level for second dan. And so on for third, fourth and fifth. And IF I am doing a good enough job at what I do, I should be motivating a fairly decent percentage of those black belts to dedicate themselves to achieving those goals.

Finally, while I don't think that black belt should come to quickly, IMO it's not how long it should take that measures the quality of the training either. Some schools are just not very efficient in their training and teaching methods. I'll take many BJJ schools as an example. They are known throughout the arts for the high quality of their black belts and the time that it takes to achieve this as a whole. However, most (not all) BJJ schools that I have seen aren't very efficient in their teaching methods. They often will teach a couple of movements and then tell the students to just go roll with it and do their "live" training. While after many years, those who stay with it do become very good, IMO more drill work and frankly better teaching methods would trim this down quite a bit and lead the students to reaching just as good or even better results in far less time. I know several BJJ instructors like Pedro Sauer, Renzo Gracie and (from what I've heard though don't know first hand) Lloyd Irvin use these methods and I'm sure many others do as well. Depending how much curriculum a school or system requires for first dan, I could see first legitimately done in a shorter time than many here are saying. If one school is teaching the same amount of curriculum and having at least as high of standards, but can get that across to the students in four years rather than eight, then IMO the four year program was the better run school with better teaching methods as a whole.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Can they take only elite athletes to a high level? Or can they motivate that fat, lazy kid to reach heights that no one, including that kid, ever thought was possible.

I'm 50 years old and started training at age 46. I was nearly 300 lbs when I started training. I'm not exactly an elite athlete, and I'm not going to become one. I was an athlete, but that was many years ago. But I will earn my black belt in time, so I have to say that's not really an issue in our school. We have criteria for promotion that are objective and some that are subjective. Objectively, one must be able to do X, Y, and Z (kata, weapons, etc) with proficiency before promotion. One must also have a minimum time in grade between belts, which is also objective. The subjective part is that our sensei has to think the student is ready for promotion. But to the best of my knowledge, no one has been denied promotion for reasons other than the objective ones listed.

Finally, while I don't think that black belt should come to quickly, IMO it's not how long it should take that measures the quality of the training either. Some schools are just not very efficient in their training and teaching methods.

I can also say, putting it delicately, that there are differences in what one art or school considers a 'black belt' and what another one does. I know for a fact that I can whip up on many young belts from some other disciplines, their 18-month belt doesn't give them the ability to defeat me, and I'm still two years from black belt in my dojo at the minimum. So IMHO, black belts in general are not an objective level of proficiency across all arts. There are black belts and there are black belts.

 

[Josh Oakley]

I've never looked at the color of someone's belt to figure out which school to join. I look at the dojo community, how well they get along with eachother, how hard they work how well they fight. I look at the instructor, how he approaches teaching. I look at how clean the dojo is, and the condition of the equipment. The belts just don't matter to me.

 

[Black Belt Jedi]

I don't see it as being extremely important to have multiple black belts in the dojo. I find it as a bonus for head instructors to capitalize on having a great school and a great reputation depending on how their businesses are runned. My school had several black belts, but quite a few of them left and I decided to stay at my Sensei's school and be an assistant instructor. At my school getting to black belt level is not easy, it takes a lot of commitment and devotion and my Sensei plays no favourites on any student. A dojo can run very well without a huge black belt club IMHO.

 

[clfsean]

I'd personally rather see a room full of under belts sweating & dying to get it as right as possible as often as possible than a room full of black belts that need to go back to basics.

 

[Kwan Jang]

Bill, I don't believe in 12-18 month black belts either. My school is roughly 4-5 years and I have MANY students who train 8-10 years of constant training before they learn to push hard enough to reach that level. My point is not to water down the quality of black belts, but rather to be a good enough instructor to help more people reach that standard and beyond. If all I had to do was get my students to black was have them be able to run some katas, point spar, and break a few boards like many schools out there, I probably COULD have them doing that at a high level in 18 months or less. My students have to be able to box, kick box, submission grapple, MMA ground strike, have very solid traditional basics and forms, have solid FMA skills (stick and knife) and have the discipline to eat and train like an olympic athlete for at least the three months prior to the exam. Many keep this up afterwards at least to a large degree. IMO though, too many schools just assume that if there are many black belts at another school, it means they were "giving them out like candy". Though there are many who do this, on the opposite end of the spectrum, it can also mean that the school with more black belts is doing a better job.

 

[Buka]

A few years ago, a friend of mine from California finally started training. I had encouraged him for years - he had always had an interest. After his first month, we had much gabbing on the phone. During our conversation I asked him if there were a lot of black belts in his school. He told me - "I checked out a lot of schools, some had a boot-load more black belts than others. But I used to sell used cars. When a customer came on the lot he wasn't looking for a lot of cars, he was looking for one. So was I."

I think he had a point.

 

[Mark Lynn]

...on the opposite end of the spectrum, it can also mean that the school with more black belts is doing a better job.

I agree with you here and your previous post on bringing the average students to a higher level instead of weeding them out so to speak.

Training under my sensei it was a thing of pride (still is) that it took us a long time to go through to black belt, for me it was 8 years. We were trained at his dojo at his house (private/semi private) and we also trained at other (colleges classes generally) schools as well. But there were only a few of us. Once he retired from his day job and then taught openly to a larger pool of students of course the dan ranks began to grow over time. Still it takes several years to reach black belt with him 5-10 is the norm. When I started teaching my classes (years ago) were small and I taught like he taught me except I was an adult then and I was teaching kids. Not a good combination as I only had about 6 kids who stayed with me for any length of time and none of them came near the point my students currently are at skill wise.

Now I teach trying to help the student achieve their goals, to take them farther then they thought possible, instead of looking to weed out the ones who have issues, I'm bending over backwards trying to help them. My classes have grown I've taught at the same place for about 5 years this spring and I'll be testing my first black belts this spring/summer I have three who are all most ready and have been with me 4-4 1/2 years. With more a couple of years behind. All of my students have been examined by my dojo mates from my instructors private dojo and my sensei will be sitting on their exam board.

Being a young school and a small school we have no black belts other than myself and another instructor who helps out generally so if someone came in and looked around now they would see a small brown belt class (about 7) working hard and having a good time. However maybe later this year if the same person was to look in the same class then they would see almost 35-40% of the students wearing a black belt plus myself and the other instructor, thus thinking we were a belt factory.

Just out of curiosity what part of the FMA do you require your students to know? I teach mainly kids TKD and my adults I teach Modern Anris, so for my BB ranks in TKD they tend to learn more of the self defense realted material from Modern Arnis (empty hand defenses against the stick and knife, plus the locking and take downs). Do you require something similar relating the material for self defense, or do you teach them more along the lines of learning knife and stick fighting?

 

[Kwan Jang]

My instructor (KJN Ernie Reyes, Sr.) is of Filipino descent and was also one of Remy's first BB's in the USA, so the FMA's in our curriculum are near and dear to him. Back when I was coming up, he did something very similar to what you are doing. In his school on the second training floor on Tuesdays and Thursdays, the West Coast Escrima Society had their trainings there. This included FMA masters such as Mike Inay, Jeff Elliott(who for a while was my training partner), Max Sarmiento, Jimmy Tacosa, Leo Giron, Dan Inosanto, Richard Bustillo and many others. They weren't all there every week, but we (my generation of students) were there training with many of them on a regular basis. I have seen on some FMA websites listing KJN Ernie among the top 25 living FMA masters and even one of my former students in the top 100. In regards to the empty hand work from the FMA's, Master Jeff Elliott (the second highest ranking master in the Inayan system after founder Suro Mike Inay) and I worked a lot together on the empty hand work when he and I were training partners. While I consider myself a pretty decent escrimador and guro, it's never been my specialty. I have placed as high as silver at both the NAGA World Grappling Championships and the World Jiu-Jitsu Championships, though (I love tying people in knots. LOL).

We actually use the basic strikes, blocks and counters, sinawali, redondo, 9-count sinawali, counter with the flow and counter against the flow from the Modern Arnis system and from the Serrada Escrima system we use their lock and block stick, lock and block stick and knife, stick flow, knife disarms, knife against knife (fun using the shock knife) and knife counter and thrust drills.

 

[Kwan Jang]

My instructor (KJN Ernie Reyes, Sr.) is of Filipino descent and was also one of Remy's first BB's in the USA, so the FMA's in our curriculum are near and dear to him. Back when I was coming up, he did something very similar to what you are doing. In his school on the second training floor on Tuesdays and Thursdays, the West Coast Escrima Society had their trainings there. This included FMA masters such as Mike Inay, Jeff Elliott(who for a while was my training partner), Max Sarmiento, Jimmy Tacosa, Leo Giron, Dan Inosanto, Richard Bustillo and many others. They weren't all there every week, but we (my generation of students) were there training with many of them on a regular basis. I have seen on some FMA websites listing KJN Ernie among the top 25 living FMA masters and even one of my former students in the top 100. In regards to the empty hand work from the FMA's, Master Jeff Elliott (the second highest ranking master in the Inayan system after founder Suro Mike Inay) and I worked a lot together on the empty hand work when he and I were training partners. While I consider myself a pretty decent escrimador and guro, it's never been my specialty. I have placed as high as silver at both the NAGA World Grappling Championships and the World Jiu-Jitsu Championships, though (I love tying people in knots. LOL).

We actually use the basic strikes, blocks and counters, sinawali, redondo, 9-count sinawali, counter with the flow and counter against the flow from the Modern Arnis system and from the Serrada Escrima system we use their lock and block stick, lock and block stick and knife, stick flow, knife disarms, knife against knife (fun using the shock knife) and knife counter and thrust drills.

 

[Aiki Lee]

I can see both sides to this argument. One the one hand you might have a lot of BB that are good or a lot that suck or any combination inbetween. From my perspective I think there are a couple of guys in my dojo who I personally wouldn't have promoted to black belt, but then I think its important to remember that black belt isn't really that high of a rank from the perspective of someone who has done martial arts; and to a person who hasn't done martial arts they wouldn't be able to tell if those black belts sucked anyway if they don't know what they're looking for (not that that's a good excuse to have poorly trained black belts).
I think it is more important to look at 2nd dans and 3rd dans and above and see how long it took them to achieve that rank and if they have any skill.

 

[WCman1976]

This is an interesting topic, and I think it all depends on how truly "into" the martial arts a potential student. You might get someone who is half-interested...wants to do it more as a hobby than a way of life...and they might just think it would be "cool" to have a black belt. So they don't care if the school hands them out like candy. Then again, if the school DOES require you to put in hard work, the casual martial artist would quit once the going got tough. Of all the reasons I have seen for people taking martial arts, there are two that are most frequent: those who are into it for the exercise, or those who are into it for self-defense. With the rise of MMA, there is a third common reason: competition. The person into it for competition will probably feel like joining a school where you have to WORK for that black belt because otherwise they'll get their butt handed to them in a tournament. Same thing for the self-defense person: if a school gives you a black belt simply because you paid for the belt and showed up to your test on time, then that would give you a false sense of security. Of all three reasons for taking martial arts, I think the person who does it for exercise might be least concerned about how easily a black belt is obtained.

But then again, this is all just my take on it...not saying this is how everyone really is. I just wanted to contribute to the conversation.

 

[geezer]

I'd say you'd have to judge each school on it's own merits. As the previous poster pointed out, people pursue the martial arts for different reasons. Different schools appeal to different groups. Right know I'm training in an FMA system where the top guy and his head assistant never earned a black belt in anything. Ironically many of their long term students, myself included, had previously earned black belts and are instructors in other martial arts. It might seem odd to someone in a rank-oriented system, but in this group, belts don't matter. You have to train regularly for a year or two just to be called a student. Everybody else is just a visitor... passing through.

The other system I practice and teach has a detailed curriculum, and regular rank testing is required... even in "backyard schools" like mine. The larger, older schools in the system, such as the headquarters in Texas have a lot of adult black belts... many of whom began training in the '90s or earlier. The fact that people stick with a school and system for the long term is a pretty good endorsement.