How "should" the system work?

[Andrew Green]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[Bob Hubbard]

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[Andrew Green]

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

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

 

[evenflow1121]

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

 

[ginshun]

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

 

[arnisador]

Yes, there is always more material and more options.

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

 

[Andrew Green]

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

Judging by the archives on this and other MA forums....

 

[Flatlander]

Mod Note:

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

-Dan Bowman-
-MT Moderator-

 

[Tgace]

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

 

[Flatlander]

Personally I believe the (belt) system is flawed and has lost credibility and practicality.

Yes. But, that's your belief. The belt's importance is quantified by the person wearing it. For some, the belt is important and necessary. For others, not. Me, for example.

 

[arnisador]

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

 

[Jaymeister]

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

Good point :asian:

 

[47MartialMan]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The system is flawed and appointing others to a board will only cause other flaws.

 

[eyebeams]

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

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

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

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

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

 

[searcher]

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

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

 

[47MartialMan]

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

Dont forget the fancy colors. Now, even Kung Fu schools use color sashes. Likewise such fall into the colorful rank snare.

 

[Andrew Green]

The system is flawed and appointing others to a board will only cause other flaws.

Probably, so how can it be fixed?

 

[47MartialMan]

Probably, so how can it be fixed?

It may never be able to.

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

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

 

[evenflow1121]

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

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

 

[47MartialMan]

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

Its not funny. This was a decade or so ago. I have it saved somewhere. It was before the "Almighty Internet".