You should have mastered your own curriculum. I'd consider that bare minimum.
I agree, and I have.
Not learning more forms doesn't mean they weren't learning.
I can say the
exact same thing. I have learned from a variety of different sources (online, books, and in person) since leaving Chung Oh's School.
Then why do you need to be a 7th degree?
It's not something I
need. It's what I
am.
I haven't needed any ranks in Taekwondo at all. They come naturally over time with training, teaching, reflection, and overall experience. It's the ITF that instituted the concept of ranks and belts for Taekwondo, and it existed in other martial arts prior to that.
Perhaps the biggest drawback to learning Taekwondo is the inevitable "rank envy" and "politics" that comes with it. Everything becomes about rank and what people think you "ought" to have based on some faulty or generalized notion of "service time" that they cling to. It doesn't take 40 years to learn Taekwondo.
If people Google "Skribs Taekwondo school" and see rank that looks suspicious, it's going to hurt my reputation more than help it.
Know thyself.
And if you're giving lessons and credentials to people while claiming a rank you did not earn, you're flirting with fraud. I'm not going to outright accuse you of it, but I know others would.
I have earned every rank that I have. The only difference is I didn't pay an exorbitant fee to get the most recent ones.
I know there are others who might accuse me of that, but I don't claim to be ITF-certified, so there is no fraud.
If ITF certification matters to people, they will need to train elsewhere. Chung Oh's School wasn't ITF-certified either, and it was the largest school in southern Ontario. Never bothered me at all.
Also, I don't know Sam-Il. I've never even heard of it. Do I deserve to be [whatever belt is before Sam-Il] because I don't know it?
Pattern Sam-Il is the first pattern taught to 3rd Dan black belts.
At my school, you would be required to know Sam-Il and Yoo-Sin and Choi-Yong to be able to test for 4th Dan (Master) black belt.
After that, we don't teach any of the remaining ITF patterns.
By whose standards are you above average? Your own. This makes your rank look more like self-indulgence than an actual achievement.
By Chung Oh's standards. Again, this has been covered ad naseum.
I can say a lot of the same for myself, but that doesn't mean I deserve to be 7th degree.
Just because people you used to teach are now a higher rank doesn't mean you deserve that rank. If I were to find out 10 years from now that someone I used to teach is 5th degree, is that a qualification for 6th? No, because I didn't get them to 5th.
That would be true if I had retired but I didn't.
I don't have to personally get someone up to a particular rank to be that rank.
My point is, in the time they were learning to get to where they are, I was learning beyond that. The only way they "catch up" in rank is if I retire from Taekwondo.
That's not how the math works. Each Dan takes progressively longer, so you can't just look at the average.
These are made-up rules that not everyone follows!
If you require number of years equal to current rank in order to reach the next rank (i.e. 3rd Dan requires 3 years to get to 4th), it should take 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 = 21 years to get from 1st to 7th. That's an average of 3.5 years per belt to get there. Which is higher than the length it took you.
If it's a number of years equal to the next rank in order to reach the next rank (i.e. 3rd Dan requires 4 years to get to 4th), it should take 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 to get from 1st to 7th, an average of 4.5 years per belt to get there.
This is why Taekwondo is dying. The bureacracy has killed it. It's absurd.
It takes as long as it takes. There is no fixed period of time that it "should" take.
The more you train and learn, the faster you get there.
This doesn't address the point you quoted. Yes, I get that you had to forge your own way after leaving your organization. But that doesn't mean you should self-promote beyond what even the most apologetic of critics (such as myself) would see as legitimate.
Again, I'm the only person being questioned here. Nobody has done a "colonoscopy" of the legitimacy of anyone else here in this forum. It just seems like a witch hunt to me.
I came here to bounce ideas off my peers, not to be
investigated.
I'll put my skills and knowledge up against anyone here of equal rank. I am absolutely legitimate in every way.
As I said, if you would have self-promoted to 4th degree when you opened your own school in 2011, and then self-promoted to 5th in 2015-2016 and to 6th in 2020-2022, that would have made sense to me. Or, since you promoted yourself to 5th in 2021, if you would have held off on self-promoting to 6th until 2026-2027, and then 7th until 2032-2034, then that would have made sense.
Originally I was going to follow the ITF system you described earlier but I decided as a former Chung Oh student to adopt their system instead. (3 years for almost every Dan level.)
I opened as 3rd Dan in 2011.
By Chung Oh: 4th (2014), 5th (2017), 6th (2020), 7th (2023).
By ITF: 4th (2015), 5th (2020), 6th (2026), 7th (2033).
But since you've accelerated yourself under your own authority, it does not look legitimate.
It's perfectly in line with Chung Oh's School and that's the authority/model that I follow.
With the ITF, black belt comes after red belt. Chung Oh added a belt there. 2nd to 3rd should take 2 years. Chung Oh added a year there. It tends to balance out over time.
Ironic that you should say this.
The second part makes sense to me. The first does not. I've never even heard of these forms.
Well they are there. Learn them!
In my experience they are very different. This just seems like a cheap way of claiming rank in multiple martial arts.
Well your experience is different from mine.
I learned from an instructor that was 9th Dan in both of them. I trust him.
I think you've figured it out by my responses here, but I will not be looking to use you as a mentor. It's not just the comments here. I looked at the way you've organized your videos on youtube, and your curriculum is the kind of rigid structure I'm trying to mostly move away from. I just don't think we see eye-to-eye on anything.
That's fine. I like having things well structured and organized.
The videos are free to watch, so maybe you'll pick up some things from them anyway.