Should a martial art require skills from outside of the school in order to progress?

[skribs]

One of the BJJ youtubers I've been watching lately has the theory that there are three main skills for self-defense: grappling, striking, and firearms. His requirement to get to purple belt is that you have some basic striking competency*, and his requirement to get to brown belt is that you have some basic firearms competency*. He doesn't expect you to go out and win a boxing match or a 3-gun, but at the very least be able to hit a heavy bag with power (for purple) and know basic gun safety and be able to hit a reasonable target (for brown).

Comments on his videos are mixed. Some really appreciate that he is not just focused on pure BJJ and that he's encouraging his students to have a well-rounded skillset. Others have the attitude that unless it's classes he offers, it shouldn't be a requirement. That he should promote based purely on BJJ skill, and let the students decide if they want to pick up other skills along the way.

Personally, I tend to side with the second group. I do have experience in striking and with firearms, and I do believe they are worthwhile skills. And if I were a 4-stripe blue/purple belt at his gym, this particular requirement would not hold me back. I could see it being a requirement if they had a striking class on Fridays and a firearms safety class once a month (similar to how Taekwondo often includes grappling techniques in belt testing, if those techniques are taught in class). I don't see it as a requirement if the skills are not offered by the instructor.

*This is in addition to his BJJ requirements.

 

[MadMartigan]

As you said. There is nothing wrong with setting a high bar of competence for promotions, but I also take issue with grading students on material that the instructor is not teaching them. If it's not taught in the school, it has no business being evaluated as part of the promotional structure.

I teach TKD and also hold a blue belt in BJJ. While my students receive some basic knowledge in BJJ from me, I am not qualified to grade them on their BJJ performance. Instead, I encourage them to add BJJ classes (from an actual BJJ instructor) to their skill set if they're interested in pursuing it further.

When you start incorporating elements of various arts into 1 syllabus, I think you start to change the end product at a certain point. It effectively makes a brown belt in "BJJ" from that instructor's school mean something different than most everywhere else. He's not giving out BJJ rank; he's giving out rank in his system (that incorporates BJJ, firearms, and boxing)... except he's not teaching those other things, so it just seems like he's setting his students up for frustration or failure.

 

[Dirty Dog]

If you don't teach it, you don't test it. Simple. You may ENCOURAGE it, of course.

 

[Holmejr]

I am a big fan of traditional arts. The beautiful kicking of some, the hands of others, animal forms. I love the art of escrima/Eskrido, but as my GM would say there is no art complete in itself. But unless you start as a child, to “master” an art takes approx a lifetime or close it. Picking up techniques to supplement is IMO worthwhile. Some will say, but to do this you must first understand that. I get it. Like my takedown defense post, I just think as a supplement, isolating the takedown defense and practicing that in the context of my own art would be worthwhile.

 

[skribs]

I am a big fan of traditional arts. I love the art of escrima/Eskrido, but as my GM would say there is no art complete in itself. The beautiful kicking of TKD

What does this have to do with the thread?

 

[geezer]

What does this have to do with the thread?

I take his comment to be in agreement with those who encourage cross-training if you want to be very well rounded for self-defense. So, if you train BJJ and you want to be well rounded you would also learn the basics of striking and weapons arts ...as you laid out in your first post

 

[frank raud]

One of the BJJ youtubers I've been watching lately has the theory that there are three main skills for self-defense: grappling, striking, and firearms. His requirement to get to purple belt is that you have some basic striking competency*, and his requirement to get to brown belt is that you have some basic firearms competency*. He doesn't expect you to go out and win a boxing match or a 3-gun, but at the very least be able to hit a heavy bag with power (for purple) and know basic gun safety and be able to hit a reasonable target (for brown).

Comments on his videos are mixed. Some really appreciate that he is not just focused on pure BJJ and that he's encouraging his students to have a well-rounded skillset. Others have the attitude that unless it's classes he offers, it shouldn't be a requirement. That he should promote based purely on BJJ skill, and let the students decide if they want to pick up other skills along the way.

Personally, I tend to side with the second group. I do have experience in striking and with firearms, and I do believe they are worthwhile skills. And if I were a 4-stripe blue/purple belt at his gym, this particular requirement would not hold me back. I could see it being a requirement if they had a striking class on Fridays and a firearms safety class once a month (similar to how Taekwondo often includes grappling techniques in belt testing, if those techniques are taught in class). I don't see it as a requirement if the skills are not offered by the instructor.

*This is in addition to his BJJ requirements.

Out of curiosity, who is the Youtuber?

 

[frank raud]

I remember, back in the day. when Wally Jay, Remi Presas and George Dillman were doing the seminar circuit, there was a requirement for their students to get at least a brown belt in another system in order to go for the black belt. Convenient when you have a karate guy, a jiu jitsu guy and a Modern Arnis guy travelling in a pack.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Many years ago, there were 2 CMA guys who got into a street fight. They beat their opponents badly until their opponent threw rocks at them and sent both of them to hospital. In hospital, they said that their CMA teahers didn't teach them how to dodge rock throwing.

After that day, to stand inside a small circle and dodge tennis balls throwing became part of the CMA training.

IMO, there are many MA skills that a MA person must have. To dodge throwing object can be one of those. To be able to run faster than your opponent can be another one.

 

[jks9199]

BJJ does include striking... unless you're in a very sport/competition oriented school.

Firearms... I'm a fan of a safety class, more than a profitiency class. But I'd actually like to see basic firearms safety taught in elementary schools.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

One of the BJJ youtubers I've been watching lately has the theory that there are three main skills for self-defense: grappling, striking, and firearms. His requirement to get to purple belt is that you have some basic striking competency*, and his requirement to get to brown belt is that you have some basic firearms competency*. He doesn't expect you to go out and win a boxing match or a 3-gun, but at the very least be able to hit a heavy bag with power (for purple) and know basic gun safety and be able to hit a reasonable target (for brown).

Comments on his videos are mixed. Some really appreciate that he is not just focused on pure BJJ and that he's encouraging his students to have a well-rounded skillset. Others have the attitude that unless it's classes he offers, it shouldn't be a requirement. That he should promote based purely on BJJ skill, and let the students decide if they want to pick up other skills along the way.

Personally, I tend to side with the second group. I do have experience in striking and with firearms, and I do believe they are worthwhile skills. And if I were a 4-stripe blue/purple belt at his gym, this particular requirement would not hold me back. I could see it being a requirement if they had a striking class on Fridays and a firearms safety class once a month (similar to how Taekwondo often includes grappling techniques in belt testing, if those techniques are taught in class). I don't see it as a requirement if the skills are not offered by the instructor.

*This is in addition to his BJJ requirements.

I can argue both sides of this, but let me offer this as an analog: what if the requirement were to compete (not win, just be in) a tournament of some sort? That's also outside of the school, and (usually) isn't something specifically offered. Of course, he could be training them for the competition, so it's not quite the same, but there are some similar points.

I considered requiring students get 6 months of exposure to some other art to get BB (or maybe brown) with me. My thought was that this would mean more people with wider exposure in the classes, and probably overall better ability to judge what works, what exercises foster bad habits, etc. I suspect some of this may be the same for him. If he thinks folks should have those skill sets to be well-rounded, and he isn't qualified to teach them, then I can see his point in requiring them at some level. I would expect him to have suggestions on how to mee the minimum standard for them, of course, and it would be good if he brought some instructors in for seminars, etc. to help get there.

 

[Holmejr]

What does this have to do with the thread?

You’re correct, I really misread the OP!
Divided allegiance? I don’t think most teachers could handle it LOL. With that said, I think a school can do as it wishes as long as they’re honest and upfront with the student. I never seen it personally. We have students that are attending other schools. We just ask them to be respectful. We don’t ask them to reveal what they learn and what we teach, we do not consider sacred. We just want it taught as GM intended. Anyway, for most schools, just getting enough students to pay the bills is tough

 

[skribs]

I can argue both sides of this, but let me offer this as an analog: what if the requirement were to compete (not win, just be in) a tournament of some sort? That's also outside of the school, and (usually) isn't something specifically offered. Of course, he could be training them for the competition, so it's not quite the same, but there are some similar points.

My experience in competitions is that the school usually goes to competitions, with your instructors being your coaches. This has been true in all three of the competitive arts I've trained.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

BJJ does include striking... unless you're in a very sport/competition oriented school.

Traditionally it does, although at a very basic level intending to set up grappling opportunities. However I think there's a modern trend for BJJ gyms to delegate striking instruction to separate MMA/Muay Thai/Boxing classes.

I think just about every other BJJ black belt I know personally is at least basically competent in striking. Some are even pretty expert in striking. However I'm the only one that I'm aware of in my circle* who teaches striking in my BJJ classes.

*I do know of BJJ schools elsewhere that include basic striking in their curriculum. It's also possible that some of my friends include striking in their BJJ classes and I just haven't been there to see it at the time. But I get the strong impression that the majority of academies these days have separated that aspect of instruction out into separate classes.

 

[skribs]

Traditionally it does, although at a very basic level intending to set up grappling opportunities. However I think there's a modern trend for BJJ gyms to delegate striking instruction to separate MMA/Muay Thai/Boxing classes.

I think just about every other BJJ black belt I know personally is at least basically competent in striking. Some are even pretty expert in striking. However I'm the only one that I'm aware of in my circle* who teaches striking in my BJJ classes.

*I do know of BJJ schools elsewhere that include basic striking in their curriculum. It's also possible that some of my friends include striking in their BJJ classes and I just haven't been there to see it at the time. But I get the strong impression that the majority of academies these days have separated that aspect of instruction out into separate classes.

I think it depends on the lineage as well. Schools that focus on BJJ for MMA or BJJ for self-defense I think are more likely to include striking in their curriculum, but even then a lot of them have dedicated striking classes.

 

[Holmejr]

I suppose also, at least in my area, many of the schools offer more than one MA in-house. One school offers BJJ, Muay Thai and Kali. So in fact folks are cross training or encouraged to cross train, most likely under the guide of a head instructor.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

My experience in competitions is that the school usually goes to competitions, with your instructors being your coaches. This has been true in all three of the competitive arts I've trained.

I think that's true within TKD and BJJ in a lot of cases. The Karate dojo I taught at, some (maybe even all) of the BB had competed, but they didn't train for it or go as a group - it was an individual thing that was encouraged, as I understand it.

 

[skribs]

I think that's true within TKD and BJJ in a lot of cases. The Karate dojo I taught at, some (maybe even all) of the BB had competed, but they didn't train for it or go as a group - it was an individual thing that was encouraged, as I understand it.

If it was just encouraged, but not required, then it's a bit out of scope of this thread. If it was required, then it's still using techniques you learned in class. Unless you're talking about them going to a wrestling match after training punches and kicks.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

If it was just encouraged, but not required, then it's a bit out of scope of this thread. If it was required, then it's still using techniques you learned in class. Unless you're talking about them going to a wrestling match after training punches and kicks.

I think he was just pointing out a school that you can go to competitions without it being something you go to with your school. I've seen a couple schools like that, going against your own experience of the two being together.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

If it was just encouraged, but not required, then it's a bit out of scope of this thread. If it was required, then it's still using techniques you learned in class. Unless you're talking about them going to a wrestling match after training punches and kicks.

That's true, but there's a difference between being trained for competition and just going to competition with what you were taught, when there was no focus on that competition context. It's definitely not as different as the original point.