Starting over with belts, yes, but techniques?

A

Angus

Guest
So, here's a question for both instructors and students who have an opinion. When someone who has much previous martial art experiences that are both recent and extensive, do you make them start from the very beginning again? I'm not talking belt wise, because that SHOULD happen. What I mean is, if a Taekwondo blackbelt goes into, say, a karate school, do you force them to only do front kicks until they get their yellow belt, or allow them to participate in advanced drills as their skill allows, regardless of what belt they are in the current system?

I ask this because this happened to me at a school I might have potentially studied at further, but it drove me nuts having most of my skill in my kicks to be forced to be stuck only doing front kicks when I can perform and teach them better than the "advanced students". I'm curious on your thoughts to this.

I can say that with my experience I would evaluate the students technique prior to relegating them to certain performing only certain moves. Obviously as systems differ slightly in execution, I would show them how our art does them and show that I expect them to be able to perform it this way correctly, though not disallowing them from their way, either. However, I don't think that I would require them to start completely from the beginning technique-wise just because of their belt color.
 
When I was studying EPAK I was at more than 3 schools and each one wanted me to start over again learning techniques etc.

Was it right?

Who knows?

Each person has their own way of doing things. You wanna be in the program you have to get with the program.
 
What you are describing is common in traditional arts. I wouldn't do it in Modern Arnis but it is familair to me from Japanese arts.
 
When I went from TSD to TKD, I did start at white belt, but they knew I knew more than a "white belt." If they did an advanced technique in class, they'd let me do it. The other white belt I was paired with stuck to the basics. I wasn't allowed to spar, though (which all white belts weren't allowed). TSD and TKD techniques are slightly different. But they would let me do what I knew till I learned otherwise (or it was time to learn that technique).

I hope this wasn't too confusing. I'm tired and rambling LOL.
 
Yeah Karatekid, that's what I'm saying. Starting at white belt and not being allowed to spar is understandable (the latter because it's best to know the person a little better before allowing them to fight another person), but you were allowed to do the techniques you knew.
 
If you are capable of a particular technique, then the instructor should not hold you back...

On the other hand, if your technique needs a lot of work based on your new system's standards, then yes, you should begin all over...

I think it is an individual thing and the instructor should evaluate each new student from other styles on a case by case basis.

:asian:
chufeng
 
Starting over with belts, yes, but techniques?

Most definately. Just because you've done extensive martial arts doesn't mean you've been blessed from the heavens of how to do those same things in different arts.

When I was an assistant instructor at our Kenpo school years ago, a GI came in explaining that he was a 1st dan in Shotokan and wanted to start training. He was incredibly upset when I explained he would need to learn Kenpo from the ground up. He left and never came back (good riddance).

What does Shotokan have to do with Kenpo? Nada

Though Taekwondo and Karate may have some simulartities, they are seperate beasts.

Hell...even training in the same art under two different teachers is an incredible difference. Each teacher has their own perspective on how things are done. Even mechanically speaking, one may have just one sentence that makes things more solid that was never shared (or thought of) by the previous.
 
I can see how it would be frustrating and often not very challenging but being forced to go back to the beginning again also has it's good points. It gives you a great chance to perfect the basics even further and when you finally do get up through the ranks, you're style will be all the more better for it. You won't be approaching the way you practice and learn the techniques the same way as the other white belts, and you may be surprised at what you discover even further about the simplest kicks and blocks etc.

Desiree McNie
 
For further clarification, I'm ONLY talking the techniques that do translate over. In Kenpo vs Shotokan, there really isn't a lot of similarity. However, if the person KNOWS certain techniques taught and can perform them proficiently, should they be held back anyway? Obviously there will be many techniques they won't know (as JB mentioned), and those I do think they should begin from the beginning with.

Jay, if it's the same thing in a different art, how is it different? If it's a basic technique, it's a basic technique. Granted, many arts have subtle variations (and some large variations), but if it's the same thing without variation, then how it is different? The fact that the art has a different name seems irrelevant to me. It doesn't require "being blessed from the heavens" if there are no changes.

AD, it wasn't really frustrating, and actually wasn't the final reason why I chose not to go there, and I eventually started over somewhere else. I quite enjoy starting over, actually, just I don't enjoy the inevitability of doing front kicks for 4 months straight when it's a kick I never use! :D

Interesting discussion, nevertheless. People seem fairly divided.
 
If you are coming from a TKD black belt background into Yiliquan (as an example, since it is the only thing I teach), you are starting over at square one. Period.

Why?

Because you know zero about Yili. Period.

You will do all the basic drills, all the basic techniques, etc., but you don't know how or why we do what we do the way we do it...

When I started Modern Arnis I was afforded a certain degree of consideration for the years I had spent in Yili. Certain movements, foot patterns, strikes and joint locks were virtually identical, and so we spent less time working on those aspects than on others. But in the final analysis how they are applied was what was missed out on. I know how we apply certain techniques pursuant to Yiliquan strategy and tactics. But those same techniques are applied in different ways in Modern Arnis. When I apply them, I lack the experience and knowledge of a Modern Arnis practitioner.

You can say that I am arguing which kills better, a 9mm or .45 (since both do a pretty good job equally well...), but I don't think so. There are plenty of folks that rage on and on about legitimacy in their arts (I'm one of them), and if you walk into my group and want to sport a black belt in what we do, then you will have to go through each and every step walked by everyone else. Doing anything less is cheapening the accumulated knowledge.

I'm not saying that a person can't progress more quickly through certain areas. A TKD fighter would obviously spend less time developing the pedal dexterity required for kicking, would need less time to develop the power of the kick, distance for application, etc. But I certainly wouldn't presume to walk into a Wing Chun school and say that, since I have already practiced CMA regardless of the extreme differences in styles, I should warrant some kind of special treatment while in their school.

I do Yiliquan, and have since 1986.

I started training in Modern Arnis in 2001, and Ryu Te Karate around June or so of last year. I am a rank amateur in each of them, period. Personally, with all the time I spent in kung fu, I don't think I warrant wearing even a white belt in Ryu Te (and I don't anyway, so I am saved that humiliation).

Those who are hung up on retaining their previous rank should let go of it completely to better embrace what it is they wish to have recognized in the first place...

Gambarimasu.
:asian:
 
I find that I find new meaning and technique in my "basic" forms and techniques almost evertime I go through them again. I would think it would be a blessing. When you get to thinking you are above certain techniques is usually when you get your butt kicked with them, at least in my experience.


7sm
 
Those who are hung up on retaining their previous rank should let go of it completely to better embrace what it is they wish to have recognized in the first place

very true. im in this situation right now. completely starting over. with a completely new style. and practicing the basics is just exciting to me. i have a new instructor with a new perspective and his attitude is that everything doesnt need to be changed, but nevertheless my techniques should be examined from the ground up and assessed. but all of the basics in the system will be tought and trained.

look at it this way, if you were teaching somebody that was an experienced practitioner and possibly a good prospect as an instructor in the future, how much material would you want to skip over at the start? im guessing not very much.
 
Originally posted by Yiliquan1


Those who are hung up on retaining their previous rank should let go of it completely to better embrace what it is they wish to have recognized in the first place... [/B]

Which is exactly what I didn't mean this discussion to be. Nothing about rank...rank begins over. Nobody is debating rank.

I'm simply asking whether you keep someone from practicing and receiving instruction on a technique which they already know the mechanics of (or one similiar to). Not to skip over the others, either, but rather not to be confined to them. Like you mentioned, if it's a different system completely with completely different movements, then they should start from the beginning with those techniques, and I agree.
 
Originally posted by Angus

Which is exactly what I didn't mean this discussion to be. Nothing about rank...rank begins over. Nobody is debating rank.

I realize this, but it requires emphasis. I have been approached in the past by people who wanted to "exchange" rankings... They were pretty surprised when I told them I had no interest whatsoever in such a thing. I will certainly share what I know with someone, and if they want to learn Yiliquan I will be happy to teach them, but "exchange" rank? Most assuredly not... :angry:

Didn't mean to imply that that was what you were talking about, just trying to make things painfully clear.

I'm simply asking whether you keep someone from practicing and receiving instruction on a technique which they already know the mechanics of (or one similiar to). Not to skip over the others, either, but rather not to be confined to them.

When I was first training in Yiliquan, I remember that while we had students of different experience levels (just talking about Yili levels here), nobody was ever excluded from training that was "above" them... If they felt up to it, come on in. Most folks were content working on the things they had on their plate at the time, and weren't all that fired up to tackle things they weren't ready for. The few that did inevitably stepped away from it the second time 'round.

In teaching folks with other backgrounds, I have made use of what they knew as a starting point, a springboard for their understanding of how Yili does what it does, but that is it. While it was helpful and negated the necessity of long airline speeches about certain movements, ultimately the entire techique had to be relearned anyway.

Like you mentioned, if it's a different system completely with completely different movements, then they should start from the beginning with those techniques, and I agree.

And I think that is the real issue at hand... If you are a Jujutsu black belt, can you walk into a Wing Chun school and be expected to hang with the Wing Chun seniors? Going from TKD to Sombo? From Taijiquan to Arnis? In situations like that, it is best just to keep your mouth shut and your mind open... ;)

Gambarimasu.
 
In my dojo there is no differance in what people do based on rank. When the Sensei demonstrates something to work on everyone from the multi-dan black belts to the person who just walked in off the street works on the same thing. The only diffferance is the level of intensity that each person is able to use, and that is determined by each student for themselves. I do not think that you EVER reach a level where there is a drill or move that you no longer need to work on. I do not belive you ever "move beond" the need to practice basics over and over and over again.


Despir Bear
 
When I changed from one ITF Tkd school to another ITF Tkd school I still had to start from the beginning.

Going back to white belt does change or take away the techniques you already know. Believing you are too good to be a white belt again is just imperialism.

Belts only signify what you know and not how good you are.

Too many people use the colour of their belts as status symbols to command immediate respect.

If it's an art you really want to study and you like the school then don't let the colour of your belt get in the way. Martial Arts is all about sacrifice and determination.
 
Originally posted by Angus

For further clarification, I'm ONLY talking the techniques that do translate over. In Kenpo vs Shotokan, there really isn't a lot of similarity. However, if the person KNOWS certain techniques taught and can perform them proficiently, should they be held back anyway? Obviously there will be many techniques they won't know (as JB mentioned), and those I do think they should begin from the beginning with.

Jay, if it's the same thing in a different art, how is it different? If it's a basic technique, it's a basic technique. Granted, many arts have subtle variations (and some large variations), but if it's the same thing without variation, then how it is different? The fact that the art has a different name seems irrelevant to me. It doesn't require "being blessed from the heavens" if there are no changes.

Angus,

If a person knows a certain technqiue proficiently...who is the judge of their ability? Themselves? Their previous instructor? Neither of those matter in the whole scheme of things. When I've taught people from other Dojo, they've made comments such as, "I'm pretty good at Omote Gyaku"...only to find weak form, improper timing and distancing and the like. All I'm suggesting is to stay open to the fact that your proficiency may not be agreed on by all parties...you may learn something new.

Same thing in a different art? A front kick from Taekwondo is not a front kick from Wing Chun. If you don't understand the mechanics of a Wing Chun front kick, then the knowledge of the TKD front kick will not help.
 
I think that wheather you "start over" with techniques/basics will depend on why you are at the other/new school. If you just want some bodies to train with them I think one should be able to use all of their skills/knowledge. However, if you want to learn a differnt art then you need to learn that new art from the begining. Kenpo with TKD kicks *isn't* Kenpo nor is TKD with a boxer's footwork TKD.
 
Angus wrote:

<For further clarification, I'm ONLY talking the techniques that do translate over. In Kenpo vs Shotokan, there really isn't a lot of similarity. However, if the person KNOWS certain techniques taught and can perform them proficiently, should they be held back anyway? Obviously there will be many techniques they won't know (as JB mentioned), and those I do think they should begin from the beginning with.>

I know where you're getting at :) No my dojang actually advanced me faster because I knew what I knew (despite the slight differences). But I did learn "their" way faster because of what I knew. Actually, the only thing I had to learn was their forms (WTF), one block was slightly different, and the term was different. Everything else was the same. The only thing I had a hard time with was the term, not the technique. Like TSD says round house kick and TKD says turning kick ..... stuff like that. Maybe it was because I study/studied only Korean arts.

If I went to Shotokan or something, TSD and Shotokan do the same forms, eventhough the techniques are different. Even then, I'd start over again, like I did with TKD. They might advance me faster because of the forms, but not the technique.

If I go to Judo (which is a definite in spring), I'd definitely be clueless LOL. I know nothing about Judo. There is nothing similar. I will be starting fresh with Judo. But I know it will be a very good combo with TKD (I'd be studying both).
 
When I started Judo and Aikido the instructors were impressed by my breakfalls, which had been requried in the Isshin-ryu Karate I was studying.
 

Latest Discussions

Back
Top