Stupid question: how do black belts learn when to promote people?

[skribs]

I want to be clear up front. I am not complaining about promotion times, or making any reference to someone getting promoted early or late. I'm just curious how black belts figure out the criteria for who should be promoted and when.

When I get a stripe, I don't know what the difference is between the day I got it, and the days before. I don't know what it is that my professor finally said, "Skribs is ready." Same for the other students. I am not aware of the decision-making process. I see that they are improving, and at some point in that improvement, they get a stripe. I've even had a friend complain to me, "I don't know what to work on to get my next stripe." It's generally considered taboo to ask about your own promotion status. It's even more out of line to ask about someone else.

Compare this with my experience in Taekwondo. It's very easy to learn who is ready for the next belt. You have a list of curriculum items that will be on the test. If the student can demonstrate those items, they're ready to test. I have tons of experience as an instructor, using this method to recommend to my Master who is ready to test, and then participating as a judge during the test. As a student, I was aware of this going on. I had my printout of what was going to be on the test, and I could check each item off as I memorized it.

How is it that black belts in BJJ go from the student that does not know when or why promotions are given out, to knowing when someone is ready?

 

[MadMartigan]

A question that I have as well. From what I've seen, it's a very subjective thing in BJJ (generally). I know there are some BJJ schools with structured curriculums... but for the ones that run as Skribs described, is it just "yeah, I've seen about a 1/4 improvement (between white and blue, etc) so put on a new stripe?"

 

[drop bear]

They guess pretty much.

 

[jks9199]

From the BJJ instructors I know -- it tends to be when they're consistently performing at the level the rank suggests they should be.

 

[mograph]

Not a stupid question: it's a good one.

 

[Dirty Dog]

From the BJJ instructors I know -- it tends to be when they're consistently performing at the level the rank suggests they should be.

Isn't that pretty much how every school should do it, regardless of the art?

 

[Tony Dismukes]

From the BJJ instructors I know -- it tends to be when they're consistently performing at the level the rank suggests they should be.

Isn't that pretty much how every school should do it, regardless of the art?

I think the question skribs is getting at is how does a BJJ instructor determine the level of performance that is appropriate for a given rank and whether a student is meeting that level.

First off, don't even worry about stripes (below black belt). There is no real standard for those in the BJJ community. There are some schools which lay out specific curriculum and/or time requirements, but they are very much in the minority. For the most part, they are basically "attaboys" to reassure a student that they are making progress even though they are likely going years in-between belt ranks. Ideally, they'd let you know that you're about 20% closer to the next belt rank, but I don't think most instructors track it that closely. In my experience it's more like "hey, you've been showing up for a while and I happen to notice that you've been making some clear progress. Here's a pat on the back to let you know that I see the improvement even if you don't."

Belt ranks are still subjective, but there's more consistency based on a shared community standard. By the time we get to black belt, we've seen a lot of blue belts, purple belts, brown belts, and black belts. We have an idea of the level of overall technical skill, sparring ability, fighting spirit, and well-roundedness that we expect to see from each level. I can list specific elements I want to see before promoting someone, but it's largely a "I know it when I see it" deal.

It's not perfectly consistent standards by any means. But the community tends to apply pressure towards some broad norms. Promote students whose ability is lower than expected, and you'll be looked down on. Hold students back too long and you'll be regarded as sandbagging (at least if those students are competing).

 

[Dirty Dog]

I think the question skribs is getting at is how does a BJJ instructor determine the level of performance that is appropriate for a given rank and whether a student is meeting that level.

I get that this is the question. My answer is the same. The same way instructors of any system do. "Can they perform the material for belt X at the skill level a person of belt x should display?"

 

[drop bear]

Otherwise seminars and competitions factor in.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I get that this is the question. My answer is the same. The same way instructors of any system do. "Can they perform the material for belt X at the skill level a person of belt x should display?"

Well, you've already hit upon one thing that differentiates BJJ ranks from many systems. For the most part, there is no "material for belt x." We usually try to start white belts off with certain fundamentals, but there is no blue belt/purple belt/brown belt/black belt material. (There are instructors who have designed curriculums with certain techniques required for certain belts, but they are very much in the minority.)

 

[skribs]

I think the question skribs is getting at is how does a BJJ instructor determine the level of performance that is appropriate for a given rank and whether a student is meeting that level.

First off, don't even worry about stripes (below black belt). There is no real standard for those in the BJJ community. There are some schools which lay out specific curriculum and/or time requirements, but they are very much in the minority. For the most part, they are basically "attaboys" to reassure a student that they are making progress even though they are likely going years in-between belt ranks. Ideally, they'd let you know that you're about 20% closer to the next belt rank, but I don't think most instructors track it that closely. In my experience it's more like "hey, you've been showing up for a while and I happen to notice that you've been making some clear progress. Here's a pat on the back to let you know that I see the improvement even if you don't."

Belt ranks are still subjective, but there's more consistency based on a shared community standard. By the time we get to black belt, we've seen a lot of blue belts, purple belts, brown belts, and black belts. We have an idea of the level of overall technical skill, sparring ability, fighting spirit, and well-roundedness that we expect to see from each level. I can list specific elements I want to see before promoting someone, but it's largely a "I know it when I see it" deal.

It's not perfectly consistent standards by any means. But the community tends to apply pressure towards some broad norms. Promote students whose ability is lower than expected, and you'll be looked down on. Hold students back too long and you'll be regarded as sandbagging (at least if those students are competing).

Maybe this is the wrong way of looking at it, but I kind of round to the nearest belt when I'm looking at people. At least, I used to.

When I first started, my school was fairly new. We had a handful of white belts, one "upper" white belt (3-stripe), a handful of blue belts, an "upper" blue belt (4-stripe), and a couple of purple belts. No brown, no other black belts (except for the Professor).

My experience the first few months with the blue belts was that they have complete control over the roll, because they have better skill than me and are focused on beating me. With the purple belts, it was that they have complete control, even though they hold back and let me play a bit. Then there's my professor, who's moving like the sloth from Zootopia and still has that complete control.

But then I was thinking, "well, that upper blue belt acts more like the purple belts...oh and that upper white belt acts more like the blue belts."

Maybe a weird way of looking at it, but my family often does have weird ways of looking at things.

I get that this is the question. My answer is the same. The same way instructors of any system do. "Can they perform the material for belt X at the skill level a person of belt x should display?"

The thing is, I don't really know that BJJ has "material for belt X". Especially not my school.

Edit: I would like to point out that I didn't read Tony's reply until after I said this.

 

[skribs]

Well, you've already hit upon one thing that differentiates BJJ ranks from many systems. For the most part, there is no "material for belt x." We usually try to start white belts off with certain fundamentals, but there is no blue belt/purple belt/brown belt/black belt material. (There are instructors who have designed curriculums with certain techniques required for certain belts, but they are very much in the minority.)

There's also an in-between. I watched one blue belt test on youtube. The test was very open-ended. For example:

• 3 sweeps from closed guard.
• 3 submissions from closed guard, at least one choke and one armlock.
• 3 closed guard passes.

Whereas in Hapkido, if we had ground techniques, it would be more like:

1. Flower Sweep
2. Scissor Sweep
3. Hip Bump
4. Arm Bar
5. Triangle Choke
6. Omoplata
7. Knee Cut
8. Toreando Pass
9. Double Under Pass

 

[Dirty Dog]

Well, you've already hit upon one thing that differentiates BJJ ranks from many systems. For the most part, there is no "material for belt x." We usually try to start white belts off with certain fundamentals, but there is no blue belt/purple belt/brown belt/black belt material. (There are instructors who have designed curriculums with certain techniques required for certain belts, but they are very much in the minority.)

Sure there is. Even if it's the same fundamentals you taught them at white belt but performed to a higher standard, it's still 'the material for X'. In point of fact, that is exactly how we do things.
To wear a white belt (10th geup), students learn Basic Form 1. For promotion to 9th, they do the same form, but to a higher standard.
The material for promotion to Chodanbo (Black Belt Candidate) is the same as for promotion to 1st Dan, but 1st Dan must be performed at a higher level.
The curriculum doesn't need to be formalized, it still exists. Performing at the level of X is still performing at the level of X, regardless of how formal the definition of X is.

 

[skribs]

Sure there is. Even if it's the same fundamentals you taught them at white belt but performed to a higher standard, it's still 'the material for X'. In point of fact, that is exactly how we do things.
To wear a white belt (10th geup), students learn Basic Form 1. For promotion to 9th, they do the same form, but to a higher standard.
The material for promotion to Chodanbo (Black Belt Candidate) is the same as for promotion to 1st Dan, but 1st Dan must be performed at a higher level.
The curriculum doesn't need to be formalized, it still exists. Performing at the level of X is still performing at the level of X, regardless of how formal the definition of X is.

Here is the curriculum for my BJJ school:

 

[Dirty Dog]

Here is the curriculum for my BJJ school:

Nah, that's just your understanding of the curriculum...

 

[skribs]

Nah, that's just your understanding of the curriculum...

We do anywhere from 2-3 techniques in any one class. We'll focus on one position for anywhere from a week to a month, and then move on to another position. For example, we might do closed guard for a month. We'll spend a week doing 2-3 pressure passes per class. They might be related, they might not. The next week, sweeps. Then speed passes, then submissions. Then we may spend a week doing lasso guard. Then two weeks on half guard. Then a week on side control. Then two weeks back in closed guard, followed by two weeks on an open guard. I missed a week and completely skipped over butterfly guard.

My professor says he's going to teach me 40% of what I'm going to learn about BJJ. The drills that we do in the first half of class make up the curriculum. The other 60% comes from:

• Figuring things out during rolls
• Upper belts giving us advice on what we're trying to do or how to counter what they're doing during rolls
• Outside research, such as videos, discussions, or cross-training (with the rule that -especially with videos or flashy techniques- you run it by the professor first)

There are things we were taught during the first month or two I was there, which anyone who started after has not learned. For example, I don't think we've touched half guard since my 2nd week, outside of a week or two on deep half guard.

An equivalent to Taekwondo would be if we picked a different kick every week. Or, some weeks maybe we do a punch or a grappling technique. So we might spend a week on back kicks. That's all we do. Monday we do a back kick, and then a spinning back kick. Tuesday, we do the same, but in street clothes. Wednesday and Thursday, we do some footwork tricks to set up the spinning back kick. Then Friday and Saturday, we do roundhouse kicks to set up the back kick. That's the first half of class. No punches. No grappling. Just back kicks and sometimes roundhouse kicks.

The second half of each class is sparring. If you have a completely new person, the only kick they know is a back kick. When an upper belt hits them with any other technique, that upper belt might teach them how to throw a roundhouse or a punch.

And then you never do back kicks again for 8 months, and anyone who started in the last 6 months or so has never done one. Unless it came up in sparring from an upper belt.

There are underlying concepts that bind every technique together. But that's not a curriculum.

I'm sure Tony or Drop Bear can correct me, corroborate me, or otherwise provide an alternative perspective on this.

 

[Dirty Dog]

We do anywhere from 2-3 techniques in any one class. We'll focus on one position for anywhere from a week to a month, and then move on to another position. For example, we might do closed guard for a month. We'll spend a week doing 2-3 pressure passes per class. They might be related, they might not. The next week, sweeps. Then speed passes, then submissions. Then we may spend a week doing lasso guard. Then two weeks on half guard. Then a week on side control. Then two weeks back in closed guard, followed by two weeks on an open guard. I missed a week and completely skipped over butterfly guard.

See? Curriculum.

An equivalent to Taekwondo would be if we picked a different kick every week. Or, some weeks maybe we do a punch or a grappling technique. So we might spend a week on back kicks. That's all we do. Monday we do a back kick, and then a spinning back kick. Tuesday, we do the same, but in street clothes. Wednesday and Thursday, we do some footwork tricks to set up the spinning back kick. Then Friday and Saturday, we do roundhouse kicks to set up the back kick. That's the first half of class. No punches. No grappling. Just back kicks and sometimes roundhouse kicks.

Sure, if that's how you want to teach your curriculum, then do it.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Sure there is. Even if it's the same fundamentals you taught them at white belt but performed to a higher standard, it's still 'the material for X'. In point of fact, that is exactly how we do things.
To wear a white belt (10th geup), students learn Basic Form 1. For promotion to 9th, they do the same form, but to a higher standard.
The material for promotion to Chodanbo (Black Belt Candidate) is the same as for promotion to 1st Dan, but 1st Dan must be performed at a higher level.
The curriculum doesn't need to be formalized, it still exists. Performing at the level of X is still performing at the level of X, regardless of how formal the definition of X is.

"Performing at the level of X" (X being a given rank) is certainly present in BJJ. What isn't present (in most schools) is specific material for a given rank.

In the example you just gave, students have to learn specific material for 10th geup and refine that same material for 9th. Students have to learn specific material for Chodanbo (which extends significantly beyond the material for 10th/9th geup) and then refine it for 1st Dan. You have specific material which is required for certain ranks, even if certain other ranks require the same material at a higher level.

BJJ is (for most schools) different. The "expected level for rank X" is generally about your overall ability to fight/grapple technically and solve problems that come up in various positions and situations, not how well you perform a toe hold or a triangle choke.

At the same time, it's not just "the fundamentals I taught them at white belt". There are a lot of techniques in BJJ. Depending on whether you're a lumper or a splitter, you can count possibly thousands of techniques or at least technical variations with more being invented all the time. Students will learn a lot of new techniques as they progress from white to black belt. But there isn't an expectation that a certain new technique will be learned by a certain belt rank.

I suppose you could say that I'm looking at the same fundamentals performed at a higher level for each rank if you re-define "material" to be broader than individual techniques. At each level I'm looking at a student's ability to protect themselves from strikes, establish and control the clinch, defend takedowns, execute takedowns, survive and escape bad positions, establish and maintain dominant positions, and defend/execute submissions (possibly using strikes to aid in the process). Getting from white belt to black belt proficiency at those skills will involve learning new techniques along the way, but I'm not necessarily expecting specific techniques at certain ranks as long as I see the student consistently demonstrate the abilities I just listed at the appropriate level. I suppose you could call that list the "material" for rank grading, but it's a bit different from what I've seen in most arts which have rank curriculums.

 

[skribs]

See? Curriculum.

Not really. It's a teaching method. But a curriculum implies there's structure and overt standards.

Sure, if that's how you want to teach your curriculum, then do it.

It was an analogy, not a plan.

My plan is somewhere in-between my TKD Master's rote curriculum and this.

Depending on whether you're a lumper or a splitter

I've never heard these terms before, can you elaborate on that?

At the same time, it's not just "the fundamentals I taught them at white belt". There are a lot of techniques in BJJ. Depending on whether you're a lumper or a splitter, you can count possibly thousands of techniques or at least technical variations with more being invented all the time. Students will learn a lot of new techniques as they progress from white to black belt. But there isn't an expectation that a certain new technique will be learned by a certain belt rank.

I was talking with our Muay Thai coach (also a BJJ black belt) about why my spinning back kick is so dang good. "I crunched the numbers, I estimate I've done 500,000 of them." I went on to say it's just like he has for all the Muay Thai techniques. Although he's probably only done 1000 of each BJJ technique, because there's just so many you can't have done them 500k times each. And why boxers are so good at punching, they probably do a million reps of each punch in a given year.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

My professor says he's going to teach me 40% of what I'm going to learn about BJJ. The drills that we do in the first half of class make up the curriculum. The other 60% comes from:

• Figuring things out during rolls
• Upper belts giving us advice on what we're trying to do or how to counter what they're doing during rolls
• Outside research, such as videos, discussions, or cross-training (with the rule that -especially with videos or flashy techniques- you run it by the professor first)

I can quibble with the percentages, but there's a lot of truth to that.

One thing I like to do is end class after sparring with a quick trouble-shooting session where we identify specific problems students had during sparring and quickly identify what they need to do to fix them. You can view that either as me adding a bit to the percentage that I'm teaching or as a way to make sure that they learn the lessons from sparring a little quicker.

We do anywhere from 2-3 techniques in any one class. We'll focus on one position for anywhere from a week to a month, and then move on to another position. For example, we might do closed guard for a month. We'll spend a week doing 2-3 pressure passes per class. They might be related, they might not. The next week, sweeps. Then speed passes, then submissions. Then we may spend a week doing lasso guard. Then two weeks on half guard. Then a week on side control. Then two weeks back in closed guard, followed by two weeks on an open guard. I missed a week and completely skipped over butterfly guard.

I'd say that's sort of a middle of the road approach. Some instructors just present a random grab-bag of techniques each class. Others will spend months deep-diving into a single position or technical cluster before moving on to the next. If you're spending a week to a month on each position, that's splitting the difference.

The difficulty for instructors is that there is so much material to cover in BJJ. If you add in strikes and takedowns (as I do), then there's even more. And it takes significant time to drill each one and provide feedback. In TKD you could line up your class and have everyone throw 50 front kicks, 50 side kicks, 50 roundhouse kicks, and 50 crescent kicks, see everyone well enough to spot who needs correction, and get through the exercise with plenty of time for whatever you're doing in the rest of class. That's not so easy in BJJ.

There are underlying concepts that bind every technique together. But that's not a curriculum.

It's not what most people consider a curriculum, but I rely on those concepts to make the material manageable. The better I can ingrain those concepts into my students, the quicker they learn new techniques or even figure them out on the fly.