the mentality of training for no belt

[jarrod]

at my old gym (the welcome mat) your belt was pretty much just an indicator of how long you've been around, how hard you've worked, & what your skill set is. black belts weren't sirs or senseis, they were just wrestlers who had been around the longest & done a lot of work. it was handy because you knew who to go to if you had a question.

but for myself anyway, if i'm training a style without a belt, i don't give a damn, i just train. but if the style has a belt system then hell yeah i want the next rank. rather i want to earn the next rank. if i respect the coaches & the leadership of that style (& why else would i train there?) then their recognition means something to me. whether a style has belts or not, the instructors have to motivate the students. whether it's belts or hearing "nice combo" during sparring, athletes need motivation.

if i don't care about the rank in a ranked system, it's essentially the same as hearing a compliment from your coach & taking no pride in it whatsoever. so why would you want to train with a coach who's opinion you didn't give a damn about?

jf

 

[Live True]

I definatley want to respond to the great thoughts and replies, but have no time today...but wanted to say thank you for all the good comments...interesting readings and good thoughts!
Thank you!
Shana

 

[Phoenix44]

I can't help but say this: preference for ranks and belts is not a peculiarly American phenomenon. Some of the the biggest egos I've ever run into are Japanese millionth-dan super-duper supreme grand masters whose apostles march around them in formation as if they're gods, and whose wives call them "sensei" at home. Yes, I realize they're very accomplished in their fields, but even Albert Einstein was probably just called "Al" when he was hanging around the house in his underwear. Sorry, but I had to get that off my chest.

I currently train in two arts, one with a rank system, and one without. Training without a rank system is more process oriented, and less goal oriented. Rank encourages working toward specific, achievable goals.

I think both are fine. One way may be more compatible with certain individuals. Training one way definitely affects my approach to the other. For both arts, I feel as though I'm in it for the "journey" and I also feel a sense of accomplishment when I achieve a specific goal. I realize some of this is a factor of maturity, like, "I'm not going anywhere, I'm in this for the long haul."

And if you really want to be competitive, you don't need ranks. You can always look at another student and wonder why she's been taught more than you have, or snicker about the "wrong" way he does a technique.

My pet peeves about rank are when the criteria for rank are not clear, or when rank is awarded inequitably. This engenders bad feelings, and diminishes the ranking system.

 

[Wo Fat]

I know there are several folks here who own thier own schools or train in schools that range from large groups to one on one teacher-student dynamics. I'v recently moved from training with a small group that had a belt system to training one on one with a new sensei who does not train to a belt level, and the experience has brought up an interesting observation.

I'm curious if anyone else has had the experience, either long term or for a short period, to train without a belt system. Did it affect your focus on training?

I know there are many discussions about the worth of a belt system as well as the misuses of such a system, and that is not my intent here.

If you are training in a dojo that has regular belt tests, scheduled in advance, and your kata and kumite are geared to a particular belt level, how does that affect your training and your viewpoint on your training...your focus?

If you are training in a dojo or less formal group, where you are training to skill sets, and they are not directly tied to a particular belt level (no regularly sheduled test, only training), does this change how you put the pieces/parts together and where you focus your attention or HOW you focus your attention?

Technically, this should have no affect, as you are training in a style, but realistically, how does it affect your focus and how you learn?

In traditional gung fu, there is no belt or sash ranking system. But in Western culture, it's not a good business model. The lack of a belt system does, however, free up a person's mind to focus their studies and attention on the art and the journey. Rather than taking from the art, people are then free to give back to the art.

Not saying that people who have belts don't give back to their arts, however.

 

[ap Oweyn]

I have mixed feelings on the matter. I trained in two belt systems (taekwondo and eskrima) for a cumulative 10 years before switching clubs again. And I've been without a belt system for the past 15 years or so.

People like to say that belt systems shift the focus from skill sets to attainment of the next coloured piece of cloth. And that's certainly possible. But if a curriculum is well structured, then that piece of cloth shouldn't be attained until the student has mastered those skill sets. So the trouble isn't the belt system itself, but the way it's implemented.

Selling belts for testing fees is wrong, certainly. But that just means a decent tool is being used wrongly. We don't abandon hammers just because people might use them to break into a house. Hammers are useful, used properly.

I don't see a big problem with lending some structure to the self-development effort. In fact, in the fields of counseling and psychology, academic advising, and similar fields, they're essential. "Treatment plans" break down the goals of the client, what smaller objectives have to be met in order to met the larger goals, what a realistic timeline is for achieving those objectives, and some criteria by which to judge success. A belt system does all of those things, done properly. It lays out a timeline and smaller, more manageable pieces of information in a way that benefits from the experiences of people who have been there before you.

I know that the "no belt" advocates (and remember that I don't train in a belt system myself these days) often point out that structure prevents experiencing your training "in the moment." But I might counter that, if you analyzed those moments in the rear view mirror, you might well find that your "flow state" wasn't necessarily pushing you as hard as you could've been pushed. People tend to reach higher benchmarks when the targets are clear, concise, and realistic. Compare that with the vagaries of "self perfection" and "individual expression."

While I've thoroughly enjoyed training in the systems and camps that I have, I think there's value in knowing where you are and, very clearly, where you want to be next. Now, that doesn't necessarily require a belt system. But it does help enormously to sit down and either heed someone else's thoughts on specifically what comes next or (even better) lay out the plan yourself.

Going ahead without some clear sense of vision is a blueprint for mediocrity.

No belt system feels "freeing," but it also can (though doesn't necessarily) remove from us a feeling of accountability. It makes it possible for us to float in a nebulous state of "self-discovery" that is really just a philosophical paint job on a basic lack of direction.

I hope it goes without saying (though I'm saying it anyway) that YMMV. Just my thoughts. But I do think there are some very valid reasons to retain a system of some sort.


Stuart

 

[girlbug2]

Okay, not a teacher or school owner--but as a parent and as a student, here's what I've observed:

Some people seem to need the colored belt system to motivate them, others would be just as happy if not happier without it. The former outnumbers the latter.

It's like the grading system at school. Grades are a reward for obtaining a certain measurable progress. Some students work for their grades, period. In fact I'd say the system encourages that mindset, study to get an "A", to raise your GPA, etc. The focus of a grading system is inevitably on the grade more than the knowledge itself. While that isn't good IMO, I am realistic enough to realize that a lot of these students would never bother to try to get the knowledge without grades as the bait. So at least it does some good for them in that sense.

Then there are the self-motivated students. These are the exceptions. They are the ones who study outside of the requirements, because they are interested in the subject. They are in it for the knowledge, with grades as a side benefit.

If a karate school were to count on running with only self-motivated students, then I'm sorry to say I don't think that school would be in business for long. There simply are not enough of that kind of students out there to keep a school afloat. Self-motivated people are wonderful, but rare. If the world were comprised of self-motivated people, we would have no need of middle management or grading systems. What a different world that would be!

 

[bekkilyn]

girlbug2's post makes me wonder if a reason for the lack of self-motivated people is due to having a "crutch" such as a belt system (grades, etc.) in the first place? And then it just feeds into a continuous cycle making belts "necessary" for MA to survive. Would there be many more self-motivated people in MA if there had never been a belt system?

For the record, my current classes have no belts, but it wouldn't matter to me either way so long as I'm learning something. Being a beginner, I definitely won't have to worry about running out of things to learn anytime soon.

 

[juikata]

Regarding your training wihtout the emphasis on belts, here is my experience that perhaps I can share with you. I have studied under an instructor where rank wasn't the priority. It was common for students to wear the same rank for a couple of years. The emphasis was on technique, principles and the art it self. To get a black belt , it would take on average a 10 year period. And not everyone rec'd a black belt. This was not a black belt school that many big box karate schools advertise. When you finally achieved black belt status, it was a big accomplishment. I have to say i cringe, when i see students who receive black belts in 3 years and have no concept of structure, ki flow or an understanding of the art they studied. When a child of 10 achieves a black belt and the parents are proud of their son/daughter wearing a black belt it does a great diservice to the art. Unfortunatley people lack commitment, so schools offer instant gratification by offering belt promotions every few months. Students fly through the rank. Its not the rank that matters , it is about the dedication and the quality you possess in your techniques, combining the mental and physical as one. A three year black belt simply lacks any understanding of what a true black belt means. Originally a beginning student wore a white belt to hold up his Gi .With time that white belt became darker and darker from sweat and grime finally turning to black. So don't worry about the rank, just learn as much as you can. With time you will come to understand that studying the martial arts in intrinsic.

 

[Blindside]

Originally a beginning student wore a white belt to hold up his Gi .With time that white belt became darker and darker from sweat and grime finally turning to black.

That belt tale is a parable.

 

[Bruno@MT]

I don't train for belts, but I do like the idea of grading. In genbukan, all kyu levels are green, all dan levels black. The idea of grading is nice because genbukan has a fixed curriculum for each grade, and grading is the same across the entire org. Reaching black belt takes 7-10 years (if you train hard enough) so the emphasis is on mastery of the curriculum, not a succession of belt colors.

That said, koryu systems still work without belts or grades (well, kinda) so I guess both approaches work.

 

[Omar B]

Sometimes I think the holistic approach of the first generation of Hapkido or something similar was amazing. Guys get together and train with their instructor working basics and concepts and it takes about 5 years to cover all the material and the cycle be started again. You could stay witht he insturctor through the whole cycle twice, or join in the middle and stay and catch up. Although guys who did train with Jae often left and some flavors of Hapkido look vastly different becauset hey joined and left without seeign the whole system.

 

[Grenadier]

That belt tale is a parable.

No kidding. If a belt did get so grimy and filthy as to turn yellow (ugh), to brown, to black, then I would be more worried about the degradation of the cotton fibers used in the belt, since bacteria, fungi, etc., can certainly employ it as a carbon source.

 

[Andrew Green]

I have to say i cringe, when i see students who receive black belts in 3 years and have no concept of structure, ki flow or an understanding of the art they studied.

Asian Superstitions should have no more impact on your training then witchcraft or Alchemy have on wrestling and boxing IMO.

A three year black belt simply lacks any understanding of what a true black belt means.

Well, don't go to Japan or anything then, 3-years is more then sufficient for Shodan (which basically means "first step" and isn't a big deal)

Originally a beginning student wore a white belt to hold up his Gi .With time that white belt became darker and darker from sweat and grime finally turning to black. So don't worry about the rank, just learn as much as you can. With time you will come to understand that studying the martial arts in intrinsic.

It's a cute story, but it's also complete nonsense. Japan is a small, densely populated region. Neatness is rather important there, showing up for class with a dirty belt would be a big no-no.

 

[Live True]

First, my gratitude for the good thoughts and interesting conversations! I'm sorry it's taken me so long to respond to the discussion going on here!

SgtMac-some good questions. I originally thought I was getting into karate to get in better shape and release some pent up aggression, but I have since learned that it is an incredible learning experience that directs my agression, builds my body/mind/spirit, teaches me much about my world and the physics that lay beneath, challenges me, builds up my self-esteem as well as my self-awareness, and so much more. I can't begin to say how much this has given and pushed me in many good directions. Perhaps, that is why I am liking the no belt system I am in now, as I am focusing on the journey and pushing myself physically and mentally. It's not just fun, it's challenging, and I'm loving it!
I find your thoughts on casual versus serious martial artist interesting. I think I have always considered myself a casual martial artist because I can only train with my sensei one day/week, and only train on my own 2-4 times a week. But I take my training seriously when I train, and I find it incorporates into so much of my daily life in lots of little ways.
Just what does seperate a casual MAist from a serious one?

Satt, Omar, JDenver, and Wo Fat-yup, that's what i'm focusing on now, training and the journey..not "the next step" to X belt.
I really don't look at it as Self improvement though, I simply look at it as learning and enjoying the process. I guess it's the same thing, but I'm doing it because of my interest in the subject...not simply to improve myself. There is an innate sense of joy missing when I think of doing something for "self improvement". Now, that doesn't mean I don't do things for that very goal, and I think improving your self on general principle is a recommended idea. However, I am enough of a hedonist that I try to incorporate enjoyment into what I do for my own improvement as well. For example, karate, weights, and belly dancing for physical fitness...all feel good and DO good. While I wouldn't sit down and read a calculus book for it's own sake, I would pull out an advanced astronomy or physics book for the enjoyment of learning the theories. I've also been known to pull out a chemistry book to understand the properties of various herbs and plants I'm working with at home...so balance is the key, IMHO. Omar, when you use the term self-improvement, what exactly does that conjur in your mind?

Grenadier, MJS, Andrew, Tallgeese, Jarrod, girlbug, and Bruno-I can appreciate your points about a clearly defined progression as well as rewarding progress. For me, though, to have my sensei tell me "well done" is reward (especially as not something I get every session, so it's not a "bone" tossed carelessly). I guess that goes to Jarrod's point about the worth of a rank and compliment, as well as what each individual feels is a "reward".

Still, in running a school, a many have said, that reward and progression may be necessary. I like the idea about helping a student past the beginning so they can move towards, perhaps, more of an ideal. Start the journey and get to a point where you suddenly realize you are enjoying the journey as much as the destination....cool!

Andrew's point about the damage that can be done, though is a fair one. In my last dojo, there was much harm caused to the small group by the appearance of partiality in advancement, and it harmed the school as well as the student.

Tallgeese, I admire the middle ground you seem to have found with your students. It allows rank and progression without focusing on that. Not an easy boundary to walk for many, and it sounds like you do well. Perhaps, in time, I will find "well done" not enough...and want a testing...we'll cross that bridge when we get there as I have SOOO MUCH to learn right now!

Girlbug, I find it sad that the self motivated student is rare..is that the fault of the student or the teacher...or is fault the right word?

Bobby135 and Haze-It makes sense that age and maturity could affect the appeal of one type of training over another. I don't think that means one type is better than another, though. I just think that different mental approaches will seek different things. I would hope those that started martial arts as children or teens, and continue into thier adult hood, would definately be seeking something different and more focused as they matured and grew older. As an adult beginner, I think the whole belt ranking system is interesting, but it's not as important to me, at least not at this time. I may go in complete reverse and WANT a ranking system once I've spent a few years training in this matter. It will be interesting to see. I wonder...of the students you began training with as a child or teen...how many are still training and do they seek different training methods now?

still learning, black lion, blindside, celtic crippler, ap Oweyn, and juikata-indeed...belt colour does not equate to level of skill and seems to involve less ego.
I also agree that having no defined path does seem to allow for more experimentation and adaptation to the moment. I can see how that could be seen as a path with strong potential for mediocrity, but I think it ultimately comes down to the teacher and the student. Mediocre students will often be mediocre whether they train belt or no belt, as they will seek to go only as far as pushed.
Juikata-I can also see how that freedom to adaptation can allow one to explore the concepts of ki and flow and determine if they work for you or if they are merely mystical bunk....that really is up to each person to decide. I've seen good martial artists with both beliefs. I respect both paths and believe they run together and parallel more often than not. But I also believe biodiversity is the best model for survival of any knowledge or species...so I'll leave it at that.

Now, the untrained mind has potential to go either way, and I think the typical younger and/or beginner student is more likely to need or benefit from the occasional push or the closely defined structure.
..but it again comes back to why you started to train in the first place. For me, at this moment in my training, the no belt does seem to equate to focusing on skill. Perhaps it is just a better fit for my personality...at this point, I really don't know...only time will show if I train better or worse. For now, I feel like i'm training harder and learning much more.

Ap Oweyn, I can appreciate the belief that you simply won't train as hard if you don't have the structure, either through a belt or through your own design, to create goals. But my question to you, and anyone else, is what do you mean by training hard? In my last group, I felt like I did a lot of going through the motions and prepping for the next test. With my current teacher, I train hard every session. I am dripping wet, and I've learned AT LEAST 2-5 new things that advance my understanding and physical practice. In a once a week session, I am growing my mind and body....I would consider that training much harder....now...to your point..perhaps it was the implementation. But what do you consider training "hard"?

Phoenix-thanks for that lovely mental image of Al in his tighty whiteys:uhyeah:...but your point is well made. I've seen and heard too many horror stories about folks with swelled heads, perhaps from tying thier belts too tight? But I think you are right..perhaps it's more what is compatible with the person and thier needs at the time, rather than one way is superior to another. I would certainly agree that any rank critieria needs to be clear and equally applied to all. See above...been there as so many others, not pretty and not truly fair to anyone involved.

Bekkilyn-being a beginner myself (wow...actually beginning my third year) I too have SOOoooOO much to learn..fortunatley, there are some really good teachers out there!

Sorry for the long post, and hope I got the right impact of each of your posts...if not, please correct me..and thanks for the good discussion!

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Coming in late!

Belts make a useful teaching tool and a good organizational tool.

Used properly, they can motivate a student and help to get them through ruts that they may otherwise stay in longer. They allow a student to see their own progress in a tangible way and offer a bit of encouragement.

Used properly, belts and their associated ranks allow a new student to come in and know who is most able to answer their questions and for a higher ranking student (particularly in a large school where everyone does not regularly see eachother due to differing class schedules) to know to tone down and maybe be more understanding of a less experienced student without ever having to ask, 'are you new?'

There are those who use the belt system as a means of generating revenue and bilking customers, and this is often one of the criticisms of the belt system. But this is more a matter of an unethical school owner than any inherent flaw in the system itself.

I do not feel that beltless systems are in any way inferior or lacking; they generally have other means to accomplish the same ends in terms of the above.

Ultimately, students need to be learning the material regardless of what flavor the school has regarding belts.

Daniel

 

[Milt G.]

I know there are several folks here who own thier own schools or train in schools that range from large groups to one on one teacher-student dynamics. I'v recently moved from training with a small group that had a belt system to training one on one with a new sensei who does not train to a belt level, and the experience has brought up an interesting observation.

I'm curious if anyone else has had the experience, either long term or for a short period, to train without a belt system. Did it affect your focus on training?

I know there are many discussions about the worth of a belt system as well as the misuses of such a system, and that is not my intent here.

If you are training in a dojo that has regular belt tests, scheduled in advance, and your kata and kumite are geared to a particular belt level, how does that affect your training and your viewpoint on your training...your focus?

If you are training in a dojo or less formal group, where you are training to skill sets, and they are not directly tied to a particular belt level (no regularly sheduled test, only training), does this change how you put the pieces/parts together and where you focus your attention or HOW you focus your attention?

Technically, this should have no affect, as you are training in a style, but realistically, how does it affect your focus and how you learn?

Hello,
A belt system is only useful for two things, really.

#1. So a student can track, gauge or follow their own progress.
#2. So an instructor can tell, at a glance, where a student is in the learning continuum.

Other then these two things there is not much use for them. Especially as there are so many different standards out there. Sadly, their "over-emphasis", of late, has caused an overall lack of interest in the use and consistant application of the belt system in general.

You do not even need a belt to keep your gi pants closed, anymore.

Thank you,
Milt G.

 

[still learning]

Hello, Belts...just a system of measurements....NOT neccessary one's actual skills in actual combat....just measurements of progress....in there school requirements...

Kinda like a high school grades...1st...12th grade...means you pass...NOT necessary..educated for the real world.

Size of belts? ...may fall in another catagory.....46 inches,52 inches..69 inchs...78 inches...Size may matter here?

Aloha, What's you size? No. 14?

 

[Shuto]

I'm intrigued by this no belt concept. Are there any arts that are noted for that style? Is it more of an individual teacher thing?

 

[Live True]

Coming in late!

[...]
Used properly, belts and their associated ranks allow a new student to come in and know who is most able to answer their questions and for a higher ranking student (particularly in a large school where everyone does not regularly see eachother due to differing class schedules) to know to tone down and maybe be more understanding of a less experienced student without ever having to ask, 'are you new?'

There are those who use the belt system as a means of generating revenue and bilking customers, and this is often one of the criticisms of the belt system. But this is more a matter of an unethical school owner than any inherent flaw in the system itself.

Hello again Daniel! no worries about arriving late to the thread...good commentary is always appreciated!

With the exception of the unethical schools you mentioned, I agree that belts help you determine who might be a good resource or who you should give some lead room to. I've been fortunate that the folks I've trained with have taken thier belt levels as a "responsibility" as well as an honour.

I agree that it provides structure and highlights resources, but as all schools do not use the same points for advancement...this can also provide confusion and difficulty for the student that moves. I don't have a lot of experience in moving from school to school, but do most schools "test" you to see if you are up to "their" level of x coloured belt?

I agree with Milt's point in his post. I think the belt system has merit, but it also seems to create confusion when comparing school a to school b. Perhaps this is just a consistency problem between schools and organizations. But it is an interesting issue.

 

[Live True]

I'm intrigued by this no belt concept. Are there any arts that are noted for that style? Is it more of an individual teacher thing?

Shuto,
I will have to leave the answering of that question to more experienced folks than I. From what I have read adn discussed with others, it appears to be mostly an individual teacher situation. For me, I was dissatisfied with one instructor and in my search for another teacher, I found my current sensei. She and I train privately, for now, at least, and it is very much a traditional approach to a style or art and no belt curriculum.

I'm finding it a great learning experience and challenging. I wish you luck if you seek the same, wether it be in a belt system or without.