The Need for ranks and belts? You Opinion?

[Corporal Hicks]

Hi there people.
I've been training in Tae Kwon Do for about 3/4 years now and I was until recently pleased and happy with the idea of a grading system. Being naive at the time I thought that the higher the belt you were the more skilled and a better fighter you were, after doing Wing Chun I only realised that the grading system shows that you can only remember a set number of patterns (no comments) and set movements.

Take for example a guy in my Tae Kwon Do class, about a year ago i thought this guy was good at fighting and TKD (I respected him), he was aggressive he looked good with his patterns he looked strong. After doing Wing Chun I was watching him yesterday. He was too rigid (no relaxing) and his attacks were only aggressive, (that doesnt make a good fighter as we know). Not only that he was performing knife hand strikes and although he looked good his arms were too tense and he was throwing his arm out so it wasnt a snap.

Havnt taken into account i'm not expert and others wouldnt know any better I just thought this is stupid. This guy is a second dan (two above black) and he's meant to be good, yet he knows next to nothing about fighting or self defence.

Surely a belt doesnt mean anything if you could not defend yourself successfully in a real fight and just because you can train once or twice a week over a set number of years doesnt make you good either. Your views please?

Should belts (if you have any) be based upon ability if your looking at it from a fighting or self defence ability and I mean the general idea of Martial Arts is to fight right? I mean there is the art part which could be used as the idea for belts and your development into the ART but surely apart from that its a misleading idea!

Regards

P.S or maybe I'm in a MacDojo

 

[DeLamar.J]

The belts dont reflect how good of a fighter you are, they reflect how far you are in the learning system, that way your not teaching someone who has been there for 5 years the basic movements. If you have a small class and can personally know where each student is in there training, then belts wouldnt really be needed. But when your art is mainstream and brought to the masses like TKD is, you need to have a belt ranking system.
Also its about giving the general public what they want, a colored belt, it keeps them comming back. More serious martial artists dont care much for belts, but those types are far and few, and dont keep 90% of the money comming in.

 

[Corporal Hicks]

More serious martial artists dont care much for belts, but those types are far and few, and dont keep 90% of the money comming in.

I would amen that! I see what you mean, mainly for public purposes then!

Regards

 

[MJS]

The belts dont reflect how good of a fighter you are, they reflect how far you are in the learning system, that way your not teaching someone who has been there for 5 years the basic movements. If you have a small class and can personally know where each student is in there training, then belts wouldnt really be needed. But when your art is mainstream and brought to the masses like TKD is, you need to have a belt ranking system.
Also its about giving the general public what they want, a colored belt, it keeps them comming back. More serious martial artists dont care much for belts, but those types are far and few, and dont keep 90% of the money comming in.

Good post! I agree with the fact that the belt is not an indicator of how well a person can fight. One would think that if they saw someone with a BB of a various rank, that their skills are good, but the reality of it is that its not always the case. Wearing a high rank does not turn someone into a Superman.

I also agree with the fact of the colored belts keeping people coming back. Yes, it is a great motivation, as people can see themselves progress, but when it gets to the point when you have "Johnnys" mom complaining because "Johnny" started at the same time as "Joey" and "Joey" is getting his next belt before "Johnny", then it just shows that people are there for the belts, and not to actually learn anything. In addition, this situation is not limited to just kids, as adults can often act like kids as well.

Mike

 

[terryl965]

I concur with everyone, the only thing I would add is no belt no-matter how high ranking you are, they all been beat one time or another especially if they do tournament fighting. nobody is undefeated. With that being said in today market people can only judge if they are getting better by the belt system that is how western civilazation has programmed the weary parents of said child.

 

[loki09789]

Belt rank, ranking systems in martial arts are for structuring the material into short and long term goals. They are no indicator of will, determination, character, fighting skill, .....

All they do is let you and other members of the system know where you are in the system material on your way to 'total system knowledge.'

That is not a bad thing. As long as instructors, students don't tag on all kinds of other meanings to the rank, belts/ranking is an effective learning tool for both instructors and students.

Non ranked system training has it's disadvantages too though. People tend to work better and with more effective mental focus with clear short and long term goals established. In an unranked system, how do you know where you are in relation to that idea of 'total system knowledge?' It is easier for personal power games to occur unchecked/unexposed.

In either setting, somekind of standard of skill/performance or progression of learning needs to be clearly outlined so that everyone knows what skills/drills/patterns/applications make up the total material.

I work with a 'rank structure' that exists on paper but we don't wear rank in the class. It is only used for the sake of structuring the material for instruction.

 

[TonyM.]

Having trained in systems with and without belts, I've come to the conclusion it's all good stuff, only the belts are superfluous. I prefer braces or suspenders anyway.

 

[Mark L]

Good comments, I mostly agree. The presence of a ranking system indicates to me that there is a specific curriculum (the system) that is being taught, and the student must learn and become proficient with specific information for each rank. Does this equate to fighting ability? Not necessarily, but I feel there should be a fairly strong correlation between rank and ability. That being said, I don't think any given rank need always be better than those ranked lower. But there should be a trend. Whether I'm point sparring, contact sparring, doing self defense, or ground fighting I'd damn well better win most battles with lower ranks. Black belts should be better than browns, browns better than greens, greens better than blues, etc. We all have our moments when we're not sharp, but you shouldn't be promoted if you haven't demonstrated superior knowledge and the ability to apply it copnsistently.

Just my opinion ...

 

[DarrenJew]

I think its a badge of accomplisment a goal for student to attain. I can see the purpose of this. Idon't come from a school that has ranks, does this also symbolize the hiarchey for students?

All we had... when I was taught:

Si Bok (uncle)= your teacher's Si-Hing
Si Dai = a male classmate who joined a school after you
Si Fu = your teacher
Si Gung = your teacher's teacher
Si Hing = a male classmate who joined the school before you
Si Je = a female classmate who joined the school before you
Si Mo = your teacher's wife
Si Sook or si suk (younger uncle) = your teacher's classmates who started after him

As for forms and kata's most people seemed to move at their own pace. Some people were good at fighting, some good at sets. Some were just good at moral support and philosophy... cooking ,moving furniture.... what-ever. It really was more of an extended family than a sturctured school.

If the school is small I see no harm in having a non-structured school. If you have hundreds of students... 3 classes a day 5 days a week. I don't see how a non-structured class can work.

 

[jjmcc]

Having trained in systems with and without belts, I've come to the conclusion it's all good stuff, only the belts are superfluous. I prefer braces or suspenders anyway.

BELTS ARE GOOD FOR HOLDING YOUR TROUSERS UP...:whip:

 

[Corporal Hicks]

BELTS ARE GOOD FOR HOLDING YOUR TROUSERS UP...:whip:

Lol! I've heard that somewhere before regarding Martial Arts, wasnt it Bruce Lee in Tao Of Gung Fu, I cant remember!

 

[cashwo]

Was it in the Karate Kid?

Oh wow, I'm a green belt now!!! hehehehehehe

 

[jjmcc]

It was in Dragon the Bruce Li story.......

 

[Danjo]

As Bruce Tegner once said (yes I'm actually quoting him) "...the various styles, schools and teachers do not usually recognize belts which are earned in a different style or school...each system selects its color scheme and it is impossible to know what that rank signifies unless you know the requirements of the system." For instance, in most schools of Brazilian Jiu Jitsu, the belt rank DOES mean that you can beat the lower ranked students in fighting/rolling etc. You don't get promoted until you can consistently beat those at your same rank and those above you from time to time. But that is not the case everywhere and so ranking is very limited in meaning. A black belt in one system might mean that you can really fight, while in another it might merely mean that you have gained proficieny in that system's karate-shaped aerobics etc.

 

[Kunoichi]

How do you folks feel about the Bujinkan(ninjutsu)'s way of ranking?
Before black there are 10 kyu ranks. Instead of having a rainbow of colours in the dojo, every student starts at white then at their first grading they get a green belt (if they pass, that is). As the student gets better they progress through the ranks wearing the same belt until black belt is reached. Personally I really like this method as the student (and teacher) are aware of the progress they are making but all other students only judged by the skill they show. No-one feels or acts superior to others because they have a different belt.

Is this a good thing/bad thing/no different to having tonnes of different colours?

 

[Floating Egg]

I'd prefer to not have a rank because I'm more interested in the journey than what's at the end, but since I'm in a minority, the Bujinkan way of dealing with rank is just fine.

 

[shtygolfr]

The school I studied a couple years ago I felt was a belt factory of some sorts. If you showed up on stripe week, you got a stripe, if you showed up for testing, you got a belt. At least at the lower belt ranks and that is where I agree... people keep coming back for the next belt.

I personally skipped testing twice because I wasn't happy with my knowledge and skill. Although, I had my stripes, I didn't come for testing.

Personally, I like the belt for myself because when I wear it, I know I earned it. I would study every technique in a room in front of a mirror in my home for hours on end late into the night until I could do them eyes closed forward and back. Same with forms. Forms are front and back, sometimes, left and right sides until it is effortless.

 

[dubljay]

For myself, belts hold very little value. To me a belt has no reflection of ability and knowledge of the wearer. In my training I have come across higher ranked individuals that did not know as much as their rank implied, and likewise I have encountered more than a few beginners that after a short time were very skilled.



Often in conversations when questioned about my training in martial arts I do not give a rank. I simply say that I am a student, and that will never change. This does not mean I do not acknowledge the belt I wear, like many (most likely all) here I know that belt is a direct reflection of my knowledge and ability. Oddly enough in my training I never really had a belt exam, except when I first tested for yellow and orange. I would show up as often as possible, and really without my realizing it, my instructor would test me.

However, belts do represent something of value in that they are short term goals that can be reached. I freely admit that I wanted to become a yellow belt then orange as soon as possible simply because they were higher belts. But I knew once I reached that level I would never stop training.

I believe most people experience this at some point in their training. They soon discover no matter their rank, or lack there of, they will continue to train.


A favorite quote of Ed Parker: "Although the belt colors show, it is not proof that they know"

-Josh-

 

[digitalronin]

One of the negatives of belt systems are the fees. When u tell a student they worked hard and earned the belt but still charge them, it taints the image of martial arts. Belts on the other hand are good to establish that a students has learned a piece of the system's knowledge.

 

[Drac]

I concur with everyone, the only thing I would add is no belt no-matter how high ranking you are, they all been beat one time or another especially if they do tournament fighting. nobody is undefeated. With that being said in today market people can only judge if they are getting better by the belt system that is how western civilazation has programmed the weary parents of said child.

I heard that and agree..