You people were right, I should've clarified.

[Dirty Dog]

More along the lines that I didn't get a black belt when I had hoped to.

And you've been whining about it ever since... Let it go.

Your white belt must be getting dirty since you've had it for so long and used it so much, it might even be turning black.

You may have noticed at some time in your life that dirt isn't black...
If you don't wash your belt, it'll turn a sort of dirty gray/brown with maybe some green mold and fungi if you sweat a lot or live in a particularly humid locale.

And yes the black belt does turn white over time, and that's a sign of true experience, a black belt with the color coming off with use that is going to white.

I guess I don't have any "true experience" then, since I wouldn't wear a ratty belt any more than I'd wear a ratty dobak.

 

[PhotonGuy]

You got one now though?

Lets just say I was very very late.

 

[PhotonGuy]

And you've been whining about it ever since... Let it go.

TRANSK53 was asking a question, I was answering him.

You may have noticed at some time in your life that dirt isn't black...
If you don't wash your belt, it'll turn a sort of dirty gray/brown with maybe some green mold and fungi if you sweat a lot or live in a particularly humid locale.

I've never had a white belt that I've worn for a long time without washing.

I guess I don't have any "true experience" then, since I wouldn't wear a ratty belt any more than I'd wear a ratty dobak.

No, this should be obvious but a particular belt, or the absence of it does not give or take away from a person's experience, it simply symbolizes it.

 

[Steve]

No, this should be obvious but a particular belt, or the absence of it does not give or take away from a person's experience, it simply symbolizes it.

Great point.

 

[Zero]

TRANSK53 was asking a question, I was answering him.



I've never had a white belt that I've worn for a long time without washing.


No, this should be obvious but a particular belt, or the absence of it does not give or take away from a person's experience, it simply symbolizes it.

Actually, although Steve seems to agree, I am not sure I totally do on that, at least to the reference of what the belt symbolises.
You seem the be stating that if a particular person had:
(i) cross trained over many years, perhaps to relatively high levels in each style; or
(ii) had remained with a certain art and trained diligently and actually become a very adept fighter but for whatever reason, such as business or travel, had not been able to grade that often,

and due to the above had not obtained a black belt (or any belt), then the lack of such belt symbolises...what? It symbolises he has no experience? The lack of the belt symbolises (ie it portrays the image to others) that this guy is not experienced or a good fighter?

But surely this runs counter to not assuming the ability of another simply based on the belt colour they wear - and I thought you agreed with that?

I agree with you in that the absence of a belt does not take away from a person's actual experience or ability. But I am struggling to understand what you mean in the second part of your sentence as to what the lack of the belt actually symbolises?

Can you please explain further?


I am sure that this is a great point but I am slower on the uptake than Steve (Steve does bjj so he will be quicker at this kind of thing than a fighter of any other style (except perhaps Systema), and there's YouTube footage to support that!)

 

[PhotonGuy]

Actually, although Steve seems to agree, I am not sure I totally do on that, at least to the reference of what the belt symbolises.
You seem the be stating that if a particular person had:
(i) cross trained over many years, perhaps to relatively high levels in each style; or
(ii) had remained with a certain art and trained diligently and actually become a very adept fighter but for whatever reason, such as business or travel, had not been able to grade that often,

and due to the above had not obtained a black belt (or any belt), then the lack of such belt symbolises...what? It symbolises he has no experience? The lack of the belt symbolises (ie it portrays the image to others) that this guy is not experienced or a good fighter?

But surely this runs counter to not assuming the ability of another simply based on the belt colour they wear - and I thought you agreed with that?

I agree with you in that the absence of a belt does not take away from a person's actual experience or ability. But I am struggling to understand what you mean in the second part of your sentence as to what the lack of the belt actually symbolises?

Can you please explain further?


I am sure that this is a great point but I am slower on the uptake than Steve (Steve does bjj so he will be quicker at this kind of thing than a fighter of any other style (except perhaps Systema), and there's YouTube footage to support that!)

If a person happens to get a certain belt in a certain system it symbolizes that they've completed the challenge of getting that belt. A person doesn't have to get a certain belt to be experienced but some people want to take on the challenge of getting to a high belt. There are some people that will stop pursuing belts after awhile, I've known people who've stopped after getting a brown belt, ect. they still train and they still want to get better but they don't care for belts anymore. They might be just as good as people who've got higher belts but they just don't care to get any more belts. But, like I said, there are some people who want to take on the challenge of getting higher belts, by getting higher belts that symbolizes that they've completed that challenge. Exactly what that means would depend on where they train and the standards set by the place where they train at. Different dojos have different standards and different levels of difficulty. Belts are certainly not fool proof in showing just how experienced a person is, like all systems created by man its subject to error. In the same way that letter grades in school (A,B,C,D,F) show generally how well a student has learned the material but they aren't foolproof. A student might get an A in a class but that doesn't always mean they know more about the subject than a student who got a lower grade. Maybe the student who got the A happened to know more of the answers that were on the tests but might not have as much overall knowledge on the subject as the student who got a lower grade.

So if a student doesn't have a high belt it doesn't necessarily symbolize that the student is inexperienced, in some cases it does such as if the student is a beginner but it could also mean that the student hasn't tested for whatever reason. Maybe they've chosen not to test or maybe they've not been able to test due to other reasons as stated or maybe they train in a system that doesn't use rank.

 

[Dirty Dog]

There is no challenge to getting a belt. There is a challenge to gaining the skills.

The difference between these two statements has consistently eluded you. This may very well have some connection to the reasons it took you so long to be promoted. I know I am (as are others) reluctant to promote someone who doesn't grasp concepts like this.

 

[Transk53]

TRANSK53 was asking a question, I was answering him.

Yeah cool. This is the thing with belts

If a person happens to get a certain belt in a certain system it symbolizes that they've completed the challenge of getting that belt. A person doesn't have to get a certain belt to be experienced but some people want to take on the challenge of getting to a high belt. There are some people that will stop pursuing belts after awhile, I've known people who've stopped after getting a brown belt, ect. they still train and they still want to get better but they don't care for belts anymore. They might be just as good as people who've got higher belts but they just don't care to get any more belts. But, like I said, there are some people who want to take on the challenge of getting higher belts, by getting higher belts that symbolizes that they've completed that challenge. Exactly what that means would depend on where they train and the standards set by the place where they train at. Different dojos have different standards and different levels of difficulty. Belts are certainly not fool proof in showing just how experienced a person is, like all systems created by man its subject to error. In the same way that letter grades in school (A,B,C,D,F) show generally how well a student has learned the material but they aren't foolproof. A student might get an A in a class but that doesn't always mean they know more about the subject than a student who got a lower grade. Maybe the student who got the A happened to know more of the answers that were on the tests but might not have as much overall knowledge on the subject as the student who got a lower grade.

So if a student doesn't have a high belt it doesn't necessarily symbolize that the student is inexperienced, in some cases it does such as if the student is a beginner but it could also mean that the student hasn't tested for whatever reason. Maybe they've chosen not to test or maybe they've not been able to test due to other reasons as stated or maybe they train in a system that doesn't use rank.

Nice reply. The challenge to gaining a belt comes with the grading. Does not matter if the student is more than capable of gaining it, all the other life factors come into play. Thanks for posting

 

[tshadowchaser]

going to take this off the serious side for a moment.
on getting a belt:
I went to an event the other weekend and because my waist has expanded with age ( not got fat) I needed a new belt that would fit when I got there. The facility I went to is not only a school/training place but is listed as a supply store. I went in introduced myself and the asked if anyone was behind the counter that could sell me a belt. They questioned why I was there asked if I was a member of their style and then told me I had to wait till my host(the person that invited me to the event) arrived to see what he wanted to do with me.
I'm sorry your listed as a supply store sell me the damn belt.
I did get the belt when my host arrived he went to the counter and asked for one and they sold to him (I paid) on the spot. It coat me 3 times what I could buy one online for but that is the business side of running a school and for a different thread.
So in conclusion getting a belt is not always easy
ok now back to the serious stuff

edit: BTW I hate a great time at the event once my host got there and I met some nice people

 

[PhotonGuy]

There is no challenge to getting a belt. There is a challenge to gaining the skills..

Once you get the skills you then have to apply them when you test, and that involves being able to perform them well enough to pass. So to pass the test you have to perform under pressure. When somebody is under pressure their skills can diminish, part of the test is being able to perform well enough under such pressure. So, to get a belt, or to pass the test to get the belt is a challenge, at least at my place it is.

The difference between these two statements has consistently eluded you. This may very well have some connection to the reasons it took you so long to be promoted. I know I am (as are others) reluctant to promote someone who doesn't grasp concepts like this.

I've explained why it took me so long to be promoted and I don't think most people would want me to explain it again.

 

[PhotonGuy]

going to take this off the serious side for a moment.
on getting a belt:
I went to an event the other weekend and because my waist has expanded with age ( not got fat) I needed a new belt that would fit when I got there. The facility I went to is not only a school/training place but is listed as a supply store. I went in introduced myself and the asked if anyone was behind the counter that could sell me a belt. They questioned why I was there asked if I was a member of their style and then told me I had to wait till my host(the person that invited me to the event) arrived to see what he wanted to do with me.
I'm sorry your listed as a supply store sell me the damn belt.
I did get the belt when my host arrived he went to the counter and asked for one and they sold to him (I paid) on the spot. It coat me 3 times what I could buy one online for but that is the business side of running a school and for a different thread.
So in conclusion getting a belt is not always easy
ok now back to the serious stuff

edit: BTW I hate a great time at the event once my host got there and I met some nice people

Some schools are like that, they will only sell you a belt if they know you've earned it or of you can show them certification saying what your rank is or, in your case, if you have the proper connections. That's how it is at my school, after you pass a belt test you can then buy your next belt for about $5.00 except for the black belt which they just give to you once you pass the test without you paying anything for it. Technically you could say its a supply store since they will sell other martial arts paraphernalia such as uniforms to just anybody. But, there are supply stores that will sell anything, including any colored belt, to anybody although those places are usually just supply stores not a school that doubles as a supply store. And of course there's the internet.

 

[Steve]

Actually, although Steve seems to agree, I am not sure I totally do on that, at least to the reference of what the belt symbolises.
You seem the be stating that if a particular person had:
(i) cross trained over many years, perhaps to relatively high levels in each style; or
(ii) had remained with a certain art and trained diligently and actually become a very adept fighter but for whatever reason, such as business or travel, had not been able to grade that often,

and due to the above had not obtained a black belt (or any belt), then the lack of such belt symbolises...what? It symbolises he has no experience? The lack of the belt symbolises (ie it portrays the image to others) that this guy is not experienced or a good fighter?

But surely this runs counter to not assuming the ability of another simply based on the belt colour they wear - and I thought you agreed with that?

I agree with you in that the absence of a belt does not take away from a person's actual experience or ability. But I am struggling to understand what you mean in the second part of your sentence as to what the lack of the belt actually symbolises?

Can you please explain further?


I am sure that this is a great point but I am slower on the uptake than Steve (Steve does bjj so he will be quicker at this kind of thing than a fighter of any other style (except perhaps Systema), and there's YouTube footage to support that!)

Hey, well, since my name was mentioned more than once, I feel like I need to elaborate a little. I think of the belt as a symbol of the progress. There's a term I picked up somewhere (lost in the deep recesses of my mind now, I'm sure): "ceremonial adequacy." In its simplest terms, the idea is that a person can go to the university for, say, six years. He may have 150% of the number of credits required to earn a degree, but hasn't taken one required course. You could argue that he is really BETTER educated than some of the people who have earned a degree. He has certainly taken and passed more classes. But without the diploma, he doesn't have the symbol that represents a body of instruction. There is no place on a resume for an almost degree in business. You either have a degree or you do not.

Same goes for many other things. Sure, the stakes are pretty low in martial arts, but in the very same way, the belts represent a body of work. It's a shorthand for, "I have accomplished these things over approximately this period of time." While the belts mean different things in diffrent systems, to anyone within the system, they mean something kind of specific.

Regarding presumptions about other peoples' skill levels, it's just the way it goes. There's always a pecking order, and i would argue that there should be. It helps cut to the chase. Whether it's overt in the form of a belt or external symbol of rank, or not, every school has a system of some kind.

 

[PhotonGuy]

Hey, well, since my name was mentioned more than once, I feel like I need to elaborate a little. I think of the belt as a symbol of the progress. There's a term I picked up somewhere (lost in the deep recesses of my mind now, I'm sure): "ceremonial adequacy." In its simplest terms, the idea is that a person can go to the university for, say, six years. He may have 150% of the number of credits required to earn a degree, but hasn't taken one required course. You could argue that he is really BETTER educated than some of the people who have earned a degree. He has certainly taken and passed more classes. But without the diploma, he doesn't have the symbol that represents a body of instruction. There is no place on a resume for an almost degree in business. You either have a degree or you do not.

Well, the person who has gone to the university for 6 years and has all those credits but hasn't taken the required courses for a degree and thus doesn't have a degree, if its a degree they want than they haven't been that smart on how they studied and the courses they've taken. To reach a goal, whether it be a college degree or whatever requires hard work but it also requires good planning and smarts, and while a college degree would certainly require academic smarts as with other goals it also requires life smarts or "horse sense." You have to know what classes you need to take for your degree and you need to know what you need to do to take those classes. That's why colleges have advisors. When you go to college you meet with an advisor and you discuss what kind of degree you want and what you need to do to get it. The same thing with wanting to get a belt in the martial arts, it requires hard work but also planning and that's why it shouldn't be wrong for a student to talk to their sensei if they're unclear about something. Some people have said that asking if they can test is seen as disrespectful but as somebody on another board pointed out, instead of asking, "can I test," asking, "am I ready to test," is more respectful. And if a student isn't ready there is no reason why the student shouldn't ask their sensei what they need to do, what they need to work on so that they will be ready. That way the student can hopefully test and pass the next time around, if the student wants a certain belt.

Same goes for many other things. Sure, the stakes are pretty low in martial arts, but in the very same way, the belts represent a body of work. It's a shorthand for, "I have accomplished these things over approximately this period of time." While the belts mean different things in diffrent systems, to anyone within the system, they mean something kind of specific.

Regarding presumptions about other peoples' skill levels, it's just the way it goes. There's always a pecking order, and i would argue that there should be. It helps cut to the chase. Whether it's overt in the form of a belt or external symbol of rank, or not, every school has a system of some kind.

Yes you're right. And it does depend on where you get the belt. As you said every school has a system of some kind. So, depending on where you get it, there often is a challenge to getting a belt. Its been said here that the challenge is in getting the skills, well getting a belt at a place where you have to get the skills first, if getting the skills is a challenge then getting the belt, at least there, is a challenge because they won't give you the belt without the skills.

 

[Zero]

Hey, well, since my name was mentioned more than once, I feel like I need to elaborate a little. I think of the belt as a symbol of the progress. There's a term I picked up somewhere (lost in the deep recesses of my mind now, I'm sure): "ceremonial adequacy." In its simplest terms, the idea is that a person can go to the university for, say, six years. He may have 150% of the number of credits required to earn a degree, but hasn't taken one required course. You could argue that he is really BETTER educated than some of the people who have earned a degree. He has certainly taken and passed more classes. But without the diploma, he doesn't have the symbol that represents a body of instruction. There is no place on a resume for an almost degree in business. You either have a degree or you do not.

Same goes for many other things. Sure, the stakes are pretty low in martial arts, but in the very same way, the belts represent a body of work. It's a shorthand for, "I have accomplished these things over approximately this period of time." While the belts mean different things in diffrent systems, to anyone within the system, they mean something kind of specific.

Regarding presumptions about other peoples' skill levels, it's just the way it goes. There's always a pecking order, and i would argue that there should be. It helps cut to the chase. Whether it's overt in the form of a belt or external symbol of rank, or not, every school has a system of some kind.

Thanks, that is helpful, I see where you, and perhaps Photon Guy, are coming from.

 

[Zero]

But, like I said, there are some people who want to take on the challenge of getting higher belts, by getting higher belts that symbolizes that they've completed that challenge.

Yes, interestingly, some people focus more on the "challenge" of acquiring said belts rather than infusing themselves with the knowledge one would hope is acquired going through the process of learning and that getting the belt is only a by-product of.

I agree what Dirty Dog says regarding there should be no challenge to "getting the belt" in itself, it is about getting the skills. But some people really will do the bare minimum to get graded up and grab that belt, their focus is only on the belts and being able to say, "hey, I'm a ...-belt, aren't I just the greatest".

I have seen at least one second-dan at my old club that could perform kata beautifully, but his technical fighting skills are poor and his actual understanding of the application of the kata techniques I think is sub-par (he joined our club from an associate's club and he did not grade to that level at our club, I say that not so much (maybe a little) in defence of my own club but as to I am not sure I understand how he got to that grade). I don't think this guy was actually focused on the belts, he was a swell guy and he really did seem to enjoy himself and devoted a lot of his time to kata, the performance of kata that is, but at his level it is shock that he didn't have the first clue as to how to go about an actual fight.

To be harsh, from my point of view he and his like are "paper" martial artists. There is a risk at certain karate clubs that the focus is placed too much on the kata and demonstration side and if externally if it looks good it is credited. You can be an excellent mimic but if you do not understand the in-depth reasoning of what you are mimicking then that really does not count for much. Look, I take nothing away from his performance ability but the guy could hardly fight and his execution was poor.

 

[Transk53]

Look, I take nothing away from his performance ability but the guy could hardly fight and his execution was poor.

It is a skill much overlooked and assumed.

 

[Zero]

It is a skill much overlooked and assumed.

Funny that isn't it? And in martial arts of all places!

 

[Transk53]

Funny that isn't it? And in martial arts of all places!

Indeed.

 

[PhotonGuy]

Yes, interestingly, some people focus more on the "challenge" of acquiring said belts rather than infusing themselves with the knowledge one would hope is acquired going through the process of learning and that getting the belt is only a by-product of.

I agree what Dirty Dog says regarding there should be no challenge to "getting the belt" in itself, it is about getting the skills.

You're not going to get the belt without getting the skill so there would have to be a challenge to getting the belt since its a challenge to get the skills. Although I agree that you should focus on the skills and the knowledge, but you might still want the desired by-product of a belt. In the same way that in school a student might want an A in a class, their primary focus shouldn't be on the grade but rather on learning the material and gaining the knowledge thats necessary to get the A but they will still want the A.

But some people really will do the bare minimum to get graded up and grab that belt, their focus is only on the belts and being able to say, "hey, I'm a ...-belt, aren't I just the greatest".

I don't agree with that, I would rather pass in flying colors than to just pass borderline. I would rather get an 100 on a test than a 90 which is still an A but just a borderline A as opposed to an 100 which is an A+

I have seen at least one second-dan at my old club that could perform kata beautifully, but his technical fighting skills are poor and his actual understanding of the application of the kata techniques I think is sub-par (he joined our club from an associate's club and he did not grade to that level at our club, I say that not so much (maybe a little) in defence of my own club but as to I am not sure I understand how he got to that grade). I don't think this guy was actually focused on the belts, he was a swell guy and he really did seem to enjoy himself and devoted a lot of his time to kata, the performance of kata that is, but at his level it is shock that he didn't have the first clue as to how to go about an actual fight.

Different places have different standards. There are some dojos that focus on kata and promotion is based almost entirely on how well you do katas. While I do believe there can sometimes be too much emphasis on kata I do believe they are important and do have their place. Part of being good with kata is to be able to understand the application of the techniques. There's also the mental aspect, you're supposed to imagine you're fighting real opponents so that's where the mental part comes in.

To be harsh, from my point of view he and his like are "paper" martial artists. There is a risk at certain karate clubs that the focus is placed too much on the kata and demonstration side and if externally if it looks good it is credited. You can be an excellent mimic but if you do not understand the in-depth reasoning of what you are mimicking then that really does not count for much. Look, I take nothing away from his performance ability but the guy could hardly fight and his execution was poor.

There are dojos that produce paper martial artists or as I like to put it, straw tigers, but every place has its own standards and its own methods of grading students.

I would also like to point out when it comes to belts how some people say its more about the journey than the destination. I would agree that the focus should be more on the journey but you also need to realize that just because you reach a certain belt doesn't mean the journey ends. The journey keeps going and going as long as you train in the martial arts. Its open ended and ongoing.

 

[Instructor]

There is no challenge to getting a belt. There is a challenge to gaining the skills.

The difference between these two statements has consistently eluded you. This may very well have some connection to the reasons it took you so long to be promoted. I know I am (as are others) reluctant to promote someone who doesn't grasp concepts like this.

Every time I go to say something Dirty Dog has said it first and better than I could have...