# omg! a 4 year in training 3rd dan came in yesterday...



## msmitht (Feb 18, 2011)

He had a good front kick. That's about it. He could do some weird Handstand kicks and his acrobatics were nice. Told me he has trained ata for about 4 years. Got his 3rd dan 3 months ago.
He almost broke his toes on a paddle target. Did not rotate his side kick properly. No idea what a back kick is. All spinning kicks look like crescent kick. He watched sparring and was in shock at our level of body contact. What am I Supposed to do if he comes back? I can not have him wear a 3rd dan. Guess I could let him wear a plain black...
I wish that certain school orgs would stop calling what they are teaching tkd. It is embarrasing to me that the general public thinks all tkd schools are like that.


----------



## jthomas1600 (Feb 18, 2011)

When I hear accounts like this I wonder if the person has been completely living in a bubble. Certainly they must wonder at some point how come it takes everyone else so long to progress. I'd think they would really question and look for answers to the question.."how did I get to 4th dan in the same time period that many would say is a minimum just to get to black?"


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 18, 2011)

msmitht said:


> He had a good front kick. That's about it. He could do some weird Handstand kicks and his acrobatics were nice. *Told me he has trained ata for about 4 years*. Got his 3rd dan 3 months ago.
> He almost broke his toes on a paddle target. Did not rotate his side kick properly. No idea what a back kick is. All spinning kicks look like crescent kick. He watched sparring and was in shock at our level of body contact. What am I Supposed to do if he comes back? I can not have him wear a 3rd dan. Guess I could let him wear a plain black...
> *I wish that certain school orgs would stop calling what they are teaching tkd.* It is embarrasing to me that the general public thinks all tkd schools are like that.




I daresay mcdojangs are present in all organizations.  No need to single out any one particular style.


----------



## granfire (Feb 18, 2011)

msmitht said:


> He had a good front kick. That's about it. He could do some weird Handstand kicks and his acrobatics were nice. Told me he has trained ata for about 4 years. Got his 3rd dan 3 months ago.
> He almost broke his toes on a paddle target. Did not rotate his side kick properly. No idea what a back kick is. All spinning kicks look like crescent kick. He watched sparring and was in shock at our level of body contact. What am I Supposed to do if he comes back? I can not have him wear a 3rd dan. Guess I could let him wear a plain black...
> I wish that certain school orgs would stop calling what they are teaching tkd. It is embarrasing to me that the general public thinks all tkd schools are like that.




The promotional speed sounds about on par with ITA standards (ATA offshoot, some 20 years ago)

However...the level of performance does not.
(Isn't that the 2nd one of that kind you had walk in in a few month? Aren't you the blessed one)

Contact in sparring is relative. That is an easy remedy as long as you don't let him get clobbered the first few times out but ease him into it.

The rest, well, that's a problem. Too bad the kid learned from a crappy place (we had one of those schools in the area, their students pretty much stunk but alas they got promoted...) because I am sure he would have great problems with other schools from the same organization in another region!

If he comes back he would have to commit to a catch up program to fix faulty technique, because that's what it is. 

(the funky handstand kick, a K-kick perhaps? I have heard a kid in the ITA actually scored a point with it in a tournament fight... )
http://www.itaonline.com/media/image/content/k-kick.jpg


----------



## StudentCarl (Feb 18, 2011)

msmitht said:


> What am I Supposed to do if he comes back? I can not have him wear a 3rd dan. Guess I could let him wear a plain black...


 
You can let him know the good news: that there are many new (to him) things he can learn from you...so he can definitely continue to grow and develop.

You can also tell him that not everything he learned in his old system transfers, so based on your assessment he should start with a plain black belt because of what he will need to perform when he is next eligible to test.

If this person is sincere about his development, this is his lucky day.


----------



## chrispillertkd (Feb 18, 2011)

Wait. He got his 3rd dan after four years _total_ training time?

Pax,

Chris


----------



## StudentCarl (Feb 18, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> Wait. He got his 3rd dan after four years _total_ training time?
> 
> Pax,
> 
> Chris


 
You're thinking maybe he slept at night?:rofl:


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 18, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> Wait. He got his 3rd dan after four years _total_ training time?
> 
> Pax,
> 
> Chris



That does seem a bit fast.    I believe at some point (4th dan?  5th dan?) in the ATA, you must start testing at their nationals/worlds/whatever instead of staying at the school level and getting an easy pass there.  Presumably quality control will be much tighter there under the careful watch of the higher ups.  

<shrugs>  From reading this board, I tend to think TKD ranks are devalued to an extent anyway.  Seems like no one really respects 1-3 dan as a rank.


----------



## IcemanSK (Feb 18, 2011)

I'm sure you'll handle this well, & with restraint. You won't tell him exactly how you feel about the fact he was given a 3rd Dan after 4 years of training. 

I'm curious as to what brought him to your door step? If he was just tested a few months back, why is he at your dojang? Has he produced any paperwork saying he's a 3rd Dan? With technique that poor, is makes me wonder if he ever actually trained. How old is this person? If an adult, that would really be a surprise to me. If a kid, the "mom & dad got hosed" story rides again.


----------



## granfire (Feb 18, 2011)

chrispillertkd said:


> Wait. He got his 3rd dan after four years _total_ training time?
> 
> Pax,
> 
> Chris



LOL, I don't think it's like World of Warcraft where you can get a total of time payed in _years_ and month....


:lfao:


----------



## miguksaram (Feb 18, 2011)

msmitht said:


> He had a good front kick. That's about it. He could do some weird Handstand kicks and his acrobatics were nice. Told me he has trained ata for about 4 years. Got his 3rd dan 3 months ago.
> He almost broke his toes on a paddle target. Did not rotate his side kick properly. No idea what a back kick is. All spinning kicks look like crescent kick. He watched sparring and was in shock at our level of body contact. What am I Supposed to do if he comes back? I can not have him wear a 3rd dan. Guess I could let him wear a plain black...
> I wish that certain school orgs would stop calling what they are teaching tkd. It is embarrasing to me that the general public thinks all tkd schools are like that.



We had an ATA Black Belt start about 5 months ago.  He sounds pretty much like what you described minus any acrobatics.  He decided to start as a white belt at our school.  His mom told us that after he did his first sparring class with us he told her that he got wiped out by our people.  Apparently ATA has no contact at all in their sparring.  I'm glad to say that he is still going strong with us after all this time.  They only thing you can do is be honest with the parents and let them know that he will need to start a bit lower on the belt chain.  Just let them know that his style is different from yours.  Good luck.


----------



## granfire (Feb 18, 2011)

AUGH, threads like this remind me painfully of how long my hiatus is going on...

However, had I not taken a break about three years ago, I would have gotten my 3rd degree in about the time frame of 4 years total training. 

However, I have no illusions about my abilities, though I am very confident my instructors taught me proper technique.

Now I am rustier than the tinman....might as well put a whitebelt on when I come back.
(would have preferred that when I tried a comeback after a few month off...being the BB in class and huffing like an old steam engine after a couple of sets of everything is just plain sad)


----------



## ATC (Feb 18, 2011)

We have an ATA BB that is now in our Dojang. We let him wear his BB and take any and all the classes he wants. He understands that he in not at the same level as even our blue belts. He does not know any of the forms or techniques either.

He will stay where he is as we develope him. Once he is to our standards he can then test again for his 1st Dan, even if that takes 3 years.

He is a quite kid. Just comes in and does his classes and leaves. He will from time to time seek out assistance from another to help with a form or what not. Everyone tries to help him, even the color belts.

He has gotten a lot better in the 6 months he has been with us. He really works hard and it is not his fault he is not up to par.

*All I can say is reach out and help this person. No need to belittle him. Just help him form this point forward.*


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Feb 18, 2011)

That is disgraceful. Its not his fault, I feel sorry for him, but I just cant understand anyone being a 3rd dan in under ten years (minimum) training.


----------



## msmitht (Feb 18, 2011)

Yes he had only trained for 4 years. And yes, I am going to help him. He came back tonight and signed up for a one month trial period. He wore a red belt to class. I told him he could wear his black but he said he prefered not to.
I have had a few ata students come in in the past year. There are 3 ata schools within 15 miles of my dojang. I treat them the same as anyone else. I do not belittle them in any way. I just try to correct technique and move on. I would hope that not all ata schools are like the ones I've seen...


----------



## granfire (Feb 18, 2011)

ralphmcpherson said:


> That is disgraceful. Its not his fault, I feel sorry for him, but I just cant understand anyone being a 3rd dan in under ten years (minimum) training.




In the end it all comes out in the wash: By the time they get to the really impressive ranks that still have put in the time.

It's just cutting the foreplay and getting to the heart of the matter.


----------



## puunui (Feb 19, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> From reading this board, I tend to think TKD ranks are devalued to an extent anyway.  Seems like no one really respects 1-3 dan as a rank.



I don't know if the ranks are devalued or the lower ranks overvalued, especially 1st Dan.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Feb 19, 2011)

puunui said:


> I don't know if the ranks are devalued or the lower ranks overvalued, especially 1st Dan.


1st dan is very varied depending where you train. You get schools like where I train where it takes quite a few years to get a black belt and then once black belt you train for another full year before 1st dan is awarded and then you get schools where you go from white to 1st dan in 2 years. So the amount of experience required to get 1st dan can vary greatly from school to school. I have met guys from the school up the road who have trained literally a third of the time I have yet they are the same rank. At least after 1st dan it starts to become a bit more consistent from school to school and it starts to work out as granfire said. From what I read on here, it appears WTF schools dont rate 1st dan very highly at all.


----------



## terryl965 (Feb 19, 2011)

Well this is just another great example of TKD at it's best, I applaud this young man for being able to get this done because it is a special person that can put 12 years of training into 4. When all of you see this as a a bad thing, I see it as a remarkable and talented young man......... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 :rofl: :erg:


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Feb 19, 2011)

If your system is not ATA then well there are different forms, etc.  In other words it is a different system and he should expect to start at the beginning and advance at a faster pace than a new student.  It would be on his part nice if he went to a new school with an empty cup so to say and started from scratch with a white belt!


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 19, 2011)

puunui said:


> I don't know if the ranks are devalued or the lower ranks overvalued, especially 1st Dan.



I'm probably one of those guys.  I think 1.5 - 2 years is too short to earn a BB.  And if you can really earn a chodan in that time frame credibly then perhaps the requirements are too scant.

I would like to see the time frame and volume of material come into line with what other arts require.


----------



## Archtkd (Feb 19, 2011)

terryl965 said:


> Well this is just another great example of TKD at it's best, I applaud this young man for being able to get this done because it is a special person that can put 12 years of training into 4. When all of you see this as a a bad thing, I see it as a remarkable and talented young man.........
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Cheers to that! Where's the hot chocolate?


----------



## granfire (Feb 19, 2011)

you're a bunch of dorks
:lfao:


----------



## granfire (Feb 19, 2011)

But seriously, we would not have this discussion if the guys ambling into your schools didn't come from a bad school and sport bad technique.

I have met a bunch of 4 year 3rds, even below the majikal age of 18 who could hold their own. Because we have some great instructors who take their job serious.

I am sure you can find just as many 10 year never BBs who have a serious lack of skill because their instructor just sucked. 

(and no, the not knowing your forms isn't an argument, considering that every club, erm, organization cooks up their own. And once you get past the basics, learning new forms becomes easier with every one you put your mind to. I had to relearn _changed_ forms, 7 or 8 in four month, well enough to _teach_. It certainly can be done. And I think relearning a form you have done in a different form is harder than starting with a blank slate.)


----------



## StudentCarl (Feb 19, 2011)

msmitht said:


> He came back tonight and signed up for a one month trial period. He wore a red belt to class. I told him he could wear his black but he said he prefered not to.


 
I see this as good news: you may have a real student there. Time will tell about his perseverence, but I don't see too many who are willing to display the level of honesty and humility that he did. He also clearly respects what a black belt represents. I hope he lasts.


----------



## puunui (Feb 19, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> I'm probably one of those guys.  I think 1.5 - 2 years is too short to earn a BB.  And if you can really earn a chodan in that time frame credibly then perhaps the requirements are too scant. I would like to see the time frame and volume of material come into line with what other arts require.



What does 1st dan represent to you? How long would you say is the time required to earn a 1st Dan?


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Feb 19, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> I'm probably one of those guys.  I think 1.5 - 2 years is too short to earn a BB.  And if you can really earn a chodan in that time frame credibly then perhaps the requirements are too scant.
> 
> I would like to see the time frame and volume of material come into line with what other arts require.


I agree with this. In my way of thinking, no one should have a first dan in under 4 years. I just dont understand someone having a 1st dan in 1.5-2 years, I look at where I was at physically in the art after 2 years and unless standards are way lower at other clubs, I was just nowhere near where someone should be to be walking around with a black belt on.


----------



## StudentCarl (Feb 20, 2011)

puunui said:


> What does 1st dan represent to you? How long would you say is the time required to earn a 1st Dan?


 
As a 2nd gup about to test for 1st, I see first dan as a level where the student has internalized the gup level material. The best I can explain it is that, in some skills, I'm becoming fluent, natural, and technically right in a way that is focused but not full of effort. When your technique becomes a part of you and doing it comes from your intent rather than having to "think it", it's visible. The first dans I know have that natural correctness across the range of gup material.

I don't think you can put a calendar measure on that, except as a minimum. The problem with sharing that kind of standard is that everyone thinks they are above average. I train 10-12 hours a week (6 days a week) in class and 2-3 outside. That might put me at a different pace than someone who trains 2-3 hours a week. Once I attain 1st gup, by my school's standards I have a minimum of a year to be eligible to test for first dan. 

It hasn't been mentioned anywhere else in this thread, but I think that competition experience and training accelerate the timeline because the intensity of effort and instruction is higher.


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 20, 2011)

puunui said:


> What does 1st dan represent to you? How long would you say is the time required to earn a 1st Dan?




It's kind of arbitrary to just blurt out a length of time without adequately qualifying it by listing the entire syllabus.... but I'll do it anyway.  I think 4-5 years would be a good length of time to allow the average student to learn and perform the material to a reasonably high level of competence.  

To me a 1st dan is NOT 'someone now ready to really learn'.  It is not someone who has been merely taught the basics.  To me, a 1st dan should look sharp in the execution of his basics and the separation in skill, speed, and power should be quite clear between him and even the high colored belts.


----------



## granfire (Feb 20, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> It's kind of arbitrary to just blurt out a length of time without adequately qualifying it by listing the entire syllabus.... but I'll do it anyway.  I think 4-5 years would be a good length of time to allow the average student to learn and perform the material to a reasonably high level of competence.
> 
> *To me a 1st dan is NOT 'someone now ready to really learn'.  It is not someone who has been merely taught the basics.  To me, a 1st dan should look sharp in the execution of his basics and the separation in skill, speed, and power should be quite clear between him and even the high colored belts.*




Well, true, but on the other hand it also should be someone who realizes that everything up to this point was just basics, because the real learning does start now.


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 20, 2011)

granfire said:


> Well, true, but on the other hand it also should be someone who realizes that everything up to this point was just basics, because the *real learning does start now*.




Shouldn't the real learning start from day 1?  This is not meant as a personal reproach towards anyone, but it seems a little patronizing to say real learning starts at chodan/shodan, rather discounting the color belt learning period.  I actually think what happens at white-green belt is much more pivotal to one's ma career than 1st dan.


----------



## granfire (Feb 20, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> Shouldn't the real learning start from day 1?  This is not meant as a personal reproach towards anyone, but it seems a little patronizing to say real learning starts at chodan/shodan, rather discounting the color belt learning period.  I actually think what happens at white-green belt is much more pivotal to one's ma career than 1st dan.



Hm, As the low level - and bear in mind, I did get my BB in a shade under 2 years  - you are busy sorting your feet out, practicing the elements, memorizing forms.

Once you have accomplished that you can  - without the next new technique - concentrate on how to do things better, put them into context and such things.

So, yes, maybe 'learning' is the wrong term, 'understanding' is closer to it.

Also, while the color belt 'scrubs'  look up to you (hopefully) in awe, you realize you are back to being the little grunt, lining up in the back of the class (divided my rank, obviously) again, as you were in the beginning of the journey. 
makes for a quick shrink of the head and ego and the realization that there is a lot still left to learn, much more than what you already know.


----------



## puunui (Feb 20, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> It's kind of arbitrary to just blurt out a length of time without adequately qualifying it by listing the entire syllabus.... but I'll do it anyway.  I think 4-5 years would be a good length of time to allow the average student to learn and perform the material to a reasonably high level of competence.



If it takes that long to reach 1st Dan, how about 2nd through 9th Dan? 




dancingalone said:


> To me a 1st dan is NOT 'someone now ready to really learn'.  It is not someone who has been merely taught the basics.  To me, a 1st dan should look sharp in the execution of his basics and the separation in skill, speed, and power should be quite clear between him and even the high colored belts.



How about between 1st and 2nd, 2nd and 3rd, etc? Do you have ever increasing physical standards for those ranks as well? 

Also, is there a competition aspect for your class? I ask because rank was originally to separate skill level amongst competitors, so if you are not competing, there is an argument that there is no need for rank.


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 20, 2011)

puunui said:


> If it takes that long to reach 1st Dan, how about 2nd through 9th Dan?



Whenever the teacher deems it appropriate.  Like I posted in another thread, it took me roughly 20 years total to reach 4th in Goju-ryu karate.  A lot of the delay for me was in the leap between 1st and 2nd dan.  At that point, I was an excellent karate-ka, but I was not an excellent Goju-ryu karate-ka if that makes sense at all.  I'm sure other people were judged ready by their teacher in less time.  

I view seasoning time as particularly important with shodan.  The color black should be a real barrier in my opinion as lay people have no conception of dan levels.  Make sure the student is up to snuff before awarding them that crucial 1st dan.



puunui said:


> How about between 1st and 2nd, 2nd and 3rd, etc? Do you have ever increasing physical standards for those ranks as well?



I do as does my teacher.  Better make sure you're hale and hearty enough to attain these 'physical grades'!  Around 4th - 5th, it's more about mastering the system on a mental level, and higher grades still are largely about teaching and contributing back to the system.   



puunui said:


> Also, is there a competition aspect for your class? I ask because rank was originally to separate skill level amongst competitors, so if you are not competing, there is an argument that there is no need for rank.



Only competition in the sense that you'd better be better than your juniors.  Certainly my teacher gave allowances for age and injury, but if you were coming up the BB ranks, you were expected to excel.   

As for the relation between competition and dan ranking, I don't necessarily believe there was originally a correlation, at least in karate.  I know about the game of go and how Kano came up with a similar system for judo.  But in Shotokan and Shito-ryu karate, when dan rankings first became implemented there was no tournament competition in kumite nor kata.  This was added later.  And certain Okinawan styles like Goju-ryu resisted the competition trend for much longer, despite also adopting the dan system after the death of their founder.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Feb 20, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> It's kind of arbitrary to just blurt out a length of time without adequately qualifying it by listing the entire syllabus.... but I'll do it anyway.  I think 4-5 years would be a good length of time to allow the average student to learn and perform the material to a reasonably high level of competence.
> 
> To me a 1st dan is NOT 'someone now ready to really learn'.  It is not someone who has been merely taught the basics.  To me, a 1st dan should look sharp in the execution of his basics and the separation in skill, speed, and power should be quite clear between him and even the high colored belts.


This is my way of thinking. A 1st dan will be asked to demo techniques, coloured belts will come to them with questions and you represent your club as a black belt. Merely knowing the material to a good standard is not good enough in my opinion. Basically, a 1st dan should look impressive, they should be fast, powerful and the techniques should be part of their muscle memory and as you said "they should be able to perform the material to a reasonably high level of competence". After all, they are a black belt. I remember  a guy at school who trained at a very popular and well known karate place in our area and he got a black belt because "he knew the basics". Anyway, one day he got in a fight at school with your average school bully and had the absolute crap beaten out of him in front of most of the school. That incident was the worst possible advertisment for his karate school and word travels fast. Bottom line, a black belt can defend themself, they dont "just know the basics" in my opinion. They dont have to be a world beater by any means, but if you have a black belt you should know what you are doing. In saying that though, I can respect that some schools do view the black belt differently and this is just my opinion.


----------



## Balrog (Feb 20, 2011)

msmitht said:


> He had a good front kick. That's about it. He could do some weird Handstand kicks and his acrobatics were nice. Told me he has trained ata for about 4 years. Got his 3rd dan 3 months ago.


I don't buy that.  It takes a lot longer than 4 years to make 3rd Degree in ATA.


----------



## msmitht (Feb 21, 2011)

Balrog said:


> I don't buy that.  It takes a lot longer than 4 years to make 3rd Degree in ATA.



It is what his parents told me. One year to first, said he trained every day, one to second and two to third.


----------



## IcemanSK (Feb 21, 2011)

msmitht, He's a kid & just testied a few months ago. What was his reasoning for changing schools?


----------



## hungryninja (Feb 21, 2011)

msmitht said:


> It is what his parents told me. One year to first, said he trained every day, one to second and two to third.


 
one year to first sounds like the student either skipped a lot of belts, or he came in as an intermediate level from another school/style.  If the student started from white, the fastest one could advance in rank in ATA would be 1.5 years (without skipping).  But that is rare, as average is about 3 years to get to 1st degree.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 21, 2011)

IcemanSK said:


> msmitht, He's a kid & just testied a few months ago. What was his reasoning for changing schools?


With the economy being what it is, it could very well have been driven by mom and dad wanting to keep their son in the arts but not to pay as much as what the other school was charging.  

Daniel


----------



## puunui (Feb 21, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> Whenever the teacher deems it appropriate.



But what if the teacher deems it appropriate to promote a student to 1st Dan after one year? I think the idea of similar rank standards for different arts is impossible. Teachers are individuals who have different ideas of what rank represents. Some think it is nothing, others everything. I forget the teacher's name but I seem to remember the Isshinryu founder promoting several of his American marine students to 9th and/or 10th Dan after a couple few years of training. 




dancingalone said:


> I view seasoning time as particularly important with shodan.  The color black should be a real barrier in my opinion as lay people have no conception of dan levels.  Make sure the student is up to snuff before awarding them that crucial 1st dan.



Why is 1st Dan crucial? After all it is the lowest rung on a system that goes up to 9 or 10. Why put an extreme standard on that? 




dancingalone said:


> As for the relation between competition and dan ranking, I don't necessarily believe there was originally a correlation, at least in karate.  I know about the game of go and how Kano came up with a similar system for judo.  But in Shotokan and Shito-ryu karate, when dan rankings first became implemented there was no tournament competition in kumite nor kata.  This was added later.



I will say that Funakoshi Sensei respected Kano Sensei to the point where he would bow whenever walking past the Kodokan. And according to the original students of Funakoshi Sensei in Japan, sparring was something that was done almost from the start of Funakoshi Sensei's move to Japan. Tournament competition was added later because Karate was in its infancy in Japan and it took time to adapt Karate to a competitive activity. But doesn't necessarily mean that the idea wasn't always there. As for Shito-ryu, Mabuni Sensei was very interested in competition. In fact, the picture in my mind of him is wearing chest guards and other sparring gear. It was his influence through Dr. YOON Kwe Byung that influenced Taekwondo adoption of the same equipment. 

Even today, Taekwondo and Karate utilize the belt ranking system to separate competitors of different levels. You don't see for example, green belts competing against black belts normally at karate or taekwondo tournaments. I'm sure you yourself competed in tournaments against similarly ranked opponents. In fact, people get mad when other schools sandbag and allow their students to compete in divisions lower than their actual rank.


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 21, 2011)

puunui said:


> But what if the teacher deems it appropriate to promote a student to 1st Dan after one year? I think the idea of similar rank standards for different arts is impossible. Teachers are individuals who have different ideas of what rank represents. Some think it is nothing, others everything. I forget the teacher's name but I seem to remember the Isshinryu founder promoting several of his American marine students to 9th and/or 10th Dan after a couple few years of training.



Teachers willing to do that obviously face backlash which may or may not be an issue to them.  It's Shimabuku, Tatsuo you are thinking of.  He gave high ranks to his American students who were leaving Okinawa and told them to wear it when they were ready which presumably would have been in a matter of years.  Of course as soon as they landed on US soil, they promptly took on the new ranks.  I respect Isshinryu as a martial art, but there's no question it has a reputation of inflated ranks among karate styles.

I myself would like to see the length of time for TKD BB rank bumped up to an average of 4-5 years.  I believe this actually enhances the reputation of the art and I can think of a few other systems that follow a similar 'difficult' progression path. 



puunui said:


> Why is 1st Dan crucial? After all it is the lowest rung on a system that goes up to 9 or 10. Why put an extreme standard on that?



I explained this above.  It's more or less for the lay people who are not aware of dan levels.  They think, perhaps rightfully so, that a black belt is an expert of sorts.  And it's quite jarring and disillusioning to see chodans and eedans who perhaps have physical skills that would be more appropriate for a colored belt.  This again feeds into the public reputation issue of TKD and other closely related martial arts which you may or may not be concerned about.




puunui said:


> I will say that Funakoshi Sensei respected Kano Sensei to the point where he would bow whenever walking past the Kodokan. And according to the original students of Funakoshi Sensei in Japan, sparring was something that was done almost from the start of Funakoshi Sensei's move to Japan.



I understand that Funakoshi, Gichin actually opposed jiyu kumite.  Free sparring did NOT happen when the elder Funakoshi was holding class.  This has been stated in various interviews with people like Nakayama, Matayoshi.   Funakoshi, Gigo, on the other hand, was a proponent of the practice, and free sparring could very well have been a staple in his classes.  Certainly tournaments and even inter-university club matches  did not become commonplace until after the elder Funakoshi had passed.



puunui said:


> Tournament competition was added later because Karate was in its infancy in Japan and it took time to adapt Karate to a competitive activity. But doesn't necessarily mean that the idea wasn't always there. As for Shito-ryu, Mabuni Sensei was very interested in competition. In fact, the picture in my mind of him is wearing chest guards and other sparring gear. It was his influence through Dr. YOON Kwe Byung that influenced Taekwondo adoption of the same equipment.



You are right about Mabuni adapting kendo equipment for sparring.  I actually thought about that when I typed my post above, but I believe the point still holds about tournaments and competition.  Shito-ryu involvement in tournaments actually post date Shotokan's creation of that 'arena', although to be sure, they free sparred privately in their classes.



puunui said:


> Even today, Taekwondo and Karate utilize the belt ranking system to separate competitors of different levels. You don't see for example, green belts competing against black belts normally at karate or taekwondo tournaments. I'm sure you yourself competed in tournaments against similarly ranked opponents. In fact, people get mad when other schools sandbag and allow their students to compete in divisions lower than their actual rank.



You are right, but the point I made about competition and karate was about the early days only.  I definitely think a valid argument could be made that 'traditionally' Okinawan karate does not compete at all.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 21, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> As for the relation between competition and dan ranking, I don't necessarily believe there was originally a correlation, at least in karate. I know about the game of go and how Kano came up with a similar system for judo. But in Shotokan and Shito-ryu karate, when dan rankings first became implemented there was no tournament competition in kumite nor kata. This was added later. And certain Okinawan styles like Goju-ryu resisted the competition trend for much longer, despite also adopting the dan system after the death of their founder.


I won't speak for karate, though so far as I know, karate in general predates the use of the kyu/dan system (I believe that Shotokan was the first to use it), but the kyu/dan system and the colored belts were intended entirely for competition bracketing when kano introduced them.

Daniel


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 21, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I won't speak for karate, though so far as I know, karate in general predates the use of the kyu/dan system (I believe that Shotokan was the first to use it), but the kyu/dan system and the colored belts were intended entirely for competition bracketing when kano introduced them.




Yes, Te and later karate were firmly established in the Ryukyu islands and Japan before the dan system was transplanted into it by Funakoshi, Gichin back in the 1920s, when he granted the first black belts to several of his students, including Ohtsuka, Hironori of Wado-ryu fame.  Ironically, it's not clear whether Funakoshi himself considered himself a dan holder from the onset, although he later used a 5th dan on record.  Much of the motivation for adding dan ranks to karate came from the behest of the Butoku-kai, a Japanese sanctioning body of martial arts.

Mabuni, Kenwa of Shito-ryu followed suit relatively quickly.  Meanwhile, Miyagi, Chojun of Goju-ryu resisted the practice during his lifetime even though he was later named Renshi and the head of the Okinawan branch of the Butoku-kai.  Miyagi is said to have become very angry at his students when a few of them asked him to award them dan levels.  For the record, Miyagi, Chojun did not believe in free sparring or tournaments either.  

In this like with much of karate, you have to look at the whole splintered picture of founders and their styles to get an accurate picture of what 'karate' was doing at the time.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 21, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> Shouldn't the real learning start from day 1? This is not meant as a personal reproach towards anyone, but it seems a little patronizing to say real learning starts at chodan/shodan, rather discounting the color belt learning period. I actually think what happens at white-green belt is much more pivotal to one's ma career than 1st dan.


Everyone looks at it differently I suppose, but I think that *real* learning starts from day one whether or not the instructor feels that it does. 

And absolutely I agree with you that white to green is a very important time period for the student. Usually, by green belt, any bad habits that have not been dealt with will ingrained and will then take twice as long or more to train out. It is also the time period where the student/teacher relationship is firmly established, as well as relationships between a student and seniors.

I think it is more accurate to say that by black belt, the student has learned how to *actively* learn.

As for ranks, I view ranks in a way akin to titles in the trades.

I view colored belt grades as apprentice period. By the end of the colored belts, the student has learned the essential system and is proficient in the art. Not expert, exceptional, or masterful, simply proficient. Proficient means that they can execute techniques correctly, spar within the system's sparring rules, and know the basic mindset of the system.

First through third or fourth dan I have always viewed as a journeyman period. The practitioner is now making the system his or her own, so to speak. At this point, they can start to figure out things for themselves and develop their own style within the system. 

Fourth or fifth and up is the master period. By now, the practitioner has internalized the system, made it their own, and understands the art beyond merely the system level. Also, it is at this point that the practitioner usually is considered ready to take on their own students and to begin passing the art along to others.

Frankly, I'm unconcerned with the specific amount of time in colored belts. Some people will become proficient in less than a year and others will take much longer due to differences in age, learning style, athletic ability, amount of time spent in practice outside of class, quanitity of classes attended, and any number of combinations of these. 

Once they are given the black belt, however, they really *should* be proficient. Most organizations have requirements for time in grade and the arts usually have an average regardless of organization (if any), and most schools stick with these, so time between dan grades is, to a certain extent, a decision that is usually made for you.

Daniel


----------



## puunui (Feb 21, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> I myself would like to see the length of time for TKD BB rank bumped up to an average of 4-5 years.  I believe this actually enhances the reputation of the art and I can think of a few other systems that follow a similar 'difficult' progression path.



I don't know about 4-5 years, but I do believe that most dojang in the United States and probably in other international countries take longer than the standard one year it takes to achieve 1st Poom/Dan in Korea. I think it is for a combination of reasons, not the least of which being financial. 




dancingalone said:


> It's more or less for the lay people who are not aware of dan levels.  They think, perhaps rightfully so, that a black belt is an expert of sorts.  And it's quite jarring and disillusioning to see chodans and eedans who perhaps have physical skills that would be more appropriate for a colored belt.  This again feeds into the public reputation issue of TKD and other closely related martial arts which you may or may not be concerned about.



I disagree that a 1st Dan is an expert. I also disagree that we should change our curriculum or what we do because of the perception of lay people. If that were the case, then Taekwondo dojang would still be labeled Korean Karate schools. I think a better approach would be to educate the public that 1st Dan is the lowest rung on a scale that goes to 9 or 10, that it is a level anyone can achieve, just like a high school diploma. 




dancingalone said:


> I understand that Funakoshi, Gichin actually opposed jiyu kumite.  Free sparring did NOT happen when the elder Funakoshi was holding class.  This has been stated in various interviews with people like Nakayama, Matayoshi.



Funakoshi Sensei writes about free sparring in his autobiography, Karate-Do My Way of Life. Looking briefly, I found two entries about free sparring: One in the section karate for everyone, states: "Of course, as one progresses in the art, an adversay will be essential in order to practice sparring (kumite) and free sparring (jyu kumite), but a real adversary is not necessary. Another in the section "Spirit of the Game", referencing Okinawan tug of war, states this: "What I learned from observing these tugs of war is that the team that is intent only on winning will usually fail to do so, while the team that enters the contest in order to enjoy the sport without worrying too much about winning or losing will frequently emerge victorious. The observation holds true for a karate bout as for a tug of war."




dancingalone said:


> You are right, but the point I made about competition and karate was about the early days only.  I definitely think a valid argument could be made that 'traditionally' Okinawan karate does not compete at all.



Traditionally, Okinawan karate did not have dan rank either, so argument exists that there is no need for dan ranks if the focus of the Karate experience is for traditional reasons, rather than modern or competitive ones.


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 21, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> As for ranks, I view ranks in a way akin to titles in the trades.
> 
> I view colored belt grades as apprentice period. By the end of the colored belts, the student has learned the essential system and is proficient in the art. Not expert, exceptional, or masterful, simply proficient. Proficient means that they can execute techniques correctly, spar within the system's sparring rules, and know the basic mindset of the system.
> 
> ...



I rather like this comparison.  I'm somewhat interested in carpentry and furniture-making, and I consider the title of journeyman to be no insult at all.  In fact, I'm rather amazed by the quality of work journeyman craftsmen can often turn out.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Frankly, I'm unconcerned with the specific amount of time in colored belts. Some people will become proficient in less than a year and others will take much longer due to differences in age, learning style, athletic ability, amount of time spent in practice outside of class, quanitity of classes attended, and any number of combinations of these.
> 
> Once they are given the black belt, however, they really *should* be proficient. Most organizations have requirements for time in grade and the arts usually have an average regardless of organization (if any), and most schools stick with these, so time between dan grades is, to a certain extent, a decision that is usually made for you.



I agree for the most part.  I've never run into a Chuck Norris-type who could learn everything I think a BB should know in < 4-5 years, but if he exists, more power to him.  He would be the *rare* exception rather than the rule.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 21, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> I agree for the most part. I've never run into a Chuck Norris-type who could learn everything I think a BB should know in < 4-5 years, but if he exists, more power to him. He would be the *rare* exception rather than the rule.


I think that a lot depends on the art and on where the art is being taught.  Glenn mentioned BB in one to two years in Korea being the average, and he is not the only one that I have heard say that.  But it is also the Korean national sport and is probably part of their physical educaion in school.

In the US, football is huge and is played in the US by every boy at some point in time, even if only in pickup games around the neighborhood.  Even I can play football, and though I never tried out, I played with friends, sometimes daily, during the summer as a kid.  Had I tried out in high school and managed to make the team I would probably have become a proficient player in less than a year.  Not due to any great tallent on my part, but because it is 'what boys in America do' on a summer afternoon.  That or baseball.  

I was the oddball; I raced BMX in high school.  Funny thing; I got my first BMX bike, a BMX Mongoose (double gusseted chromoly frame, motomags and the covetted vee-bars; maybe that's why I'm partial to the vee neck dobok?) and went out racing.  I was proficient pretty quicly, and after I replaced the motomags with Araya 7X alloy wheels, effectively halving the bike's weight, I started taking home trophies.  I eventually replaced the Mongoose with bike built around a GT Pro frame.

Sound like I got up to speed on the track pretty quickly, except that I'd spent my elementary and middle school years getting around on a bicycle and had been running paper routs on a bicycle for several years before I set out to race.

I think that martial arts in the US is such that outside of boxing and wrestling, it is sufficiently alien to most people's experience that they need more time to become proficient.

Daniel


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 21, 2011)

puunui said:


> I don't know about 4-5 years, but I do believe that most dojang in the United States and probably in other international countries take longer than the standard one year it takes to achieve 1st Poom/Dan in Korea. I think it is for a combination of reasons, not the least of which being financial.



1 year is laughable with all due respect.  I've worked with a handful of Koreans who came to the US for their advanced degrees and have decided to stay at least for a time in the US.  They all have some training in TKD, a couple even had poom belts.  They tell me TKD is considered a child's pursuit there and when you come of age, it's time to pursue more respectable pursuits (like school or golf!).

Obviously I'm pained by their feelings about a martial art I spent a lot of time practicing.  Yet I can't help but feel that this 1 year term, if that's the standard time frame, is somewhat connected to the lack of regard they feel.  In a way, I was surprised about their feelings since I thought TKD was a big source of national pride for South Koreans.

I don't get the same undercurrent of disrespect/amusement from Japanese or Okinawan people about their martial arts, though their participation in martial arts as youth seem to be much less universal than Koreans.



puunui said:


> I disagree that a 1st Dan is an expert. I also disagree that we should change our curriculum or what we do because of the perception of lay people. If that were the case, then Taekwondo dojang would still be labeled Korean Karate schools. I think a better approach would be to educate the public that 1st Dan is the lowest rung on a scale that goes to 9 or 10, that it is a level anyone can achieve, just like a high school diploma.



I think lay people are important.  They represent future students after all.  I have a nagging suspicion that serious beginners who want to learn a fighting art are electing for other styles than TKD, although certainly TKD is the dominant leader in the school age demographic.



puunui said:


> Funakoshi Sensei writes about free sparring in his autobiography, Karate-Do My Way of Life. Looking briefly, I found two entries about free sparring: One in the section karate for everyone, states: "Of course, as one progresses in the art, an adversay will be essential in order to practice sparring (kumite) and free sparring (jyu kumite), but a real adversary is not necessary. Another in the section "Spirit of the Game", referencing Okinawan tug of war, states this: "What I learned from observing these tugs of war is that the team that is intent only on winning will usually fail to do so, while the team that enters the contest in order to enjoy the sport without worrying too much about winning or losing will frequently emerge victorious. The observation holds true for a karate bout as for a tug of war."



I'm not sure what to think about that passage you are quoting.  It seems less than an endorsement of free sparring, yet it is odd that Funakoshi even mentions it to begin with.

Everything else I have ever read has always stated he opposed free sparring.  There are references all over the 'net about Funakoshi, Gichin thinking it was a bad development for martial karate.  In fact, Funakoshi's opposition to free sparring is frequently given as a reason why Ohtsuka broke with the Shotokan and formed Wado-ryu.  And there is also Shotokai karate, itself a splinter group from the Shotokan formed as a reaction against the pro-sport direction Shotokan was taking, with a mission towards teaching 'orthodox' karate that Funakoshi, Gichin taught.



puunui said:


> Traditionally, Okinawan karate did not have dan rank either, so argument exists that there is no need for dan ranks if the focus of the Karate experience is for traditional reasons, rather than modern or competitive ones.



Dan ranks were added to Okinawan karate so that the various styles and their practitioners could become accepted members of the Buto-kai.  It was not for competitive purposes from the perspective of the karate-ka although this may have been an aim of the Buto-kai eventually.


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 21, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I think that a lot depends on the art and on where the art is being taught.  Glenn mentioned BB in one to two years in Korea being the average, and he is not the only one that I have heard say that.  But it is also the Korean national sport and is probably part of their physical educaion in school.



See the post immediately above about my experiences talking to Koreans about TKD.  From their own mouths, they don't necessarily respect the activity, and I can't help but think this 1 year model is part of the reason for it.


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 21, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> In the US, football is huge and is played in the US by every boy at some point in time, even if only in pickup games around the neighborhood.  Even I can play football, and though I never tried out, I played with friends, sometimes daily, during the summer as a kid.  Had I tried out in high school and managed to make the team I would probably have become a proficient player in less than a year.  Not due to any great tallent on my part, but because it is 'what boys in America do' on a summer afternoon.  That or baseball.
> 
> ....
> 
> I think that martial arts in the US is such that outside of boxing and wrestling, it is sufficiently alien to most people's experience that they need more time to become proficient.



I know nothing about your biking analogy, but I will disagree with your assertion about football and the ease of picking it up, even for an American boy.

Football is a game of very specific physical, mental, and also sensory/intuitive skills.  I played quarterback (backup for the most part, although I started 1 season in HS) at the 5A level in Texas, and it's such a specialized game that you have no chance of playing any of the skill positions to a high degree unless you've been playing and learning in ORGANIZED leagues since you were a tyke under GOOD instruction.  The kids that go to the expensive camps during the summer by and large are the ones that go on to star at QB in college and later the NFL.

You might be able to pick up the game through natural talent at another position like running back, but not QB and I suspect not wide receiver either.

I think martial arts, especially those with a high degree of sensitivity in their practice, are similar to quarterbacking in football.  It takes a lot of time and practice to get where you want to go.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 21, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> 1 year is laughable with all due respect. I've worked with a handful of Koreans who came to the US for their advanced degrees and have decided to stay at least for a time in the US. They all have some training in TKD, a couple even had poom belts. They tell me TKD is considered a child's pursuit there and when you come of age, it's time to pursue more respectable pursuits (like school or golf!).


I have also heard this before.  Which is essentially what taekwondo has become in the US if you go by average age.  I'd wager that 80 to 90% of the student body of most TKD schools in the US are under the age of 18.  No references to back that up, mind you; its a seat of the pants estimate.  

Daniel


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 21, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> I know nothing about your biking analogy, but I will disagree with your assertion about football and the ease of picking it up, even for an American boy.
> 
> Football is a game of very specific physical, mental, and also sensory/intuitive skills. I played quarterback (backup for the most part, although I started 1 season in HS) at the 5A level in Texas, and it's such a specialized game that you have no chance of playing any of the skill positions to a high degree unless you've been playing and learning in ORGANIZED leagues since you were a tyke under GOOD instruction. The kids that go to the expensive camps during the summer by and large are the ones that go on to star at QB in college and later the NFL.
> 
> ...


I don't disagree, and I was not implying that football is an easy game to pick up either.

By the time I got to high school, I had played enough football that if a pick up game was to be had, I could play and inspite of being the underweight tall skinny guy, I was usually not the last one picked. Football had also been a fairly regular part of PE in elementary and middle school. Any difficulty that I had had in learning how to play the game I had had prior to middle school. 

I could throw a ball correctly. I could catch a ball correctly. In short, I was proficient in the basics of football, not a good player, and certainly not good enough to have made the team by any means. There are many proficient drivers on the road. But racing cars requires more than just driving proficiency. Likewise, playing football on a high school, college, or pro team requires more than just proficiency.

However, the vast majority of taekwondoin are not competing. They take class and go home and hopefully practice. It is a much smaller group that actually competes.

Daniel


----------



## puunui (Feb 21, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> 1 year is laughable with all due respect.  I've worked with a handful of Koreans who came to the US for their advanced degrees and have decided to stay at least for a time in the US.  They all have some training in TKD, a couple even had poom belts.  They tell me TKD is considered a child's pursuit there and when you come of age, it's time to pursue more respectable pursuits (like school or golf!).



Laughable only because you are applying your Goju-ryu standard to a non-Goju-ryu art. And in Korea the overwhelming majority of practitioners are children. Very few adults practice taekwondo in Korea and the ones that do, tend to be poomsae or kyorugi competitors. 




dancingalone said:


> Obviously I'm pained by their feelings about a martial art I spent a lot of time practicing.  Yet I can't help but feel that this 1 year term, if that's the standard time frame, is somewhat connected to the lack of regard they feel.  In a way, I was surprised about their feelings since I thought TKD was a big source of national pride for South Koreans.



I don't think it has anything to do with the idea of a one year 1st poom/dan. I think it has to do with the fact that in most dojang in Korea, it is loaded with kids, that it is seen as a kid activity, in much the same way soccer is seen as a childhood activity in the US. You don't see too many adults doing soccer here and the ones that do, are competitors on teams or in leagues. But for most, soccer is a childhood activity.




dancingalone said:


> I think lay people are important.  They represent future students after all.  I have a nagging suspicion that serious beginners who want to learn a fighting art are electing for other styles than TKD, although certainly TKD is the dominant leader in the school age demographic.



I agree that lay people are important in the sense that they represent future students. But I do not think that they are so important that we should change what we do to fit with their stereotyped misconceptions of what is or isn't a black belt. 





dancingalone said:


> I'm not sure what to think about that passage you are quoting.  It seems less than an endorsement of free sparring, yet it is odd that Funakoshi even mentions it to begin with.



Not so odd, if you consider that Funakoshi Sensei was a progressive thinker who made radical changes in his day and understood that the Karate of his day must give way to the Karate of his students. He changed the name of the art, changed the order of the kata, changed the name of the kata, adopted a uniform, a dan rank system, got rid of the weapons, so why wouldn't he adopt and embrace free sparring, something that Kano Sensei, a person that he openly admired, also adopted? 




dancingalone said:


> Dan ranks were added to Okinawan karate so that the various styles and their practitioners could become accepted members of the Buto-kai.  It was not for competitive purposes from the perspective of the karate-ka although this may have been an aim of the Buto-kai eventually.



Sensei Patrick McCarthy talks about the Butokukai in his books "Ancient Okinawan Martial Arts. What he says is that titles such as renshi, kyoshi, etc. were given to the Okinawan pioneers, in part to legitimize Karate; but he doesn't state that dan ranks were given to their students.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Feb 21, 2011)

This subject will always make for some great debate and probably because everyone's perception of what a "black belt" is will be different. I know for me personally, I regard a black belt to be good, very good. They should have no trouble handling themselves on the mythical "street" against an untrained attacker (within reason). When I grew up the black belts I knew were like this, they didnt just "know the basics" so my perception is etched by what I grew up considering a black belt to be. For this reason, when I was phoning around looking for a martial arts school to train at I was skeptical of schools giving out black belts in under 4-5 years because I felt no one could learn enough to be black belt standard in that little time. These days Ive just realised its because everyone's view of what a black belt should be seems to differ.


----------



## puunui (Feb 21, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Glenn mentioned BB in one to two years in Korea being the average, and he is not the only one that I have heard say that.  But it is also the Korean national sport and is probably part of their physical educaion in school.



It's not one to two years; it is one year in Korea. And while there are some elementary schools that are famous for their Taekwondo (Mi Dong, etc.) most students learn Taekwondo at private dojang after school. 

I guess I am comparing what a 1st Dan knows to what I knew as a 1st Dan. Looking back, it was next to nothing, especially compared to the information that is available today. Every crumb, every scrap of information came at a very high price. If someone knew something, they kept it for themselves, which is one of the reasons why I try to give information freely. I didn't appreciate the sandbagging that went on back then. 

In some ways we were more advanced than today's student (in stretching, and self motivation for example), but it was really crude back then. And I genuinely felt like I was a rank beginner at 1st Dan, especially when compared to some of my more accomplished seniors. Back then, no one asked for my opinion on anything, and I never gave my opinion. If I did open my mouth, it was to ask a question, never to voice my thoughts, especially when there were seniors in the room. No one really asked for my opinion until I was 6th Dan or so. Even at USTU meetings representing my state, I just sat there and soaked it all in. Now my seniors ask for my opinion all the time, while my juniors get upset and offended when they hear me speak. One of my seniors said it best when he said that we are much better juniors to our seniors than our juniors are to us. But what can you do. It's a different world today than it was when we were 1st Dan.... People simply do not think the same way that we did, that we do.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Feb 21, 2011)

puunui said:


> It's not one to two years; it is one year in Korea. And while there are some elementary schools that are famous for their Taekwondo (Mi Dong, etc.) most students learn Taekwondo at private dojang after school.
> 
> I guess I am comparing what a 1st Dan knows to what I knew as a 1st Dan. Looking back, it was next to nothing, especially compared to the information that is available today. Every crumb, every scrap of information came at a very high price. If someone knew something, they kept it for themselves, which is one of the reasons why I try to give information freely. I didn't appreciate the sandbagging that went on back then.
> 
> In some ways we were more advanced than today's student (in stretching, and self motivation for example), but it was really crude back then. And I genuinely felt like I was a rank beginner at 1st Dan, especially when compared to some of my more accomplished seniors. Back then, no one asked for my opinion on anything, and I never gave my opinion. If I did open my mouth, it was to ask a question, never to voice my thoughts, especially when there were seniors in the room. No one really asked for my opinion until I was 6th Dan or so. Even at USTU meetings representing my state, I just sat there and soaked it all in. Now my seniors ask for my opinion all the time, while my juniors get upset and offended when they hear me speak. One of my seniors said it best when he said that we are much better juniors to our seniors than our juniors are to us. But what can you do. It's a different world today than it was when we were 1st Dan.... People simply do not think the same way that we did, that we do.


Probably a good thing its changed. That 'old school' way of thinking really seems outdated and arcaic. I know from personal experience that I have learnt things many times from coloured belts and I know of third or 4th dans who have learnt something from me. Everybody has something to offer and we can learn from any of our class mates. The whole idea of the "elitism" that "Im a 4th dan and you're only a 1st dan so just sit there and dont voice any thoughts, and only open your mouth to ask a question", its just such an outdated way of looking at things. In fact, I learnt something about my trade today at work from one of my 1st year apprentices, and I was happy to hear his thoughts and ideas despite the fact Ive run my business for 18 years and he only has 6 months experience. Its hard to develop in anything if you are close minded and assume you know more about everything than your juniors.


----------



## andyjeffries (Feb 22, 2011)

puunui said:


> soccer is seen as a childhood activity in the US. You don't see too many adults doing soccer here and the ones that do, are competitors on teams or in leagues. But for most, soccer is a childhood activity.



How weird.  Over here, soccer is definitely seen as for both children and adults.  There is always an indoor football game going on at the Leisure Centre where we train, and I often speak to my friends/family that play in company teams or play with groups of friends after work (and my age group is mid-30s).

I'd also venture as far to say most adult males also support a football team and pay a fleeting to active interest in watching football.

I know my brother in law (who is English but living in USA) has a soccer blog and is having a hard time getting american adults interested in the game...


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Feb 22, 2011)

andyjeffries said:


> How weird.  Over here, soccer is definitely seen as for both children and adults.  There is always an indoor football game going on at the Leisure Centre where we train, and I often speak to my friends/family that play in company teams or play with groups of friends after work (and my age group is mid-30s).
> 
> I'd also venture as far to say most adult males also support a football team and pay a fleeting to active interest in watching football.
> 
> I know my brother in law (who is English but living in USA) has a soccer blog and is having a hard time getting american adults interested in the game...


Exactly the same here in Australia. Heaps of adults play soccer, my brother was playing to a decent level until he was 34 and only stopped playing because he went to the UK where he has hooked up with a team over there. Actually its amazing how many adults play competitive sport here well into their 40's and 50's. One of the 6th dans at my club is 53 and still plays competitive rugby league, but thats just crazy.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 22, 2011)

andyjeffries said:


> How weird. Over here, soccer is definitely seen as for both children and adults. There is always an indoor football game going on at the Leisure Centre where we train, and I often speak to my friends/family that play in company teams or play with groups of friends after work (and my age group is mid-30s).
> 
> I'd also venture as far to say most adult males also support a football team and pay a fleeting to active interest in watching football.
> 
> I know my brother in law (who is English but living in USA) has a soccer blog and is having a hard time getting american adults interested in the game...


Not sure about outside of the US, but in the US, adults playing soccor are like adults playing softball (except that there are way more adults playing softball than soccor). Some do it, but they are definitely in the minority. Most ball sports are put aside after college in the US. 

I'd venture that adults playing 'football' in Europe and the UK is like adults playing softball in the US.  There are organized leagues and large companies will sometimes have a team, but these adults are still the exception and not the rule.  

Aside from friendly pickup games, adults playing ball sports in any organized fashion are definitely the exception. Ball sports are pretty much for kids, teens, and college students. After that, the drop off is pretty sharp. 

Daniel


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 22, 2011)

puunui said:


> Laughable only because you are applying your Goju-ryu standard to a non-Goju-ryu art. And in Korea the overwhelming majority of practitioners are children. Very few adults practice taekwondo in Korea and the ones that do, tend to be poomsae or kyorugi competitors.
> 
> ....
> 
> ...



These points all approach the same issue from different direction.  To me, it's a matter of rigor and the inherent respect gained both internally and externally from following a difficult path.  It's a bit like the 2 year associate's degree in the US versus a full bachelors degree from a US university.  They both have their usages, but there's no question which one is more highly regarded by anyone you'd care to ask.

Black belts in some martial arts like BJJ are respected because it is known they are difficult to earn.  It is not regarded as a activity primarily for children.  I would simply like to see a measure of the same rigor applied to TKD.




puunui said:


> Not so odd, if you consider that Funakoshi Sensei was a progressive thinker who made radical changes in his day and understood that the Karate of his day must give way to the Karate of his students. He changed the name of the art, changed the order of the kata, changed the name of the kata, adopted a uniform, a dan rank system, got rid of the weapons, so why wouldn't he adopt and embrace free sparring, something that Kano Sensei, a person that he openly admired, also adopted?



I still don't believe he embraced free sparring.  Like I said, there are references all over the internet stating the contrary.  I need to find the interview from Nakayama stating as such as that seems to be the best source in my mind, but I was able to find this article which was published in Dragon Times, the forerunner of Classical Fighting Arts, which I hope satisfies some degree of scholarly work.

http://seinenkai.com/articles/noble/noble-funakoshi1.html

"  It was another 23 years before the second edition of 'Kyohan' was  published.  That was in 1958, the year after Funakoshi's death.    Nonetheless, I imagine he did most of the work involved in the revision  of the book.  Because of Funakoshi's advanced age, the techniques in  this edition were demonstrated by younger experts, primarily Shigeru  Egami.  By that time they were doing more or less the Shotokan style  that we know today.  The change from Gichin Funakoshi's original 1922  karate to modern Shotokan was a gradual process, but in many respects  the style was there by the mid-1930s among some of the younger trainees.   The change arose from several sources: Funakoshi himself, his son  Yoshitaka and his associates, from a general infusion of new blood into  the art and over the last three decades the contribution of the Japan  Karate Association and its instructors. * But if we go back a little to  the 1935 edition of, "Karate-do Kyohan" it seems to me that Funakoshi  sensei's personal karate did not go much beyond there, that is a karate  based primarily on the practice of kata, augmented by yaku soku  (prearranged) kumite and makiwara (striking board) practice.  Funakoshi  did not care for jiyu-kumite (free sparring) and even in that era he  drew some criticism from other (Japanese) teachers for what they saw as  his overemphasis on kata.  Such teachers were familiar with the  free-play of judo and kendo and felt that something of that sort should  be introduced to karate.  That was a new idea to Funakoshi and, because  of long established habits of mind, something that he had difficulty  coming to terms with.*"






puunui said:


> Sensei Patrick McCarthy talks about the Butokukai in his books "Ancient Okinawan Martial Arts. What he says is that titles such as renshi, kyoshi, etc. were given to the Okinawan pioneers, in part to legitimize Karate; but he doesn't state that dan ranks were given to their students.



Indeed, they weren't initially.  But the holders of those teaching titles eventually granted dan ranks to their students with Miyagi being a notable exception.


----------



## andyjeffries (Feb 22, 2011)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Exactly the same here in Australia. Heaps of adults play soccer, my brother was playing to a decent level until he was 34 and only stopped playing because he went to the UK where he has hooked up with a team over there. Actually its amazing how many adults play competitive sport here well into their 40's and 50's. One of the 6th dans at my club is 53 and still plays competitive rugby league, but thats just crazy.



Rugby players do generally seem to play much older than other sports.  I know quite a few rugby players of that sort of age.  Very weird, it's quite a rough sport...


----------



## granfire (Feb 22, 2011)

andyjeffries said:


> Rugby players do generally seem to play much older than other sports.  I know quite a few rugby players of that sort of age.  Very weird, it's quite a rough sport...



but probably one were old and sneaky still gets you by...


----------



## andyjeffries (Feb 22, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I'd venture that adults playing 'football' in Europe and the UK is like adults playing softball in the US.  There are organized leagues and large companies will sometimes have a team, but these adults are still the exception and not the rule.


 
It does sound similar, but adults certainly aren't the exception playing football over here really.  One of the reasons is that in school most children rotate the sport they're doing (for example at my school we had Rugby for a term, Cricket for a term, Athletics for a term - football was an occasional thing).  Other schools may differ so they get Football for a term or maybe even Football once per week. Given the amount of adults that play weekly for their company, with their friends or for a pub team - I'd say it's potentially just as big for adults as children.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Aside from friendly pickup games, adults playing ball sports in any organized fashion are definitely the exception. Ball sports are pretty much for kids, teens, and college students. After that, the drop off is pretty sharp.



That's definitely different over here.

For example, in my town (est 80,000 people) has there is a Sunday League that has 5 divisions, each division having about 10 teams.    That doesn't include all the 5-a-side leagues (one of them run by Stevenage Borough FC our local professional team) and people just playing in fun games each week with groups of friends.  And this just relates to our small town that doesn't have any "top flight" football teams playing here - in those places the people are generally much more in to football.

Definitely sounds bigger than it sounds on your side of the pond.


----------



## puunui (Feb 22, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> These points all approach the same issue from different direction.  To me, it's a matter of rigor and the inherent respect gained both internally and externally from following a difficult path.  It's a bit like the 2 year associate's degree in the US versus a full bachelors degree from a US university.  They both have their usages, but there's no question which one is more highly regarded by anyone you'd care to ask.



I associate a 1st Dan to a high school diploma, something that is attainable by all. How highly regarded are high school graduates in the educational scheme of things, especially when compared to those who have bachelor's masters or doctorate degrees, not to mention those who have gone on to do post doctorate work?




dancingalone said:


> I still don't believe he embraced free sparring.



Not only did he embrace the idea of competition, he stated that he advocated its use for ranking purposes. Here is a quote from the translation "Karate Jutsu" by Funakoshi Sensei, written in I think 1922:

"Ranking

The reason that until now there has been no assigning of ranks in karate is that it has not been possible to have shiai (competitive matches) as in judo or kendo. This is because of the devastating power of karate techniques; a strike to a vital point could immediately prove fatal. Likewise, in times past swordsmanship was taught only through kata since a shiai, whether using real swords or wooden swords, was always fought at the risk of one's life. Subsequently, today's face masks and wrist guards were developed, and although this brought about a certain amount of degradation of kendo, it allowed it to become that much closer to a sport rather than a martial art. With continuing research it is not unfeasible that as in judo or kendo our karate, too, might incorporate a grading system through the adoption of protective gear and the banning of attacks to vital points.

In fac, I believe that it is important to move in that direction. I must emphasize that I am not refuting the viability of grading a person's level through observing his performance of kata, his hand and leg movements, and questioning him on the meaning of techniques. The problem is that in the past one's level was publicly recognized according to the reputation and influence of one's teacher or one's number of years of practice, placing the assessment on rather shaky grounds."


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 22, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I don't disagree, and I was not implying that football is an easy game to pick up either.
> 
> By the time I got to high school, I had played enough football that if a pick up game was to be had, I could play and inspite of being the underweight tall skinny guy, I was usually not the last one picked. Football had also been a fairly regular part of PE in elementary and middle school. Any difficulty that I had had in learning how to play the game I had had prior to middle school.
> 
> ...




Well, here's the thing.  If you got your BB in one year as a kid, poom distinction or not, I question what you learned exactly.  Good to be an effective 'driver' even for normal transportation needs to use your driving analogy?  I don't know about that.


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 22, 2011)

puunui said:


> I associate a 1st Dan to a high school diploma, something that is attainable by all. How highly regarded are high school graduates in the educational scheme of things, especially when compared to those who have bachelor's masters or doctorate degrees, not to mention those who have gone on to do post doctorate work?



Yet how many kids earn high school diplomas even if we accept that as an equivalent level of achievement?  And in one year at that?

I think we'll never see eye to eye on this.  I think a 1st dan should be more like a 4 year university degree with correlating distinction of physical skill compared to the colored belt ranks.





puunui said:


> Not only did he embrace the idea of competition, he stated that he advocated its use for ranking purposes. Here is a quote from the translation "Karate Jutsu" by Funakoshi Sensei, written in I think 1922:
> 
> "Ranking
> 
> ...



Thanks.  I'll have to come back with more ammo later to try to argue with you on this.  It is known that adding competition was an aim of the Buto-kai, so I am not surprised that Funakoshi would have outwardly expressed support for the idea, but I still believe he had reservations about free sparring and its possible detracting effect on karate as a martial method.


----------



## puunui (Feb 22, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> I think a 1st dan should be more like a 4 year university degree with correlating distinction of physical skill compared to the colored belt ranks.



To me, a 3rd Dan is the equivalent to a bachelor's degree. 




dancingalone said:


> It is known that adding competition was an aim of the Buto-kai, so I am not surprised that Funakoshi would have outwardly expressed support for the idea, but I still believe he had reservations about free sparring and its possible detracting effect on karate as a martial method.



Funakoshi Sensei had reservations about beginner engaging in free sparring, as he wrote in Karate-Do Kyokan, in the second edition, in the section entitled Free Sparring: "Beginning students must refrain at all times from heedlessly engaging in free sparring." and goes on to explain why. But in almost every book that he wrote, Funakoshi Sensei wrote about free sparring as a training method for karate. But still that does not take away from the point that he made in his first book, which is that he advocated shiai or match sparring like in judo and kendo as a method of rank determination.


----------



## miguksaram (Feb 22, 2011)

puunui said:


> Even today, Taekwondo and Karate utilize the belt ranking system to separate competitors of different levels. You don't see for example, green belts competing against black belts normally at karate or taekwondo tournaments. I'm sure you yourself competed in tournaments against similarly ranked opponents. In fact, people get mad when other schools sandbag and allow their students to compete in divisions lower than their actual rank.


You are correct that today competitors are pitted against similar ranked opponents.  That wasn't always the case in karate tournaments.  In early era of karate tournaments you would have white belts and black belts all in one division for fighting. Do Kendo/Kumdo tournaments still do this or do they break up in rank divisions?


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 22, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> Well, here's the thing. If you got your BB in one year as a kid, poom distinction or not, I question what you learned exactly.


_What_ you learned or how *effectively* you learned it? 

There is not enough material in taekwondo between white belt and first dan that it *couldn't *be taught in a year. Whether or not it can be learned effectively in a year probably depends on the person, though I am not personally a proponent of one year black belts.



dancingalone said:


> Good to be an effective 'driver' even for normal transportation needs to use your driving analogy? I don't know about that.


I didn't say *good*. I said _proficient_, and I draw a big distinction between the two.

Most people spend about a year between a learners permit and driver's ed before getting their license. They can pass a test and thus are deemed 'proficient'. After a year of driving, between driver's ed and actually driving on a learners, yes, I'd consider them proficient (as opposed to good; nobody brags, nor should they, about being proficient).

By proficient, I mean that they can work the pedals, the gear shift, know the rules of the road, and can make the car go in a straight line, steer the car, park the car, do three point turns, paralel park the car, do lane changes, etc. 

That makes them proficient. A good driver is beyond being a proficient driver. A good driver is experienced in how the car handles in different weather conditions, can alter their modulation of the controls to account for variables that a merely proficient driver cannot. A good driver also is careful about what they are doing and is mindful of what they are doing. I can be technically proficient, but if I'm playing with my i-pod while driving, my results be less than good.

Beyond good, you have experienced, which is as far as most of us ever get. 

Then there are advanced drivers. These are people who must drive under very demanding conditions, such as police pursuit or emergency services. Also, there is the option of taking a high performance driving course. They are offered, but very few people (comparatively, hardly any) take them. 

Above these are competitive drivers, test drivers, and stunt drivers. 

Want to drive to school, work, or the grovery store? Get proficient with the car and pass the driver's test, by which the state declares you proficient.

Want to be a _good_ driver? That takes more time and regular practice.

Going back to football, I was a proficient player. But if you put me on the field with guys who had played organized football from the single digits, I'd be considered a scrub. Moreso now that I'm almost 44. 

Proficiency is nothing more than the basis for being decent; A person who is not proficient in taekwondo cannot be decent at taekwondo. A person who is not decent cannot be good. A person who is not good cannot be great.

The big question is what you want your black belt to represent. If it is merely a student who can punch, kick, block, perform stances and pumse and who can spar with proficiency, then yes, you could do it in a year. If you want them to be decent (as in merely okay), you'll probably need two. Good? You're into the three to five year bracket at that point. 

Daniel


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 22, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> _What_ you learned or how *effectively* you learned it?
> 
> There is not enough material in taekwondo between white belt and first dan that it *couldn't *be taught in a year. Whether or not it can be learned effectively in a year probably depends on the person, though I am not personally a proponent of one year black belts.



I am curious then what passes for a 1st dan curriculum in TKD if it can be taught in 1 year.  For the record, I don't consider learning the outward shell of a movement to be 'taught' something and that may represent the divide for me.




Daniel Sullivan said:


> I didn't say *good*. I said _proficient_, and I draw a big distinction between the two.
> 
> ....
> 
> Proficiency is nothing more than the basis for being decent; A person who is not proficient in taekwondo cannot be decent at taekwondo. A person who is not decent cannot be good. A person who is not good cannot be great.



*pro·fi·cient/pr&#601;&#712;fiSH&#601;nt/*

Noun: A person who is *proficient*.
Adjective: Competent or skilled in doing or using  something.


Proficient does mean good, at least the way I read the definition.  But the adjective used doesn't really matter.  





Daniel Sullivan said:


> The big question is what you want your black belt to represent. If it is merely a student who can punch, kick, block, perform stances and pumse and who can spar with proficiency, then yes, you could do it in a year. If you want them to be decent, you'll probably need two. Good? You're into the three to five year bracket at that point.



Yes, that sounds about right.  Even more so if we decide to add enriching material of the close range variety, arguably stuff that was stripped out when it should never have been.


----------



## miguksaram (Feb 22, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> 1 year is laughable with all due respect.  I've worked with a handful of Koreans who came to the US for their advanced degrees and have decided to stay at least for a time in the US.  They all have some training in TKD, a couple even had poom belts.  They tell me TKD is considered a child's pursuit there and when you come of age, it's time to pursue more respectable pursuits (like school or golf!).
> 
> Obviously I'm pained by their feelings about a martial art I spent a lot of time practicing.


True but think of the way we look at baseball.  For the most part we view it the same way...fun as a kid but when you come of age you need to be focusing on something more feasible.   



			
				dancing alone said:
			
		

> Yet I can't help but feel that this 1 year term, if that's the standard time frame, is somewhat connected to the lack of regard they feel.  In a way, I was surprised about their feelings since I thought TKD was a big source of national pride for South Koreans.


Again it goes to individual tastes.  Baseball is our national pride, yet if you ask me it is boring as hell.  Go over to Korea and baseball is the shiznit.   They love their baseball over there.  I'm sure they would be shocked to find not all Americans think the same about it.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 22, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> You are correct that today competitors are pitted against similar ranked opponents. That wasn't always the case in karate tournaments. In early era of karate tournaments you would have white belts and black belts all in one division for fighting. Do Kendo/Kumdo tournaments still do this or do they break up in rank divisions?


Kendo brackets you by gender, age, weight, and grade.

The last competition SEUSKF tournament that I went to broke it down along roughly these lines.

Grade is not a yudansha
Grade is shodan to nidan
Grade is sandan or higher

I haven't competed in a couple of years, so this may not be up to date. 

Daniel


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 22, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> True but think of the way we look at baseball.  For the most part we view it the same way...fun as a kid but when you come of age you need to be focusing on something more feasible.
> 
> 
> Again it goes to individual tastes.  Baseball is our national pride, yet if you ask me it is boring as hell.  Go over to Korea and baseball is the shiznit.   They love their baseball over there.  I'm sure they would be shocked to find not all Americans think the same about it.




Then again I don't regard taekwondo as a sport or a child's activity, so it's not surprising that my feelings are different from the Koreans I met who do.  

What a tangled web.  It makes me want to look askance at anyone who earned a BB in Korea.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 22, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> I am curious then what passes for a 1st dan curriculum in TKD if it can be taught in 1 year. For the record, I don't consider learning the outward shell of a movement to be 'taught' something and that may represent the divide for me.


Ever drive with a newly licensed driver? There's your one year black belt.

I don't know about Korea, but in the US, we call these belt factories and all that that implies. 



dancingalone said:


> *pro·fi·cient/pr&#601;&#712;fiSH&#601;nt/*
> 
> Noun: A person who is *proficient*.
> Adjective: Competent or skilled in doing or using something.
> ...


Proficient means skilled. As opposed to *un*skilled or having no skill. Competent, as opposed to *in*competent or having no competency. A one year black belt will be skilled in the craft of taekwondo by virtue of having trained for a year.

So they are skilled; not highly skilled. They have the minimum skill to perform the "outward shell of the movements." That is what I mean by proficient. 

A proficent driver can perform the outward shell of the movements. Car must stop, I depress brake. Car must go, I depress accelerator until I get to speed I want. Car must turn left, I turn wheel left until car is pointed left. I can make car go without chirping tires and I can make the car stop without screaching to a halt. I can keep the car going at a steady speed and I can turn without the car sliding. That is proficiency. Nothing more.

Thus a merely proficient driver has skill, but no depth. They cannot feel the car's gradual loss of traction as they enter a turn or the way that the weight shifts rearward with the throttle on. That is why merely proficient drivers lose it in turns on wet roads when they abruptly take their foot off of the gas and touch the brake to slow down (a phenomenon called drop throttle oversteer). They cannot modulate the throttle so as to not break traction when grip is low. And without antilock breaks, they cannot perform a panic stop without locking up the tires.

Many drivers never get much better than proficient. They make no effort to get 'good' at driving. They never make the effort to get 'better' in the areas that they are weak in. They simply become well practiced in minimal skills and see the car as an appliance that takes them from point A to point B. As soon as circumstances deviate from the norm, a merely proficient or well practiced proficient driver finds themselves suddenly out of their depth.



dancingalone said:


> Yes, that sounds about right. Even more so if we decide to add enriching material of the close range variety, arguably stuff that was stripped out when it should never have been.


I cannot speak for what was stripped out or whether it was ever there in the first place. If you are doing Kukki *only*, there simply is not that great a volume of material (even so, I am still not a proponent of one year BBs, regardless of the norm in Korea). If you do Kukki plus, then... well you get the picture.  

Daniel


----------



## puunui (Feb 22, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> You are correct that today competitors are pitted against similar ranked opponents.  That wasn't always the case in karate tournaments.  In early era of karate tournaments you would have white belts and black belts all in one division for fighting.



Not when I was growing up competing in karate tournaments. We were always divided by age, weight and rank. This was for kata and kumite.


----------



## puunui (Feb 22, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> Then again I don't regard taekwondo as a sport or a child's activity, so it's not surprising that my feelings are different from the Koreans I met who do.



If you purchase your friend's dojang like you said you are thinking about, I think that you have to be prepared to accept the fact that the majority of students will be children below the age of 13 and that the adults who join will not be the strapping teenager or young male in his twenties. Most likely if you get adults, they will be children who continue to train as teenagers, and the parents of younger students.


----------



## miguksaram (Feb 22, 2011)

puunui said:


> Not when I was growing up competing in karate tournaments. We were always divided by age, weight and rank. This was for kata and kumite.


Sensei Sharkey and I were talking about this the other day.  He was telling me how that when he competed there was just one rank division and that was it. This was of course back in late 60's early 70's.


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 22, 2011)

puunui said:


> If you purchase your friend's dojang like you said you are thinking about, I think that you have to be prepared to accept the fact that the majority of students will be children below the age of 13 and that the adults who join will not be the strapping teenager or young male in his twenties. Most likely if you get adults, they will be children who continue to train as teenagers, and the parents of younger students.



There is a lot of truth to what you are saying.  Perhaps it is a good topic for a new thread, but if I go ahead with the business opportunity, I do anticipate change on both my side as well as the students.  Some of it is inevitable anyway due to a change in personality, etc, from the head instructor.

We shall see.  I am still looking over the financials...


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Feb 22, 2011)

puunui said:


> If you purchase your friend's dojang like you said you are thinking about, I think that you have to be prepared to accept the fact that the majority of students will be children below the age of 13 and that the adults who join will not be the strapping teenager or young male in his twenties. Most likely if you get adults, they will be children who continue to train as teenagers, and the parents of younger students.


Why is this? We have no trouble getting adults to do tkd over here, Id go nuts if my class was made up of mostly children under 13. My current class has 50 students made up of about 40 adults a couple of teenagers and maybe 5 or 6 kids. Is it the way tkd is marketed over there or the fact that adults think the flashy stuff might be too hard on their bodies or is there another reason? And Dancingalone, I admire the fact that you believe a black belt should be more than just competent. If you purchase your friend's dojang please dont compromise your principles on this. I cant help but feel the reason tkd has the reputation its got is because too many people are handing out black belts in 2 years and saying "little johnny knows the basics, so now he's a black belt". Other arts have a field day at the expense of tkd because of this very attitude. If I ever start my own dojang, there will be no black belts in under 5 years thats for sure.


----------



## puunui (Feb 22, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> There is a lot of truth to what you are saying.  Perhaps it is a good topic for a new thread, but if I go ahead with the business opportunity, I do anticipate change on both my side as well as the students.  Some of it is inevitable anyway due to a change in personality, etc, from the head instructor. We shall see.  I am still looking over the financials...



Are you planning on doing it as a business? Is this in a commercial space? For some reason I picture you in my head as a small club type of instructor.


----------



## mango.man (Feb 22, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> Sensei Sharkey and I were talking about this the other day.  He was telling me how that when he competed there was just one rank division and that was it. This was of course back in late 60's early 70's.



I don't know how it is done in other countries, but I can tell you that my daughter's trip to Russia last year the divisions were broken down by age group and weight.  Rank played no part and therefore you had everything from White to Black fighting against each other.

Sam fought a yellow belt, blue belt and a black belt in the competition.  She said it was very weird as a BB with 11 + years of experience fighting a yellow belt with perhaps just a couple months, if that, of experience.

The kids were told, thats just the way that they do it in Russia.


----------



## Gwai Lo Dan (Feb 22, 2011)

mango.man said:


> Sam fought a yellow belt, blue belt and a black belt in the competition.  She said it was very weird as a BB with 11 + years of experience fighting a yellow belt with perhaps just a couple months, if that, of experience.


The problem with separating by rank is you can have a true beginner with 3 months experience fighting as a yellow belt, against a person new to TKD but 8 years experience in karate.  So the winner of the tournament in that category is a "yellow" belt with 8 years martial arts experience.  So I think it ends up amounting to virtually the same thing as a yellow belt sparring a black belt.


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 22, 2011)

puunui said:


> Are you planning on doing it as a business? Is this in a commercial space? For some reason I picture you in my head as a small club type of instructor.



I have always run a small school intentionally so I could devote more time to the students and teach the type of martial arts I am interested in.  Prior to last year, I did not even teach children.

I recently took a voluntary separation from my company.  Between the severance package and my savings I don't have to worry about earning an income for a good while, but I'm at the point to where I sort of want to run my own business.  I already have a nice sideline teaching basic karate as 'wellness' exercise to corporate clients.  Opening a commercial dojo/dojang seems like the next logical step if I can keep the quality high enough to keep my own satisfaction level up.

My friend's dojang is a strip mall location with ample parking and lots of drop in traffic.  It's a good situation to get into, but the clientele is indeed mostly children and yes they aren't exactly the type of students I have sought after previously.


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 22, 2011)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Why is this? We have no trouble getting adults to do tkd over here, Id go nuts if my class was made up of mostly children under 13. My current class has 50 students made up of about 40 adults a couple of teenagers and maybe 5 or 6 kids. Is it the way tkd is marketed over there or the fact that adults think the flashy stuff might be too hard on their bodies or is there another reason? And Dancingalone, I admire the fact that you believe a black belt should be more than just competent. If you purchase your friend's dojang please dont compromise your principles on this. I cant help but feel the reason tkd has the reputation its got is because too many people are handing out black belts in 2 years and saying "little johnny knows the basics, so now he's a black belt". Other arts have a field day at the expense of tkd because of this very attitude. If I ever start my own dojang, there will be no black belts in under 5 years thats for sure.



I am sure some adjustment would be necessary on both sides if I buy the school.  3 years seems to be the average time frame to earn a BB there, which isn't bad, but they do have a few dan ranks who are a little 'blah' by my standard.  It is a KKW affiliated school, so there is also a whole new pool for me to dive into.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Feb 22, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> I am sure some adjustment would be necessary on both sides if I buy the school.  3 years seems to be the average time frame to earn a BB there, which isn't bad, but they do have a few dan ranks who are a little 'blah' by my standard.  It is a KKW affiliated school, so there is also a whole new pool for me to dive into.


Good luck with it all. Do you know the kukki curriculum? How similar is what you currently teach to kukki?


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 22, 2011)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Good luck with it all. Do you know the kukki curriculum? How similar is what you currently teach to kukki?



I don't know any KKW material other than the 2 semesters I studied with the late Kim, Dae Shik Ph.D. at the University of Texas and also at his private dojang.  I learned the first couple of Taegeuks then and his method of kicking which was admittedly a bit different from my previous TKD experience.  A little self-defense too, but I'll admit I remember almost none of it.

If I bought the school, I would have to learn the material currently taught to help smooth the transition. My friend has said would not be a problem for me and I presume he is right.  He does not have an Olympic type school which is a good thing, else this transaction would not even be a possibility since I know nothing about Olympic sparring.

<shrugs>  I have a wealth of knowledge and experience in a variety of martial arts, even a 2nd dan in American Tae Kwon Do.  But I am sure some will be offended by the idea of an outsider to the system taking over.  It is what it is.


----------



## Kwan Jang (Feb 23, 2011)

I'm butting into this one a bit late. but would like to throw in my own two cents. As I understand it (having been told by a TKD 9th dan), in Korea TKD's ranking became greatly watered down by incorperating it into the public schools. Basically dumbed down to the lowest common denominator so that earning a 1st dan over here has far more prestige and hopefully merit than it does over there. To me, the fact that the Koreans have let the system de-value is no justification that it is endorsed through the rest of the world. Even though KKW is the world headquarters for the largest branch of TKD, the gup/dan or kyu/dan system is not their creation, but rather than something that they adopted and the other arts that use the system are at least as valid as standard bearers on the subject IMO.

To me, the "quality of my product" as an instructor and school owner is the quality of my advanced students, especially my black belts. If I were to promote someone from a beginning white belt to first dan in a year or two, I wouldn't see much value in that rank. I admit that while I started with a TKD base (and hold a 6th dan in that art), I now teach a truly multi-style MMA system which includes TKD, Submission Grappling/Jiu-Jitsu, Muay Thai and Escrima. Therefore, we have a LOT more curriculum than if we were only teaching TKD, but IMO if a student does not have to grow into being a black belt, then there is no point to it at all.

One thing my instructors have said over the years comparing our black belts to the belt factories is that you can get an associate's degree from the local community college or a bachelor's degree from Stanford. I personally DO consider first dan as equivalent to a high school diploma, but one from an elite prep school to prepare students for an Ivy League university and not just the local public school that will pass everyone (i.e. no student left behind). On a related note, I remember when KKW made a very strong push in the early eighties to force a movement away from TKD being taught as a combat system and more a a "family friendly" sport. My instructors balked at this and there was a fall out with Korea and the US TKD hiearchy for many years. It's funny though that in recent years, my instructor has been used as a role model by that same hiearchy and even been made the VP of the US TKD Committee (a KKW affiliate) because those same powers-that-be felt they had went astray and that we were good models of the way they now think they should be heading.

BTW, I am able to keep nearly as many adults to children in my school (55/45%) and have an active student count of nearly 300 in a town of 20,000. While this is not Earth shattering, it does show that you CAN keep high standards and uphold your integrity and still make a decent six figure income teaching quality martial arts. I believe I could do much higher numbers in a less rural area and my instructor does this with well over 800 active students out of one location.


----------



## miguksaram (Feb 23, 2011)

Gwai Lo Dan said:


> The problem with separating by rank is you can have a true beginner with 3 months experience fighting as a yellow belt, against a person new to TKD but 8 years experience in karate.  So the winner of the tournament in that category is a "yellow" belt with 8 years martial arts experience.  So I think it ends up amounting to virtually the same thing as a yellow belt sparring a black belt.


In the open circuit we have ran across this problem before.  One of our rules is that you have to compete at the highest rank you have received in martial arts.  So even though you are a 3 month beginner in TKD if you have a BB in karate, you have to compete as a BB.


----------



## Bruno@MT (Feb 23, 2011)

ralphmcpherson said:


> I cant help but feel the reason tkd has the reputation its got is because too many people are handing out black belts in 2 years and saying "little johnny knows the basics, so now he's a black belt". Other arts have a field day at the expense of tkd because of this very attitude. If I ever start my own dojang, there will be no black belts in under 5 years thats for sure.



I worked hard for 2 years, 2 times 1.5 hours per week in the dojo, and once per week at home (sometimes more in the summer) so now I have 8th ku ninpo and 9th kyu jujutsu. The idea that you could get black in 2 years seems alien to me. By then you are just starting to grasp the basics imo.

Imo as an outsider, black is seriously devaluated in TKD


----------



## puunui (Feb 23, 2011)

Gwai Lo Dan said:


> The problem with separating by rank is you can have a true beginner with 3 months experience fighting as a yellow belt, against a person new to TKD but 8 years experience in karate.  So the winner of the tournament in that category is a "yellow" belt with 8 years martial arts experience.  So I think it ends up amounting to virtually the same thing as a yellow belt sparring a black belt.




That is the exception rather than the rule. The more likely scenario would be an instructor allowing a higher belt to wear a lower belt and compete at the lower level. That used to be common for our state association, but not so much now.


----------



## puunui (Feb 23, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> I don't know any KKW material other than the 2 semesters I studied with the late Kim, Dae Shik Ph.D. at the University of Texas and also at his private dojang.



When did Dr. Kim pass away? I have a shelf full of his books. 




dancingalone said:


> If I bought the school, I would have to learn the material currently taught to help smooth the transition. My friend has said would not be a problem for me and I presume he is right.  He does not have an Olympic type school which is a good thing, else this transaction would not even be a possibility since I know nothing about Olympic sparring.



Would you keep the curriculum the same, or slowly change it?


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 23, 2011)

Bruno@MT said:


> I worked hard for 2 years, 2 times 1.5 hours per week in the dojo, and once per week at home (sometimes more in the summer) so now I have 8th ku ninpo and 9th kyu jujutsu.


I am unclear if you mean two years in two separate arts, or one art with more than one subset   



Bruno@MT said:


> The idea that you could get black in 2 years seems alien to me. By then you are just starting to grasp the basics imo.
> 
> Imo as an outsider, black is seriously devaluated in TKD


Different arts, no real comparison.  

Daniel


----------



## puunui (Feb 23, 2011)

Kwan Jang said:


> As I understand it (having been told by a TKD 9th dan), in Korea TKD's ranking became greatly watered down by incorperating it into the public schools. Basically dumbed down to the lowest common denominator so that earning a 1st dan over here has far more prestige and hopefully merit than it does over there.



The one year 1st Dan came from GM HWANG Kee and the Moo Duk Kwa back in the 40's. He was the one who started that, back when the other Kwan Jang had two year programs.But then, higher dan rank wasn't such a big deal. In the Chung Do  Kwan under GM LEE Won Kuk, a student could go from white belt to 7th Dan  in fifteen years. Aikido's TOHEI Koichi Sensei was 32 when he received 8th Dan from Ueshiba Sensei, after twelve years of training, including a break during WWII. He was 9th Dan at age forty (twnety years of training) and 10th Dan at fifty (30 years of training). 




Kwan Jang said:


> To me, the fact that the Koreans have let the system de-value is no justification that it is endorsed through the rest of the world. Even though KKW is the world headquarters for the largest branch of TKD, the gup/dan or kyu/dan system is not their creation, but rather than something that they adopted and the other arts that use the system are at least as valid as standard bearers on the subject IMO.



Korean martial artists didn't create the dan rank system, but they are tending to follow how it was originally implemented. For example, Funakoshi Sensei moved to Japan in 1921 or 1922, and he awarded his first dan ranks in 1924 or so. 1st Dan just isn't a big a deal as it is in the United States. 




Kwan Jang said:


> To me, the "quality of my product" as an instructor and school owner is the quality of my advanced students, especially my black belts. If I were to promote someone from a beginning white belt to first dan in a year or two, I wouldn't see much value in that rank.



Maybe that is a good thing, that you don't see much value in a 1st Dan. It is, when all is said and done, a low rank, the lowest on the dan scale.




Kwan Jang said:


> On a related note, I remember when KKW made a very strong push in the early eighties to force a movement away from TKD being taught as a combat system and more a a "family friendly" sport.



The Kukkiwon never made a strong push from combat system to "family friendly" sport. Perhaps the WTF's creation put competition up to the forefront in people's minds, but that isn't the same thing as the Kukkiwon doing it. My instructor taught the Kukkiwon Instructor Course for over twenty five years including during the early eighties and he said the Kukkiwon Instructor Course is basically the same back then as it is now, although the material is updated.


----------



## Bruno@MT (Feb 23, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I am unclear if you mean two years in two separate arts, or one art with more than one subset
> 
> 
> Different arts, no real comparison.
> ...



The arts complement each other and taught both in the same dojo. We train both, and alternate the exams. So that is 3 kyu level exams in 2 years time. Regardless. For the sake of the discussion: I've passed 3 exams in 2 years time.

You are right they are different systems. However, imo 'black' means a decent understanding of the system and a firm grasp of the basics. Black used to identify you as a serious practicioner with excellent form and technique.

Regardless of whether you look at jujutsu, ninpo, karate, or TKD... can you seriously say that someone who practices 2 times per week for 2 years can be considered more than someone who is beginning to get an understanding?


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 23, 2011)

puunui said:


> When did Dr. Kim pass away? I have a shelf full of his books.



In 2007 of some form of cancer.  He is missed.

http://www.utexas.edu/faculty/council/2008-2009/memorials/kim.html




puunui said:


> Would you keep the curriculum the same, or slowly change it?



I would likely keep the current curriculum and gradually add more content over time, including weapons, grappling, and such.  Maybe even play with inventing some applications and 2 man drills for the Taegeuks so they could become a centerpiece in training.  Right now like with most TKD studios I know, the forms are just something you learn 'because'.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Feb 23, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I am unclear if you mean two years in two separate arts, or one art with more than one subset
> 
> 
> Different arts, no real comparison.
> ...


I know we can say "different arts no comparison" but it appears more and more that tkd is alone on this. I have friends who do hapkido, zendokai, shotokan, bjj, aikido, wing chun and ninjitsu and all of them are taking a hell of a lot longer than 2 years to get a black belt. All of them, too, find it laughable that tkd hands them out in 2 years. Its as if all other arts have a belief of what a black belt "should be" that differs so greatly from tkd. It just seems to me that tkd really is the exception to the rule on this. I know there's the odd karate club out there handing out black belts in 2 years but its not as common as tkd. I just thinks its so frustrating that tkd is becoming the exception to the rule on this. Most students are still tripping over their own feet after 2 years of training and the thought that they can get a black belt in that time frame just doesnt seem right. I can remember where I was at after 2 years training and if Id had to defend myself for real I would have been in real trouble. the bottom line is that tkd is a martial art, its not a dance class, so if someone has a black belt they better be able to defend themself in my opinion.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 24, 2011)

Bruno@MT said:


> The arts complement each other and taught both in the same dojo. We train both, and alternate the exams. So that is 3 kyu level exams in 2 years time. Regardless. For the sake of the discussion: I've passed 3 exams in 2 years time.


So you are training in two arts simultaneously.  I would say that the grades that you hold are, after two years, abnormally low if you were only training in one art.  Not a criticism, but after two years in most arts that have ten kyu/geub levels, a student has made it to at least 5th kyu.



Bruno@MT said:


> You are right they are different systems. However, imo 'black' means a decent understanding of the system and a firm grasp of the basics.


Cannot speak for other arts, but as a system, taekwondo is not exactly arcane, so yes, two years should be sufficient to have a decent understanding and a firm grasp of the basics.  And I studied way longer than two years before finally testing for my first dan, so believe me, I have no dog in this race.  



Bruno@MT said:


> Black used to identify you as a serious practicioner with excellent form and technique.


I recall more than enough students quitting after they got their black belt back in the day that I question how serious each and every holder really was.  Not that they didn't take it seriously, but they moved on to other things.  



Bruno@MT said:


> Regardless of whether you look at jujutsu, ninpo, karate, or TKD... can you seriously say that someone who practices 2 times per week for 2 years can be considered more than someone who is beginning to get an understanding?


Depends on the person and how much they are practicing outside of class.  I don't believe in the one size fits all with regards to time to black belt.  And again, it also depends on what a black belt is in a given art.  In Kukki Taekwondo, it means that you have learned eight relatively brief forms, a selection of kicks and punches, to break boards, and to engage in a form of fencing that uses the feet as the primary weapon in a tournament atmosphere.  

Also, the primary use of belts in taekwondo is for competition bracketing and keeping track of the student levels in a large class.

Yes, I agree that a blackbelt holder should be able to execute the techniques of the art proficiently and correctly.  Some will be able to do this much more quickly than others.  Going back to my trade analogy, I took tests for various automotive certifications when I was working in automotive.  I did not take the test until I was ready to reasonably pass it.  While I was in college taking automotive courses, I had to test at specified times and did not have the luxury of waiting until I was ready.  If a student did not know the material, he/she did not receive a passing grade.  

The big issue that I see with black belts these days is not the time to grade, but the fact that many studio owners use the grading as a means of income and push unready students to test all the way *to* blackbelt without ever addressing any of the shortcomings that the student may have had along the way.  

Students who clearly do not have a firm grasp of the material at a test should not be passed (disallowing students to test until they are ready is another discussion), and that needs to begin with the first belt test.

Praising students who did not learn the material and presenting them with a belt is a huge disservice to the student at any level.  But if the school owner passes them and presents them with a belt at each test, they keep them testing and keep those fees rolling in, all the way up to the often much more expensive black belt test. 

A first dan represents that the student has learned and has proficiency in the colored belt material, nothing more.  And it should be nothing less.

Daniel


----------



## IcemanSK (Feb 24, 2011)

puunui said:


> When did Dr. Kim pass away? I have a shelf full of his books.
> 
> 
> GM Kim died in either 2007-2008 if I recall hearing correctly. Not sure what my source is or of the date.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 24, 2011)

ralphmcpherson said:


> I know we can say "different arts no comparison" but it appears more and more that tkd is alone on this. I have friends who do hapkido, zendokai, shotokan, bjj, aikido, wing chun and ninjitsu and all of them are taking a hell of a lot longer than 2 years to get a black belt.


 Again, different arts, not only from taekwondo, but from each other.

Ninjutsu, hapkido and aikido are not traditionally sporting arts, so competition bracketing is not a factor. BJJ blue belts probably take longer than most aikido black belts, haven't a clue about zendokai, and shotokan is on average four years, but also has more and more elaborate forms, plus bunkai for each form, plus competition.

Wing chun (and CMA in general) doesn't even use belts to my knowledge, so unless enterprising school owners have adopted some form of them (sashes, or whatever), that isn't even a valid comparison. Most CMA practitioners that I know find belts in CMA to be an indicator or McDojoism, accurate or not.



ralphmcpherson said:


> All of them, too, find it laughable that tkd hands them out in 2 years. Its as if all other arts have a belief of what a black belt "should be" that differs so greatly from tkd. It just seems to me that tkd really is the exception to the rule on this.


And I could criticize all of the arts that you just mentioned by enumerating the things that are generally thought about them by outsiders.

Ninjutsu = larpers who cannot defend themselves outside of their dojo.
Aikido = peacenicks who can't defend themseves after years of training
Wing Chun = the same as aikido minus the peacenick part.

People who practice those arts would probably write several paragraphs of rebuttal to those comments or dismiss them as trolling with no thought of changing what they do. 

For the record, I do not think that those characterizations are valid, but they are definitely out there.



ralphmcpherson said:


> I know there's the odd karate club out there handing out black belts in 2 years but its not as common as tkd. I just thinks its so frustrating that tkd is becoming the exception to the rule on this. Most students are still tripping over their own feet after 2 years of training and the thought that they can get a black belt in that time frame just doesnt seem right.


If the majority of students are *literally* "still tripping over their own feet" after two years of training, I *seriously* question the quality of training that they are receiving. If you are employing hyperbole when you say that, then perhaps you can clarify what you really mean.



ralphmcpherson said:


> I can remember where I was at after 2 years training and if Id had to defend myself for real I would have been in real trouble.


 
If you cannot effectively use the techniques (kicks, punches, and blocks) after two years of training, I would be curious as to why.

Look, I'm not saying that two years should or should not be the norm. But taekwondo techniques are not so arcane or complex that you cannot get a handle on kicks, punches, and blocks after two years, particularly if you are athletic. By two years time (barring medical issues), you should have a solid roundhouse, front, side, and axe kick, should be able to punch correctly, and should be able to block and dodge. Seriously. It doesn't take *that* long.

If your teacher is teaching a ton of non martial material along with technique, or is focusing a lot on one or two basic techniqes for a very long time before broadening the curriculum, then that is acceptable, but will also alter the time that it takes to become proficient. 

Not good or bad; new kumdo/kendo students spend a lot of their first six months doing a very small set of basic techniques before broadening the technique base. Consequently, the average time to first dan is four year or more, even though there are actually *fewer* techniques than there are in taekwondo. 



ralphmcpherson said:


> the bottom line is that tkd is a martial art, its not a dance class,


Absloutely, though that has no bearing on belts; belts are not employed in many martial arts. 

Martial art does not always equal self defense. I don't carry my katana, bamboo sword or a 39" long cane with me on a daily basis, so it is unlikely that I would use kumdo to defend myself, yet we both agree that it is a martial art, and I have way more than two years of kumdo under my belt, in addition to other sword work.



ralphmcpherson said:


> so if someone has a black belt they better be able to defend themself in my opinion.


Defend themselves what capacity? Beat all comers? Hold their own? In class? On the deadly street? The schoolyard? Against armed opponents? 

How do you define being able to defend yourself?

Not being argumentative, by the way (sometimes, I'm not sure if a post is coming across that way or not, so I wanted to clarify), but I am always curious of the context when people say what you just said.

Within your organzation, I gather that the norm is more like four years. I don't know what the norm is in the ITF. ATA, and KKW, from what I have seen, the norm is two years, with some schools being more and some being less. You should really be comparing a school within its own art and organization. If the norm in KKW in the states is two years, then a one year BB is a stand out. If the norm in Korea in KKW taekwondo is one year, then a six month BB would be the oddball. If four years is the average for ITF TKD, then a two year BB is the oddball.

I'm not a proponent (or detractor) of two year first dans. Students should be given actual tests between white belt and colored belt and should not be passed if they don't know the material. Or, if you follow the 'don't test the student till he's ready philosophy' then the school shouldn't be testing unready students for the sole purpose of collecting a fee or placating unruly parents. Some people will be ready more rapidly than others. Each should progress at the pace that is the best for *them*. Regardless of art or organization.

Daniel


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 24, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> BJJ blue belts probably take longer than most aikido black belts,



Aikikai black belts (1st dan) are typically earned in 5-7 years.  That's very impressive if it takes longer to earn a BJJ blue belt!


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 24, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> Aikikai black belts (1st dan) are typically earned in 5-7 years. That's very impressive if it takes longer to earn a BJJ blue belt!


I could be mistaken then.  

I was under the impression from posts on the web that a BJJ blue belt is like four or five years and assumed (apparently incorrectly) that aikido averaged four to black.

Maybe BJJ doesn't take that long, but the way that BJJ grading is discussed, that was the impression that I got.    

Daniel


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 24, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I could be mistaken then.
> 
> I was under the impression from posts on the web that a BJJ blue belt is like four or five years and assumed (apparently incorrectly) that aikido averaged four to black.
> 
> Maybe BJJ doesn't take that long, but the way that BJJ grading is discussed, that was the impression that I got.



I roll occasionally with a Machado brown belt.  I believe he said a blue belt is around 1.5-2 years, which is still a good length of time for attaining the first colored belt.  Add to this the fact that BJJ belts are earned rather than given and it is no wonder that even a blue belt is a real accomplishment.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 24, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> Add to this the fact that BJJ belts are earned *rather than given* and it is no wonder that even a blue belt is a real accomplishment.


And this, I feel is the primary issue with black belts in many schools: not that the time is too short, but that the belt is not *earned*.

Daniel


----------



## jthomas1600 (Feb 24, 2011)

ralphmcpherson said:


> I know we can say "different arts no comparison" but it appears more and more that tkd is alone on this. I have friends who do hapkido, zendokai, shotokan, bjj, aikido, wing chun and ninjitsu and all of them are taking a hell of a lot longer than 2 years to get a black belt. All of them, too, find it laughable that tkd hands them out in 2 years. Its as if all other arts have a belief of what a black belt "should be" that differs so greatly from tkd. It just seems to me that tkd really is the exception to the rule on this. I know there's the odd karate club out there handing out black belts in 2 years but its not as common as tkd. I just thinks its so frustrating that tkd is becoming the exception to the rule on this. Most students are still tripping over their own feet after 2 years of training and the thought that they can get a black belt in that time frame just doesnt seem right. I can remember where I was at after 2 years training and if Id had to defend myself for real I would have been in real trouble. the bottom line is that tkd is a martial art, its not a dance class, so if someone has a black belt they better be able to defend themself in my opinion.



I don't think it's just practitioners within other arts. As someone who has always had an interest in martial arts, but is new to TKD I can tell you I was very surprised to find out you could get a black belt in 3-4 years. Prior to my involvement in TKD I would have guessed 6-8 yeas to be pretty average. I've taken some BJJ so I knew that was a long haul and I would have guessed most arts were similar.

I've also been somewhat surprised on here to hear so many people talk about "your journey just beginning" at black belt, or "now you've got the basics down". When do the students become aware of this? I really think when people sign up to take TKD the average person thinks a black belt is an expert. Most people are aware that there are dan rankings after black belt, but I still don't think they're under the impression that black belts have just learned the basics. I wonder if this mindset is also unique to TKD. Is it a way to justify promoting to black so fast? 

I love TKD. I love the school I train at. I hope my post does not sound overly critical.


----------



## andyjeffries (Feb 24, 2011)

jthomas1600 said:


> I was very surprised to find out you could get a black belt in 3-4 years. Prior to my involvement in TKD I would have guessed 6-8 yeas to be pretty average. I've taken some BJJ so I knew that was a long haul and I would have guessed most arts were similar.



I think there are differences and parallels with BJJ grades though.

BJJ - 2 years to blue belt, 2 years to purple belt.  It's quite normal to have small clubs run by a purple belt.  2-3 more years to brown and 2-3 years to black.  Can promote others to black belt after 8-10 years total training.

TKD - 3-4 years to 1st Dan black belt.  Can open a club at 1st Dan. 1 year to 2nd Dan.  2 years to 3rd Dan. 3 years to 4th Dan.  Can promote others to 3rd Dan after 9-10 years total training.

Sure, a black belt in BJJ has a longer training time, but if you ignore the mythical black belt and view them in terms of instructor/rank-promoter, they are really pretty similar in terms of time.


----------



## Bruno@MT (Feb 24, 2011)

Well, your counting is correct. If we split out my jj training from ninpo training, we get to 6  years to BB for ninpo, and 4 years for jujutsu. The ninpo curriculum is bigger and more difficult.

2 exams per year is really about the max you can do. I don't see how it could be different. With every kyu / gup, you get new techniques, kata, throws, etc. Learning those and becoming good at them takes time. During that time, we're also required to keep training older stuff, like rolling and tai sabaki. Passing an exam means that you are good enough to have earned the grade, but you're expected to keep improving those skills.

To get to black in 2 years, I'd have about 2 months to learn and become skilled at an entire kyu level curriculum. Imo that seems a bit unrealistic.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 24, 2011)

jthomas1600 said:


> I've also been somewhat surprised on here to hear so many people talk about "your journey just beginning" at black belt, or "now you've got the basics down". When do the students become aware of this? I really think when people sign up to take TKD the average person thinks a black belt is an expert. Most people are aware that there are dan rankings after black belt, but I still don't think they're under the impression that black belts have just learned the basics. I wonder if this mindset is also unique to TKD. Is it a way to justify promoting to black so fast?


The mindset is not unique to taekwondo, though I think that taekwondo tends to have quicker times to first dan than other arts. Not good or bad; it simply is.

Some of this is due to differences in technique quantity, some due to a different (perhaps the original?) meaning being given to a first dan/black belt.

Funny thing is, and I said this recently on another thread, all of the people here who have been critical of short times to first dan and of the student's time in grade in the OP *all *have said on other threads that rank is unimportant/meaningless/or doesn't matter.

My only concrete concern with rank relates primarilly to kids.  You are correct in your observation that in the west, the black belt is viewed by the layman as an expert fighter.

Because of that, I feel that black belts should not be awarded to kids who will not have the maturity to equate it with just having the basics.  Giving an eight year old a black belt has the potential to embolden him with schoolyard bullies that he may not be able to handle himself with, and may also cause the schoolyard bullies to step up their bullying (got a black belt huh?  Lets see if you can make me not kick your ____).  That, and I see many schools using the black belt as a means of generating more income from parents.

For me, it is mainly an issue of giving a false sense of security, regardless of the intent of the instructor.

Daniel


----------



## andyjeffries (Feb 24, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Funny thing is, and I said this recently on another thread, all of the people here who have been critical of short times to first dan and of the student's time in grade in the OP *all *have said on other threads that rank is unimportant/meaningless/or doesn't matter.



I don't know if this includes me or not, but just to clarify my feelings:

I think less than 3 years is too short for 1st Dan.  I think 1st Dan isn't an expert but is just competent in all the basics and ready to learn more.  I think rank is somewhat important (but you may feel I've argued the other way sometimes, I sometimes do that to just play devil's advocate) but not the be-all and end-all of Taekwondo.


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 24, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> The mindset is not unique to taekwondo, though I think that taekwondo tends to have quicker times to first dan than other arts.  Not good or bad; it simply is.
> 
> Some of this is due to differences in technique quantity, some due to a  different (perhaps the original?) meaning being given to a first  dan/black belt.



But my contention is that it shouldn't.  TKD should be as rich in technique as any art.  Despite all the limited tenure in TKD or karate the early TKD men had, we also know that many of them had strong backgrounds in judo and other arts as well.  When you consider the whole of their martial knowledge, it certainly seems like any modern curriculum that allows you to grade to chodan in 1-2 years is inherently deficient.




Daniel Sullivan said:


> Funny thing is, and I said this recently on another thread, all of the people here who have been critical of short times to first dan and of the student's time in grade in the OP *all *have said on other threads that rank is unimportant/meaningless/or doesn't matter.



It does not matter to *ME* at this stage of my career, but I do not expect the person walking into the dojang for the first time to feel the same.

There is the conundrum.  It seems you have to be training for a good while before you see rank to be ultimately unimportant compared to the skill and knowledge it is *SUPPOSED* to represent.  And that is where I still care about rank.  If its meaning is so shallow, then it has no real meaning at all and thus casts a shadow on my own hard training when others think the debased experience is my experience.  As a teacher of others, I obviously would and must take exception with that.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 24, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> But my contention is that it shouldn't. TKD should be as rich in technique as any art. Despite all the limited tenure in TKD or karate the early TKD men had, we also know that many of them had strong backgrounds in judo and other arts as well. When you consider the whole of their martial knowledge, it certainly seems like any modern curriculum that allows you to grade to chodan in 1-2 years is inherently deficient.


Now that is a different discussion, and one where I agree with you.  



dancingalone said:


> It does not matter to *ME* at this stage of my career, but I do not expect the person walking into the dojang for the first time to feel the same.
> 
> There is the conundrum. It seems you have to be training for a good while before you see rank to be ultimately unimportant compared to the skill and knowledge it is *SUPPOSED* to represent.


Indeed.  Kind of like the Bruce Lee saying about a punch being just a punch, then he encountered martial arts and learned how a punch was so much more than just a punch, and then becoming advanced, finding that a punch is just a punch.

I'm paraphrasing, but I see the same dynamic.  Before martial arts, a black belt is what you wore with black shoes and 'dan' was just my name.  After seeing that first Jhoon Rhee commercial and finding out about the supposed rarity of karate black belts from a James Bond movie, the black belt and first dan holder became hugely important, so much more than just a regular fighter.  Now that I hold a dan grade higher than first in more than one art, a black belt gathers my dobok quite nicely, matches the color scheme, and is handy for techniques that use a belt or require you to grab a belt.  The '___th dan' certificate is just a certificate that certifies that I trained hard and passed a test.  My pride is in the training and passing of the test, not in the certificate itself. 



dancingalone said:


> And that is where I still care about rank. If its meaning is so shallow, then it has no real meaning at all and thus casts a shadow on my own hard training when others think the debased experience is my experience. As a teacher of others, I obviously would and must take exception with that.


I disagree, though I understand your reasoning. 

A degree is just a degree, and degrees from some schools are far more valuable than degrees from others.  An ATA four year third dan does not in any way debase my own certifications.  His ability, as described in the OP, coupled with the rank awareded him by an ATA school is a reflection on that ATA school, for better or worse.

Another statement made often on MT is that 'rank is only valuable within the school where you earned it.'  While I don't *fully* agree with that, particularly in the context of a larger organization, in principle it is essentially true.

Daniel


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 24, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I disagree, though I understand your reasoning.
> 
> A degree is just a degree, and degrees from some schools are far more valuable than degrees from others.  An ATA four year third dan does not in any way debase my own certifications.  His ability, as described in the OP, coupled with the rank awareded him by an ATA school is a reflection on that ATA school, for better or worse.
> 
> Another statement made often on MT is that 'rank is only valuable within the school where you earned it.'  While I don't *fully* agree with that, particularly in the context of a larger organization, in principle it is essentially true.



I think "rank is only valuable within the school where you earned it" is a nice platitude, but it doesn't represent reality.  Those of us like you and me who have schools know all too well that the actions of the few (um, many?) inevitably confront us all.  And if we earn our bread from teaching, that is a problem.  

I do not like having to defend taekwondo as a valid martial art to other martial artists or to lay people who form their impressions of TKD from the McDojo fare.  It's all very pure and Zen to say we should just ignore the detractors, but I fear such a perspective is not rooted in day-to-day concerns.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 24, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> I think "rank is only valuable within the school where you earned it" is a nice platitude, but it doesn't represent reality. Those of us like you and me who have schools know all too well that the actions of the few (um, many?) inevitably confront us all. And if we earn our bread from teaching, that is a problem.
> 
> I do not like having to defend taekwondo as a valid martial art to other martial artists or to lay people who form their impressions of TKD from the McDojo fare. It's all very pure and Zen to say we should just ignore the detractors, but I fear such a perspective is not rooted in day-to-day concerns.


I don't think that detractors should just be ignored; I simply don't feel that my certificates or training is debased by some kid with third dan after four years. 

I agree that it should not be ignored, though I am choosey about who I take the time to defend the validity of my arts to. As my own private studio is hapkido and kumdo, taekwondo's issues affect me less directly; most lay people don't know what either art is, so defending their validity doesn't really come up. 

As for other martial artists questioning the validity of taekwondo as an art, they are the ones that I tend to ignore most often. Most of the time, they question the validity of taekwondo as an art in order to puff themselves up (those here on MT excluded). 

I am happy to respond to actual dialogue with other martial arts practitioners, which is mostly what I get here and why I continue to dialogue with people here. 

I stopped participating in the the _'my art is so great, your art is for wimps'_ sites long ago for that reason.

Lay people are so woefully *un*informed that most won't even get to the point of questioning taekwondo as a valid art. The armchair masters among the laity I usually ignore, but occasionally, it is fun to engage them to see just how far they'll go with their ridiculous arguments.

Daniel


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 24, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I don't think that detractors should just be ignored; I simply don't feel that my certificates or training is debased by some kid with third dan after four years.



Neither is mine I hope, but I have found myself having to defend my own training.  Is that debasement?  It depends on the beholder, I guess.




Daniel Sullivan said:


> I agree that it should not be ignored, though I am choosey about who I take the time to defend the validity of my arts to. As my own private studio is hapkido and kumdo, taekwondo's issues affect me less directly; most lay people don't know what either art is, so defending their validity doesn't really come up.



If you ever decide to open a more public studio and you decide to teach TKD, I suspect it will be more of an issue for you.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> As for other martial artists questioning the validity of taekwondo as an art, they are the ones that I tend to ignore most often. Most of the time, they question the validity of taekwondo as an art in order to puff themselves up (those here on MT excluded).
> 
> I am happy to respond to actual dialogue with other martial arts practitioners, which is mostly what I get here and why I continue to dialogue with people here.
> 
> I stopped participating in the the _'my art is so great, your art is for wimps'_ sites long ago for that reason.



It's not just on the internet, I'm afraid.  I'm part of a multidisciplinary practice group.  We meet every couple of months.  It's where I met that Machado brown belt I roll with.  TKD bashing happens there from time to time, and I always have to take a few minutes to explain and demonstrate what good TKD is.  I also get a few comments occasionally in my karate class or in my TKD class that our training is nothing like what XYZ McDojang offers.  The comments both reassure and disgust me at the same time.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Lay people are so woefully *un*informed that most won't even get to the point of questioning taekwondo as a valid art. The armchair masters among the laity I usually ignore, but occasionally, it is fun to engage them to see just how far they'll go with their ridiculous arguments.



To me, it's not a matter of laughing and scoffing at them.  Their negative feelings towards taekwondo didn't appear out of thin air.  They are rooted in something negative that happened either to them or to an acquaintance who was only too happen to spread their dissatisfaction to others.

To me, it's a matter of self-respect to address their incomplete picture of TKD in a positive fashion.  Not berating them or beating them up.  Not screaming shrilly that my kung fu is the best!  Instead, I think it important to take the time to gently show them a different picture that they have never seen before and hopefully help change negative opinion with one person at a time.


----------



## puunui (Feb 24, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> There is the conundrum.  It seems you have to be training for a good while before you see rank to be ultimately unimportant compared to the skill and knowledge it is *SUPPOSED* to represent.  And that is where I still care about rank.  If its meaning is so shallow, then it has no real meaning at all and thus casts a shadow on my own hard training when others think the debased experience is my experience.  As a teacher of others, I obviously would and must take exception with that.




Funny but prospective students don't ask me what my rank is. In fact, I don't think any of my students actually know what rank I am. It just never comes up. The instructors of the two largest Taekwondo schools here don't put up their dan certificates on the wall. People criticize Taekwondo all the time. It really doesn't affect me in any shape form or fashion, and it certainly doesn't affect the students since they seem to keep coming in droves.  The people who complain and criticize Taekwondo tend to be practitioners of other arts. Frankly, who cares what they say. I know I don't, and never really did. If they don't see the value in Taekwondo, then that is their problem, not mine. 

I told this story before, but I will say it again. I had a student who was studying kenpo for I think a year, and after a year, he was still a white belt. He was short, 5'3" and would get beat up in sparring all the time. So he came to me because he wanted to learn kicks. I told him come train hard for three months, we would spar after every class for ten or fifteen minutes, and after that, you can go back and spar those kenpo students. I focused on stance, the four basic steps and back leg roundhouse kick with him. After three months, he went back told his kenpo class mates that he was also studying korean martial arts, which they were cool about. they snickered and made comments about it, but they shut their mouths after sparring with him. He beat everyone in sparring, 10-0, except for one golden gloves boxer assistant instructor who was a foot taller than him. After that he was instantly promoted to purple belt. He probably could have medaled at nationals in finweight, if he wanted to, but he didn't want to. He just wanted to get back at his kenpo classmates. He eventually made it to 1st Dan, then quit because of work and school obligations. I miss him because he was my best Hapkido counterattack partner. We would go back and forth for an hour or more and it was so smooth we looked like were on Dancing with the Stars. Oh well. 

But I wouldn't worry about what others say if I were you. In the big scheme of things, it really doesn't matter.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 24, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> Neither is mine I hope, but I have found myself having to defend my own training. Is that debasement? It depends on the beholder, I guess.


I would say that one's certificate would be debased it it was found to be fraudulent; say, for instance a GM fakes KKW certs and you find out that your cert is bogus after the fact. 

Or that the instructor who issued it was fraudulent in some way that would create some foundational flaw in your training; such as having training in some other art and then deciding to teach taekwondo because that is where the money is without ever actually learning taekwondo (saw someone do this with Tai Chi recently).

But the rank gymnastics of *other* schools does not debase yours. If anything, it actually makes yours more valueable.



dancingalone said:


> If you ever decide to open a more public studio and you decide to teach TKD, I suspect it will be more of an issue for you.


If I ever end up teaching taekwondo, I expect, based on what I see at local TKD schools, that the majority of my students will be teens and children who won't care about my rank.



dancingalone said:


> It's not just on the internet, I'm afraid. I'm part of a multidisciplinary practice group. We meet every couple of months. It's where I met that Machado brown belt I roll with. TKD bashing happens there from time to time, and I always have to take a few minutes to explain and demonstrate what good TKD is.


The fact that they bash the art that one of the people with whom they roll practices says more about them than it does about taekwondo. If they respect you enough to roll with you regularly, it would seem that they would respect your art.



dancingalone said:


> I also get a few comments occasionally in my karate class or in my TKD class that our training is nothing like what XYZ McDojang offers. The comments both reassure and disgust me at the same time.


Your classes are geared to a different clientelle.



dancingalone said:


> To me, it's not a matter of laughing and scoffing at them. Their negative feelings towards taekwondo didn't appear out of thin air. They are rooted in something negative that happened either to them or to an acquaintance who was only too happen to spread their dissatisfaction to others.


Actually, I think most of them read it on the internet and just regurgitate it. Some people are just negative and they do all that they can to spread it around. And people, for whatever reason, feed on negativity. If they didn't, the news networks, tabloids, and most reality television would be out of business.



dancingalone said:


> To me, it's a matter of self-respect to address their incomplete picture of TKD in a positive fashion. Not berating them or beating them up. Not screaming shrilly that my kung fu is the best! Instead, I think it important to take the time to gently show them a different picture that they have never seen before and hopefully help change negative opinion with one person at a time.


To be clear, I don't berate or beat them up. But I am sometimes amused by the preposterous arguments that people put forth. Sometimes it takes getting them to that point and then posing a logical counter argument to get them to think for themelves (most spout arguments that are not their own) and look at things objectively. 

In many cases, however, the individual doesn't want a complete picture of taekwondo, as his incomplete picture is supporting some other strongly held belief that is dependent upon the picture he has of certain things.

Daniel


----------



## Balrog (Feb 24, 2011)

msmitht said:


> It is what his parents told me. One year to first, said he trained every day, one to second and two to third.


Sad to say, we have some schools in the ATA that are belt factories.  He apparently attended one.

That's just embarrassing.


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 25, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> If I ever end up teaching taekwondo, I expect, based on what I see at local TKD schools, that the majority of my students will be teens and children who won't care about my rank.



I was addressing the reputation of TKD on the whole and the prospects therein of losing serious students to other arts.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> The fact that they bash the art that one of the people with whom they roll practices says more about them than it does about taekwondo. If they respect you enough to roll with you regularly, it would seem that they would respect your art.



The group changes faces quite frequently since you're asked to bring someone new each time with you if possible.  It's also no gi.  Often people have no idea what martial art you practice unless you volunteer it.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Your classes are geared to a different clientelle.



Indeed.  Yet if I buy a commercial dojang, they will not be.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Actually, I think most of them read it on the internet and just regurgitate it. Some people are just negative and they do all that they can to spread it around. And people, for whatever reason, feed on negativity. If they didn't, the news networks, tabloids, and most reality television would be out of business.
> 
> To be clear, I don't berate or beat them up. But I am sometimes amused by the preposterous arguments that people put forth. Sometimes it takes getting them to that point and then posing a logical counter argument to get them to think for themelves (most spout arguments that are not their own) and look at things objectively.
> 
> In many cases, however, the individual doesn't want a complete picture of taekwondo, as his incomplete picture is supporting some other strongly held belief that is dependent upon the picture he has of certain things.



I don't run into a lot of the internet machismo types.  However I have been asked on several occasions if qualify self-defense is indeed a focus in my school as opposed to exercise or 'building leaders'.  This makes me think the schools that do focus on these other activities are creating flak for the schools that indeed want to teach TKD as a fighting art foremost.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 25, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> I was addressing the reputation of TKD on the whole and the prospects therein of losing serious students to other arts.


I see commericalism as the biggest issue facing taekwondo.  The whole sport/SD or length of time to black belt are distractions.  Lack of focused training, promotion of unready students, regardless of time frame, and making students into teachers before they are really ready for the responsibility are all a result of commercialism.  Unfortunately, if you're the biggest, you tend to end up with the highest amount of commericialization.

Nobody criticizes judo for not being a striking art.  Nobody criticizes boxing for lack of kicks or grapples.  Taekwondo should be trained hard in every school and students should not get passed along just because the check cleared.

I suspect that if you run your program as you have described that losing serious students will not be an issue for you.  



dancingalone said:


> The group changes faces quite frequently since you're asked to bring someone new each time with you if possible. It's also no gi. Often people have no idea what martial art you practice unless you volunteer it.


Once again, if someone is participating in a group of MAists from different backgrounds, those backgrounds should be respected and art bashing has no place.



dancingalone said:


> Indeed. Yet if I buy a commercial dojang, they will not be.


How will you address that common clientelle if you buy the dojang?



dancingalone said:


> I don't run into a lot of the internet machismo types. However I have been asked on several occasions if qualify self-defense is indeed a focus in my school as opposed to exercise or 'building leaders'. This makes me think the schools that do focus on these other activities are creating flak for the schools that indeed want to teach TKD as a fighting art foremost.


Then you have a perfect opportunity to tell these people that your studio offers something that they are looking for.

For the record, I think that the exercise/leadership crowd, the sport/athlete crowd, and the SD/tradition crowd can all be accomodated in taekwondo.  If good, solid training and a high standard of performance is the basis of your program, you can build towards any of those goals without sacrificing quality and without losing students.

Daniel


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 25, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I see commericalism as the biggest issue facing taekwondo.  The whole sport/SD or length of time to black belt are distractions.  Lack of focused training, promotion of unready students, regardless of time frame, and making students into teachers before they are really ready for the responsibility are all a result of commercialism.  Unfortunately, if you're the biggest, you tend to end up with the highest amount of commericialization.



Agreed.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Nobody criticizes judo for not being a striking art.  Nobody criticizes boxing for lack of kicks or grapples.



That's because neither judo nor boxing has super-duper fanciful techniques that are more for display than actual usage.  Some of the criticism about TKD is merited, though certainly again it's an issue of individual schools running amuck



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Taekwondo should be trained hard in every school and students should not get passed along just because the check cleared.  I suspect that if you run your program as you have described that losing serious students will not be an issue for you.



It's not losing students I have already that worries me.  I do wonder however if some potential martial artists never even consider TKD to begin with because of its reputation as a kiddie sport.  Maybe these people never even set into a dojang to try it out.  They might be going straight to other arts.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Once again, if someone is participating in a group of MAists from different backgrounds, those backgrounds should be respected and art bashing has no place.



I related the anecdote as an example of how I have had to defend TKD in the past.  Whether the bashing should have happened is another matter.




Daniel Sullivan said:


> How will you address that common clientelle if you buy the dojang?



I don't entirely know.  It would definitely need to be a key part of my business plan otherwise I'd be setting myself up for failure from the onset.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Then you have a perfect opportunity to tell these people that your studio offers something that they are looking for.



Well, yes, and I do,  but that doesn't get at the point of what we are discussing, i.e., the actions of some reflecting poorly on the rest of us. 



Daniel Sullivan said:


> For the record, I think that the exercise/leadership crowd, the sport/athlete crowd, and the SD/tradition crowd can all be accomodated in taekwondo.  If good, solid training and a high standard of performance is the basis of your program, you can build towards any of those goals without sacrificing quality and without losing students.



I'm not so sure about that.  A huge part of the problem is that all those factions use the name 'taekwondo' causing exactly the same problems of identity/goal confusion I describe above.  You once said the sport side should call their stuff something like 'tae do'.  Have you changed your mind about that?


----------



## miguksaram (Feb 25, 2011)

I have asked this many times, and so again I will ask.  Why does anyone feel the need to base the "value" of their rank by what other have or have not achieved?  My first dan test in Shorei-ryu was 100 times harder than my 1st dan test in TKD and it took me 3 years longer to reach. Do I feel my 1st dan in TKD has no value? No.  I gave everything I had when I took both tests and I feel I earned what I received.  

When I took my Shorei-ryu test it was not has hard as the test that was given to others who have tested before me.  So is my belt of no value?  Again, no.  I gave it my all and earned it.  So again why is that people suddenly feel devalued by what others achieve?  Perhaps it is a self esteem issue lingering around.  Perhaps a self examination was done and a realization that maybe they too may not deserve what they achieved.  I don't know.  All I know is quit stressing out about it.  If they are not training with you or your school then it really is not your problem to deal with.


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 25, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> I have asked this many times, and so again I will ask.  Why does anyone feel the need to base the "value" of their rank by what other have or have not achieved?



I guess you haven't been reading?  I'm affected as a potential studio owner when people scoff at TKD due to various things like 1 year dans or 18 year old third dans or BBs who can't fight their way out of a paper bag.

Like I said, it's very PC and Zen and such to ignore it and say it's not a problem and that we should internally look for why we feel this way... but I hardly think it's looking at matters pragmatically.  Effective business contingency planning means one must consider the problem and have a solution at hand to redress it sufficiently, at least in your own immediate sphere of influence.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 25, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> That's because neither judo nor boxing has super-duper fanciful techniques that are more for display than actual usage. Some of the criticism about TKD is merited, though certainly again it's an issue of individual schools running amuck


I find that the biggest criticisms of taekwondo by students of other arts all revolve around issues arising from commercialism. Black belts who can't *do* the fanciful kicks, or even decent meat and potatoes kicks, eight year old black belts, etc. 

Kyokushin has fanciful kicks and a sparring style that prohibits punches to the head, but somehow, you don't see volumes of threads and magazine articles about kyokushin not teaching you to guard your head. Any criticisms of Kyuokushin's body of techniques and sparring rules is usually followed by comments along the lines of 'but you gotta respect the training.'

Hard training garners respect, no ifs, ands or buts, and is entirely unrelated to the content of the art. Boxers and judoka train hard because competition is part and parcel of their arts. Taekwondo, in my opinion, suffers from a bit of an identity crisis at the dojang level, though in large part, this is due to commercialism.



dancingalone said:


> It's not losing students I have already that worries me. I do wonder however if some potential martial artists never even consider TKD to begin with because of its reputation as a kiddie sport. Maybe these people never even set into a dojang to try it out. They might be going straight to other arts.


Honestly, serious students of the martial arts generally already have their idea of what they're after and there aren't enough between-school-serious-students of the martial arts in the marketplace to impact a school one way or another. Serious students are more often developed in house than lured in from outside. As for the general public, they have no perception of taekwondo; as far as they are concerned, its white pajamas with belts and in their minds, karate. 



dancingalone said:


> I related the anecdote as an example of how I have had to defend TKD in the past. Whether the bashing should have happened is another matter.


Once again, the bashing says more about the person doing it than it does about the art. I could, as an outsider ask you about things relating to aikido, and ask about the criticisms of aikido without bashing aikido.



dancingalone said:


> I don't entirely know. It would definitely need to be a key part of my business plan otherwise I'd be setting myself up for failure from the onset.


Yup. The cute kiddies are not going away.



dancingalone said:


> Well, yes, and I do, but that doesn't get at the point of what we are discussing, i.e., the actions of some reflecting poorly on the rest of us.


Every art suffers from some reflecting poorly on others. But with TKD schools on every corner, the bad eggs are far more noticable. 



dancingalone said:


> I'm not so sure about that. A huge part of the problem is that all those factions use the name 'taekwondo' causing exactly the same problems of identity/goal confusion I describe above. You once said the sport side should call their stuff something like 'tae do'. Have you changed your mind about that?


I still see the sport as being different from the rest of the KKW curriculum, though I will say that Glenn has given me a differnent perspective on the sport/art topic.

Regardless, a name change is not going to happen, so regardless of my feelings on the subject, KKW schools need to be able to address the art and sport in a meaningful way.

I think that leadership, confidence, discipline, and fitness should be byproducts of training and perhaps should be a more prominent part of kids programs.

Where I see a problem with the leadership/fitness aspects is not that they are there, but that their presence is used to justify a lower level of ability in technique or the inability of students to use their skills in any meaningful way.

As far as the sport goes, integrate it as a part of the class so that all students get some exposure to it, but make it only one training tool, with some other form of free sparring (whatever you are using now) as another. In addition offer a class one night a week that is dedicated to competition training entirely and a class one night a week that is entirely devoted to pumse. That way, those who are interested in competition can gravitate to the former and those who want to focus more on pumse can gravitate to latter, and those who are interested in both can of course do both. 

Different rooms, one house.

Daniel


----------



## miguksaram (Feb 25, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> I guess you haven't been reading?  I'm affected as a potential studio owner when people scoff at TKD due to various things like 1 year dans or 18 year old third dans or BBs who can't fight their way out of a paper bag.
> 
> Like I said, it's very PC and Zen and such to ignore it and say it's not a problem and that we should internally look for why we feel this way... but I hardly think it's looking at matters pragmatically.  Effective business contingency planning means one must consider the problem and have a solution at hand to redress it sufficiently, at least in your own immediate sphere of influence.


I guess the average consumer is just smarter in your neck of the woods than in my area.  I have yet to run across a first time participant and hear them say "This isn't Taekwondo is it?  Because I hear it is just a belt factory."  They don't know the difference.

The only people who generally scoff at it are those who have been in martial arts and go by what they hear or read, without real experience with it, or those who have been exposed to one school which happen to suck and then went on to a different art.  Most people who have bad experience tend to stick with the same art but look for a better school before saying the art itself sucks.  At least that is what I have found.


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 25, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I find that the biggest criticisms of taekwondo by students of other arts all revolve around issues arising from commercialism. Black belts who can't *do* the fanciful kicks, or even decent meat and potatoes kicks, eight year old black belts, etc.



Yep.




Daniel Sullivan said:


> Kyokushin has fanciful kicks and a sparring style that prohibits punches to the head, but somehow, you don't see volumes of threads and magazine articles about kyokushin not teaching you to guard your head. Any criticisms of Kyuokushin's body of techniques and sparring rules is usually followed by comments along the lines of 'but you gotta respect the training.'



I am not aware that kyokushin trains 360 kicks, etc.  It's true enough that spinning back kicks, hook kicks, and axe kicks are.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Hard training garners respect, no ifs, ands or buts, and is entirely unrelated to the content of the art. Boxers and judoka train hard because competition is part and parcel of their arts. Taekwondo, in my opinion, suffers from a bit of an identity crisis at the dojang level, though in large part, this is due to commercialism.



High intensity sparring/randori, not competition.  Many boxers and judoka never enter a single tournament.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Honestly, serious students of the martial arts generally already have their idea of what they're after and there aren't enough between-school-serious-students of the martial arts in the marketplace to impact a school one way or another. Serious students are more often developed in house than lured in from outside. As for the general public, they have no perception of taekwondo; as far as they are concerned, its white pajamas with belts and in their minds, karate.



Maybe the people in my area are more knowledgeable as miguksaram said, although I think he meant it sarcastically.  I definitely get occasional inquiries from people with prior knowledge of TKD or at least a preconceived notion of what TKD is.  Much of the time, they're very concerned with avoiding a soft training experience.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> I think that leadership, confidence, discipline, and fitness should be  byproducts of training and perhaps should be a more prominent part of  kids programs.



I can definitely agree with the first part of your sentence.  I'm conflicted on the second part.  I played a lot of sports when I was a kid and I think I learned many life lessons along the way.  That said, playing (and umm, winning) was the principle goal in those sports.  It was never #1 on teaching manners, respect, confidences, etc.



Daniel Sullivan said:


> Where I see a problem with the leadership/fitness aspects is not that  they are there, but that their presence is used to justify a lower level  of ability in technique or the inability of students to use their  skills in any meaningful way.



Not to mention this is a real sideline.  How many martial artists have child development degrees?  Seems like we should focus principally on martial arts which presumably we are experts in?



Daniel Sullivan said:


> As far as the sport goes, integrate it as a part of the class so that  all students get some exposure to it, but make it only one training  tool, with some other form of free sparring (whatever you are using now)  as another. In addition offer a class one night a week that is  dedicated to competition training entirely and a class one night a week  that is entirely devoted to pumse. That way, those who are interested in  competition can gravitate to the former and those who want to focus  more on pumse can gravitate to latter, and those who are interested in  both can of course do both.



A lot of people do that.  Who knows, maybe I will too.  Kids love to point fight.


----------



## miguksaram (Feb 25, 2011)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I think that leadership, confidence, discipline, and fitness should be byproducts of training and perhaps should be a more prominent part of kids programs.
> 
> 
> Daniel



One of the things I tell parents is that we do not TEACH self discipline or confidence at the school, but the students LEARN them through their hard training.  The one thing we do teach is leadership skills.  While students can learn this through their training, we do teach do's and don'ts when instructing a class or a individual student.

I agree that all the hype of teaching discipline, respect, confidence, self-esteem, concentration has always been a by-product learning martial arts not the core objective.


----------



## puunui (Feb 25, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> I do not like having to defend taekwondo as a valid martial art to other martial artists or to lay people who form their impressions of TKD from the McDojo fare.  It's all very pure and Zen to say we should just ignore the detractors, but I fear such a perspective is not rooted in day-to-day concerns.




I don't like having to defend Taekwondo either from people who come in asking why we don't call the instructors "Sensei" like at their old Taekwondo school on the mainland, or why no one but them wears a red white and blue cross over uniform instead of a v neck, or why their stance is too wide, or why they cannot punch to the face, or why it isn't pronounced Tie Kwon Do, or a million other whys that pop up. But that's just the way it is. As an instructor your job is to educate, and that is part of the educating process, to clear up misconceptions that people might have. 

For better or worse, Taekwondo as a commercial venture has carved out a very nice niche for itself -- children. Parents will eat vienna sausage and tuna sandwiches in order to give their children a better life, and they are also willing to pay Taekwondo instructors big bucks to help "raise" their kids. 

The sacrifice seems to be that you give up the type of student that you are looking for or the type of training that you want to give. it is a decision most every commercial school owner has faced and dealt with. 

Some new instructors had very strong feelings about contracts and so when they first opened, they made a big point out of saying they did not have contracts, only to find out that students tended to stay for shorter periods of time because of that. Other instructor want to emphasize a heavy self defense curriculum, with heavy contact, only to find that a lot of students quit because of that. Some want to emphasize Olympic style sparring only to learn that one or more students quit after every tournament that they participate in. Others discover that if they water down the curriculum, cut the classes to 45 minutes, create a black belt club, that they can make more money than they ever dreamed of. Do you hold fast your platitudes and starve, or sell out and make tons of money? Is there some middle ground where you don't feel like a sell out and yet maintain quality and a comfortable living? That's for you to find out. 

To me, all of that is part of the 4th Dan learning curve. You open a new school and you get to put all your own ideas into play. Some work, others won't. But through that process you develop your own style with your style. After that, you move on to other lessons on the journey.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Feb 25, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> I am not aware that kyokushin trains 360 kicks, etc. It's true enough that spinning back kicks, hook kicks, and axe kicks are.


I was thinking of spinning kicks and high kicks as well as the 360 kicks, though now I am curious as to whether they train in those as well.





dancingalone said:


> High intensity sparring/randori, not competition. Many boxers and judoka never enter a single tournament.


No, they may not enter a tournament, but competition is a part of the art. A judo sensei is not going to alter the class just because I don't think I'll enter a competition. I either participate in the randori or find another place to train.



dancingalone said:


> Maybe the people in my area are more knowledgeable as miguksaram said, although I think he meant it sarcastically. I definitely get occasional inquiries from people with prior knowledge of TKD or at least a preconceived notion of what TKD is. Much of the time, they're very concerned with avoiding a soft training experience.


Good! Sounds like your area is more likely to support a school that offers the kind of classes that you want to teach. 



dancingalone said:


> I can definitely agree with the first part of your sentence. I'm conflicted on the second part. I played a lot of sports when I was a kid and I think I learned many life lessons along the way. That said, playing (and umm, winning) was the principle goal in those sports. It was never #1 on teaching manners, respect, confidences, etc.


Maybe it should be. Might be nice if athletes learned early on that you've got to behave with courtesy, respect and integrity before they're handed a $10,000,000 contract. Pretty much everyone is sick and tired of grown men acting like drunken frat boys or spoiled primadonnas. 



dancingalone said:


> Not to mention this is a real sideline. How many martial artists have child development degrees? Seems like we should focus principally on martial arts which presumably we are experts in?


If your studio is running a daycare center (which is what after school programs and summer camps really are), then there should be the same qualified and licensed staff on hand as one would find in a daycare center.

If you're just teaching a kids class, I don't think a child development degree is needed. The whole leadership thing is more or less just a question of encouraging kids to take initiative and to behave in a mature way that will encourage others to follow their example.



dancingalone said:


> A lot of people do that. Who knows, maybe I will too. Kids love to point fight.


Sounds like that is you best option; it would enable you to maintain a more intense adult class while keeping the kids involved and interested but not challenged beyond what they're ready for.

Daniel


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Feb 25, 2011)

I dont know whether its child black belts, the 2 year black belts, olympic sparring etc but no one can deny that in the last 15 years tkd has started to cop a battering as far as its reputation is concerned. Its validity as a viable martial art is questioned almost everywhere. When I went to school we had a couple of tkd black belts and they were feared and respected. These days I hear kids telling me that they dont tell anyone at school they do tkd because they get teased and people say "why dont you go and hang with your 6 year old mates and play with your black belts". We could go on discussing this for another 3 weeks, but the bottom line is that the '2 year black belt' has harmed tkd's image. Irrespective of whether tkd values a black belt differently, does it for marketing reasons or whatever the reason, the general public are 'sus' on anyone getting blackbelts in 2 years, they just dont get it. It may be a short term solution to get people to join up, so their little johnny gets his black belt (despite the fact the school bully will beat him up with both arms tied behind his back), but on the larger scale it is damaging the image of the art. Tkd when taught properly is a very effective fighting system and is a great art, but it doesnt take einstein to figure out you cant get good in 2 years. I would like to line up 100 "2 year black belts" and ask them all to do a spinning hook kick. I will guarantee that at least 90 of them would stumble through it or at best do a very average kick. In my opinion how can a tkd black belt not do a fast, crisp accurate spin hook kick? And thats just one kick. I doubt these 2 year black belts can do form with any purpose or 'understand' the form on any decent level. I will just never accept or understand the 2 year black belt, buts thats probably because I have a different view to what a black belt is.


----------



## puunui (Feb 25, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> I guess you haven't been reading?  I'm affected as a potential studio owner when people scoff at TKD due to various things like 1 year dans or 18 year old third dans or BBs who can't fight their way out of a paper bag.



The people who scoff at that sort of thing aren't the ones who will be coming to your school inquiring about lessons. The ones who scoff are those who are already taking some sort of martial art. As for the one year black belt, I think that commercial schools have an interest in prolonging the black belt process as a way to gain more income from each student. I find that the Taekwondo schools with the longest road to 1st Dan/Poom are the big commerical schools. More color belts means more belt test money and more tuition to black belt, when contracts expire and people quit because they reached their goal of becoming a black belt. As for the 18 year old 3rd Dan, he probably started when he was 4 or 5, spends all his free time at the dojang and is an assistant instructor who helps teach classes.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Feb 25, 2011)

puunui said:


> The people who scoff at that sort of thing aren't the ones who will be coming to your school inquiring about lessons. The ones who scoff are those who are already taking some sort of martial art. As for the one year black belt, I think that commercial schools have an interest in prolonging the black belt process as a way to gain more income from each student. I find that the Taekwondo schools with the longest road to 1st Dan/Poom are the big commerical schools. More color belts means more belt test money and more tuition to black belt, when contracts expire and people quit because they reached their goal of becoming a black belt. As for the 18 year old 3rd Dan, he probably started when he was 4 or 5, spends all his free time at the dojang and is an assistant instructor who helps teach classes.


Big commercial schools are longer to black belt because they dont grade as regularly, there are still 10 or 11 belts before black so obviously if it takes longer to get black they just make the student stay at each coloured belt longer, thus earning less from grading fees. Your theory would only work if commercial schools had 20 belts before black because obviously if they are trying to make more money from gradings why wouldnt they just let students grade more regularly and get more grading fees? Its the one year black belt schools who make the grading money quickly because they are pumping out 10 lots of grading fees in only 12 months.


----------



## leadleg (Feb 25, 2011)

Number 1, what 2 year bb school do you know of? I could see a two year bb that put in 1000 hrs a year, but rarely do I see that kind of dedication. 
As for testing fee's as a money generator I would say not so much compared with tuition.A lot of schools who charge over 100 dollars a month throw in the testing fee's. Contracts are something I do not do but lots of people ask for them, they want a discount on the tuition. 
I see alot of people who do not want junior bb's, and some think teaching children is wrong, but almost every ffounder or pioneer has a story of them training at very young ages. 
While I agree that young people do not have the maturity to encompas the phylosophy or the ability to act like adults, like this 18 year old,if they can do the requirements how do you hold them back? We do it with poom belts.
I have seen my fair share of adult bb's who did not have the maturity or technique of some of the 12 year old poom holders. 
It is no secret that you can make money and produce excellent students, but you are going to have to market and treat your school as a buisness. Why does this mean you need to keep people you do not want to teach or not teach the way you want? 
You may have to have some classes that cater to different types of students, but you can still have your favourite class,even if it only has 6 students.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Feb 25, 2011)

leadleg said:


> Number 1, what 2 year bb school do you know of? I could see a two year bb that put in 1000 hrs a year, but rarely do I see that kind of dedication.
> As for testing fee's as a money generator I would say not so much compared with tuition.A lot of schools who charge over 100 dollars a month throw in the testing fee's. Contracts are something I do not do but lots of people ask for them, they want a discount on the tuition.
> I see alot of people who do not want junior bb's, and some think teaching children is wrong, but almost every ffounder or pioneer has a story of them training at very young ages.
> While I agree that young people do not have the maturity to encompas the phylosophy or the ability to act like adults, like this 18 year old,if they can do the requirements how do you hold them back? We do it with poom belts.
> ...


Do some schools charge $100 or more a month? Thats outrageous. What's the average at most places?


----------



## mango.man (Feb 25, 2011)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Do some schools charge $100 or more a month?



Yes



ralphmcpherson said:


> What's the average at most places?



I don't know.  I have paid anywhere from $59/month to $150/Month for my daughter's training.  And that is just monthly tuition.  Belt tests, equipment fees, coaching fees, competition costs, gas for the 60 mile commute to practice and 60 miles home etc. well that was all extra out of pocket costs.

Over the past 12+ years I, and many others I am sure, have paid for a decent college education with TKD costs.  I added it up once a few years ago and I had spent well over $40,000.  Since then, I have probably spent another $15,000.

Do I wish I had saved that money for college instead of "wasting it on TKD"?  Well, since she graduated from high school last year, I suppose part of me does.  But then I remember that I paid for my own college education, so she can to.  In the mean time she learned many life skills, leadership, discipline, responsibility, pride, honor, respect etc.  At the same time, she got to travel all over the USA and visit Russia making all sort of friends and experiencing so many things that I had to join the military to do.

She has never been hugely successful on the competitive circuit.  Always did great on a local and state level, OK at a regional level but less than stellar on the national scene.  She has had fun though, learned alot, met lots of great people and seen lots of great things and had many great experiences that hopefully she will look back on and be grateful for.

If she does, than the roughly $55,000 will be worth it.


----------



## Archtkd (Feb 26, 2011)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Do some schools charge $100 or more a month? Thats outrageous. What's the average at most places?


 
What's outrageous, that $100 is too high or too low?


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 26, 2011)

$90-$125 seems to be the median range in my area for a commercial dojang.  The most expensive TKD dojang I know of charges $160 a month for their Masters Club.  The cheapest one is ... free.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Feb 26, 2011)

Archtkd said:


> What's outrageous, that $100 is too high or too low?


Sorry, I should have clarified. Too high, Ive never hard of anywhere charging that much.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Feb 26, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> $90-$125 seems to be the median range in my area for a commercial dojang.  The most expensive TKD dojang I know of charges $160 a month for their Masters Club.  The cheapest one is ... free.


Most I know of charge $50 a month, that includes uniform and you only have to pay for 3 family member after that any additional family members are free. My wife, my daughter and I all train and pay $50 a month each, when my son starts he will be free, so 4 of us can train for $150 a month. Geez it would be an expensive hobby it the whole family did it and each paid $100 or more per month.


----------



## puunui (Feb 26, 2011)

miguksaram said:


> I guess the average consumer is just smarter in your neck of the woods than in my area.  I have yet to run across a first time participant and hear them say "This isn't Taekwondo is it?  Because I hear it is just a belt factory."  They don't know the difference.




If the "belt factory" criticism was a concern, then the millions of parents over the years would not go near a Taekwondo school. Instead they keep coming.


----------



## puunui (Feb 26, 2011)

leadleg said:


> As for testing fee's as a money generator I would say not so much compared with tuition.A lot of schools who charge over 100 dollars a month throw in the testing fee's.



Let's run some numbers. For the sake of comparison, let's use the same amounts for tuition ($100/month) and color belt tests ($30/test).

First the Korean model of one year 1st poom: Korea has white, yellow, green, blue, red and black, which translates into testing every two months before 1st poom, 4 months between red and poom. 12 months tuition ($1200) plus four color belt tests ($120) equals $1320 to 1st poom: 

American Model: USA has generally more color belts: Let's take an average belt system, white, yellow, orange, green, purple, blue, high blue, brown, high brown, red, high red, bodan, black. That's eleven belts, with belt tests every three months, every six months starting after red belt. That's 45 months of tuition ($4500) plus eleven color belt tests ($330) equals $4830 to 1st poom. 

This does not include school membership fees, discounts for cash outs, uniform, sparring equipment sales (even if the school does not participate in tournaments), membership fees for black belt club or demo team, etc. Also fees for 1st poom/dan are not included, and if the instructor does not issue Kukkiwon certification, then they can pocket the entire testing fee. 

So again, there is incentive to stretch out the process from white to 1st poom. The main money maker is the tuition, not the belt testing money. The longer the stretch to 1st poom/dan, the more money an instructor can make. 

Some basic assumptions that many school operate under: The goal of black belt is stressed ("We are a black belt school"), and the majority of students quit after reaching the goal of black belt and our primary goal is the financial success of the school. I am sure people have issues with some or all of this, but at the same time, I am sure the experienced school owners can see how many dojang owners function under these circumstances. This, basically, is how you end up with a Bentley.


----------



## puunui (Feb 26, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> $90-$125 seems to be the median range in my area for a commercial dojang.  The most expensive TKD dojang I know of charges $160 a month for their Masters Club.



I hear some schools are now in the $175-200+ range. I believe the idea of high tuition came from Stephen Oliver, an instructor in the Denver, Colorado area. He feels that you charge for the value of your services, and if you value what you offer, then you should charge accordingly. I hear he makes a ton of money.


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 26, 2011)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Most I know of charge $50 a month, that includes uniform and you only have to pay for 3 family member after that any additional family members are free. My wife, my daughter and I all train and pay $50 a month each, when my son starts he will be free, so 4 of us can train for $150 a month. Geez it would be an expensive hobby it the whole family did it and each paid $100 or more per month.



My sister pays $150 a month for her two kids.  Belt exams (every 3 months like clockwork) are $60, and they have lots of tournaments and other related expenses.  She spends $500 a month on average on taekwondo easily.


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 26, 2011)

puunui said:


> I hear some schools are now in the $175-200+ range. I believe the idea of high tuition came from Stephen Oliver, an instructor in the Denver, Colorado area. He feels that you charge for the value of your services, and if you value what you offer, then you should charge accordingly. I hear he makes a ton of money.



There might be something to that theory.  One of the most successful schools in the area is also the most expensive one.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Feb 26, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> There might be something to that theory.  One of the most successful schools in the area is also the most expensive one.


Its the way it works with most things. A top tennis coach aint cheap.


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 26, 2011)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Its the way it works with most things. A top tennis coach aint cheap.



You're right about that.  I take a few lessons every year from Aussie great John Newcombe.  He's not cheap, but he's worth it.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Feb 26, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> You're right about that.  I take a few lessons every year from Aussie great John Newcombe.  He's not cheap, but he's worth it.


I just signed my 6 year old son up for soccer and thats very expensive compared to tkd. My daughter gets private lessons for ice skating and thats very expensive. I suppose the difference is that in some  things its one on one coaching so the rates can be significantly higher. My instructor has 50 students just in the class I attend. Fifty students paying $50 a month, and thats just one of his classes. He makes very good money from teaching tkd. He makes about $8000 a month from tkd for 6 hours work a week. He lives on a 300 acre farm, enjoys life,  gets to spend plenty of time with his family and works minimal hours for good money. All grading fees go to the GM, so everyone's happy. And thats just charging $50 a month.


----------



## puunui (Feb 26, 2011)

dancingalone said:


> You're right about that.  I take a few lessons every year from Aussie great John Newcombe.  He's not cheap, but he's worth it.



Does he understand the modern game, or is he a no spin, flat shot kind of guy? The thing that I would want to learn from him is how to serve. My serve sucks.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Feb 26, 2011)

puunui said:


> Does he understand the modern game, or is he a no spin, flat shot kind of guy? The thing that I would want to learn from him is how to serve. My serve sucks.


He was captain of our davis cup team until about 2000 I think, so I assume he has a good grasp of the modern game. Your serve couldnt possibly be worse than mine


----------



## Gwai Lo Dan (Feb 27, 2011)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Its the way it works with most things. A top tennis coach aint cheap.


Uhmm....you got me thinking...Jim Kelly (the black guy in Enter the Dragon) became a tennis coach.  I guess tennis pays more than martial arts!


----------



## granfire (Feb 27, 2011)

Gwai Lo Dan said:


> Uhmm....you got me thinking...Jim Kelly (the black guy in Enter the Dragon) became a tennis coach.  I guess tennis pays more than martial arts!




more old people in Tennis...they have the fat wallet...


----------



## ETinCYQX (Feb 27, 2011)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Sorry, I should have clarified. Too high, Ive never hard of anywhere charging that much.



Seems to me that my tuition at one point was in the neighbourhood of $150 a month. At the time I was a member of the top-end competition club we fielded, and with that, advanced classes and demo training counted we trained in the neighborhood of 12hrs a week over 5 nights. I'd consider the school probably the best in the area.

I pay around $50 now, no competition support and 2 nights a week, roughly 2h each under the same school.


----------



## Archtkd (Feb 27, 2011)

ralphmcpherson said:


> Sorry, I should have clarified. Too high, Ive never hard of anywhere charging that much.



High? Depends on where you are. $50 -- $75 per hour can be considered a normal fee for personal classes in some areas.

Maybe we are not making an apples to apples comparison. What's the Australian dollar worth? One reason the average schools charge $100 plus is real estate prices. Prior to the recession the average commercial rental rate space at shopping centers -- where the bulk of Taekwondo schools tend to be located in surburban St. Louis -- was anywhere from $18-$28 per square foot triple net. If you have a small 1,500 square foot dojang that's $2,250- 3,500 in rent per month. Remember triple net does not cover real estate taxes and other lease related costs. Do the math to see how many students you need to cover rent alone, in a tiny school with limited capacity.


----------



## Emma (Feb 27, 2011)

Archtkd said:


> High? Depends on where you are. $50 -- $75 per hour can be considered a normal fee for personal classes in some areas.
> 
> Maybe we are not making an apples to apples comparison. What's the Australian dollar worth? One reason the average schools charge $100 plus is real estate prices. Prior to the recession the average commercial rental rate space at shopping centers -- where the bulk of Taekwondo schools tend to be located in surburban St. Louis -- was anywhere from $18-$28 per square foot triple net. If you have a small 1,500 square foot dojang that's $2,250- 3,500 in rent per month. Remember triple net does not cover real estate taxes and other lease related costs. Do the math to see how many students you need to cover rent alone, in a tiny school with limited capacity.





AU$1 is worth US$1.014 right now.

I'm not sure about the metro areas, but in my area most martial arts schools run out of community halls and similar type places, so wouldn't have anywhere near the overheads that places in America seem to have.


----------



## dancingalone (Feb 27, 2011)

puunui said:


> Does he understand the modern game, or is he a no spin, flat shot kind of guy? The thing that I would want to learn from him is how to serve. My serve sucks.



I suspect so, but I don't know from personal experience.  Whenever he works with me, I always ask for lessons on the serve, volley, and midcourt/front court games since that's what he was famous for.

He has plenty of other coaches working at his tennis ranch who work with juniors.  I'm sure they can teach the current style of play even if he can't.


----------



## Archtkd (Feb 27, 2011)

Emma said:


> AU$1 is worth US$1.014 right now.
> 
> I'm not sure about the metro areas, but in my area most martial arts schools run out of community halls and similar type places, so wouldn't have anywhere near the overheads that places in America seem to have.


 
Interesting. In my neck of the woods, and I'd think in most of the urban and suburban U.S., the bulk martial arts schools are located in commercial spaces, and often -- and unfortunately -- categorized as retail businesses. By the way, school owners often have bear the costs of improving the space for their studios.


----------



## ralphmcpherson (Feb 27, 2011)

Archtkd said:


> Interesting. In my neck of the woods, and I'd think in most of the urban and suburban U.S., the bulk martial arts schools are located in commercial spaces, and often -- and unfortunately -- categorized as retail businesses. By the way, school owners often have bear the costs of improving the space for their studios.


Thats probably the big difference. Most clubs I know of over here train in school halls. The govt has built pretty large, modern halls in the schools that didnt previously have one. So now almost all classes run through our club utilize these halls. They are large, have plenty of seating, have good air flow or air con and probably cost around $100-$150 a month for 1 and a half hours 2 nights a week. That must be why the costs are so low for training as I would imagine the overheads of having your own premises would be much higher than renting a school hall.


----------



## golfermatt (Mar 9, 2011)

Backing up from the business of Dojangs to earlier posts: I see that much focus is placed on the amount of time in years to achieve a BB. I would love to hear a greater breakdown from contributors. When you say 4-5years is sufficient, is that two one hour classes per week? 

Furthermore, if a student commits 10+ hours per week, they should advance at a greater pace, right? Does an instructor stick with strict time guidelines then?

It strikes me that the role of the instructor is a huge issue here. Evaluating the skills of one's students seems to be especially paramount. What may take one student 4-5years may take a more gifted or more committed student less time. An instructor would have to evaluate this, attaching a generic time line does not seem to be dynamic enough.


----------



## Dragons TKD (Mar 9, 2011)

> Backing up from the business of Dojangs to earlier posts: I see that  much focus is placed on the amount of time in years to achieve a BB. I  would love to hear a greater breakdown from contributors. When you say  4-5years is sufficient, is that two one hour classes per week?



It took me 1.5 years to get my black belt and another 6 months to get first dan.  That's only because I was allowed to double test some color belts.  I trained 6 days a week, 2-3 hours a day.  I only missed about 15 classes total in that time due to family vacations.  Also, I was competing at least once a month.


----------

