# Hapkido "time in grade"



## IcemanSK (Apr 19, 2013)

In Kukki-TKD (and other types of TKD) there are minimum "time in grade requirements" before one can test for the next BB rank. Does Hapkido have a time in grade requirement as well? If so, what are they?


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Apr 22, 2013)

IcemanSK said:


> In Kukki-TKD (and other types of TKD) there are minimum "time in grade requirements" before one can test for the next BB rank. Does Hapkido have a time in grade requirement as well? If so, what are they?



This would depend on the school and what organization (if any) they belong to.  TIG requirements can vary widely or be non-existant.  Also, it seems rather typical for skipped ranks in Hapkido (and other arts like TKD as well).  

It is hard in some respects to justify a set TIG since some of Hapkido's seniors had rather quick TIG advancements.  For example, Ji was an 8th Dan at age 28 or so with only 13-16 total training time.  That is quick.  Others in Hakido appear to have had accelerated advancement as well, and some simply won't supply their TIG at all.  My point is it is hard to generate/justify a TIG standard based upon prior precedence.  Should it be a year from first to second?  Two years from second to third?  If so, why?  If so, what is the precedent/justification for this TIG standard being set?  Was it followed by the seniors of the organization in question?  If not, why?  If some had accelerated advancement and/or skipped rank(s), what was the justification for such a thing?  Not necessarily a bad thing, but does/would it apply to anyone meeting those same justificaitons?


----------



## oftheherd1 (Apr 23, 2013)

The Hapkido I studied when I was in Korea from about 1984 to 1987, there was no time limit.  The limit was on properly learning and being able to execute the techniques.  But that was based on the fact that most students were US service persons and only there for 1 year.  I was very difficult, but possible to earn a BB in one year.  Going beyond that, at least to 2nd Dan, was pretty much the same thing.  Beyond that, I don't know if there was a set TIG or if it was simply sort of understood that one should study for two or more years before the next advancement.  I have the impression that it was generally understood that TIG for 2nd and above would be around 3 years, give or take.  I know my GM's son has some 4th Dan and I believe he has been teaching where he now lives for something like 10 years or more.


----------



## Instructor (Apr 23, 2013)

Our org likes to see at least a year between 1st and 2nd Dan, two years between 2nd and 3rd, and three years between 3rd and 4th.  These are not carved in stone though and it's largely a case by case basis.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Apr 23, 2013)

Alright, not to shift the thread too much, but...

A new member here in the Hapkido section mentioned that his son (age 7 or 8 IIRC) has his 2nd Dan.  Furthermore, a fellow child in the class is a 9 year old 3rd Dan.  No disrespect intended, but this seems (like many arts) too much too soon.  Okay, TKD has a plethora of 5 year old BB's running around.  And to be fair, a majority of these types of TKD schools don't have a whole lot of substance to them i.e. if you can kick, throw some punches and learn the required form-per-colored belt then there isn't much else to the art (note that some TKD schools have a LOT of substance and a LOT of material so I'm not broad-brushing TKD as a whole).  My point is that Hapkido, in addition to punches and kicks has throws, locks, chokes etc.  Are you going to tell me a 6 or 7 or 8 or 9 year old has delved that deeply into the art as to be able to do these techniques to the level of a first, second or third Dan?  When did this 9 year old start in order to '_earn_' 3rd Dan by age 9?  

I'm sorry, I just can't help but feel that the Dan grades have been so watered down to make money and pump up mom and dad as to make them laughable.  I know this has been debated multiple times, and I'm sure will be again.  But that's how I feel.


----------



## Instructor (Apr 23, 2013)

I dont' teach kids with the exception of my daughter and occasionally my son.  Neither of them are anywhere near Dan level.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Apr 24, 2013)

Kong Soo Do said:


> This would depend on the school and what organization (if any) they belong to.  TIG requirements can vary widely or be non-existant.  Also, it seems rather typical for skipped ranks in Hapkido (and other arts like TKD as well).
> 
> It is hard in some respects to justify a set TIG since some of Hapkido's seniors had rather quick TIG advancements.  For example, Ji was an 8th Dan at age 28 or so with only 13-16 total training time.  That is quick.  Others in Hakido appear to have had accelerated advancement as well, and some simply won't supply their TIG at all.  My point is it is hard to generate/justify a TIG standard based upon prior precedence.  Should it be a year from first to second?  Two years from second to third?  If so, why?  If so, what is the precedent/justification for this TIG standard being set?  Was it followed by the seniors of the organization in question?  If not, why?  If some had accelerated advancement and/or skipped rank(s), what was the justification for such a thing?  Not necessarily a bad thing, but does/would it apply to anyone meeting those same justificaitons?


I'm familiar with the post to which you refer.

I would need to know more about the curriculum before saying anything (is it a kiddie curriculum?) but I will repeat what I repeated on that thread: I cannot see an HKD ildan in a year, and two is really pushing it without some *very* relevant prior experience (such as an aikido black belt, judo black belt, prior hapkido training, etc.).  However, I am told by virtually everyone who has trained in Korea over the past twenty years that a black belt in HKD or TKD is one year, and that it is simply viewed as having completed the basic class.  

RE. children, I don't believe that children should be learning hoshinsul beyond escapes from holds, rolling and falling.  There are more than enough HKD striking techniques, more hand/arm and leg/foot than are in taekwondo, to fill up a two year curriculum for kids.  

The reason that I don't believe that children should be learning hapkido is physiological.  Children's bones, joints, and tendons are still growing and are not developed and are more susceptible to damage than a teen's or adult's.  

I still train in hapkido and taekwondo, but it is purely for enjoyment.  Any income derived from teaching others is enough to cover costs of materials, mainly pizza.  I have a much more formal kendo class that I teach, but regardless, advancement is based on when the student is ready.  I have only promoted one student to shodan and her time in kyu grades (we don't use belts in kendo) was roughly four years.  I have a very athletic student who just gets it.  He picks up everything right away and excels.  He also practices a lot outside of class.  He will probably get there in less time.  I have another student who has been training for over a year and has just gotten to the point where he isn't tripping over his own feet.  He will probably take longer than the young lady did.  

I use grades to track where a student is in the curriculum.  Nothing more.  I only charge enough to cover the costs of renting space and fuel costs.  I do not charge for tests, so I am in no particular hurry to promote students.  When they're ready, they're ready.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Apr 24, 2013)

IcemanSK said:


> In Kukki-TKD (and other types of TKD) there are minimum "time in grade requirements" before one can test for the next BB rank. Does Hapkido have a time in grade requirement as well? If so, what are they?



When I learned hapkido, I had already spent a few years in a taekwondo class with hapkido hoshinsul and where we trained in rolling and falling for self defense.  It took me aproximately two years to earn my HKD ildan.  Whether it would have been the same without prior training is something that I have never actually given any thought to.  The time between belts was one year for each current dan grade.  My GM at the time had broken off from the IHF (long story behind that and I'm not getting into it) and started his own federation.  He pretty much adhered to the model that I described above.  I have been told that that is how the IHF does it as well, but I don't know first hand.  After I earned my yidan, I was asked to teach classes.  After teaching for about a year, I was skipped to sadan.  I currently have the time in grade for that rank and have little interest in seeking further promotion.

I have since joined the World Hapkido Association.  Time in grade is essentially what I have experienced in other KMA; 2+ years to ildan, then one year per current dan grade to the next dan.  I have not sought further promotion or confirmation of my current grades in the WHA.  I train and teach purely for enjoyment and camraderie.  As I said previously, I ask my students to throw into the kitti so that we can cover the cost of belts, boards, and pizza.  With kendo, I teach at a ballet studio and they pay the studio owner.  It is enough to cover the cost of the space rental and fuel to get there.  I do not charge for tests.  I've never liked the idea of doing so.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Apr 24, 2013)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I would need to know more about the curriculum before saying anything (is it a kiddie curriculum?) but I will repeat what I repeated on that thread: I cannot see an HKD ildan in a year, and two is really pushing it without some *very* relevant prior experience (such as an aikido black belt, judo black belt, prior hapkido training, etc.).
> 
> RE. children, I don't believe that children should be learning hoshinsul beyond escapes from holds, rolling and falling.  There are more than enough HKD striking techniques, more hand/arm and leg/foot than are in taekwondo, to fill up a two year curriculum for kids.
> 
> The reason that I don't believe that children should be learning hapkido is physiological.  Children's bones, joints, and tendons are still growing and are not developed and are more susceptible to damage than a teen's or adult's.



I would be very surprised to learn that the children's training mirrored the adult for the very reason(s) you've stated.  It would actually be irresponsible to subject children to the adult version as it would/could be detrimental to their growth/health.  


> However, I am told by virtually everyone who has trained in Korea over  the past twenty years that a black belt in HKD or TKD is one year, and  that it is simply viewed as having completed the basic class.



I agree with you that two years + in Hapkido is more realistic.  Having a third Dan by age 9 is simply, imho, unrealistic and states another agenda i.e. money.  I do not necessarily agree with the Korean view that BB is simply basic skills in and of itself.  Yes, the curriculum needs to have been learned, but to a certain degree of proficiency.  Although this can, and has been done in a year it would seem that this has become a 'standard' of sorts for the masses.  And that again isn't realistic and imho is detrimental to the learning curve by providing the student with a sense of security/achievement that hasn't actually been achieved.  I fully think this move is motivated more by $ than anything else.  Get them to the almighty BB level as quick as possible to pump up the ego regardless of whether it has been earned or not.  Then delay the certificate a few months to a year to 'help them adjust to the new position' even though it is just a 'basic' level (read dangle the carrot a bit longer to get them hooked in for the next Dan level...cause that is just right around the corner).  

At some point they're going to have to expand the Dan system from 9th or 10th upwards to 15th or 20th just to have more to offer.  After all, if you're a BB by age 5 or 6 and can get some rapid fire promotions upwards of 3rd or maybe even 4th before you've hit puberty then what happens if you stick around into your teens, 20's, 30's etc?  What's the justification of slowing it down?  Age requirements?  Why?  



> I still train in hapkido and taekwondo, but it is purely for enjoyment.   Any income derived from teaching others is enough to cover costs of  materials, mainly pizza.  I have a much more formal kendo class that I  teach, but regardless, advancement is based on when the student is  ready.  I have only promoted one student to shodan and her time in kyu  grades (we don't use belts in kendo) was roughly four years.  I have a  very athletic student who just gets it.  He picks up everything right  away and excels.  He also practices a lot outside of class.  He will  probably get there in less time.  I have another student who has been  training for over a year and has just gotten to the point where he isn't  tripping over his own feet.  He will probably take longer than the  young lady did.



+1



> I use grades to track where a student is in the curriculum.  Nothing  more.  I only charge enough to cover the costs of renting space and fuel  costs.  I do not charge for tests, so I am in no particular hurry to  promote students.  When they're ready, they're ready.



Same here.  I think the same approach (they're ready when they're ready) should be upheld regardless of whether one teaches for the love of the art or for $.  Perhaps a naive belief, but I'll hold to it nonetheless.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Apr 25, 2013)

Kong Soo Do said:


> I agree with you that two years + in Hapkido is more realistic.


Personally, I think that two years in hapkido for an ildan is unrealistic without prior relevant experience.  Personally, I'd say three minimum simply based on the volume of material.



Kong Soo Do said:


> I do not necessarily agree with the Korean view that BB is simply basic skills in and of itself.


It isn't a question of whether or not you and I agree with it; that is the way that it is there.  Blackbelts are apparently so commonplace that there is no mystique about them.  That may or may not be a good fit for other environments, but in that environment, that is the norm.



Kong Soo Do said:


> Same here.  I think the same approach (they're ready when they're ready) should be upheld regardless of whether one teaches for the love of the art or for $.  Perhaps a naive belief, but I'll hold to it nonetheless.


I believe that one can have love of the art and teach for a living.  But doing so puts the school owner into a position of having to deal with issues that a not for profit school doesn't need to consider.  If the norm is $90 a month and $500 for a black belt test and $20 - $50 belt tests along the way, it can be hard to see outside of that box.


----------



## Manny (Apr 25, 2013)

For me, any martial arts school or academy wich has a lot of black belt peewes is ........., I will never give a black belt (1st degree) to a kid/girl below 17 years old, below that is the colored belts and in some cvases the poom belt (black belt).

In a tourney I went I saw a teen or maybe ma around 20 years old that has 4 striops in his black belt, c'mon 4th Dan at such an early age! Also I saw a lot of second dan black belts around 12 years.

A black belt or dan is earned tru hard work, dedication,good tech,etc. and I blieve kids have not what it takes to earn a black belt because of the lack of maturity.

Manny


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Apr 27, 2013)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Blackbelts are apparently so commonplace that there is no mystique about them.  That may or may not be a good fit for other environments, but in that environment, that is the norm.



(Note that my commentary to follow isn't directed at you Daniel, or anyone in particular.  Your comment just brought stuff to mind that I thought I'd ramble on about this morning  )

I think this tends to be an uncomfortable area that many wish to avoid discussing.  To begin with, there really should be no mystique about being a black belt other than an acknowledgement of the hard work that should be required to obtain one.  It should of course not be viewed as an automatic ninja-killer belt.  Secondly, in Korea it has been generally acknowledged on this board and others, by those living/training in Korea that the martial arts (in general) is for children.  Adults for the most part don't have the time or enthusiasm for the martial arts outside of G.I.'s and the like.  Again, this is a general statement, from those living/training in Korea.  So most of these BB's walking around in Korea obtained them as a child but probably haven't done much/anything with it after becoming an adult.  And in general, again according to many of those living/training in Korea who have been forthright enough to speak frankly, often times the level of training in Korea isn't up to snuff.  The romantic notion that Korean training MUST be superior/hard core/mystical is often simply wishful thinking.  Members have posted videos here of Korean children and their demonstrations/training methods and (in general) it hasn't really been impressive.  This isn't to put down Koreans or their training methods, that isn't my point.  I'm sure there are schools of exceptional caliber just as in most countries.  My point is that the Dan ranks, in many Korean arts, have been watered down to generate a higher profit margin.  The bottom line is just that, the bottom line.  Looking at the KKW as a prime example, according to their own stats the VAST majority of KKW BB's are Koreans.   These Koreans earned a BB in a year or less as a child.  The quality of these BB's has been brought into question many times.  So really, I can fully see/understand why it there is no mystique about all the BB's running around in Korea.  For the most part, I would suggest that the standards are woefully sub-par (in general and recognizing that there are always exceptions) and the Dan ranks are watered down intentionally for material gain.  

In the end, if you lower the standards, lower the TIG, water down the training and sell out to commercialism you'd expect BB's to be coming out of the wood work.  That shouldn't be looked upon as a good thing or a selling point for any particular art.


----------



## Jaeimseu (Apr 27, 2013)

Kong Soo Do said:


> (Note that my commentary to follow isn't directed at you Daniel, or anyone in particular.  Your comment just brought stuff to mind that I thought I'd ramble on about this morning  )
> 
> I think this tends to be an uncomfortable area that many wish to avoid discussing.  To begin with, there really should be no mystique about being a black belt other than an acknowledgement of the hard work that should be required to obtain one.  It should of course not be viewed as an automatic ninja-killer belt.  Secondly, in Korea it has been generally acknowledged on this board and others, by those living/training in Korea that the martial arts (in general) is for children.  Adults for the most part don't have the time or enthusiasm for the martial arts outside of G.I.'s and the like.  Again, this is a general statement, from those living/training in Korea.  So most of these BB's walking around in Korea obtained them as a child but probably haven't done much/anything with it after becoming an adult.  And in general, again according to many of those living/training in Korea who have been forthright enough to speak frankly, often times the level of training in Korea isn't up to snuff.  The romantic notion that Korean training MUST be superior/hard core/mystical is often simply wishful thinking.  Members have posted videos here of Korean children and their demonstrations/training methods and (in general) it hasn't really been impressive.  This isn't to put down Koreans or their training methods, that isn't my point.  I'm sure there are schools of exceptional caliber just as in most countries.  My point is that the Dan ranks, in many Korean arts, have been watered down to generate a higher profit margin.  The bottom line is just that, the bottom line.  Looking at the KKW as a prime example, according to their own stats the VAST majority of KKW BB's are Koreans.   These Koreans earned a BB in a year or less as a child.  The quality of these BB's has been brought into question many times.  So really, I can fully see/understand why it there is no mystique about all the BB's running around in Korea.  For the most part, I would suggest that the standards are woefully sub-par (in general and recognizing that there are always exceptions) and the Dan ranks are watered down intentionally for material gain.
> 
> In the end, if you lower the standards, lower the TIG, water down the training and sell out to commercialism you'd expect BB's to be coming out of the wood work.  That shouldn't be looked upon as a good thing or a selling point for any particular art.



I honestly don't think it's all about increasing profits. It's easy to think that way from an American point of view. In Korea, people tend to only do things recreationally to a certain point. After that point, it's your life. Students find out at a relatively young age if they have the potential to be a "player" on the big stage. If they don't have that potential, they tend to gravitate to more "important" things.

 So having said that, the training in Korea is hardcore for hardcore students. It's very similar to football in America in that generally the only adults still playing are big time and their training is different from a guy playing in the park with his friends on Saturday.

I'd say training in just about everything in Korea is hardcore at a certain point. This is a country where high school students attend school from 8am to 10pm and may even spend their weekends in private academies studying more. There just isn't much time for hobbies here. Everything is super competitive and wasting time on hobbies is frowned upon. 

Sent from my SHV-E210K using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Apr 27, 2013)

Jaeimseu said:


> I honestly don't think it's all about increasing profits. It's easy to think that way from an American point of view. In Korea, people tend to only do things recreationally to a certain point. After that point, it's your life. Students find out at a relatively young age if they have the potential to be a "player" on the big stage. If they don't have that potential, they tend to gravitate to more "important" things.
> 
> So having said that, the training in Korea is hardcore for hardcore students. It's very similar to football in America in that generally the only adults still playing are big time and their training is different from a guy playing in the park with his friends on Saturday.
> 
> ...



Good post.  I would suggest, in general, that this demonstrates a lack of depth in Korea in regards to the martial arts.  It seems to be more of a game or hobby than an art.  As you mentioned, if they don't have/show the potential to excell in the game they move on to more important things.  This imho is the problem with viewing the arts through the prism of sport.  And that apparently isn't enough to have a holding interest on the youth-to-adult population.  If you excell at the game then its fine.  If you don't excell at the game the evidence points to a drifting away in mass.  And that's a shame.   

In many martial arts, the sport version really doesn't have a lot of depth.  Before anyone gets offended, let me explain what I mean.  Sport versions of arts, by necessity, are block, punch, kick with a certain amount of memorization of forms and drills.  Now if you're a gymnist and can excell and/or you're a tough competitor and can win and/or you can put a lot of flash in your form then you can win.  Where does this leave everyone else?  Obviously we're seeing them drift away to other pursuits.  Basically I can see where a kid can get a BB in a year or less in some of these arts...they're just isn't a lot to the art in-and-of-itself.  Then I look at older arts and/or Korean arts that don't focus on sport (at least not to the exclusion of all else).  They have the same block, punch, kick, drills and kata...but there is something else.  Something different.  There is depth.  In some schools, at least the ones in my experience, a single form could take a year or more to learn because of bunkai associated with it along with all the rabbit trails that it produces (in a positive sense).  And these schools, again speaking only of my experience, don't rush rank or even make it a real issue.  

I really think it boils down to the cash and that it has been detrimental to the KMA's as a whole.  This isn't to demonize or poo-poo sport or to turn this into a sport-bashing thread.  But I'm looking long term/big picture here for a moment.  If something is important to a person, they will make time for it.  KMA's in Korea (as just an example of the home country) doesn't seem to be important enough for some/many/most to continue for the long term.  And perhaps, with what is offered, that is a justifiable postion for them to take.  Since I'm rambling on, let me continue just a moment longer.  What is better;  learning 10 or 15 or 20 forms that are basically the same block, punch, kick movements rearranged into different patterns of longer length and maybe complexity?  After all, a straight punch is a straight punch.  How many forms do you need for that?

Or

Learning a small number of forms/kata where you really, really, REALLY have a full understanding?  It isn't just block, punch and kick.  I always use Uechi Kanbun Sensei as an example.  It took him ten full years to learn three kata.  But he was so powerful with those three forms, and had such an intimate understanding of them that 70+ years later people in and out of the art of Uechi Ryu talk about it.  And that was passed down to his students as well.  

O'well, like I said...I'm just rambling.  No one take offense to anything I've touched on as I'm just thinking outloud.  Maybe I just think the arts are meant for other things rather than just, "yeah I took that when I was a kid but then I went into soccer...".


----------



## Jaeimseu (Apr 27, 2013)

Kong Soo Do said:


> Good post.  I would suggest, in general, that this demonstrates a lack of depth in Korea in regards to the martial arts.  It seems to be more of a game or hobby than an art.  As you mentioned, if they don't have/show the potential to excell in the game they move on to more important things.  This imho is the problem with viewing the arts through the prism of sport.  And that apparently isn't enough to have a holding interest on the youth-to-adult population.  If you excell at the game then its fine.  If you don't excell at the game the evidence points to a drifting away in mass.  And that's a shame.
> 
> In many martial arts, the sport version really doesn't have a lot of depth.  Before anyone gets offended, let me explain what I mean.  Sport versions of arts, by necessity, are block, punch, kick with a certain amount of memorization of forms and drills.  Now if you're a gymnist and can excell and/or you're a tough competitor and can win and/or you can put a lot of flash in your form then you can win.  Where does this leave everyone else?  Obviously we're seeing them drift away to other pursuits.  Basically I can see where a kid can get a BB in a year or less in some of these arts...they're just isn't a lot to the art in-and-of-itself.  Then I look at older arts and/or Korean arts that don't focus on sport (at least not to the exclusion of all else).  They have the same block, punch, kick, drills and kata...but there is something else.  Something different.  There is depth.  In some schools, at least the ones in my experience, a single form could take a year or more to learn because of bunkai associated with it along with all the rabbit trails that it produces (in a positive sense).  And these schools, again speaking only of my experience, don't rush rank or even make it a real issue.
> 
> ...



I'm going to guess that most students of <insert martial art here> around the world don't study with a tremendous amount of depth. In my opinion, just as with any other area of study, the depth is there for those who want it, but for various reasons few people study any subject that deeply. I believe there is value in even a superficial study of MA. There is always something to be learned, and it's always possible to go deeper. Sport can be very shallow, yet also surprisingly complex, but the accessibility of sport allows for more people to participate. From a cynical point of view, yes this may mean more money, but it also means the opportunity to give the benefits provided by MA to a greater number of people.

Sent from my SHV-E210K using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Apr 28, 2013)

Jaeimseu said:


> I believe there is value in even a superficial study of MA. There is always something to be learned, and it's always possible to go deeper. Sport can be very shallow, yet also surprisingly complex, but the accessibility of sport allows for more people to participate. From a cynical point of view, yes this may mean more money, but it also means the opportunity to give the benefits provided by MA to a greater number of people.



What value do you see coming from a superficial study of MA's?  It would appear that this training methodology has very little holding power to keep people interested/motivated in the arts.  And perhaps this is a self fullfilling prophesy or sorts.  Provide a shallow, cookie-cutter art for mass consumption (coupled with easy, ready-made promotions when they're barely out of the first grade) and then wonder why so many leave the arts for some other pursuit.  I don't think it is cynical to hold the opinion that its more about money than anything else.  That is simply an honest assestment.  

I think an honest discussion on the topic would include the aspect that the arts have been watered down to the point that a 9yr old can be a 3rd Dan.  By watering down the arts in this way we can make it more accessible to the masses (read children which keep the schools open), charge ridiculous fees (read make a lot of money for the school and some organization so they can issue a piece of paper that cost them a dollar to print), make them feel good with lots of promotions every couple of months (read keeps them happy and coming back) and keep the parents pumped up (and paying) because now little johnny is a martial arts master while in middle school.  And we see what holding power it has as the vast majority go on to something else.  But that's okay as there is another crop of kids right behind them that just shed their diapers and are ready to strap on the black belt.  

I guess I'm getting to old to be politically correct.  Its a racket.  And when it becomes a racket it is no longer a martial art.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Apr 29, 2013)

Kong Soo Do said:


> I think this tends to be an uncomfortable area that many wish to avoid discussing.  To begin with, there really should be no mystique about being a black belt other than an acknowledgement of the hard work that should be required to obtain one.  It should of course not be viewed as an automatic ninja-killer belt.


I agree, but with the caveat that in prior discussions on the subject, and likely in subsequent discussions on the subject, for most people who oppose child black belts and who dislike black belts who don't look as skilled/polished/intense as they think they should look, hard work is not enough.  Time in grade, sport vs. non-sport, and a number of other issues are consistently brought up in addition to the student's hard work.  T

hen you have the issue that "hard work" is sujective.  A very athletic person who intuitively picks things up can sometimes take a class and pick up literally everything the first time and do it very well pretty much right away.  In the same class, you may have a very unathletic person who has to work four times harder than the average student just to do a decent front kick.  One works hard but never looks particularly graceful or polished after two to four years, the other looks like an ildan at white belt and cruises through the class.  

Not coincidentally, when his ildan test goes up on youtube, all of those who oppose kiddie belts or who want a black belt to reflect a higher standard point to that video as being what the black belt should look like, while the unathletic student's video is held up as crap, even though he may have worked ten to twenty times harder than his counterpart and probably only put up his video to share it with friends but didn't think to change his privacy settings.

Then you have varying degrees of natural ability and work between the two, the middle area being where most fall.



Kong Soo Do said:


> Secondly, in Korea it has been generally acknowledged on this board and others, by those living/training in Korea that the martial arts (in general) is for children.  Adults for the most part don't have the time or enthusiasm for the martial arts outside of G.I.'s and the like.  Again, this is a general statement, from those living/training in Korea.  So most of these BB's walking around in Korea obtained them as a child but probably haven't done much/anything with it after becoming an adult.  And in general, again according to many of those living/training in Korea who have been forthright enough to speak frankly, often times the level of training in Korea isn't up to snuff.


Up to snuff is relative.  I'm sure that it is more than adequate for kids and teens in grade school or high school, or for adults who train for lifestyle and fitness.  People who want to take it further and either compete at a higher level, be a hard core self defense guy, or perhaps get into cinematic martial arts in movies or theatre train in more intense programs aimed at what they're interested in doing.  The same is probably true of many studios in the US.  I'm sure that Stephen Lopez preparation for his next grade looks very, very different from that of the average student of the same level at even a very good school.



Kong Soo Do said:


> The romantic notion that Korean training MUST be superior/hard core/mystical is often simply wishful thinking.  Members have posted videos here of Korean children and their demonstrations/training methods and (in general) it hasn't really been impressive.  This isn't to put down Koreans or their training methods, that isn't my point.  I'm sure there are schools of exceptional caliber just as in most countries.


I suspect that that comes from the image of training in Japan, which based on what I have heard, is generally a step above training in JMA outside of Japan.



Kong Soo Do said:


> My point is that the Dan ranks, in many Korean arts, have been watered down to generate a higher profit margin.  The bottom line is just that, the bottom line.


While I think that that varies more from school to school and area to area, my general rule of thumb is that 80% (hyperbolic) of everything is lousy filler.  Go into a book store and you will find a small number of good authors amidst a sea of literary drivel.  Go into a record/cd store and you will find a small number of fine musicians (all styles) amidst a sea of corporate product and just plain junk.

The smaller the total number of anything is, the greater the general quality.  Once the field widens, there is more room for lesser players in the field.  Martial arts is no exception.  Of course with more room for lesser players also comes a larger talent pool, so you have to take the good with the bad.



Kong Soo Do said:


> Looking at the KKW as a prime example, according to their own stats the VAST majority of KKW BB's are Koreans.


I'm not saying that you're mistaken, but could you cite the source?  



Kong Soo Do said:


> These Koreans earned a BB in a year or less as a child.  The quality of these BB's has been brought into question many times.  So really, I can fully see/understand why it there is no mystique about all the BB's running around in Korea.  For the most part, I would suggest that the standards are woefully sub-par (in general and recognizing that there are always exceptions) and the Dan ranks are watered down intentionally for material gain.


I won't comment on the motivations, nor on whether the standards are "woefully sub-par," but you could easily say the same thing about the US.  Lots of people go in, but lots of people drop off.  



Kong Soo Do said:


> In the end, if you lower the standards, lower the TIG, water down the training and sell out to commercialism you'd expect BB's to be coming out of the wood work.  That shouldn't be looked upon as a good thing or a selling point for any particular art.


Personally, I see many of these things as being interconnected, but not necesarilly all at the same time.

Some schools lower the standards because they're lousy schools.  Some schools maintain high standards but lower time in grade to BB in order to weed out those who just want to chase belts.  

I see watering down (the addition of material to the art's curriculum) as a combination of commercialism (we offer more, come train with us, we offer more, so pay more money) and the mistaken idea that more material is qualitatively better than less.  More _can_ be good, but you cross a line where you get diminishing returns, and if you add too much, you cross a line where students are just spinning their wheels.

Having said all that, in the US (I won't comment on other countries), commercialism is the biggest enemy of quality martial arts, or quality anything else for that matter (look at the music industry).


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Apr 29, 2013)

Double post.  Sorry.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Apr 29, 2013)

Kong Soo Do said:


> What value do you see coming from a superficial study of MA's?


Mostly lifestyle/fitness value, which is why many people take up the martial arts in the first place.  Even kids programs that focus on self esteem and such fall into the lifestyle/fitness category, albeit on a child's level. 

As for why "so many leave the arts for some other pursuit," I don't think that shallow, cookie cutter art for mass consumption is the reason.  I'd wager that the majority of people who started in the seventies left prior to or shortly after earning their black belt.  I know a lot of people my age who started in the seventies and stopped sometime after green belt.  People try things and find that it isn't for them and move on.  Many people leave because regardless of the program, it is a lot of physical work.  Others have a personal goal of "get a black belt in karate" and once they check it off of the bucket list, they move on.

I would venture that the percentage of lifers in the martial arts hasn't actually changed much over the past forty years.  There simply aren't that many people who have the passion for an MA.  Usually, they practice the MA for some personal goal, be it fitness, confidence, self defense, getting a black belt, or even just for the sake of checking it out.  Once they've achieved their goal (I lost 20 pounds/I feel more confident/I can fight/I got my black belt/hey, I tried it), they move on.  Some come back later in life.  Some do not, but their kids get into it with their encouragement.  Some never have an encounter with the martial arts again for the rest of their life.

The big question is what they took away from the experience.  A great school that doesn't sell out and maintains high standards will always have more drop out than stay in.  Those who leave such a school and don't continue to train often say that the experience profoundly impacted them and greatly influenced them to be better people.  

If all students take away from a school is a piece of fabric and a certificate, it likely isn't worth attending.  And unfortunately, many (not all) commercial schools fall into that category.


----------



## WaterGal (Apr 29, 2013)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I suspect that that comes from the image of training in Japan, which based on what I have heard, is generally a step above training in JMA outside of Japan.



I think some of it may also be from the way (some) Korean masters talk about old Korean training.  I don't know if you've read any of Marc Tadesci's "Hapkido" book, but it's got a bunch of interviews with old Korean grandmasters, and practically all of them complain about how lazy American students are and how when they were a kid they trained for 5 hours every single day on the mountain outside in the snow barefoot etc etc.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Apr 29, 2013)

WaterGal said:


> I think some of it may also be from the way (some) Korean masters talk about old Korean training.  I don't know if you've read any of Marc Tadesci's "Hapkido" book, but it's got a bunch of interviews with old Korean grandmasters, and practically all of them complain about how lazy American students are and how when they were a kid they trained for 5 hours every single day on the mountain outside in the snow barefoot etc etc.


Very likely.

But just to point out that there are other reasons that people drop off from the martial arts and do other things; I delivered papers for several hours a day rain, snow, sleet, or shine, on a bicycle in the mornings when I was a kid, cut lawns all summer regardless of the temperature, and rode thirty miles a day, every day, rain, sleet, snow, or shine, because I wanted to compete in BMX at a higher level and later had visions of competing in the Tour De France.  I practiced my "karate" everyday indoors for about a half hour to an hour a day.  All that on top of school and a part time job. 

By Junior year of high school, I had proven that I could defend myself, which was why I started taking "Karate" (it was TSD for a year and then TKD for a couple of years, and then Shotokan in high school) in the first place.  I never tested for a black belt; I was able to defend myself.  I had reached my goal.  I stopped formal training regularly about two years after I got out of high school (I was back in TKD by then), but I attended simply to train.  I wasn't interested in a black belt and I had gotten into fencing by then anyway.  Cycling was a huge part of my life and eventually, fencing replaced karate, but neither one ever trumped cycling.  I got into hot rods in high school because my folks wouldn't allow me to by a motorcycle, and by the time I was ready to explore that again, I was married with a son. 

I eventually got back into formal training in taekwondo 2005 and got into hapkido in 2008 (I think).  I got my black belts.  I also eventually did explore motorcycles again in 2011, got my license in 2012, and bought my first Harley Davidson (96 Superglide) this year.  And I have been teaching kendo and participating in fencing on some level consistently for a while now.  I still keep my HKD and TKD chops in practice, but it isn't my main focus.  

None of that is a reflection on where I trained; it is simply the direction that my life has gone.

I have a student who is fairly good in kendo, but he's also a hot shot tennis player. Guess what he's practicing outside of class.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (Apr 29, 2013)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> I'm not saying that you're mistaken, but could you cite the source?



The numbers are/were on the KKW website.  They may still be there but I can't find it.  Last year in the TKD thread there were links to it as well as the table posted with the break down for each Dan level inside and outside of Korea.  I did a net search which brought up:

http://www.bctaekwondo.org/history.htm

This stated as of 2003 that inside Korea there were over 5 million poom/Dan holders, outside of Korea a little over 300K.  Over 4th Dan in Korea were over 62K while outside Korea only 9K.  

The TKD thread was more current (maybe 2007 or more recent) which had it up over 7 million.  I don't remember the numbers off hand but the % was about the same.  I want to say that (rounding numbers) if there were 7 million poom/Dan in the KKW that about 6 million + were in Korea.  This goes with what has been stated here in this thread i.e. everyone walking around is a BB. Why?  Because they got it as a child (which is pretty standard) with a watered down curriculum which in turn inflates the numbers to impress the those that are easily impressed.  I don't mean to be mean with that statement, but it is what it is.  Proponents of the KKW often tout/shout the number of BBs in the KKW but often neglect to mention they were mostly children in Korea that fall away in droves as adulthood is reached.  Too me...this doesn't speak very highly of KKW TKD in Korea or elsewhere.  Not pooing the KKW (though it may seem this way) but I'm just being straight up.  If someone likes the KKW and what they have to offer, that's fantastically wonderful and great.  Just don't blow smoke by standing on numbers as an indicator of how great the organization seems to be.  It is a paper tiger in regards to retention, standards and meaningful numbers.

Unfortunately it appears that Hapkido is/has followed suit. :uhohh:


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Apr 30, 2013)

Kong Soo Do said:


> The numbers are/were on the KKW website.  They may still be there but I can't find it.  Last year in the TKD thread there were links to it as well as the table posted with the break down for each Dan level inside and outside of Korea.  I did a net search which brought up:
> 
> http://www.bctaekwondo.org/history.htm
> 
> This stated as of 2003 that inside Korea there were over 5 million poom/Dan holders, outside of Korea a little over 300K.  Over 4th Dan in Korea were over 62K while outside Korea only 9K.


Appreciated.



Kong Soo Do said:


> The TKD thread was more current (maybe 2007 or more recent) which had it up over 7 million.  I don't remember the numbers off hand but the % was about the same.  I want to say that (rounding numbers) if there were 7 million poom/Dan in the KKW that about 6 million + were in Korea.  This goes with what has been stated here in this thread i.e. everyone walking around is a BB. Why?  Because they got it as a child (which is pretty standard) with a watered down curriculum which in turn inflates the numbers to impress the those that are easily impressed.


Unless you know the actual KKW curriculum and the curriculum that is being taught in Korea to the majority of students, you really cannot know if it is watered down.  You* can *reason that the black/pum belt is little more than a merit badge for learning what is considered the basics of the art.  I have the textbook.  There honestly isn't so much material in the geub levels that you would have to truncate the course to get someone through it in a year, and if they're training five days a week consistenty, it is quite possible.  None of the Taegeuk pumsae are overly complex and there is very little the geub grades that goes beyond strikes and blocks.  

As the saying goes, horses for courses.  I see tons of adults start a martial art and then drop out.  The fact that they aren't kids doesn't make it any better, but they do swell the numbers for the schools they attend.  I don't pay all that much attention to the pum/dan numbers or even the overall numbers to determine the quality of the art.  Even the drop out rate isn't all that important, given that based on conversations with people in many arts, the dropout rate doesn't vary all that much. 

I have a friend who teaches jazz guitar and worked for several years in the music industry.  You see similar take up and drop off rates in music instruction as well.  A lot of the reason is that people take lessons because they want to learn to play guitar.  Once they can play guitar, they generally stop taking lessons.  Usually, you can only count on keeping an adult student for 1 - 4 years.  Kids will stay consistently until they graduate high school.  

Martial arts isn't all that different.  Adults sign up to meet a goal.  Lose weight, learn to fight, get a black belt, try something new.  Once they achieve their goal, they move on.  Generally, you're looking at one to four years.  Kids are in the martial arts in the US as an after school activity.  Once they graduate, they go to college.  

Regardless of the art, only a very small percentage of people actually stick with the art much past shodan, and even a smaller number continue past second or third.  Then you have that tiny group that will be involved in the martial arts for as long as they're physically able, and even they dont' always stay in the same art. 

As far as kids learning the art and getting their black belt, kids learn lots of things.  For many years, in certain segments of western culture, kids were expected to take piano lessons or violin lessons.  They generally stop after high school.  They can competently play piano.  But they aren't concert pianists, they don't compose their own pieces, they can't play in a band or orchestra setting, they cannot take on the role of a church pianist and they may or may not be able to improvise.  But they can open up a song book and play piano.

Whether or not a million Korean children with black belts is a good thing or not is irrelevant to a certain extent; that is the environment.  It works there, but it may not be the best fit in other places.  Again, it comes down to what the belt represents, which isn't consistent from art to art, place to place, or even school to school.



Kong Soo Do said:


> I don't mean to be mean with that statement, but it is what it is.  Proponents of the KKW often tout/shout the number of BBs in the KKW but often neglect to mention they were mostly children in Korea that fall away in droves as adulthood is reached.  Too me...this doesn't speak very highly of KKW TKD in Korea or elsewhere.  Not pooing the KKW (though it may seem this way) but I'm just being straight up.  If someone likes the KKW and what they have to offer, that's fantastically wonderful and great.  Just don't blow smoke by standing on numbers as an indicator of how great the organization seems to be.  It is a paper tiger in regards to retention, standards and meaningful numbers.


The subject of KKW pum/dans came up in relation to a question of which federation had the greatest presence.  The KKW doesn't track non pum/dan enrolment, so that was the only number available.

I agree that the number is fairly meaningless in terms of measuring the success or quality of the art.  And as most of us will agree, quantity doesn't reflect quality of the art, though it may reflect quality of the ability to market the art.



Kong Soo Do said:


> Unfortunately it appears that Hapkido is/has followed suit. :uhohh:


In Korea, it has apparently been following suit for at least a couple of decades, which indicates that the black belt is simply not viewed in Korea as it is here.  Personally, I cannot see a children's program that can comprehensively and responsibly teach the entirety of the basics for reasons that I have already elaborated (safety mainly).  Given that hapkido doesn't translate as well into a sport as TKD and that it isn't the national sport of Korea, I cannot see any practical benefit to pushing tons of kids through the geub grades.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (Apr 30, 2013)

Daniel Sullivan said:


> Unless you know the actual KKW curriculum and the curriculum that is being taught in Korea to the majority of students, you really cannot know if it is watered down.  You* can *reason that the black/pum belt is little more than a merit badge for learning what is considered the basics of the art.


Just a comment here: You can get them through the actual geub level curriculum without truncating, watering down, or otherwise reducing the curriculum in a year.  I cannot vouch for what they'll_* look *_like, but it can be done.


----------



## Jaeimseu (Apr 30, 2013)

Kong Soo Do said:


> What value do you see coming from a superficial study of MA's?  It would appear that this training methodology has very little holding power to keep people interested/motivated in the arts.  And perhaps this is a self fullfilling prophesy or sorts.  Provide a shallow, cookie-cutter art for mass consumption (coupled with easy, ready-made promotions when they're barely out of the first grade) and then wonder why so many leave the arts for some other pursuit.  I don't think it is cynical to hold the opinion that its more about money than anything else.  That is simply an honest assestment.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## oftheherd1 (Apr 30, 2013)

Kong Soo Do said:


> ...
> 
> Unfortunately it appears that Hapkido is/has followed suit. :uhohh:



That is one of the most sad things I have heard lately.  

It has been only 25 years since I was last in Korea.  Hapkido, along with Tang Soo Do, were the holdouts when TKD attempted to take over all Korean MA under their umbrella.  I think that is still true, although individual teachers may combine TSD and TKD, at least in title.  

When I was there, I know my GM and the schools under him, promoted on learning rather than time, but that was generally more than two or three years for 1st Degree BB for non on-post schools.  He did not hand out BB to American military just for attendance either.  If they attended every class, and learned, they could make it in a year.  Not many did.

I also had the impression that Hapkido had more older students than grade school, if grade school at all, outside of American military schools.  At least then, Hapkido was strongly viewed as an art with applications for police and military.  For the special units, it was required the members have a 3rd Dan in some martial art.  Hapkido was preferred, and would have to be learned if they didn't know it already.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (May 1, 2013)

oftheherd1 said:


> That is one of the most sad things I have heard lately.



I must admit, I was taken back when I saw the 9yr old 3rd Dan post.  I really wasn't expecting it to be that bad.



> At least then, Hapkido was strongly viewed as an art with applications for police and military.



+1

I feel Hapkido, Jujutsu, Chin Na etc are outstanding arts for Police, Corrections, bouncers, event security etc.  I've mentioned before that I've used controlling techniques (locks) FAR more than striking.  People in those venues have a lot of opportunity to need control, transport or take down techniques.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (May 1, 2013)

Jaeimseu said:


> It's not a racket, it's a business. There are dishonest people out there, just as there are in any business. I agree that numbers alone don't equal quality, but they don't necessarily equal a lack of quality, either. Every cynic thinks they are a realist, but I think you are giving people too much credit, making people into evil geniuses, sitting in their dojang offices, counting their money and contemplating how they can fleece their students more efficiently.



I can only speak to what I have personally seen and/or have been told by those with firsthand accounts.  I wouldn't put it in the '_evil genius_' category but I would put it squarely in the _lack of integrity for cash category_.  Racket or business may be two sides of the same coin.  I think they know what their doing in most cases, or are simply following suit with what they've seen their seniors do in the arts.


----------



## oftheherd1 (May 2, 2013)

Kong Soo Do said:


> I must admit, I was taken back when I saw the 9yr old 3rd Dan post.  I really wasn't expecting it to be that bad.



I can only agree.  It just wasn't that kind of art when I was there.  What I learned, I would think, would not be appropriate for 9 year olds, in that I would think they would have had to start learning at least at six, with an incredible commitment in class time and effort.  I just don't get it.



Kong Soo Do said:


> +1
> 
> I feel Hapkido, Jujutsu, Chin Na etc are outstanding arts for Police, Corrections, bouncers, event security etc.  I've mentioned before that I've used controlling techniques (locks) FAR more than striking.  People in those venues have a lot of opportunity to need control, transport or take down techniques.



That has always been my thought as well, and I think you have had practical experience that most of us have not.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (May 2, 2013)

Kong Soo Do said:


> I must admit, I was taken back when I saw the 9yr old 3rd Dan post.  I really wasn't expecting it to be that bad.


I'm with on this.

I'm going to put aside the belt for a moment, as I view it as a merit badge.  If the school is charging $500 for this merit badge, then it's an overpriced merit badge.

Looking purely at the rank: I hear about children with pum/dan grades in TKD (not federation specific) and to a certain extent, I think, 'whatever.'  My opinion of a nine year old samdan is this: samdan conveys no administrative authority and is akin to a nine year old who went to college.  Great, the nine year old is really smart and got a degree in astrophysics at nine.  It makes makes the folks proud and rightly so.  B

ut nobody is going to hire him ahead of the adult graduates.  Why?  Because he's nine.  If he remains interested and pursues the field into adulthood, then he'll be an incredible asset to his field.  But for now?  He's nine.

Likewise, lower ranked adult's are not going to defer to him, he isn't going to be put in charge of classes and isn't able to go out and open his own school.  Why?  Because he's nine.

A hapkido samdan is something I look at differently than a TKD samdan.  The nature of the techniques are such that nine year olds simply are not (in my opinion) physically ready for them, regardless of how adept or mature for their age they may be.  

So my opinion of putting a nine year old through the material up to samdan and not adjusting it for a child is that it is very irresponsible.  My opinion of issuing a samdan to a child for completing a child's course of study is that, at least in the US, it shouldn't be done and it sends mixed messages to the students.

If everyone is on the same page and thinks it's okay, well it's your school and if you're happy then more power to you.  But when a $500 price tag is attached to what amounts to a merit badge, it kind of undermines the authenticity of the accomplishment, regardless of how deserving the student may be (regardless of age).



Kong Soo Do said:


> +1
> 
> I feel Hapkido, Jujutsu, Chin Na etc are outstanding arts for Police, Corrections, bouncers, event security etc.  I've mentioned before that I've used controlling techniques (locks) FAR more than striking.  People in those venues have a lot of opportunity to need control, transport or take down techniques.


Hapkido, jujutsu, chin na, various military combatives, etc.  Andy Moynihan shared a video on another site of US Navy training filmed during WWII; prior to hapkido or taekwondo existing and prior to any real exposure to karate or other Asian martial arts.  It was virtually indistinguishable from hapkido.  And equally beyond what I would teach a nine year old.

Having said all that, I do not wish the poster with the nine year old son to think that I am demeaning his son's accomplishments.  Kids work very hard to earn their awards and to excel in their chosen art/sport/hobby, sometimes harder and with greater earnest than their adult counterparts.  I believe that that should be recognized.  In fact, I think the kids get more out of belts and ranks than the adults do.  I would simply choose a different way to do so than the award of dan rank.


----------



## Dwi Chugi (May 2, 2013)

My son joined Taekwondo when he was 3 1/2. I am the owner of the dojang and headmaster. He will be 9 in July. So far he has made it to blue belt. I figure by the time he is 11 or so, he will have earned his Il Poom.  He trains hard and put forth a lot of effort. 

I have never promoted anyone to black belt in taekwondo before the age of 11 and you have to be 16 for a Hapkido black belt in my school. 

That is the way we do it. Doesn't make it right or wrong, just right for us.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (May 2, 2013)

Good post Daniel, well stated.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (May 2, 2013)

Dwi Chugi said:


> My son joined Taekwondo when he was 3 1/2. I am the owner of the dojang and headmaster. He will be 9 in July. So far he has made it to blue belt. I figure by the time he is 11 or so, he will have earned his Il Poom.  He trains hard and put forth a lot of effort.
> 
> I have never promoted anyone to black belt in taekwondo before the age of 11 and you have to be 16 for a Hapkido black belt in my school.
> 
> That is the way we do it. Doesn't make it right or wrong, just right for us.



16 is the age the IKSDA decided upon for a minimum age for Dan rank.  There was a lot of lengthy discussion with one member leaving as a result.  He wanted a much lower age and continually cited 'business reasons' as a justification for the lower age.  Kong Soo Do (as we teach it) is quite similar to Hapkido in many regards i.e. locks, throws, chokes, balance displacement etc.  So while we stress gross motor skills for SD, it also has a more technical side for the same situations you'd use Hapkido/Jujutsu/Chin Na techniques.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (May 2, 2013)

Kong Soo Do said:


> 16 is the age the IKSDA decided upon for a minimum age for Dan rank.  There was a lot of lengthy discussion with one member leaving as a result.  He wanted a much lower age and continually cited 'business reasons' as a justification for the lower age.


Business should never be a reason to determine promotion of students.  

I could actually give a good argument for a nine year old third dan.  It would involve a radical shift in how most people view the kyu/dan system, and it would be entirely for non business reasons.  Personally, I wouldn't implement such a system, as I would be more inclined to move away from it entirely and stop giving out belts as merit badges.


----------



## Kong Soo Do (May 2, 2013)

I once proposed a change in the Dan/Kyu dynamic long time ago on a different board.  Didn't go anywhere fast, but I still toy with the idea from time to time.  Basically it was logged training hours.  In essense, a student was a white belt until they had trained for X amount of hours and then passed the Dan test.  At that time, if they passed, they transitioned from Kyu status to Dan status.  A plain black belt.  The hours would continue to accumulate as they trained.  This would eliminate the problem with children at too young an age (theoretically).  As an example, little Johnny starts training at whatever age.  Let's say the minimum age (if used) was 16 just to pick a number.  Johnny logs his training hours year after year until it is time to test for Dan status.  If he has enough logged hours, and passes the test he becomes a black belt.  He keeps all his earned hours so he's lost nothing.  If his/her teacher wants them to begin teaching they simply become a Sensei or whatever title is used. 

This does a couple of things (again in theory at least).  First, it can help eliminate some ego and/or the buying of rank.  Whereas anyone can buy rank these days, with a logged system you've either put in the training hours or you haven't.  Secondly, if you have a couple of guys that have claimed to be a black belt for 20 years...what does that mean really?  One guy could have put in 5 days a week for 20 years and the other got BB as a kid and then left and did something else.  So with logged hours, one guy might have a few hundred hours and the other 5000 hours.

I don't claim this is a perfect alternative.  I don't pretend that it can't be manipulated by those intent on doing so.  Just something I've tossed around from time to time.


----------



## oftheherd1 (May 3, 2013)

Daniel Sullivan - I agree business is not a preferred reason for having an accelerated promotion system.  I can understand why you would want to move away from it.  Student's at too young an age don't usually have the necessary motor skills to be a BB, no matter how good they are.  More importantly, I don't think they normally have the maturity needed.  While I understand there can be exceptions, it would seem to be difficult to always be sure a student has both the correct motor skills and maturity.

Kong Soo Do - That's an interesting system you propose.  I think teachers do a form of that as it is, just not structured as you mention.


----------



## Daniel Sullivan (May 3, 2013)

oftheherd1 said:


> Daniel Sullivan - I agree business is not a preferred reason for having an accelerated promotion system.  I can understand why you would want to move away from it.  Student's at too young an age don't usually have the necessary motor skills to be a BB, no matter how good they are.  More importantly, I don't think they normally have the maturity needed.  While I understand there can be exceptions, it would seem to be difficult to always be sure a student has both the correct motor skills and maturity.


So long as I teach arts that traditionally use the system, I will use it.  In kendo, I am an independent.  I could make up names for each rank if I wanted to, given that I have no regulatory body to tell me not to, but I feel that if I am teaching kendo that that would be inappropriate.  I try to be as authentic as possible and as close to the ZNKR standards as I can. 

With Hapkido and Taekwondo, I am a member of the WHA and the KKW respectively.  Both arts traditionally use geub/dan grades and rank belts.  I am happy to keep to that.  I just don't use so many; white, yellow, green, blue, red, and red/black for kids/black for adults.  I don't believe in more than four belts between white and black, though since I don't charge for tests, I suppose I could have twenty four and it wouldn't matter.


----------



## oftheherd1 (May 7, 2013)

In the Hapkido I studied, there were two levels of white, two of yellow, two of blue, then 4 red before BB.  After BB, the highest rank was 8th Dan.  There was an attempt a few years ago to add BB up to 10, but I think that fizzed out.  Perhaps too many like my GM, who said he couldn't see any advantage to essentially paperwork drills and money to advance.  He had been an 8th Dan for a long time by then, which had been the highest rank available for a long time.

When I studied TKD under Jhoon Goo Rhee, 8th was the highest in TKD as well, but they added two more rankings later.


----------

